Will Still

[Greedyfly]

49 minutes ago, CSA96 said:

We used this formation in preseason and a L significant number of forum users were moaning about how awful we looked in it and how we looked better in the 3-4-3… 

Also, MF is not a 10

I don't understand why we've reverted to a 3 at the back having not done it in preseason though, I'd like to understand why we're suddenly doing it. 

 

I agree we looked shite in both formations but I think we looked marginally better in a 4 and less overrun in midfield. I also don't love a defensive line up when you're at home especially against Wrexham...(Or anyone really if we're meant to be league favourites).

 

It's all a bit of a mess that Still hasn't sorted out despite a full pre season. And I think that's everyone's issue... That and fucking playing AA as a sole no 9

[LoyalSaintSO50]

40 minutes ago, Greedyfly said:

I don't understand why we've reverted to a 3 at the back having not done it in preseason though, I'd like to understand why we're suddenly doing it. 

 

I agree we looked shite in both formations but I think we looked marginally better in a 4 and less overrun in midfield. I also don't love a defensive line up when you're at home especially against Wrexham...(Or anyone really if we're meant to be league favourites).

 

It's all a bit of a mess that Still hasn't sorted out despite a full pre season. And I think that's everyone's issue... That and fucking playing AA as a sole no 9

Yeah good point. Bizarre that we didn’t try this formation at all pre-season from what I can remember. 

[a1ex2001]

5 hours ago, CSA96 said:

 

Well done you found one, still stands that most successful teams in British football don’t play 3 centre backs and again Instand to be corrective but I can’t remember saints ever doing it well.  How many sides in the top ten of the championship this year will play 3 centre backs in most games?

[CSA96]

10 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

Well done you found one, still stands that most successful teams in British football don’t play 3 centre backs and again Instand to be corrective but I can’t remember saints ever doing it well.  How many sides in the top ten of the championship this year will play 3 centre backs in most games?

Boro do, they’re second and on maximum points…

Preston and Bristol City also do, so that’s four of the top 10 

[benjii]

Very unimpressive so far. Clueless on the ball and terrible at the back. Great combination. 

[bugenhagen]

Didn’t Ralph have great success with playing all of preseason one way, and suddenly changing things up from the start of the season? 

[Whitey Grandad]

3 hours ago, CSA96 said:

Apart from changing formation second half against Wrexham?
Apart from hooking Armstrong at HT yesterday and then going with two up top?

Apart from pulling Quarshie out of the lineup after the game at Ipswich and going for a more combative player in Nathan Wood?

Come on, you can make your point without lying about things surely  

He should change his formation before the kickoff.  Not after half time.

[Galway saint]

Although it’s supposedly been ‘rebooted’ we still have Baz in goal, Stephen’s at CB and captain ( with a new contract), AA upfront on his own, 5 at the back, acquisitions who are no better than what we have  and in some cases worse ( Quarshie and Downs) and have failed (to date) to bring in a decent no 9. Seems like the same old shit to me.

It’s not the managers fault the players are on the whole crap but it did worry me when he apologised to the players for substituting them. Seemed to betray a lack of confidence but he’s a young guy.

Seems to me that as things stand we have a far worse squad than the one that was playing in the championship in 23/24.

Big week ahead and I have no real confidence it will be a good week given the past few years.  

[Charlie Wayman]

Will Still appears to be disdainful of systems of play but his alternative looks to be completely haphazard relying on his players to play by their instincts, almost like making it up as they go along.

Most will have recent memories of Russball deeply engrained into their psyche so it's not surprising they revert to that in the absence of anything better being taught them.

We don't have a team full of Messi's and Salah's who maybe could be left to innovate and get on with it Will.

I have not been impressed at all by what you have served up so far, not quite as incoherent as Sunday League kick and rush but not that much better either. Can anybody be surprised that we have gone behind in all four matches played? In my view the players might actually prefer a system of play that they can relate to, learn and adopt.

@sortitoutWillfhs

 

[trousers]

4 minutes ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Can anybody be surprised that we have gone behind in all four matches played?

Which four matches would that be then...? 🤦🏻

[SW11_Saint]

18 minutes ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Will Still appears to be disdainful of systems of play

 

Where do you get that from? 

