3-5-2 formation this season for United?

[#07]

He played 3 5 2 to give the defenders a moral boost and to send a message to his wide forwards to work better for the defensive duties which has been a real issue for us lately.

Not sure how you could know this but, assuming this is accurate, how would a back five boost confidence if they're expected to play a back four? It could simply make the defence conscious of how hard they find it to keep a clean sheet when we don't have a back five.

Likewise, why do the wide forwards need reminding of their duties? It was Ole himself who said we were playing 424, before Atalanta. It was Ole himself who said before, and after Liverpool, that he felt a Man Utd team had to play on front foot. Hence, why we got the kamikaze, headless chicken chasing from our front four. Which left the midfield isolated. We did something totally different yesterday, with Cavani (and Ronaldo to a lesser extent) deliberately not pressing and dropping back into shape. Our wide forwards don't need reminding to do this. They do this every time we play City, for example, and it usually goes well. You have to assume that they haven't been doing this because they were told to do otherwise.

I am happy blaming the players when we need to. However, it's fairly clear from what Ole has said that we naively moved away from compact, counterattacking football this season. That was an error on the side of the coaching staff. I wouldn't blame the players for failing to carry out tactics that are clearly not suited to this squad e.g., pressing high, requires Lindelof & Maguire to defend from halfway to keep the team compact. Never going to work given their flaws.

 

[Ixion]

Ronaldo scored and assisted yesterday. Bruno assisted, played a big role in the second. So I'm really glad Ole picked them and Cavani.

I really don't get watching the Spurs game and complaining Ronaldo, Cavani and Bruno played. Makes zero sense to me.

And we're 8 points off the top of the league while waiting for all those players to suddenly have another good game. If we lose or draw to City we'll be 10 or 11 points off and waiting for the same group of players to eventually put in another good game?

We should pick players based on form, it is not rocket science. Over playing certain players is literally one of the biggest problems of Ole's entire spell at the club and he's now obsessed with the same 8-9 players and in the long run it won't end well.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Look, I get it from your name he's your boy and I'm not having a pop at him. The other poster said that none of the young players have done anything to deserve to start and I was pointing out in the past 4 games Rashford has outscored Cavani and Ronaldo. You don't have to be so defensive. Christ.

You don't have to take it too personal or defensive, its ok to admit you are not making it logical.

 

[Marwood]

Look, I get it from your name he's your boy and I'm not having a pop at him. The other poster said that none of the young players have done anything to deserve to start and I was pointing out in the past 4 games Rashford has outscored Cavani and Ronaldo. You don't have to be so defensive. Christ.

I said there was no compelling argument for them to start. Not that they hadn't done anything at all.

In other words its debatable at least. Then there's the actual game that took place, that completely vindicated starting the OAP's.

 

[Ixion]

You don't have to take it too personal or defensive, its ok to admit you are not making it logical.

Rashford has more goals in the past 4 games than Cavani and Ronaldo. Stats. Facts. Logic.

 

[Resch]

He played 3 5 2 to give the defenders a moral boost and to send a message to his wide forwards to work better for the defensive duties which has been a real issue for us lately.

The problem was not the work rate, the problem was the space between attack - midfield and defense. Our wide forwards just had too much grass to cover, so most of the time defending was a waste of energy. Why hunting the ball like a dog? A team must defend as a unit, it minimizes the space of the opponents, under Ole we offer too much space between our lines.

 

[AussieRedDevil84]

Against the ball, your formation would maybe struggle for width due to not having wingbacks (which often are part of 3-at-the-back systems) nor fullbacks (part of 5-at-the-back systems). That would mean, either the centerbacks would have to go further out or the defensive mids. So the defensive stability you are using the 3 cb's plus 2 dm's for, would just vanish.
Attacking that might be a working solution, very attacking though. As our "wing"players are mostly strikers the natural wingplay (tracking back, helping out) isn't ingrained in them (why we struggled quite a bit this season).

Additionally it would create pretty deep distinction between attack and defense, 5 players there, 5 players there. Modern football doesn't work with that sort of fixed roles but is dynamic. Bringing as many attackers in as possible in a certain situation while staying defensively robust.

Edit: Welcome to the redcafe!

