3 at the back

After watching Englands new system in this summers World Cup whats your thoughts on The Millers adopting the same system especially at home, Ajayi Raggett Robertson across the back then 2 wing backs bombing on, Vyner and Mattock for me are better going forward than defending so would fit the bill nicely, that formation would create 5 across midfield (when we havnt got the ball), and 2 up front, it looks good on paper to me but are we good enough or brave enough to give it a go. Quite a few different options with certain players in certain positions, whats your thoughts, keep it clean PLEASE and dont tell Warney.!!! ;D;D

Who would your 3 in the middle be.?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Archiemiller

After watching Englands new system in this summers World Cup whats your thoughts on The Millers adopting the same system especially at home, Ajayi Raggett Robertson across the back then 2 wing backs bombing on, Vyner and Mattock for me are better going forward than defending so would fit the bill nicely, that formation would create 5 across midfield (when we havnt got the ball), and 2 up front, it looks good on paper to me but are we good enough or brave enough to give it a go. Quite a few different options with certain players in certain positions, whats your thoughts, keep it clean PLEASE and dont tell Warney.!!! ;D;D

---

Typical formation for a Canyon Waller ! Us lads from Monkwood were much more attacking 5 up front for us ! None of this defensive system !

For that to work you’d need really speedy wingers who can not only cross a ball and dribble but who can tackle and clear it as well. To put simply Mattock and vyner couldn’t do all of that in my opinion and the only one who could maybe and I do say maybe do it is Williams but you’d need someone else.

What we could do is play

Vyner Wood Mattock
—vaulks—ajayi
Williams Palmer forde
—-vassal smith

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caytonmiller

Who would your 3 in the middle be.?

---

That's the problem in a nutshell, at the moment we haven't got midfielders who are good enough or mobile enough to play 3 at the back.
Also I'm not sure that Vyner or Mattock are pacey enough to play conventional wing back roles.
I get the impression that Warne might be going to experiment with a defensive midfielder (probably Ajayi) shielding the back four.

The first time England met top quality opposition in Croatia who had the nous and tactical knowledge to press high up the pitch the 3 at the back were forced to lump it and the pressure just increased .

I'd suggest with all due respect Rotherham are facing equally more talented teams who will press and exploit any shortcomings , bear in mind the 3 England defenders are elite footballers and pretty comfortable technically and yet they were severely exposed .

To play through a press you need a good midfield duo , something England didn't have either and from what I read on here a problem for yourselves in this area .

England had a good world cup and gave us a run for our money but only really beat inferior opposition .

The system was found wanting when a quality team arrived to play against them .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caytonmiller

Who would your 3 in the middle be.?

---

Perm any 3 from...Palmer,Vaulks,Wiles,Jones, at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by animallittle3

The first time England met top quality opposition in Croatia who had the nous and tactical knowledge to press high up the pitch the 3 at the back were forced to lump it and the pressure just increased .

I'd suggest with all due respect Rotherham are facing equally more talented teams who will press and exploit any shortcomings , bear in mind the 3 England defenders are elite footballers and pretty comfortable technically and yet they were severely exposed .

To play through a press you need a good midfield duo , something England didn't have either and from what I read on here a problem for yourselves in this area .

England had a good world cup and gave us a run for our money but only really beat inferior opposition .

The system was found wanting when a quality team arrived to play against them .

---

Thats solved it then Animal...9 across back and 1 up top, thanks for your input.:blue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MILLERSTALE

Typical formation for a Canyon Waller ! Us lads from Monkwood were much more attacking 5 up front for us ! None of this defensive system !

---

Quite true Millerstale, but you lot always went home with your tales between your legs. XDXD

Not for me Archie. No goals in that team.. Smith plays better with a playing partner. Midfield is too slow to help a loan striker we have all the wrong players to go with 3 at the back.. if like mellow said. We get a couple of CM then it could work though if we had two good CM would we need to play 351?

From the squad we have and if everyone is fit
442 would be a balanced side though only for home games or Vs sides who are in poor form
Rodak.
Vyner
Robertson
Ajayi
Mattock
Forde
Vaulks
Palmer
Williams
Smith
Vassell

Away from home i would go 451 I'm swapping vassell for Jones. (Potter if available)

If I had a chance to bring in 2 loan players they would be a creative cm, a Nolan type player and a defencive MF like the lad I've mentioned before from scunny. Ojo