25-08-2018, 08:09 PM
Well, that Birmingham match highlights the point I was trying to make. I know individually players were poor as well as collectively, but fundamentally Karanka sets us up too defensively.
You don’t play two defensive midfielders in a 4-2-3-1 like that. They’re too deep, too close to the defence, so weren’t even competing to own the middle of the park. So we got overrun in the actual midfield, which puts our ‘creative’ 3 on the backfoot. And when we win possession back we’re deep so either try to run it out or hoof it to an outnumbered target man with no support. Neither of which works. The almost back 6 are disconnected from the ~forward 4.
I agree that you can get tied up with formations. They’re a framework and it depends on who you have on the pitch. That’s partly why it worked better when Gueddy played there - when he played well- because he played forwards. It’s a combination of the formation and who you pick. But my heart sank when I saw the team sheet, with Colback and Watson. They play too defensively for a 4-2-3-1 to work. In possession at times it looked like they tried to push the fullbacks forward, get one of the mids to drop into a 3 in the back with the other defensive mid coming short as an option. But it’s still too much weight of your numbers too deep in the pitch. Alternatively you pick the team with a body further up the pitch, win back possession higher up the pitch, and have more men in forward positions to worry the opposition. The subs changed it, when he got rid of the second defensive mid. I won’t claim it was just because of that that we got the draw but it’s no coincidence that we did better when we ditched one of those defensive mids.
And it’s no coincidence Karanka has such a poor winning record - 6 in 27 matches. He sets it up too defensively - and as a squad we will continue to underperform compared to the quality in that squad if he persists with it.
You don’t play two defensive midfielders in a 4-2-3-1 like that. They’re too deep, too close to the defence, so weren’t even competing to own the middle of the park. So we got overrun in the actual midfield, which puts our ‘creative’ 3 on the backfoot. And when we win possession back we’re deep so either try to run it out or hoof it to an outnumbered target man with no support. Neither of which works. The almost back 6 are disconnected from the ~forward 4.
I agree that you can get tied up with formations. They’re a framework and it depends on who you have on the pitch. That’s partly why it worked better when Gueddy played there - when he played well- because he played forwards. It’s a combination of the formation and who you pick. But my heart sank when I saw the team sheet, with Colback and Watson. They play too defensively for a 4-2-3-1 to work. In possession at times it looked like they tried to push the fullbacks forward, get one of the mids to drop into a 3 in the back with the other defensive mid coming short as an option. But it’s still too much weight of your numbers too deep in the pitch. Alternatively you pick the team with a body further up the pitch, win back possession higher up the pitch, and have more men in forward positions to worry the opposition. The subs changed it, when he got rid of the second defensive mid. I won’t claim it was just because of that that we got the draw but it’s no coincidence that we did better when we ditched one of those defensive mids.
And it’s no coincidence Karanka has such a poor winning record - 6 in 27 matches. He sets it up too defensively - and as a squad we will continue to underperform compared to the quality in that squad if he persists with it.