[CSA96]

21 minutes ago, trousers said:

Which four matches would that be then...? 🤦🏻

Quite. Although if there was a way to go behind in a 1-0 win, I am sure Saints would find it 

[saintant]

Think Will Still is going to do fine. The one thing which has disappointed me is his insistence on sticking rigidly to 3 at the back. I was expecting him to play all sorts of weird and wonderful formations but he's been welded to this 3 at the back which doesn't work for us. Mix it up a bit Will and show some imagination and innovation not same old same old.

[Charlie Wayman]

50 minutes ago, trousers said:

Which four matches would that be then...? 🤦🏻

Oops! 

 

Reply to SW_Saint: His own words!

"People say 'oh you need to play this way, or that way...' like the Southampton way or like with Sam Allardyce, the West Ham way. But what is the West Ham way? What is the Southampton way? You got relegated, so obviously there's something that doesn't work in it. Our way now is win, because that's all we have to do."

Edited 19 hours ago by Charlie Wayman

[Tommy]

On a positive, we could spend 200m on a new front 3 and still not be able to create and score goals like united 😁

[SW11_Saint]

1 hour ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Oops! 

 

Reply to SW_Saint: His own words!

"People say 'oh you need to play this way, or that way...' like the Southampton way or like with Sam Allardyce, the West Ham way. But what is the West Ham way? What is the Southampton way? You got relegated, so obviously there's something that doesn't work in it. Our way now is win, because that's all we have to do."

That just means he isn’t wedded to one single ideology (like ‘some’ previous managers), and is prepared to adapt to opposition, players available etc. it was music to my ears actually.

And before anyone dives in with “so why hasn’t he changed from 3 at the back?” - he has (during games) and has also mentioned he doesn’t feel he has the (forward) players yet to start with 442 yet. 

[Whitey Grandad]

2 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

That just means he isn’t wedded to one single ideology (like ‘some’ previous managers), and is prepared to adapt to opposition, players available etc. it was music to my ears actually.

And before anyone dives in with “so why hasn’t he changed from 3 at the back?” - he has (during games) and has also mentioned he doesn’t feel he has the (forward) players yet to start with 442 yet. 

He has made changes but he shouldn't have needed to had he started off with the correct formation.

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, SW11_Saint said:

And before anyone dives in with “so why hasn’t he changed from 3 at the back?” - he has (during games)

Only when we’re behind and there’s about 10 mins left. He throws on a forward and withdraws a centre half. It’s like sides throwing a centre half up front, managers aren’t showing their tactical flexibility or tactical genius, it’s a fucking Hail Mary move. If it was 0-0 he wouldn’t have done it. 

[SW11_Saint]

12 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Only when we’re behind and there’s about 10 mins left. He throws on a forward and withdraws a centre half. It’s like sides throwing a centre half up front, managers aren’t showing their tactical flexibility or tactical genius, it’s a fucking Hail Mary move. If it was 0-0 he wouldn’t have done it. 

Again he’s working with what he has. At least he does ‘throw the dice’ unlike the last 3 managers we’ve had! 

[SW11_Saint]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

He has made changes but he shouldn't have needed to had he started off with the correct formation.

Maybe give him a call and explain your thinking. I’m sure he’d be receptive and appreciate your advice (assuming you’re ‘steeped in the game’ and have knowledge of how players have done in training during the week?).

[AlexLaw76]

12 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

Again he’s working with what he has. At least he does ‘throw the dice’ unlike the last 3 managers we’ve had! 

Are you saying there is no other system he can start with other than 3 at the back and Armstrong as a lone striker?

[OnceaSaintalwaysaSaint]

2 hours ago, saintant said:

Think Will Still is going to do fine. The one thing which has disappointed me is his insistence on sticking rigidly to 3 at the back. I was expecting him to play all sorts of weird and wonderful formations but he's been welded to this 3 at the back which doesn't work for us. Mix it up a bit Will and show some imagination and innovation not same old same old.

I think he will do fine too. A week ago after the Ipswich game many posters were positive about our play and one loss and it's a calamity.

Sure he has to realise Adam Armstrong can't play up front on his own. Sure he needs to change formations. But apparently Saints have created more chances in the first three games than any other team...

[Whitey Grandad]

52 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

Maybe give him a call and explain your thinking. I’m sure he’d be receptive and appreciate your advice (assuming you’re ‘steeped in the game’ and have knowledge of how players have done in training during the week?).

I doubt he'd be receptive and how the players have done in training has no bearing on how they perform under the spotlights. 

Like a lot of others on here, I have had the experience of being involved in several thousand games but that's nothing compared with over a century of football experience. Formations come and go and fashions change but denuding your midfield is rarely a good idea.

Edited 16 hours ago by Whitey Grandad
Dawned autocorrect.

[SW11_Saint]

26 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Are you saying there is no other system he can start with other than 3 at the back and Armstrong as a lone striker?

I’m saying HE has decided that HE feels it’s the best system for now (3 at the back that is, not Arma up front), and I trust that he’s in better position to make that call than me or you, as he works with the players week in week out. I suspect if Downs or Stewart weren’t ill last week they may have started on Saturday. 

[SW11_Saint]

5 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

I doubt he'd be receptive and how the players have done in training has no bearing on how they perform under the spotlights. 

Like a lot of others on here, I have had the experience of being involved in several thousand games but that's nothing compared with over a century of football experience. Formations come and go and fashions change but deluding your midfield is rarely a good idea.

The first para I think indicates that you aren’t qualified to make the call. Ask any pro, what happens during the week in training does have a bearing on gameday (form, fitness, attitude, mentality). 
 

I have no idea what ‘deluding your midfield’ means in this context, but watching a thousand games from the stands is not the same as studying the game as a coach for decades or managing at the top level. 

[SW11_Saint]

3 hours ago, saintant said:

Think Will Still is going to do fine. The one thing which has disappointed me is his insistence on sticking rigidly to 3 at the back. I was expecting him to play all sorts of weird and wonderful formations but he's been welded to this 3 at the back which doesn't work for us. Mix it up a bit Will and show some imagination and innovation not same old same old.

I think that comes if/when he gets the personnel in he needs. It’s bit ‘make do and mend’ atm. 

[AlexLaw76]

8 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

I’m saying HE has decided that HE feels it’s the best system for now (3 at the back that is, not Arma up front), and I trust that he’s in better position to make that call than me or you, as he works with the players week in week out. I suspect if Downs or Stewart weren’t ill last week they may have started on Saturday. 

This is a message board for opinions on SFC. Next thing you will tell me Branfoot was right all along dropping Matt Le Tissier as he knew best, given was a pro and everything.

 

Edited 16 hours ago by AlexLaw76

[SW11_Saint]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

This is a message board for opinions on SFC. Next thing you will tell me Branfoot was right all along dropping Matt Le Tissier as he knew best, given was a pro and everything.

 

Not at all. I was vehemently anti-Branfoot. Our issue with him wasn’t just style, it was results judged over a longish period of time. 
 

Will Still doesn’t strike me as an idiot, and I’m pretty sure he’d like to play a effective 442, but atm he (apparently) doesn’t feel it’s optimal with the players at his disposal. I just trust that he’s in a better position to decide than me, whatever my opinion. 

[Whitey Grandad]

6 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

The first para I think indicates that you aren’t qualified to make the call. Ask any pro, what happens during the week in training does have a bearing on gameday (form, fitness, attitude, mentality). 
 

I have no idea what ‘deluding your midfield’ means in this context, but watching a thousand games from the stands is not the same as studying the game as a coach for decades or managing at the top level. 

Oops 🫩 I typed 'denuded'. If this is Artificial Intelligence then humanity is doomed.

More games were on the grass than in the stands.

[Whitey Grandad]

3 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

Not at all. I was vehemently anti-Branfoot. Our issue with him wasn’t just style, it was results judged over a longish period of time. 
 

Will Still doesn’t strike me as an idiot, and I’m pretty sure he’d like to play a effective 442, but atm he (apparently) doesn’t feel it’s optimal with the players at his disposal. I just trust that he’s in a better position to decide than me, whatever my opinion. 

I never thought he was but performances and results are starting to be a reason for concern. Just raised eyebrows at the moment but let's see how things develop. 

[SW11_Saint]

59 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

I never thought he was but performances and results are starting to be a reason for concern. Just raised eyebrows at the moment but let's see how things develop. 

Again, I think he is best judged once (hopefully) he has something like the squad he wants. 

We’ll see how he goes of course, but if we get decent performances and results I’ll happily stick with him, even if we don’t go up.
 

This club really needs a reset and (if we don’t go up) I’d rather wait another year with him for promotion and properly build for the future than have another ‘hire & fire’ approach. 

Edited 14 hours ago by SW11_Saint

[HKsaint]

I think he just tries to get the maximum points for each players he fields out. 

[benjii]

9 hours ago, SW11_Saint said:

That just means he isn’t wedded to one single ideology (like ‘some’ previous managers), and is prepared to adapt to opposition, players available etc. it was music to my ears actually.

And before anyone dives in with “so why hasn’t he changed from 3 at the back?” - he has (during games) and has also mentioned he doesn’t feel he has the (forward) players yet to start with 442 yet. 

The changes are just throwing on forward players, taking advantage of our relatively superior squad, after playing shit and being behind. 

[Smirking_Saint]

Its early days, but all I can see is issues at the moment, the squad does need reinforcements but we aren’t that bad.

I think we need to drop 5 atb, Im not sure what it offers really, if anything it further disjoints us, pushing to a 4 atb allows us another body in midfield, we can either deploy that as a deep midfielder or another attacking midfielder

Our issue, seems to be that we just don’t win the midfield battle, and I always say the majority of games are won or lost there, and we tend to lose it… Downes/Charles are excellent midfielders at this level but I genuinely think they’re being asked to do too much, from what I see there’s a huge gap between the CBs and forward line, which means FD/SC have a lot of ground to cover, its even meant Fernandes has had to come deep too often to get involved/help out

A 433 or 4231 allows us to ensure either Downes or Charles can shield the backline more, which should stop us being over run in the middle, Charles can then become the No.8 with 3 or 4 players ahead of him, we lack a good no.10 to play 4231 so we can employ 433 with Fernandes and Charles being interchangeable No.8s if necessary with the former being allowed more freedom

I ‘don’t’ think creativity is as much of an issue as many think, we’re creating chances, we’re just wasteful. Arma is not a No.9, so lets try Stewart or Downs there, flanked by Robinson and either Fraser or Arma

Lastly, we’re quite ponderous in build up, although I suggest this is due to the central disconnect I mentioned earlier, either way we need to be quicker in transitions, Stoke were exceptional at it yesterday and for that reason you can see why they’re top of the league

[gio1saints]

@Smirking_Saint. Think you are right.

And I’d add- and pass to the forwards more often - and faster. The forwards we have are statistically very good for this level - yet so far all I see is they don’t get given the ball. Enough. Give them the ball let me see if “statistically good “ is “ actually good”- or not.
But if they only get three bad position touches a half it’s putting a lot of onus on the mf and backs to score for us - and ours are the opposite of prolific. 

[SW11_Saint]

2 hours ago, benjii said:

The changes are just throwing on forward players, taking advantage of our relatively superior squad, after playing shit and being behind. 

So you’d rather he didn’t make changes if things aren’t going well? It’s one or the other…

[SW11_Saint]

38 minutes ago, Smirking_Saint said:

Its early days, but all I can see is issues at the moment, the squad does need reinforcements but we aren’t that bad.

I think we need to drop 5 atb, Im not sure what it offers really, if anything it further disjoints us, pushing to a 4 atb allows us another body in midfield, we can either deploy that as a deep midfielder or another attacking midfielder

Our issue, seems to be that we just don’t win the midfield battle, and I always say the majority of games are won or lost there, and we tend to lose it… Downes/Charles are excellent midfielders at this level but I genuinely think they’re being asked to do too much, from what I see there’s a huge gap between the CBs and forward line, which means FD/SC have a lot of ground to cover, its even meant Fernandes has had to come deep too often to get involved/help out

A 433 or 4231 allows us to ensure either Downes or Charles can shield the backline more, which should stop us being over run in the middle, Charles can then become the No.8 with 3 or 4 players ahead of him, we lack a good no.10 to play 4231 so we can employ 433 with Fernandes and Charles being interchangeable No.8s if necessary with the former being allowed more freedom

I ‘don’t’ think creativity is as much of an issue as many think, we’re creating chances, we’re just wasteful. Arma is not a No.9, so lets try Stewart or Downs there, flanked by Robinson and either Fraser or Arma

Lastly, we’re quite ponderous in build up, although I suggest this is due to the central disconnect I mentioned earlier, either way we need to be quicker in transitions, Stoke were exceptional at it yesterday and for that reason you can see why they’re top of the league

Some good points, esp about Downs/Charles having too much to do. 

[chiknsmack]

18 hours ago, Greedyfly said:

I don't understand why we've reverted to a 3 at the back having not done it in preseason though, I'd like to understand why we're suddenly doing it. 

We did it in the second half against Brighton, and won that half 2-1.

On that occasion the two in midfield was Fraser and Charles, with Robinson, Archer, and Armstrong the front three. Obviously you want Fernandes in there somewhere too, so that forces Fraser out. But Still appears to want Fraser on the pitch, so that forces Armstrong out. BUT Still also appears to want Armstrong on the pitch, so that forces Archer (or Downs, or Stewart) out.

If you want both Fraser and Armstrong in your front three (I don't, though it seems Still does for now) you either play Armstrong up top or you play him on the right with Fraser on the left (benching Robinson) and a striker up top. 3-4-3 also only gives you two midfielders, when our best three (Fernandes, Charles, Downes) are all very good.

The more recent change is to play Fraser at wingback instead of Sugawara, which makes room for Armstrong on the right and a proper striker up the middle. But that still only gives you two midfielders, so instead against Stoke Still went with Fernandes on the right of the front three (it was more of a 3-4-2-1 than a 3-4-3), Downes and Charles as the midfield two, and Armstrong up top.

Personally I think the correct 3-X-X formation with the squad we have is 3-5-2. You get all of Fernandes/Charles/Downes on the pitch, you can play Fraser on the right of the five, and you play two up top (so even if Armstrong has to play its him plus another striker). Though the downside of this is that Robinson doesn't fit; he's not a striker in a two and he's not really a wingback.

It's difficult to accommodate Robinson, Armstrong, and Fraser in the same lineup. Especially if you also want Fernandes, Charles, and Downes. With three at the back you have those six plus one other as your midfield and attack, and with four at the back it's worse (you go down a CB but presumably go up two proper fullbacks rather than playing Fraser at FB, giving you six spots for those six midfield and attacking players).

The obvious answer is to not play both Fraser and Armstrong, but it seems like Still rates their workrate and experience. Maybe that will change with Downs and Stewart being fully over their recent illnesses and the Stoke performance being pretty average with Armstrong up top.

What does a 4-4-2 look like? Well for starters there's only two midfielders so Downes is on the bench. Then your wingers are Fraser and Robinson with zero depth (BBD? Edozie? Sugawara? We tried Armstrong on the right of the 4 in preaseason and he looked lost) behind them. Robinson shouldn't be asked to play 90 minutes 35+ times in his first year of senior football, and if you were to ask that of him he'd have more of a chance on the left of a front three than on the left of a midfield four where he'd have more defensive work to do.

So 4 at the back means 4-3-3. All three main midfielders, and a front three of Robinson, a striker, and someone else on the right. If Fraser and Armstrong are nailed-on starters, one of them's your striker.

So the difference between 4-3-3 and 3-4-3 is that in the former you have four defenders, three midfielders, and both Armstrong and Fraser in the front three, whereas in the latter you have four defenders (three CBs and a defensive wingback), two midfielders, Fraser at wingback, and room for a striker in the front three. Basically, do you want Downes or Downs?

 

Of course, all of that changes with an injury (If any of Robinson/Fraser/Armstrong is out the other two play alongside a striker and the full midfield three, if any of the midfield three are injured you can make the like-for-like swap and bring in Smallbone or drop Fraser into midfield and play a striker) or new signing (maybe a midfielder leads to a return of Ralph's 4-triple 2; Charles and Downes behind Fernandes and the new guy behind two high-energy high-pressing forwards). And it all changes if Still doesn't see a need for both Fraser and Armstrong to play.

