The Back Three and The Wing Backs

[bobbystagsfan]

To be fair we lost plenty of games last season playing a back 4.

time will tell, however from that showing we didn’t have the players available to call it a success don’t you think ?

If we'd have took our chances on Saturday we would've got something out of the game (which is bleeding obvious). We didn't and that had nothing to do with the formation.

If we created NOTHING then I would be worried, but that wasn't the case.

[Dan]

I know you think you’re entitled to a public statement for everything, but since when have club tactics been directly discussed with fans of any club? When would you like this announcement - at the start of the season, before every game, as we’re attacking, as we’re defending, in the middle of a game, when a substitution is taking place?

ha ha why wouldn’t an interviewer ask so then Nigel what’s your reasons for going to a back three when a back four worked well last season & improving it with a quality CB & RB would make it even better ?

why is that so difficult to understand, do you not want to know why this baffling disission has been had ?

an interviewer did ask why he was going to a back three. The answer was:

Nigel Clough: "We think we’ve got the players to carry it out (3-5-2). I think we’ve got ideal wing-backs, I think the centre halves we’ve got can adapt to it, I think Oli Hawkins is perfect in the middle of a three, and it gets us two up top which is important as well."

After the Sheff Utd game, Clough then added: “The 3-5-2 system is working well at the moment."

There's the problem.

[gazza1988]

To be fair we lost plenty of games last season playing a back 4.

time will tell, however from that showing we didn’t have the players available to call it a success don’t you think ?

No, still early days though.

I fact you could argue that we've stuck with largely the same players at the back and still can't defend direct running and diagonal balls.

In the heat of the game and the hours following a result emotions run high.

I've said my piece we need 2-3 actual defensive options.

The last team we had any kind of success with this formation we had White, Preston. Pearce, Sweeney and Benning (arguably CJ Hamilton as well). Who out of our current back 5 would displace them playing in the first half of that season? JJOT and Macca.

That is a tad unfair on Harbottle, he's had one start for us so far, but the rest? And that team only finished 3 places higher and was a string contender until the final whistle of the last game.

Hawkins would be decent in the middle but he's no krystian Pearce and any side worth their salt will thread through balls between him and his CB partner either side for a quick attacker to run onto and

[yorkshire stag]

To be fair we lost plenty of games last season playing a back 4.

time will tell, however from that showing we didn’t have the players available to call it a success don’t you think ?

No, still early days though.

I fact you could argue that we've stuck with largely the same players at the back and still can't defend direct running and diagonal balls.

In the heat of the game and the hours following a result emotions run high.

I've said my piece we need 2-3 actual defensive options.

The last team we had any kind of success with this formation we had White, Preston. Pearce, Sweeney and Benning (arguably CJ Hamilton as well). Who out of our current back 5 would displace them playing in the first half of that season? JJOT and Macca.

That is a tad unfair on Harbottle, he's had one start for us so far, but the rest? And that team only finished 3 places higher and was a string contender until the final whistle of the last game.

Hawkins would be decent in the middle but he's no krystian Pearce and any side worth their salt will thread through balls between him and his CB partner either side for a quick attacker to run onto and

correct & we int even opposition scouts, oh dear i’m starting to fear he hadn’t & wont recruit to the level required

[Stag95]

I’m a fan of the 3/5 at the back, but only so long as players are played in position. Bowery at CB is nothing short of ludicrous. Play them where they’re comfortable and they are good enough to win most games.

[Rob]

I’m a fan of the 3/5 at the back, but only so long as players are played in position. Bowery at CB is nothing short of ludicrous. Play them where they’re comfortable and they are good enough to win most games.

I'm a fan too, but to play it you need strength in depth at CB which we clearly don't have at present.

[Martin Shaw]

I’m a fan of the 3/5 at the back, but only so long as players are played in position. Bowery at CB is nothing short of ludicrous. Play them where they’re comfortable and they are good enough to win most games.

I'm a fan too, but to play it you need strength in depth at CB which we clearly don't have at present.

we didn't on Saturday, but we do in the squad: Perch, Hewitt, Hawkins, O'Toole, Harbottle.

[yorkshire stag]

I’m a fan of the 3/5 at the back, but only so long as players are played in position. Bowery at CB is nothing short of ludicrous. Play them where they’re comfortable and they are good enough to win most games.

