Ange & the back 3

  • Thread starter User removed at own request
  • Start date
Saw someone say he said in his press conf after the game that we won't be switching to a back 3... but I do think we may use it to close out games and/or against certain opposition if Drag has been guaranteed game time.

I always said 3 CBs doesn't have to be defensive... It was just the style / personnel that made it quite so turgid under Conte. I absolutely loved Hugo but even having a GK who is comfortable with a ball at his feet is transformative.

We played some amazing attacking football with a back 3 - think we went on our longest winning run doing so? only problem was we were playing catch up on Conte's Chelsea who had similarly gone on a ridiculous run playing a back 3 at the time.
 
I don't think our main formation will move away from 4-2-3-1, but I do think there will be times where Ange goes for the 3-2-4-1 that he has used before. It will always depend on the circumstances, but like you say, having this option to close out games is another option he will be glad to have.
 
Matic said:
I don't think our main formation will move away from 4-2-3-1, but I do think there will be times where Ange goes for the 3-2-4-1 that he has used before. It will always depend on the circumstances, but like you say, having this option to close out games is another option he will be glad to have.
Click to expand...
yeah or against opposition who have poor full backs can kill them with the added width. If Poch made it work with Davies and Trippier imagine what we could do with our current lot.
 
freundorfoe said:
yeah or against opposition who have poor full backs can kill them with the added width. If Poch made it work with Davies and Trippier imagine what we could do with our current lot.
Click to expand...

I think it's more subtle nowadays. Back in the day, you'd have the old MW system. Left halves / right halves / wingers etc. As the game moved on we'd often see one full-back roaming and the other tucked in. Then in midfield you'd reverse that with the other side tucked in and the other playing as a winger. Most 4-4-2's were set up that way for a long time with AC Milan mastering that system.

Then we moved to a Robson style 1990 5-3-2 formation with Parker and Pearce playing the wing-backs on the outside of old fashioned centre halves. As we evolved to a Hoddle system, we started to see the Anderton, Le Saux and even Beckham deployed there. Then, somehow the game shifted back to the back four systems and it was rare we saw the 3 centre halves. It was more akin to the Mourinho system with a Makelele sitting behind 2 centre mids.

What was interesting in those periods was that centre halves were just that, centre halves. Then more recently those centre halves became more like how we think of Vertonghen i.e. one of the best footballers in the team. Now Spurs have 3 of them that could easily play orthodox full-back or centre half. You could easily play Dragusin (RB), Romero (CD), VDV (LB) with Biss and Bents in a double pivot and not even have Porro or Udogie on the pitch. Then you almost end up back to where it all began in the old 1961 double winning MW formation.

The one thing that never changes is that shifting formations around disrupts the opposition. It took Poch a couople of years to find his 3 at the back Plan B system. I hope Ange finds Plans A, B and C
 
Matic said:
I don't think our main formation will move away from 4-2-3-1, but I do think there will be times where Ange goes for the 3-2-4-1 that he has used before. It will always depend on the circumstances, but like you say, having this option to close out games is another option he will be glad to have.
Click to expand...
Hmm, looked to me that we played 4-3-3 against Manure?!
 
Spursex said:
Agreed, but I just reminded myself how we lined up and how we played from the heat maps, and it was definitely a 4-3-3, although at times because we try to be so fluid, putting a formation label on isn't as simple as it used to be!
Click to expand...

I think the curiosity came from how we finished the game. Skipp was playing ahead of the other two and doing the high pressing. He was replaced with Dragusin, but only then VDV cramped up. So we definitely finished with Porro, Emerson, Romero, Dragusin and Udogie on the pitch, but they didn't really seem to playing in that right to left line either.

I'd have to watch it again and pay attention. You can see why the media narrative started talking about 3 at the back though.
 
muttley said:
I think the curiosity came from how we finished the game. Skipp was playing ahead of the other two and doing the high pressing. He was replaced with Dragusin, but only then VDV cramped up. So we definitely finished with Porro, Emerson, Romero, Dragusin and Udogie on the pitch, but they didn't really seem to playing in that right to left line either.

I'd have to watch it again and pay attention. You can see why the media narrative started talking about 3 at the back though.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I don't, I agree we may finish that way, if their is a radical plan in Ange's head it wouldn't surprise me if we push Romero forward and keep to our current formation, but who know's in my mind he'd probably make a better Defensive midfielder/almost an attacking one than he does a CB..
 
muttley said:
Think I need to see more of Dragusin first. Perhaps he is the inverted RB, not Romero.

We certainly know it works the other way round though.
Click to expand...
Dragu is rapid.

The logical thing to do is to go three at the back as we line up, but push Romero into midfield where he can screen and penetrate, especially in transition. Udogie/Bissouma coming oinside alongside him, Porro pushed forward more and then it's just a selection headache upfront depending on who we're playing.

We'd have excellent cover across most positions then especially if we add one or two in the centre
 
I could've and still could be that Ange was trying to get a basic system together, with what he had at the time, ie 4-3-3. Until his processes were instilled and indeed until he saw first hand, who cold play his system, before being able to tweak or change tactics, and line ups, these may just be, starting to come thru' now.
Mind you Ange & the Back 3 sounds like a crap 70's band 😉
 
Niall D said:
I could've and still could be that Ange was trying to get a basic system together, with what he had at the time, ie 4-3-3. Until his processes were instilled and indeed until he saw first hand, who cold play his system, before being able to tweak or change tactics, and line ups, these may just be, starting to come thru' now.
Mind you Ange & the Back 3 sounds like a crap 70's band 😉
Click to expand...

Nah, Ange and the Back 4.......every successful band needs a keys player :tongue:
 
Spursex said:
Can you imagine if Romero became that elusive B2B D'mer?!
Click to expand...
Do you think it matters? From what I can see, similar to Poch with Vertonghen getting forward, I am under the impression that all of our players will end up all over the pitch. It seems like there's less focus on positions and more about total squad emphasis.

From back to front, I'd argue that every player on the pitch (minus Bissouma) is a goal threat.
 
thelaughingcock said:
Do you think it matters? From what I can see, similar to Poch with Vertonghen getting forward, I am under the impression that all of our players will end up all over the pitch. It seems like there's less focus on positions and more about total squad emphasis.

From back to front, I'd argue that every player on the pitch (minus Bissouma) is a goal threat.
Click to expand...

I really do think it matters, Ange-ball is build on complex orchestrations of movement at precisely the right times and phases of a game, to that extent he is akin to that of a maestro conducting his orchestra.

Every movement, every decision, and every strategy is meticulously crafted to achieve one ultimate goal: victory. It’s not just about guiding the players on the field; it’s about the tactical genius that defines how anyone in his squad can step into a predesignated role. To many, Angeball just looks chaotic, they think it' simple with it being nothing more than high press and chasing back in transition, but if you watch the patterns of play, it's clear to me that we win games because of how he's drilled them on every eventually, at every moment in his system.

It was actually Alex Ferguson that first went into this level of dynamic minute detail in his tactical approach, and after many re-inventions it is Ange that has turned a theory into almost living art, hence why it's called 'Orchestrations'.

So I believe it's alot of emphasis on positions and transitions of play, he's developed / used the theory and now has the chance to use with some exceptional top class players.

As you can tell I'm loving it, his tactical approach, his training routines really have my old grey matter working overtime !
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.