Marwood
Full Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2021
- Messages
- 4,740
As expected there is a trademark explosion by the "fans" on yesterday's result. But on proper analysis it is more to do with the formation than the players.
I can understand why ETH continued with the 4-1-2-3 formation as the players are already familiarized with that approach in pre-season and in terms of their role based training. The issue is with using a midfielder who likes to drop too deep as a false 9. A false 9 should be more like Messi where he tends to roam around the middle and front of the attacking half, capable of dribbling through the channels or creating chances for the 2 wide forwards. Eriksen tried to help out the central midfield in his pressing and ended up moving away from his position, resulting in Rashford and Sancho unable to cut in and receive passes. To be fair to ETH, Brighton's formation did not allow Eriksen any space as well. Its basically a mismatch of formation as Brighton was playing a 3-6-1 variant where they easily countered our 4-1-2-3.
In the 2nd half, ETH started to move towards a 3-6-1 variant with Ronaldo staying up, Rashford and Sancho as 2 wingers and a 4-man midfield of Shaw Bruno McTominay Dalot (Shaw and Dalot as wingbacks) and Eriksen becoming a regista in front of Maguire and Martinez which helped to counter Brighton's formation, but we just missed too many chances. If ETH had originally used the formation of a 3-5-2 diamond, it would be a different result altogether. Rashford and Sancho as the front 2, with Bruno acting as the AM, Shaw Eriksen Dalot as the CM and Wingbacks, Fred as the DM and Martinez, Maguire and Varane as the CBs would have turned the result in our favour.
The good thing is that ETH is capable of making tactical changes quickly and is not afraid to withdraw his original plan (e.g. Fred changed for Ronaldo). Its quite promising actually, since this means he will be utilizing a different approach against Brentford based on what he has learnt against Brighton.
What you mean is in your opinion its to do with formation.
These players have been puttimg these performances in for years. Under different managers, in different formations.
I don't think any further analysis is needed. They aren't good enough.