I'm a fan too, but to play it you need strength in depth at CB which we clearly don't have at present.

a voice of reason at last before all the lemmings fall off the edge

[NEStag]

I’m not really a fan of 3 5 2, for Mansfield and this squad at least.
I think it leaves too much space down the wings and the wing backs often get caught too far forward and then the opposition gets in behind too easily.
I think we aren’t good enough to play 3 5 2 and we are better with 4 4 2 (maybe at home) or 4 5 1 (away), with flexibility to switch mid game.
I also think that the McLaughlin (LB) and Quinn (left mid) is the best combination in the team.
Just my view and I appreciate I’m not a football manager.

[Rob]

I’m a fan of the 3/5 at the back, but only so long as players are played in position. Bowery at CB is nothing short of ludicrous. Play them where they’re comfortable and they are good enough to win most games.

I'm a fan too, but to play it you need strength in depth at CB which we clearly don't have at present.

we didn't on Saturday, but we do in the squad: Perch, Hewitt, Hawkins, O'Toole, Harbottle.

When you consider who they are, it's not enough Martin, you know it. We need George Foster in his prime. As for your list, Perch and Hewitt are right backs, O'Toole a CM, Hawkins a striker and sometimes CB, Harbottle is a talented youngster. None of them are the experienced centre half we need at the back. We need to fix that, or its mid-table.

[stagmanrob]

Neither of those centre backs (questionable that's what they are - apart from Harbottle as Rob has alluded to) have the legs to get them out of bother when they get skinned for pace.
We're going to pick up a lot of bookings and sendings off this season I think from last ditch tackles or tactical fouls when they get easily ran past.

I found it no surprise that Thomas-Asante created one, and scored the other on Saturday.
He caused us problems not only because of his pace, but his strength to roll his man as well.

Many opposition scouts watching the match video will have picked up on that weakness straight away.

[part time pete]

I’m not really a fan of 3 5 2, for Mansfield and this squad at least.
I think it leaves too much space down the wings and the wing backs often get caught too far forward and then the opposition gets in behind too easily.
I think we aren’t good enough to play 3 5 2 and we are better with 4 4 2 (maybe at home) or 4 5 1 (away), with flexibility to switch mid game.
I also think that the McLaughlin (LB) and Quinn (left mid) is the best combination in the team.
Just my view and I appreciate I’m not a football manager.

You say opposition gets in behind too easily and we ought to play Macca at LB, then in the same breathe you suggest Macca bombing forward is best as well. So who is covering behind Macca.

Surely Macca is best playing LWB and then we have more cover at back because we have 3 centre backs who can shuffle across instead of just two if he played at LB.

[NEStag]

I’m not really a fan of 3 5 2, for Mansfield and this squad at least.
I think it leaves too much space down the wings and the wing backs often get caught too far forward and then the opposition gets in behind too easily.
I think we aren’t good enough to play 3 5 2 and we are better with 4 4 2 (maybe at home) or 4 5 1 (away), with flexibility to switch mid game.
I also think that the McLaughlin (LB) and Quinn (left mid) is the best combination in the team.
Just my view and I appreciate I’m not a football manager.

You say opposition gets in behind too easily and we ought to play Macca at LB, then in the same breathe you suggest Macca bombing forward is best as well. So who is covering behind Macca.

Surely Macca is best playing LWB and then we have more cover at back because we have 3 centre backs who can shuffle across instead of just two if he played at LB.

Where did I say that Pete.....?

I think Macca at LB is fine and he gets forward and links with Quinn, just not as a wing back, that's all.

This was the formation we played last year and it seemed to work quite well.

[StagInHucknall]

I know you think you’re entitled to a public statement for everything, but since when have club tactics been directly discussed with fans of any club? When would you like this announcement - at the start of the season, before every game, as we’re attacking, as we’re defending, in the middle of a game, when a substitution is taking place?

ha ha why wouldn’t an interviewer ask so then Nigel what’s your reasons for going to a back three when a back four worked well last season & improving it with a quality CB & RB would make it even better ?

why is that so difficult to understand, do you not want to know why this baffling disission has been had ?

an interviewer did ask why he was going to a back three. The answer was:

Nigel Clough: "We think we’ve got the players to carry it out (3-5-2). I think we’ve got ideal wing-backs, I think the centre halves we’ve got can adapt to it, I think Oli Hawkins is perfect in the middle of a three, and it gets us two up top which is important as well."