Thanks for the welcome mate, and for taking the time to break down the problems with the formation I suggested. I was really looking for a way to bring in a couple of those wingers like Rashford and Sancho who otherwise miss out in the formation that Ole used against Spurs, but from what I understand of yours and others answer is that replacing the two wingbacks with more attacking wingers would essentially be boosting the attack but at too much expense to the defense. Is that essentially what it would come down to?

As for other formations, I’ve seen a lot of people pushing for a 3-4-3 which would allow the wingbacks to play as well as twoattacking wingers, but it means that we’d only be playing the one striker, and Ole seemed to go on about how much he liked the way that having two guys there improved the attack. So I’m really struggling to find a formation that allows for that defensive support while also letting Rashford, Sancho, Greenwood, etc play, AND giving Ole his two striker setup. Is there a formation that would work to cover all those needs? Or is it likely going to be a case of different formations against different opponents, depending on how we can best approach them?

 

[Sultan]

Thanks for the welcome mate, and for taking the time to break down the problems with the formation I suggested. I was really looking for a way to bring in a couple of those wingers like Rashford and Sancho who otherwise miss out in the formation that Ole used against Spurs, but from what I understand of yours and others answer is that replacing the two wingbacks with more attacking wingers would essentially be boosting the attack but at too much expense to the defence. Is that essentially what it would come down to?

As for other formations, I’ve seen a lot of people pushing for a 3-4-3 which would allow the wingbacks to play as well as two attacking wingers, but it means that we’d only be playing the one striker, and Ole seemed to go on about how much he liked the way that having two guys there improved the attack. So I’m really struggling to find a formation that allows for that defensive support while also letting Rashford, Sancho, Greenwood, etc play, AND giving Ole his two striker setup. Is there a formation that would work to cover all those needs? Or is it likely going to be a case of different formations against different opponents, depending on how we can best approach them?

4-4-2 system would allow 2 wingers and 2 strikers to be included in the set-up.

 

[AussieRedDevil84]

4-4-2 system would allow 2 wingers and 2 strikers to be included in the set-up.

I’ve read a lot of people saying that this roster was built for a 4 man backline. Do you expect that Ole will go back to that, and something of a 4-4-2?

 

[Sultan]

I’ve read a lot of people saying that this roster was built for a 4 man backline. Do you expect that Ole will go back to that, and something of a 4-4-2?

If anything the squad is not assembled for 3-5-2 with all our young players not getting game time if Ole persists with Cavani and Ronaldo up front and our full-backs are primarily first and foremost defenders.

Ole, IIRC has not played 4-4-2 during his tenure.

 

[Sultan]

4-4-2 was the preferred system during Sir Alex's reign.

 

[JPRouve]

4-4-2 was the preferred system during Sir Alex's reign.

And SAF built the squad for that, his system combinations were 4411, 442, 4231 and he often had a player or two that allowed him to play in 433/4141 in small doses. It reminds me the way Atletico built their team under Simeone.

 

[Lee565]

It's funny that ole uses 352 now but never when he actually had a squad more suited to it when he first arrived at the club which is why conte probably would have been the best choice to replace Mourinho back then.

____________de gea
___bailly_lindelof_smalling_
Valencia/young_herrera_matic_shaw
______________pogba
__________lukaku_rashford

 

[NZT-One]

To add to Sultans answer:
I also don't remember us playing 4-4-2 under Ole. It needs to be said, that a 4-4-2 winger should be a different beast as "our current" wingers Rashford, Greenwood and Sancho. I'd call them inside forwards. Sancho might be able to hold his own in a more traditional role but especially Greenwood would struggle quite a bit. If we could make these three work at least to an agree like a traditional winger, we probably wouldn't even need to change the system.

I don't think, there is a system, that makes use of 2 attacking wingers and 2 strikers. You could name our famous setup in the 8-2 against Arsenal back in the day but even that was more of a 4-2-4-0 than a real 4-2-4.

The formation alone isn't the issue these days in my eyes, it is the missing cohesion between formation, players and approach. It isn't consequential. If we want to field all our attacking players, we could, but we would then either have to play for possession (avoid losing the ball as 1st line of defense) or we have to play an awesome pressing system to make the most use of it. But the squad isn't built for that. With the current set of players, it is difficult to come up with a way to field the best players in their best positions WHILE MAKING SURE the team balance itself stays intact.

 

[NZT-One]

And SAF built the squad for that, his system combinations were 4411, 442, 4231 and he often had a player or two that allowed him to play in 433/4141 in small doses. It reminds me the way Atletico built their team under Simeone.

