Steve Cooper: The Tactics Thread

[kingfox]

The most head scratching thing to come out of last night is Fatawu’s situation.
 

It was pretty evident that in possession was a fluid mix of 3-4-1-2 and 3-4-2-1. 
 

Then comes the problem, where does Fatawu go? If Cooper is insistent on using a back three system, whatever system he uses I can’t see it playing to Fatawu’s strengths. It’s either adopt him as a wing-back in a 3-4-1-2, or use him as an inverted winger in a 3-4-2-1, but of course it would probably then be Ricardo providing the width. 
 

I think these setups can very much work for Mavididi, I thought he did pretty well last night, plus he does have history of playing centrally at times when he was at Montpellier. 
 

But the Fatawu situation is a conundrum and something Cooper must tweak. In a 3-4-1-2 as a right sided wing-back, I wouldn’t be overly keen, but he does have the energy and defensive work where he could potentially work in that role 🤷‍♂️
 

15 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

 

I'm hoping that is the change he's going to make and he only started Fatawu for balance. But being linked with Soule... it feels like him and Mavididi would be the 10's, so Fatawu would still be left wing back. Luke Thomas was available yesterday but used as LCB instead of LWB. 

Exactly that Strider, but after last night one of the first things I thought was the potential signing of Soule is not needed. 
 

For the right balance Fatawu must be on the right, which would then mean whoever starts on the left wing, comes inside as the number 10, this is why I’d rather go for someone like Puertas over Soule. 
 

But if you tweak it slightly to 3-4-2-1 in possession, then you’re left with Fatawu being used as an inverted winger. Then the signing of Soule would look even more unnecessary, but if he does sign, one of them will probably be shafted to the bench if you go 3-4-2-1. 
 

Then also with a 3-4-2-1 the whole left side would need changing. The potential signing of Saelemaekers looks far more plausible on the basis of last night. While we’d also need another signing in that LB/LCB slot, don’t fancy Okoli, Kristiansen or Thomas in that role. 

[Finnegan]

1 minute ago, kingfox said:

The most head scratching thing to come out of last night is Fatawu’s situation.
 

It was pretty evident that in possession was a fluid mix of 3-4-1-2 and 3-4-2-1. 
 

Then comes the problem, where does Fatawu go? If Cooper is insistent on using a back three system, whatever system he uses I can’t see it playing to Fatawu’s strengths. It’s either adopt him as a wing-back in a 3-4-1-2, or use him as an inverted winger in a 3-4-2-1, but of course it would probably then be Ricardo providing the width. 
 

I think these setups can very much work for Mavididi, I thought he did pretty well last night, plus he does have history of playing centrally at times when he was at Montpellier. 
 

But the Fatawu situation is a conundrum and something Cooper must tweak. In a 3-4-1-2 as a right sided wing-back, I wouldn’t be overly keen, but he does have the energy and defensive work where he could potentially work in that role 🤷‍♂️
 

Exactly that Strider, but after last night one of the first things I thought was the potential signing of Soule is not needed. 
 

For the right balance Fatawu must be on the right, which would then mean whoever starts on the left wing, comes inside as the number 10, this is why I’d rather go for someone like Puertas over Soule. 
 

But if you tweak it slightly to 3-4-2-1 in possession, then you’re left with Fatawu being used as an inverted winger. Then the signing of Soule would look even more unnecessary, but if he does sign, one of them will probably be shafted to the bench if you go 3-4-2-1. 
 

Then also with a 3-4-2-1 the whole left side would need changing. The potential signing of Saelemaekers looks far more plausible on the basis of last night. While we’d also need another signing in that LB/LCB slot, don’t fancy Okoli, Kristiansen or Thomas in that role. 

 

343.

 

But better yet, drop the 3 CBs shit. It's garbage. If you need 3 centre backs to defend properly as a coach you've already done something wrong. No football team that aspires to keep the ball, play progressive, passing football should ever be wasting a position on the pitch on a third centre back. 

 

Did I mention I hate 3atb?

[escape2victory]

9 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

343.

 

But better yet, drop the 3 CBs shit. It's garbage. If you need 3 centre backs to defend properly as a coach you've already done something wrong. No football team that aspires to keep the ball, play progressive, passing football should ever be wasting a position on the pitch on a third centre back. 

 

Did I mention I hate 3atb?

Ahh I love 3 atb, probably for nostalgic reasons with O’Neills 90’s team.

 

I think at times too much is made of formations. Generally most systems defend with 5 and attack with 5

[kingfox]

24 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

343.

 

But better yet, drop the 3 CBs shit. It's garbage. If you need 3 centre backs to defend properly as a coach you've already done something wrong. No football team that aspires to keep the ball, play progressive, passing football should ever be wasting a position on the pitch on a third centre back. 

 

Did I mention I hate 3atb?

A fluid mixture of 3-4-2-1/3-4-3 could potentially work, get Mavididi and Fatawu drifting into wide areas, then have the wing-backs either sitting back or invert them like two 8’s/10’s 
 

Whether people like it or not, 3atb looks here to stay, Cooper is just continuing on with what Maresca left but with a few tweaks. 3atb in possession for me works when you’re either starting Vestergaard or Coady, Vestergaard as the centre piece in a back three was crucial to how we played last season. The thought of using Vestergaard or Coady in a four in and out of possession is terrifying, unless you park the bus. 

[RowlattsFox]

It's a bit quick to jump on Cooper imo, although I share the concerns around Fatawu position. He's got the defensive work rate, energy and pace to be an attack minded wing back but you do lose a lot of his strengths. His cutting inside was a strength but also massively inconsistent. Maybe Fatawu can develop his game on the left, who knows. 

Sometimes in pre-season you get players playing in strange positions, sometimes experiments or sometimes it's just so that everyone can get minutes. 

 

[coolhandfox]

2 hours ago, iancognito said:

When else does he experiment? Best to try now than when we're 2 down in a league game

I think to survive; we need to be one of the most organised and best-coached teams in the league, which mean we need to make the most of pre-season. 

 

 

[mazarron fox]

1 hour ago, kingfox said:

The most head scratching thing to come out of last night is Fatawu’s situation.
 

It was pretty evident that in possession was a fluid mix of 3-4-1-2 and 3-4-2-1. 
 

Then comes the problem, where does Fatawu go? If Cooper is insistent on using a back three system, whatever system he uses I can’t see it playing to Fatawu’s strengths. It’s either adopt him as a wing-back in a 3-4-1-2, or use him as an inverted winger in a 3-4-2-1, but of course it would probably then be Ricardo providing the width. 
 

I think these setups can very much work for Mavididi, I thought he did pretty well last night, plus he does have history of playing centrally at times when he was at Montpellier. 
 

But the Fatawu situation is a conundrum and something Cooper must tweak. In a 3-4-1-2 as a right sided wing-back, I wouldn’t be overly keen, but he does have the energy and defensive work where he could potentially work in that role 🤷‍♂️
 

Exactly that Strider, but after last night one of the first things I thought was the potential signing of Soule is not needed. 
 

For the right balance Fatawu must be on the right, which would then mean whoever starts on the left wing, comes inside as the number 10, this is why I’d rather go for someone like Puertas over Soule. 
 

But if you tweak it slightly to 3-4-2-1 in possession, then you’re left with Fatawu being used as an inverted winger. Then the signing of Soule would look even more unnecessary, but if he does sign, one of them will probably be shafted to the bench if you go 3-4-2-1. 
 

Then also with a 3-4-2-1 the whole left side would need changing. The potential signing of Saelemaekers looks far more plausible on the basis of last night. While we’d also need another signing in that LB/LCB slot, don’t fancy Okoli, Kristiansen or Thomas in that role. 

I have got to give a big 👏👏👏to you tactic analysts ,it is very interesting and gives us lesser  mortals who think it’s just 11 blokes kicking a bag of wind some perspective. Keep up the good work.

[Greg2607]

What happened to pre-season also being about getting minutes into people's legs? It could just be that he wanted Fatawu to get some game time.... it doesn't automatically mean he's our starting LWB. 

 

with staggered return dates etc, we still have to put out an 11 in these games. 

 

I wouldn't start to worry too much about it, or deconstruct it, until it's happening in the final pre-season game ahead of the season opener... 

[Scotch]

So, if I picked it up properly, this would be a rough idea as to how we want to set up....

 

Looking at our squad as it stands, I think it suits certain players, doesn't suit others and shows where we would need to address in terms of additions coming in, but looking at each position individually...

 

#1- we are fine with Mads, Stolarcyk, Iversen

 

#4/5- we have plenty of players there, Coady, Vesty, Okoli, Souttar, Nelson, Faes. It's just a question of some of their quality. One or two would probably need to go. 

 

#3- Ricardo is an obvious first choice. After that... Maybe BDR or JJ but not sure. Also not convinced Ricardo's body would hold up to that position so a natural back up would make sense. 

 

#2- We have no-one that fits here. Maybe JJ as backup, but as a first choice LB/LCB hybrid? We need someone here. 

 

#6- Ndidi as first choice CDM. Currently have Hamza as back up but would like a better option. 

 

#8- Winks in the DLP role with possibly Soumare or Braybrooke backing him. 

 

#7- There is no-one for this role. Fatawu maybe shoe-horned in here but it doesn't fit. We would need 2 players for here. 

 

#10- Suits Mavididi with Alves as backup. 

 

#11- suits Mcateer and BDR but neither are starter here, need someone here with Mcateer maybe going out. 

 

#9- Vardy/Daka/Cannon have this covered but I'd maybe loan Cannon and get another striker in to maybe be starter. 

[ClaphamFox]

14 minutes ago, Greg2607 said:

What happened to pre-season also being about getting minutes into people's legs? It could just be that he wanted Fatawu to get some game time.... it doesn't automatically mean he's our starting LWB. 

 

with staggered return dates etc, we still have to put out an 11 in these games. 

 

I wouldn't start to worry too much about it, or deconstruct it, until it's happening in the final pre-season game ahead of the season opener... 

In his post-match interview, Cooper said that they were experimenting with playing certain players in different positions to see how they'd get on. My impression was that nothing is set in stone and we'll probably see other formations and tactics tried out in the forthcoming preseason games. This would fit with what we know of Cooper - ie, he's a pragmatic coach who is willing to change systems throughout the season and is not wedded to any particular formation.

[FerrisBueller]

16 minutes ago, Scotch said:

So, if I picked it up properly, this would be a rough idea as to how we want to set up....

 

Looking at our squad as it stands, I think it suits certain players, doesn't suit others and shows where we would need to address in terms of additions coming in, but looking at each position individually...

 

#1- we are fine with Mads, Stolarcyk, Iversen

 

#4/5- we have plenty of players there, Coady, Vesty, Okoli, Souttar, Nelson, Faes. It's just a question of some of their quality. One or two would probably need to go. 

 

#3- Ricardo is an obvious first choice. After that... Maybe BDR or JJ but not sure. Also not convinced Ricardo's body would hold up to that position so a natural back up would make sense. 

 

#2- We have no-one that fits here. Maybe JJ as backup, but as a first choice LB/LCB hybrid? We need someone here. 

 

#6- Ndidi as first choice CDM. Currently have Hamza as back up but would like a better option. 

 

#8- Winks in the DLP role with possibly Soumare or Braybrooke backing him. 

 

#7- There is no-one for this role. Fatawu maybe shoe-horned in here but it doesn't fit. We would need 2 players for here. 

 

#10- Suits Mavididi with Alves as backup. 

 

#11- suits Mcateer and BDR but neither are starter here, need someone here with Mcateer maybe going out. 

 

#9- Vardy/Daka/Cannon have this covered but I'd maybe loan Cannon and get another striker in to maybe be starter. 

Genuinely took me about 5 minutes to work out who BDR is 😅

[pmcla26]

I have to say I'm a little bit disappointed with the tactical idea that Cooper has experimented with in the first couple of games. I get it - new manager comes in and has his own ideas (and tweaks were going to have to be made to adapt to the Premier League) but I was hoping that we'd stay with the same shape and individual roles (Ricardo inverting, Mavididi and Fatawu keeping their width but cutting in, underlapping runs into the box from the 8s) as a template for players to follow and for when buying in the market. 

 

I honestly don't think we needed to do too much business this summer, it was just about adding quality to the squad. 

 

Mads 

 

Ricardo

Faes 

Coady (Think Vesty will get caught out for pace and we won't need his passing ability quite so much this season given we won't be breaking down low blocks every game)

Kristiansen/new LCB type (someone like Theate? - maybe unrealistic but we were linked) 

 

Winks 

Ndidi 

KDH replacement (O'Riley?) 

 

Fatawu 

Vardy/new signing (Target man type alternative?) 

Mavididi 

 

That's a good starting 11 and one that features a lot of continuity from last season. We will have had to speed up our play through the lines on transition (so it won't strictly be "enzo-ball", just the same roles with slightly different tactics), but we won't face sides sitting 11 behind the ball this season. 

 

It just seems a lot more simpler to me than what Cooper has implemented so far and it's concerning me, despite it being so early in pre-season. 

[sporter113]

34 minutes ago, Scotch said:

So, if I picked it up properly, this would be a rough idea as to how we want to set up....

 

Looking at our squad as it stands, I think it suits certain players, doesn't suit others and shows where we would need to address in terms of additions coming in, but looking at each position individually...

 

#1- we are fine with Mads, Stolarcyk, Iversen

 

#4/5- we have plenty of players there, Coady, Vesty, Okoli, Souttar, Nelson, Faes. It's just a question of some of their quality. One or two would probably need to go. 

 

#3- Ricardo is an obvious first choice. After that... Maybe BDR or JJ but not sure. Also not convinced Ricardo's body would hold up to that position so a natural back up would make sense. 

 

#2- We have no-one that fits here. Maybe JJ as backup, but as a first choice LB/LCB hybrid? We need someone here. 

 

#6- Ndidi as first choice CDM. Currently have Hamza as back up but would like a better option. 

 

#8- Winks in the DLP role with possibly Soumare or Braybrooke backing him. 

 

#7- There is no-one for this role. Fatawu maybe shoe-horned in here but it doesn't fit. We would need 2 players for here. 

 

#10- Suits Mavididi with Alves as backup. 

 

#11- suits Mcateer and BDR but neither are starter here, need someone here with Mcateer maybe going out. 

 

#9- Vardy/Daka/Cannon have this covered but I'd maybe loan Cannon and get another striker in to maybe be starter. 

If you just flipped the sides, it suits our players much more.

 

Push #3 back, and play Justin there. Faes/Okoli/Nelson are all right-footed and could cover that role.

Push #2 up and that suits Kristiansen. We would lack depth there though.

Swap #7 to the right-side and that allows us to play Fatawu in his best position.

 

All we'd need for the starting XI, is it to sign a new starter for #11, i.e. Soule or O'Riley. Ricardo could cover either at #6 or #8, and BDR could cover for #7, #10 and #11, so we'd only need a back-up for #2.

 

To be fair, enough players are still on holiday that we might see this once we have our full squad available.

[RedSoxUK]

2 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

343.

 

But better yet, drop the 3 CBs shit. It's garbage. If you need 3 centre backs to defend properly as a coach you've already done something wrong. No football team that aspires to keep the ball, play progressive, passing football should ever be wasting a position on the pitch on a third centre back. 

 

Did I mention I hate 3atb?

I mean, Vestergaard sweeping up and being  excellent with possession of the ball means we can keep the ball, be progressive and play passing football, examplified last year already. I'd say most 3 atb teams aren't playing 3atb to be defensive hoofy counter attack but you retain possession due to a double pivot Infront

[The Doctor]

2 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said:

I mean, Vestergaard sweeping up and being  excellent with possession of the ball means we can keep the ball, be progressive and play passing football, examplified last year already. I'd say most 3 atb teams aren't playing 3atb to be defensive hoofy counter attack but you retain possession due to a double pivot Infront

there's a huge difference between what we did last year and a 3 centre back formation. what we did last year was a 4-2-3-1 out of possession, flat four with right back and left back. in possession the second of the pivot pushed forward, the right back (Ricky) inverted to keep the double pivot and the left back tucked in as the centre backs shuffled across, creating a 3-2-4-1 in possession. it's a lot more versatile than actually putting 3 centre backs on the pitch with wing backs (people have been shouting about wingbacks since Puel, and it's never suited our squad)

[RedSoxUK]

4 minutes ago, sporter113 said:

If you just flipped the sides, it suits our players much more.

Think that's exactly what Cooper will do for the next game. The dodgy Z formation 3421

 

                 Mads

Justin - Vestergaard - Faes

                                           Kristiansen 

             Ricardo - Winks

Fatwatu 

                 Soule - Mavididi

                      Vardy

 

 

[RedSoxUK]

1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

there's a huge difference between what we did last year and a 3 centre back formation. what we did last year was a 4-2-3-1 out of possession, flat four with right back and left back. in possession the second of the pivot pushed forward, the right back (Ricky) inverted to keep the double pivot and the left back tucked in as the centre backs shuffled across, creating a 3-2-4-1 in possession. it's a lot more versatile than actually putting 3 centre backs on the pitch with wing backs (people have been shouting about wingbacks since Puel, and it's never suited our squad)

Is Doyle a CB? It was 3 ATB in possession the difference to last night was the 3 CBs didn't push forward as much, probably because two were Nelson and Thomas.

[Finnegan]

9 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said:

I mean, Vestergaard sweeping up and being  excellent with possession of the ball means we can keep the ball, be progressive and play passing football, examplified last year already. I'd say most 3 atb teams aren't playing 3atb to be defensive hoofy counter attack but you retain possession due to a double pivot Infront

 

Go back through history and look at how many progressive, passing based teams won things using wing backs and a back three. Pep has experimented with it once or twice for a couple of games at a time and sacked it off. That's about as close as you'll get unless people start clutching at straws talking about non-CBs being played in slightly hybrid CB-esque roles. 

 

There's two glaring problems with it. Firstly, with honourable exceptions like John Stones (and maybe Vestergaard, I'll grant you) by and large centre backs aren't amongst your better technical footballers and playmakers. By over committing at the back you're just denying yourself more outfield players that could be helping progress the ball up the pitch. But secondly, nearly every successful passing system utilises as much width as possible to expand the playing area and move and stretch opponents, especially in the attacking third. Playing with a narrow front two/three and relying on wing backs with obvious defensive duties to provide that width for you is never, ever going to be preferable to just having actual wide attacking players.

 

The brilliance of an inverted full back system as we played it last year is that you get the same wide overloads but with underlapping attacking "mezzalas" instead of overlapping full backs because 9/10 the attacking midfielders in your team are much better footballers to have hitting the final third than the likes of Viktor Kristensen or James Justin who in turn are generally better defenders than the likes of Dewsbury Hall. It was perfect.

 

To throw in an extra centre back we've either got to sacrifice a centre midfielder or we're sacrificing width in the attacking third. Neither of those things are productive and intelligent ways to play the type of football the club wants to play and that's why there's so very few examples in history of winning teams playing 3atb.

 

[Big_Nige]

1 hour ago, Greg2607 said:

What happened to pre-season also being about getting minutes into people's legs? It could just be that he wanted Fatawu to get some game time.... it doesn't automatically mean he's our starting LWB. 

 

with staggered return dates etc, we still have to put out an 11 in these games. 

 

I wouldn't start to worry too much about it, or deconstruct it, until it's happening in the final pre-season game ahead of the season opener... 

This is where I am, can’t say I was pleased to see Fatawu playing LWB, or the idea of the workload being afforded to Ricardo. But it’s the first proper pre-season game, players are still coming back and it’s just about minutes

 

Come Lens on the 10th of August and if we’re seeing something similar in terms of square pegs then ill start to be a bit more concerned 

 

 

[RedSoxUK]

And the B team:

 

               Anyone but Ward

          Coady - Souttar - Okoli

                                           Thomas 

             Ndidi - Soumare

Reid

              McAteer - Alves

                       Daka

 

 

[The Doctor]

9 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said:

Is Doyle a CB? It was 3 ATB in possession the difference to last night was the 3 CBs didn't push forward as much, probably because two were Nelson and Thomas.

Doyles a hybrid lb/cb. the bigger difference is the formation last year made use of the squad and got players in their correct positions. the initial indications from Cooper is that it will be a proper back 3 rather than hybrid roles and that as a result we'll be weakening our biggest threat, the wingers 

[kingfox]

16 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

the initial indications from Cooper is that it will be a proper back 3 rather than hybrid roles

If last night is anything to go by, that won’t be the case mate. 
 

As Strider showed on Page 9, out of possession very much looked like a 4-4-2, with Ricardo and Thomas dropping into their natural positions. 
 

In possession was just a few tweaks on last season, instead of inverted full back and two 8’s, we just switched it for a predominant RWB and two 10’s, one of which(Mavididi) joined in a front two. 

[RedSoxUK]

4 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Go back through history and look at how many progressive, passing based teams won things using wing backs and a back three. Pep has experimented with it once or twice for a couple of games at a time and sacked it off. That's about as close as you'll get unless people start clutching at straws talking about non-CBs being played in slightly hybrid CB-esque roles. 

 

There's two glaring problems with it. Firstly, with honourable exceptions like John Stones (and maybe Vestergaard, I'll grant you) by and large centre backs aren't amongst your better technical footballers and playmakers. By over committing at the back you're just denying yourself more outfield players that could be helping progress the ball up the pitch. But secondly, nearly every successful passing system utilises as much width as possible to expand the playing area and move and stretch opponents, especially in the attacking third. Playing with a narrow front two/three and relying on wing backs with obvious defensive duties to provide that width for you is never, ever going to be preferable to just having actual wide attacking players.

 

The brilliance of an inverted full back system as we played it last year is that you get the same wide overloads but with underlapping attacking "mezzalas" instead of overlapping full backs because 9/10 the attacking midfielders in your team are much better footballers to have hitting the final third than the likes of Viktor Kristensen or James Justin who in turn are generally better defenders than the likes of Dewsbury Hall. It was perfect.

 

To throw in an extra centre back we've either got to sacrifice a centre midfielder or we're sacrificing width in the attacking third. Neither of those things are productive and intelligent ways to play the type of football the club wants to play and that's why there's so very few examples in history of winning teams playing 3atb.

 

I wasn't actually talking about wing backs,  but 3 positional CBs and a double pivot. That being said Bayer Leverkusen just dominated with 3 atb and variations of wing backs similar to a 3421..so I wouldn't write it off.

 

My point was that the Championship and PL were won by teams with the 3 positional CBs with a double pivot playing progressive passing football, dominating possession.

 

343 and variations with 3 ATB have been very popular throughout history with many winners. The logic that you sacrifice a midfielder to play 3 CBs is the opposite of what Enzo did, and why Pep started to push Stones into midfield as well. But you need creative players and fortunately, also my point, we have Vestergaard. 

 

I'd be annoyed if Cooper uses Fatwatu as a wing back.

[RedSoxUK]

32 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Doyles a hybrid lb/cb. the bigger difference is the formation last year made use of the squad and got players in their correct positions. the initial indications from Cooper is that it will be a proper back 3 rather than hybrid roles and that as a result we'll be weakening our biggest threat, the wingers 

Yeah I agree with you and think Cooper was giving minutes / fitting players in.

Don't think he will invert but will use one side more defensive and one more attacking,  probably switching throughout and overall being a lot more adaptive.

 

[GingerrrFox]

He may not have used an inverted full back before but when you have arguably the best player in England outside of Trent Alexander Arnold in that role in your squad AKA Ricky P, why wouldn’t you just stick with it? There’s a whole season of work to show that Winks and Ricky work together beautifully in a midfield pivot and it baffles me that he’s gonna just throw it all away.