After the Sheff Utd game, Clough then added: “The 3-5-2 system is working well at the moment."

There's the problem.

If he’s wrong then let him fall on his sword. If not then enjoy the ride.

[wink68]

Hewitt was really good overlapping down the right last season, I don’t understand the lack of faith in him being in RWB position. I’ll take him over Gordon because he’s capable of defending too.

Saying he can defend is a bit of a stretch. Whenever the opposition had an attacking left side he got ripped to shreds. The next game people would comment he'd had a better game when he wasn't put under any pressure at all. Not sure Gordon is any better but at least has pace going forwards and can get him out of trouble at the back. Right side of defence would have been my first signing.

[gazza1988]

Hewitt was really good overlapping down the right last season, I don’t understand the lack of faith in him being in RWB position. I’ll take him over Gordon because he’s capable of defending too.

Saying he can defend is a bit of a stretch. Whenever the opposition had an attacking left side he got ripped to shreds. The next game people would comment he'd had a better game when he wasn't put under any pressure at all. Not sure Gordon is any better but at least has pace going forwards and can get him out of trouble at the back. Right side of defence would have been my first signing.

Just to reiterate. You would have signed a 4th RB/RWB before signing a second LB/LWB?

Hewitt isn't that bad. Making him the first choice RB last season contributed to our good run, in my opinion of course.

[bear 73]

To be fair we lost plenty of games last season playing a back 4.

time will tell, however from that showing we didn’t have the players available to call it a success don’t you think ?

No, still early days though.

I fact you could argue that we've stuck with largely the same players at the back and still can't defend direct running and diagonal balls.

In the heat of the game and the hours following a result emotions run high.

I've said my piece we need 2-3 actual defensive options.

The last team we had any kind of success with this formation we had White, Preston. Pearce, Sweeney and Benning (arguably CJ Hamilton as well). Who out of our current back 5 would displace them playing in the first half of that season? JJOT and Macca.

That is a tad unfair on Harbottle, he's had one start for us so far, but the rest? And that team only finished 3 places higher and was a string contender until the final whistle of the last game.






Hawkins would be decent in the middle but he's no krystian Pearce and any side worth their salt will thread through balls between him and his CB partner either side for a quick attacker to run onto and

correct & we int even opposition scouts, oh dear i’m starting to fear he hadn’t & wont recruit to the level required

Your cofidence after one game is inspiring.
From staff and players all agree its a work in progress and will take a week or so to fine tune

[wink68]

Hewitt was really good overlapping down the right last season, I don’t understand the lack of faith in him being in RWB position. I’ll take him over Gordon because he’s capable of defending too.

Saying he can defend is a bit of a stretch. Whenever the opposition had an attacking left side he got ripped to shreds. The next game people would comment he'd had a better game when he wasn't put under any pressure at all. Not sure Gordon is any better but at least has pace going forwards and can get him out of trouble at the back. Right side of defence would have been my first signing.

Just to reiterate. You would have signed a 4th RB/RWB before signing a second LB/LWB?

Hewitt isn't that bad. Making him the first choice RB last season contributed to our good run, in my opinion of course.

LB or LWB Macca was contender if not player of the season who started 90% of games. Yes you have to have cover but realistically any cover hopefully wouldn't get much game time. Contrast the right hand side we never started a game with a RB good enough for a top 3 side, so yes strengthen your weakest area first.

[gazza1988]

Hewitt was really good overlapping down the right last season, I don’t understand the lack of faith in him being in RWB position. I’ll take him over Gordon because he’s capable of defending too.

Saying he can defend is a bit of a stretch. Whenever the opposition had an attacking left side he got ripped to shreds. The next game people would comment he'd had a better game when he wasn't put under any pressure at all. Not sure Gordon is any better but at least has pace going forwards and can get him out of trouble at the back. Right side of defence would have been my first signing.

Just to reiterate. You would have signed a 4th RB/RWB before signing a second LB/LWB?

Hewitt isn't that bad. Making him the first choice RB last season contributed to our good run, in my opinion of course.

LB or LWB Macca was contender if not player of the season who started 90% of games. Yes you have to have cover but realistically any cover hopefully wouldn't get much game time. Contrast the right hand side we never started a game with a RB good enough for a top 3 side, so yes strengthen your weakest area first.

Fair enough