[Whitey Grandad]

47 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

So you’d rather he didn’t make changes if things aren’t going well? It’s one or the other…

I'd rather he made the changes before kick-off. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

48 minutes ago, SW11_Saint said:

So you’d rather he didn’t make changes if things aren’t going well? It’s one or the other…

Personally I’d rather he played the correct formation at the start and didn’t have abandon it and chase the last 15 because we’re behind. Make no mistake, we’re extremely fortunate not to have only 1 point. There’s not many games you score 2 in injury time. To go behind in 100% of our league games must indicate that something is amiss. 

[gio1saints]

I think the “ playing the cards he’s got” excuse (though entirely valid imo) only has a limited number of weeks to go.

The end of window basically. 

After that, and assuming he has been given the players, that excuse is redundant. 

I expect to see different formations post window. I do not expect fluidity or even winning from our team using them. That would be too lovely and that’s not Saintsy 😇. 

I do expect though to see something OTHER than the 3CB system used. The current system may have delivered great XG ~ but in real life has not delivered REAL GOALS. Keep repeating until it does ? Or Try a different way. Will that’s what you are paid to decide.
 

Edited 4 hours ago by gio1saints

[Saint Fan CaM]

My concern is that there’s little to separate Still’s tactics at the moment with anything we saw last season or indeed the season before that. Slow ponderous football with a team set-up to deliver exactly that. Flat lines of players in the final third - strikers too distant from other team members - no creative passes to break defensive lines….the list goes on. Then there’s the insistence to show-horn 3 CB’s into the starting line-up, including the ever-asleep Stephens. 

Is there someone telling our Managers how to select a team and play in a certain way - are their hands tied? Probably not, but you’d be forgiven for thinking so.

[SW11_Saint]

2 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Personally I’d rather he played the correct formation at the start and didn’t have abandon it and chase the last 15 because we’re behind. Make no mistake, we’re extremely fortunate not to have only 1 point. There’s not many games you score 2 in injury time. To go behind in 100% of our league games must indicate that something is amiss. 

I’ll agree there, but for whatever reason he’s avoiding starting with 442 atm - I think as he feels he doesn’t have the right offensive mix for that formation. 

No guarantee that starting with 442 would have improved our results or performances of course, but I’d prefer to see it too. 

 

[Whitey Grandad]

3 hours ago, gio1saints said:

I think the “ playing the cards he’s got” excuse (though entirely valid imo) only has a limited number of weeks to go.

The end of window basically. 

After that, and assuming he has been given the players, that excuse is redundant. 

I expect to see different formations post window. I do not expect fluidity or even winning from our team using them. That would be too lovely and that’s not Saintsy 😇. 

I do expect though to see something OTHER than the 3CB system used. The current system may have delivered great XG ~ but in real life has not delivered REAL GOALS. Keep repeating until it does ? Or Try a different way. Will that’s what you are paid to decide.
 

That's because xG is wrong in our case. It's based on other teams and not one that includes our players.

[Miltonaggro]

2 hours ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

My concern is that there’s little to separate Still’s tactics at the moment with anything we saw last season or indeed the season before that. Slow ponderous football with a team set-up to deliver exactly that. Flat lines of players in the final third - strikers too distant from other team members - no creative passes to break defensive lines….the list goes on. Then there’s the insistence to show-horn 3 CB’s into the starting line-up, including the ever-asleep Stephens. 

Is there someone telling our Managers how to select a team and play in a certain way - are their hands tied? Probably not, but you’d be forgiven for thinking so.

My 'hopeful' reading was / is that he is playing this formation in the early matches down to the closing of the window to keep things tight and evaluate the squad / league.  Then once things start to gel and he knows fully what he's got we set up to attack. It is clearly not working currently.  Keep reminding myself that Still is the man who demolished Monaco 4-0 in his last game with Lens, ultra attacking 3-1-4-2 that day against possession they had 15 shots, let's hope we see it in Soton soon. 

[Andy Hill]

Will Still still be here at Xmas. I very much doubt it - could easily be 2 losses this week.