I'd add the 4-5-1 to your list. The famous 4-5-1 I remember back in the day when in the German Forum I was a part of, people got crazy seeing Rooney deployed on the wing to accomodate a third midfielder. But it got us further in Europe, a great example how Ferguson adapted to the trends of the times. I'd give a lot for seeing him these days... I'd really like to know what his more indivudualistic approach would fight against the systemdriven approaches of Klopp or Pep. We know what Peps Barca did to us in 2009 it definitely would have been a challenge.

It's funny that ole uses 352 now but never when he actually had a squad more suited to it when he first arrived at the club which is why conte probably would have been the best choice to replace Mourinho back then.

____________de gea
___bailly_lindelof_smalling_
Valencia/young_herrera_matic_shaw
______________pogba
__________lukaku_rashford

That sounds actually great. Valencia would have been the archetype of a right-wingback. People would have tried to clone him!

 

[eire-red]

Never really liked the 5 at the back formation (or 3 at the back, whichever), but if it helps to steady the ship, then it might be necessary for a time.

I think with the squad we have, we're actually more suited to a 343 type set up, with Rashford and Sancho/Greenwood playing inverted roles either side of Cavani/Ronaldo.

Problem is, we may have to drop Bruno to play that system, and we're back to square one of being exposed in midfield potentially.

For me, 433 is the most dominant formation in the game, and we should be looking to sign a defensive midfielder to play a 433. In the interim, 352 might work.

The critical thing for me is that Cavani is one of the two up top. Any two of Rashford, Greenwood and Ronaldo, and I don't think we have enough workrate or off the ball movement.

 

[Highfather_24]

Give Laird a go at the rwb, he would make it his I think.

I'd send him to a PL side on loan next season.

 

[Highfather_24]

Those who are saying we can play 4-2-3-1and defend deep and be organised just the same are missing something.

We are conceding from counters this season. Playing 3atb means, you have 5 players to defend a counter, while our 4-2-3-1 leaves 4 to defend a counter, when fullbacks go up.

 

[charlenefan]

352 is fine for the next few games either to gain some confidence/lay some foundations or until we inevitably lose playing the formation but it's not sustainable for the long term, Rashford, Sancho, Greenwood all need to be getting regular games and Sancho especially doesn't fit in with this formation

 

[NZT-One]

Those who are saying we can play 4-2-3-1and defend deep and be organised just the same are missing something.

We are conceding from counters this season. Playing 3atb means, you have 5 players to defend a counter, while our 4-2-3-1 leaves 4 to defend a counter, when fullbacks go up.

We are conceding counters not just because of 2 or 3 atb (nifty abbreviation, will use it from now on). We were so vulnerable to counters because we a) set up more expansive than usual, b) affording ourselves with 4 striking figures ("wingers", the striker, Bruno) who afforded themselves with not putting in much of a defensive effort, c) McFred being in bad form for quite some time and d) heavily overstretched lines. And the actual conceding part is closely connected with individual mistakes as well (Shaw taking Maguires position leaving his man free and so on). No system change will change all that with just one click nor will any formation prevent these things by default.

The whole teams needs to work together. We can't just have a separated attack and a defense with sort of bridge-like midfield. That isn't going to work. We have to up the workrate, the concentration, the awareness of distances between each other to stay compact, and we have to practice moves even if they end in tactical fouls.

All teams that try to play some sort of expansive football have to deal with counters. There is no way to stop that easily apart from trying to not needing 7 players to challenge a deep block so a potential counter only has to overcome three players. But that is the bread and butter of a top club. Counter attacking is the 1st step, possession is the 2nd. With it come conterattacks and we are not the first ones to have to find ways to deal with it. Other teams get this done without a 3atb so obviously it is possible.

Again- yesterdays defensive performance was built on many pillars:
- defensive approach (5 defenders, 2 defensive minded midfielders, 1 midfielder and two strikers) trying to sit deep and wait for counters ( in 2nd half we played with 6 players on the last line when McTom dropped into the backline, while Cavani, Fred and Bruno played 10 meters in front of the defense
- having Varane back in the mix
- more or less complete neglection of offensive play
- a toothless opponent not asking difficult questions
- backs against the wall match after three matches where we conceded 11 goals
...
...
...
- the formation

Obviously I make it as striking as it gets because of course I understand, that a formation holds a lot of other things together. But it is just one game. Any conclusions and predictions where this formation will be helping us in the future are paper thin.

