+ Visit Crewe Alexandra FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: 3 at the back

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,023

    3 at the back

    That's what I hope DA employs next season.
    It was what changed the season for Conte, Wenger is reaping some rewards from it (yeah, I know - better players but .....!!) and if you recall we had one of our best recent defensive lines when we had Alan Tate on loan from Swansea in that formation.
    Ok, you need marauding full-backs for this to work who can combine defensive and midfield duties - but I reckon out current first choice FBs could do that. It also lessens the dependency on their defensive capabilities because we would have that extra cover.
    And Ng, Ray and Guthrie (if we can get him to commit) would make an effective threesome.
    I know some will say why keep a defence that was already leaky but I say play them in the right formation and they would be more effective. Just need another CH for options.

    Further up the field, looks like we will be retaining DH, so that's our skipper sorted. Maybe one more midfield addition.
    And with Nicky Maynard back on the market, I'd have him back in a heartbeat.
    Now aged 30, is that possible or a pipe dream?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,611
    Strangely enough I was thinking of a sweeper system when I saw how Bingham was playing at the back, he would have made a good sweeper but we knew he was going.
    The three seems quite a possibility though

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    7,861
    Quote Originally Posted by out0lunch View Post
    Strangely enough I was thinking of a sweeper system when I saw how Bingham was playing at the back, he would have made a good sweeper but we knew he was going.
    The three seems quite a possibility though
    Ray will sign, Guthrie won't (I think) and nor will Turton. And if hose two do it is because no-one else wanted them

    I'm all for 3 at the back or a 2 with a screen, which is how Tate played for us. I'm all for 442, 433,4312 etc etc. Having plan A, B and C IS the key.

    Plan A, i think, will be 442. Zooms, Ray, New CH, New LB or NG there maybe.

    Perry, Ray and Guths (Guthrie best position IS centre half) and same full backs is a recipe to not progress, I think. Been there and tried it - kept losing....

    DH, hmmmmm is he staying? Hope so.

    Nicky M lives in Audlem doesn't he. Has no club, so got to be fair shout if big Dave wants him?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    3,191
    I’m all for Nicky M coming back – right attitude, right skills and I think he’d fit in well (he’d also blow my negative feelings about ex-Alex players returning out of the water).
    I am no expert tactician, but for far too many seasons we have had a weak and often ineffective defence. Even in our most recent glory days of winning the Div 2 play-offs, I have felt that the strategy and tactics of games was simply to score more than we conceded.
    If Turton and Guthrie depart, are we savvy enough to construct a defensive style and formation that works as well as we’ve seen from some visiting teams. The defenders didn’t seem more skilful, but did a better job in terms of positioning and backing each other up.
    I don’t know what the solution is, but defence has been a weakness for far too long.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    546
    Given Artell's experience as a CH, he ought to be open to a change in formation but we have been caught out too often without a plan B or C when the opposition change tactics. Hopefully, Artell and Lunt are more tactically aware.

    If Maynard was interested, could we afford his wage demands? Of course, he has the choice of income or no income and playing for us could give him an opportunity to show scouts what he is capable of.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,175
    My concerns about Maynard would be his injury record (which isn't great) and whether he meets the criteria of what Dave is looking for. He has said he wants someone 'similar to Bowery' who is more of a physical presence and I don't think Nicky is that. If he still has the pace he possessed at 19 ( or has almost as much!) then he might be worth a go but would we still need the Bowery replacement? Given that funds will inevitably be limited I would suggest strengthening the defensive options is a greater priority. Compared with the start of the season we will have released at least 3 of our highest earners (Lowe, Davis, Nugent) with a few more possibly following (Guthrie, Turton) but that only leaves room for 4 or 5 better paid recruits..... and that's better paid by Alex standards!!

    As for formations, I quite like us playing 3 at the back when we have at least 2 who can step out and pass the ball, and with Ray, Ng and hopefully Guthrie we have that. Still need a more basic type, I think, like an upgrade on Nugent, for the Newport Countys of this world. Also gives us a chance to exploit the best of Zooms, which is surely on the overlap. But on the left, Proggs! It's a new RB we might need, or RWB, if Turton goes.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    7,861
    Quote Originally Posted by AstonAlex View Post
    My concerns about Maynard would be his injury record (which isn't great) and whether he meets the criteria of what Dave is looking for. He has said he wants someone 'similar to Bowery' who is more of a physical presence and I don't think Nicky is that. If he still has the pace he possessed at 19 ( or has almost as much!) then he might be worth a go but would we still need the Bowery replacement? Given that funds will inevitably be limited I would suggest strengthening the defensive options is a greater priority. Compared with the start of the season we will have released at least 3 of our highest earners (Lowe, Davis, Nugent) with a few more possibly following (Guthrie, Turton) but that only leaves room for 4 or 5 better paid recruits..... and that's better paid by Alex standards!!

    As for formations, I quite like us playing 3 at the back when we have at least 2 who can step out and pass the ball, and with Ray, Ng and hopefully Guthrie we have that. Still need a more basic type, I think, like an upgrade on Nugent, for the Newport Countys of this world. Also gives us a chance to exploit the best of Zooms, which is surely on the overlap. But on the left, Proggs! It's a new RB we might need, or RWB, if Turton goes.
    Is Zooms left footed? I thought, could be wrong, he was a right back playing on left as Turton was a midfielder playing at full back....(breath....).

    If I am right we need a LB, if I am wrong - I said RB

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,175
    Well he's described as a left back on the Club website, which I accept is not the most reliable source! But if he can whip in crosses with his right food better than he does his left then I'll be dead impressed! And wondering why he hasn't been playing at a higher level than L2!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,959
    suddenly losing a lot of midfielders!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    7,861
    Quote Originally Posted by gazan View Post
    suddenly losing a lot of midfielders!
    But gaining defenders whom we thought would go - Turts and Guthers.

    It's all changeable isn't it. Nothing is anything until ink is dry on a contract.

    In the end Dave I trust.....or something like that. Drives ya mad trying to guess it all

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •