The Kraken

I don’t know, I’ll be honest, but I thought they played 4 at the back last season.

Ok, I’m more convinced that this isn’t Ralph’s idea. Worrying. Hopefully the message has got through to whoever.

I did raise this on another post I made today. I haven’t made my mind up on it yet, but I find the whole thing a bit of a conundrum. I’m not convinced it’s Ralph’s idea.

Good job we only started 3 debutants then. Phew!

We lost 4-1, how much trouble could there have been? We were comprehensively beaten. Also, Valery has played far fewer games in the past two years than Billy Ketchup. It’s a nonsense of an argument you’re making. Especially as Valery was so shit that he was replaced at half time (by Jack Stephens Ffs).

There’s a middle ground to what you’ve stated. Not changing from last week would have been foolish. Changing it to todays line up involved 4 different players starting, but I think you’ll struggle to find many who watched the game who would say we started with the ‘correct’ line up or formation. Our last twenty minutes or so of today was the best we’ve looked so far. I think people are encouraging more of that type of lineup and style. It certainly was worlds away from the first three-quarters of the game, which was fairly abject. We didn’t have a shot in target in the first hour.

Honestly, I can’t remember someone being so utterly ineffective for us in quite a while. And it’s a really low benchmark. Elmo was terrible today.

You seemed to quote yourself there, so @Matthew Le God, explain yourself please.

I’ve said this before……we sacked Alan Pardew after 3 games and that worked out just fine in the end. In fact the biggest flaw was sacking him and not having the incoming manager ready to replace him until another 3 games (defeats) after that. If we are going to get rid of Ralph it needs a succession plan in place to ensure the switch happens quickly.

I’d say we are much better equipped this season to play variations of that than we have been before. Take Liverpool away last season; Ralph wanted to play a solid 4-5-1 but Diallo got injured in the build up, due to lack of other personnel we ended up with some sort of 3-4-3 system and got utterly humped. With the option to play Lavia, Romeu and JWP in the same side with a 4 at the back, it allows us a bit more solidity than we’ve had before without persisting with the awful 3 centre back arrangement.

Genuinely, the whole thing completely baffles me. We’ve played variations of 3 CBs before this season, but Ralph has always been very much a 4 at the back man. This pre-season saw a complete change, in 5 games we played all but 45 minutes with 3 CBs. And we only won 1 of those 5 games, so it was not exactly a glowing endorsement of the new system. I’ve just watched Ralph’s post match interview. He referred to the turning point being the switch to 4, and that the players “gave themselves the answer of how it can work”. Last week, after the Spurs game, Ralph came out with some comments where he said some thing along the lines of “we thought 5 at the back is more solid but it’s clear it’s not the case.” I remember it specifically at the time as it almost seemed like 3/5 at the back was being forced on Ralph, though I concede that’s perhaps unlikely. Nonetheless I’m still baffled at the whole change in setup, only for the manager himself to call it into question after only one game, and I do still wonder exactly where the change has come from. Tales from the match thread suggest Selles might have been instrumental in making the switch at the drinks break. So, it will be interesting to see where we go from here. It was clear, I think to everyone, that 3 at the back just wasn’t working and 4 at the back looked so much more natural. Though I do feel that our subs made a big impact too, Leeds also ran out of steam and that was contributory too. But there are so many reasons why I think 4 at the back is a must for us: in general the team can play higher up the pitch, this helps KWP have more options around him going forward, Billy Ketchup looked much more assured in a 4 (his role is much better defined), we don’t have to play Bednarek, the transition from defence to attack is more fluid, and in general everyone seemed to understand their position that bit better. The major downside of 4 at the back is that we don’t have a left back without Perraud. Djenepo did ok second half today but he’s still far from a natural fit there, so that’s the downside. But there’s too many upsides to not go back to it IMO. So, whether the 3 CB formation was a Ralph decision or something else, I just hope that’s the end of it. If we line up with it against Leicester I’m going to be totally confused about why we’re doing it.

Managing Man United is an easy job and anyone could do it 😉

He’s definitely got ability. What a through ball that was. The shot was impressive too, barely any backlift and he thumped it. I think we’ll need to be patient with him, he seems like the type of player who will drift in and out of games. No doubting his talent though, looks like a very useful prospect.

We’re 15th!! We are staying up.

Mara looks a bit of an enigma.

If this doesn’t get rid of the shocking 3 at the back experiment then nothing will. Billy Ketchup doesn’t seem to suit a 3, just looks a bit more assured as a 2 so he knows exactly who he’s supposed to be marking.

Brilliant from Mara.

Come on!!

This formation is so much better, we’re finally able to play a bit further up the pitch. Foul throw ffs

🤣 exactly this.

Joe Aribo finally gives us a shot on target. After one hour of play. Saints are an utter shambles. The formation makes us sit too deep, so we look vulnerable in defence and too slow to get into attack. How can a Hassenhuttl side look so dawdling, we have no identity any more.

Fucking hell

Thank god, Big Joe coming on.

Got to be Elmo coming off surely.

Weak down the flanks to allow all the time in the world for the cross. Utterly atrocious defending then from Bednarek.