 

[AneRu]

352 is fine for the next few games either to gain some confidence/lay some foundations or until we inevitably lose playing the formation but it's not sustainable for the long term, Rashford, Sancho, Greenwood all need to be getting regular games and Sancho especially doesn't fit in with this formation

You are right, it will go straight into the bin the moment we lose. With regard to its sustainability I think it's just that Ole is rigid manager and a poor rotator because with Cavani and Ronaldo both 34 and 36, big game on Sunday, there is nothing that stops him from starting with Greenwood and Rashford in Italy, for example!

If he so wanted he could have a different front five each game.

---------------back five
-------------Fred-----------McTominay
---------------------Bruno
--------------Cavani--------Ronaldo

- - - - - - - - Back five
- - - - - - - - - - - Matic
- - - - - - Pogba - - - - - Bruno/DVDB
- - - - - - - - Sancho - - - - Rashford

 

[The United]

Not sure how you could know this but, assuming this is accurate, how would a back five boost confidence if they're expected to play a back four? It could simply make the defence conscious of how hard they find it to keep a clean sheet when we don't have a back five.

Likewise, why do the wide forwards need reminding of their duties? It was Ole himself who said we were playing 424, before Atalanta. It was Ole himself who said before, and after Liverpool, that he felt a Man Utd team had to play on front foot. Hence, why we got the kamikaze, headless chicken chasing from our front four. Which left the midfield isolated. We did something totally different yesterday, with Cavani (and Ronaldo to a lesser extent) deliberately not pressing and dropping back into shape. Our wide forwards don't need reminding to do this. They do this every time we play City, for example, and it usually goes well. You have to assume that they haven't been doing this because they were told to do otherwise.

I am happy blaming the players when we need to. However, it's fairly clear from what Ole has said that we naively moved away from compact, counterattacking football this season. That was an error on the side of the coaching staff. I wouldn't blame the players for failing to carry out tactics that are clearly not suited to this squad e.g., pressing high, requires Lindelof & Maguire to defend from halfway to keep the team compact. Never going to work given their flaws.

It is not strictly about the system. It is like strikers having moral boost when they keep scoring against different teams.

Same thing here with keeping clean sheets and feel confidence with their defending again individually since most of goals we conceded had some elements of individuals errors.

 

[The United]

The problem was not the work rate, the problem was the space between attack - midfield and defense. Our wide forwards just had too much grass to cover, so most of the time defending was a waste of energy. Why hunting the ball like a dog? A team must defend as a unit, it minimizes the space of the opponents, under Ole we offer too much space between our lines.

The team must defend as a unit = part of work rate.

 

[Resch]

The team must defend as a unit = part of work rate.

Yes, a part, but work rate will never be enough, if there is too much space to cover.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

Could Sancho play as an attacking RWB against the smaller teams?

Against likes of City and Liverpool etc I'd play AWB there but I reckon against Watford, Burnley etc we'd get away with Sancho there as long as we had Varane Maguire and Lindelof all fit.

That would be worth a shout. He'd still get lots of chances to attack as AWB does as it is.

 

[justsomebloke]

4-4-2 system would allow 2 wingers and 2 strikers to be included in the set-up.

But not Bruno.

 

[devilish]

I don't think the Cavani-Ronaldo-Bruno trio could work against a team that is not this Spurs. Cavani and Ronaldo can't be expected to drop deep and do the work while Bruno plays too forward these days. So I'd say we should try and play Sancho or Rashford behind Ronaldo. Let's see how it goes.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

I think we should stick with the 352 and rotate Sancho and AWB depending on the difficulty of the fixture.

City home = AWB
Watford away = Sancho
Chelsea away = AWB

Then we have a good 8-10 games where Sancho could play pretty much every game.

Reece James plays pretty much as a winger for Chelsea in their 352. No reason Sancho can't do that for us.

 

[Trequarista10]

Why do people put Shaw as an option for one of the outside centre backs but not Wan Bissaka?
Surely WB would be ideal in that position instead of as a wing back?
Or is it the sheer lack of right wing back options if not him?

I think it's a couple of things. Firstly, Shaw has played LCB before. People are scared of new things until they've happened before. Secondly, being left footed is much rarer. Left footed CBs are hard to come by, and Maguire generally plays LCB because he's alright with his left foot (but is clearly still right foot dominant). A LCB slot is hard to fill, whereas the RCB in a three would really suit Lindelof, Maguire and Tuanzebe, and possibly others, so AWB is further down the list for RCB than Shaw is for LCB.

This is before even getting to whether AWB has the tools to actually succeed as a RCB. I don't have a strong opinion on it, however other people have given some valid concerns about why he's potentially not.

 

[M Bison]

I'm not convinced 3/5 at the back is the long-term solution, i think teams will potentially expose us out wide.

The two biggest changes on Saturday in my view were:

1. We worked a lot harder, Cavani never stopped running and added some much needed bite and aggression, but that was mirrored in a number of areas, not just Cavani; and

2. Bruno played deeper giving us 3 in midfield. That for me was the biggie and is only a subtle change but we looked a lot more solid in midfield and even if we do revert to 4 at the back (which i think we will), needs to be retained.

 

[therealtboy]

I'd play more of a 3-4-2-1 so Bruno and Rashford could play behind Ronaldo/Cavani, more narrow while the fullbacks go beyond them. Sancho and Greenwood could also play this narrow inside role. Pogba and McTominay could then play in the 2. To add more attacking to the team, I'd push Telles in at LWB and Shaw to LCB alongside Maguire and Varane. Rashford could go up top alongside Ronaldo with Bruno behind them at anytime and the front three could switch to a 3-4-3 too, it's fluid and would give us options throughout the game. Pogba's lack of defensive discipline would be covered by the three at the back. I feel it's the best way to go.

 

[justsomebloke]

Given the hole we were in, playing this formation made good sense, and it worked. But does it really offer a way forward?

Historically we've used this formation against the strongest teams, where we've been content to cede dominance of the game and rely primarily on counterattacks. Even yesterday, against a Spurs team that played badly enough to make the board consider Santos' position, we had barely 40% possession. Not that possession is the goal in itself, but it speaks clearly about how this formation makes us an essentially reactive team. And if Spurs managed nearly 60%, what's it going to be against Chelsea, or even Brighton? Is that a sound basis for progressing towards being a top team? And where is Paul Pogba going to fit into it?

We've learned some things by now:

* Ronaldo benefits from playing two up front
* We have trouble playing 4231, particularly when Ronaldo is the striker. Especially defensively, but also offensively.
* Cavani works well with Ronaldo, and offers things no other forward in the squad does in terms of movement, pressing and wrk rate
* Our midfield two isn't good enough to shield or pick up the slack for other parts of the team, but on the contrary needs buffering. That is particularly true when Pogba is one of the players in it.

Whichever you twist it, that leaves us with a fundamentally incompatible set of requirements. Pogba needs the team organised so that there's not too much pressure on the central midfield. McFred needs to be not overexposed. Bruno needs to operate high and free. And Ronaldo needs things organised around him in the attack. In addition to this, our other good forwards mostly require specific circumstances too. To be effective, Rashford must hover on the offside line. Greenwood plays more and more like a finisher. Sancho needs to play as part of a creative attacking set up.

You can accomodate Pogba in a midfield three, playing him with two players who defend and press better than him, realistically primarily McFred. And you could combine that with Bruno and two strikers up front. But that leaves Sancho out, and an awful lot of good players sitting on the bench nearly always. Ronaldo works well with Cavani, but would he work well in a pairing with Greenwood or Rashford? Or you could play a 3 man attacking line with that, but then that leaves no room for Bruno, and no strike partner for Ronaldo. If you play Bruno as part of that midfield 3, he either has to assume a much more careful and disciplined role, which absolutely wastes the potential of arguably our most important player, or you get a midfield 3 as vulnerable as the current one in 4231.

Bruno is best accomodated in a 4231, but that so far hasn't worked with Ronaldo and Pogba also on the pitch.

You can play a 442 to get both the two up front and the use of our wingers, but in that case it's questionable if either Bruno or Pogba plays. And if they do, it'd have to be in a much more circumscribed role.

I say it again: We have too many star players who require things to be organised around their needs in order to be effective. It won't add up.

AFAICS, that will leave us with no other option than to chop and change, formation-wise. 4231 remains the only formation that allows us to make optimal use of the player material of the squad, and we really need to find a way to make that work - at the very least against some opponents. If we have 2 or 3 different variants that we can use effectively, and OGS is bold and imaginative in the use of the squad, that might work. However, that seems to run counter to the established patterns of his management, which is to stick with largely the same lineup and formation once he's found something that has overcome a crisis. And if we do that with the 3412 we will hit the wall eventually, and have half the squad deeply unhappy even while it goes well.

 

[justsomebloke]

I think we should stick with the 352 and rotate Sancho and AWB depending on the difficulty of the fixture.

City home = AWB
Watford away = Sancho
Chelsea away = AWB

Then we have a good 8-10 games where Sancho could play pretty much every game.

Reece James plays pretty much as a winger for Chelsea in their 352. No reason Sancho can't do that for us.

Sancho as a RWB is of course a nice, appealing notion because it solves two big problems at once. But is there any basis for it other than wishful thinking? Has he ever done it? Is there any indication that he's got the required propensity for reading the defensive side of the game, tackle and so on that being a good RWB requires? An RWB isn't just a winger who drops deep.

And it's a little bit different getting a good skilled FB to play as a winger, than getting a good skilled winger to play as a defender.

 

[justsomebloke]

I don't think the Cavani-Ronaldo-Bruno trio could work against a team that is not this Spurs. Cavani and Ronaldo can't be expected to drop deep and do the work while Bruno plays too forward these days. So I'd say we should try and play Sancho or Rashford behind Ronaldo. Let's see how it goes.

Why would we play Rashford behind anyone? The whole point of playing Rashford is that he's a constant lethal threat to the space behind the opposition line, much more so than either Ronaldo or Cavani - which means he really needs to be our most forward player when we have the ball.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

Sancho as a RWB is of course a nice, appealing notion because it solves two big problems at once. But is there any basis for it other than wishful thinking? Has he ever done it? Is there any indication that he's got the required propensity for reading the defensive side of the game, tackle and so on that being a good RWB requires? An RWB isn't just a winger who drops deep.

Like I said I wouldn't play him there against just anyone.

Against Norwich at home, Watford Away etc then I think we could afford to drop AWB for Sancho and still have 4 defenders on the pitch plus two DM's.

It comes down to coaching. Ole needs to let go of 4231. It's never worked for him. We don't control games against even the minnows using it.

 

[justsomebloke]

Like I said I wouldn't play him there against just anyone.

Against Norwich at home, Watford Away etc then I think we could afford to drop AWB for Sancho and still have 4 defenders on the pitch plus two DM's.

It comes down to coaching. Ole needs to let go of 4231. It's never worked for him. We don't control games against even the minnows using it.

Yeah, that doesn't answer the question though. It doesn't automatically become feasible if you just use it against weaker teams.

And what are you talking about "4231 never worked for him"? He's played that with few exceptions for the past two years, and I think I'd argue that has worked pretty well, up until this season. Certainly better than other formations we've tried. Also, it's the formation the squad is built to.

 

[sparx99]

Why do people put Shaw as an option for one of the outside centre backs but not Wan Bissaka?
Surely WB would be ideal in that position instead of as a wing back?
Or is it the sheer lack of right wing back options if not him?

I imagine because his positioning has been poor at times which would be more of an issue at RCB. He’s also been caught out defending the back post a lot.

 

[Smores]

Imagine signing a young exciting attacking sensation like Sancho and playing him at wing back though. Jose would be proud

 

[sparx99]

Yeah, that doesn't answer the question though. It doesn't automatically become feasible if you just use it against weaker teams.

And what are you talking about "4231 never worked for him"? He's played that with few exceptions for the past two years, and I think I'd argue that has worked pretty well, up until this season. Certainly better than other formations we've tried. Also, it's the formation the squad is built to.

The problem is and has never been formation. It’s the tactics and structure within those formations. We haven’t even been playing two defensive midfielders like people claim. Fred and McTominay or whichever other combo have played have both had license to get forward. It’s been two box to box midfielders rather than a double pivot.

 

[OmarUnited4ever]

I hate the 3-5-2 formation, just a personal thing, for me, I hate seeing a team fielding 3 CBs at the back plus 2 FBs/WBs, I understand that 3-5-2 formation is not a defensive or an attacking formation (formations do not determine the tactical approach) but i still don't like it.

of course if it works for us this season, I am all up for it.