Thomas Frank - back five

End of last season. He takes the microphone and points out Ivan Toney sat in the stands to the fans. He then gave such a rousing support of Toney and his problems that Toney could do nothing more than smile and feel touched.

Pure charisma and motivation.
 
Brentford are premier league’s leading scorers from set pieces. ‘Why wouldn’t we be? We have control of the situation’ …I paraphrase him. That includes throw-ins! They crowd the box at corners then disperse to pick up second phase, not leaving a man on the halfway line. He knows all the figures but most importantly whatever his formation he adapts it to the opposition as the game reveals itself. Brilliant coach
 
No such thing as a 'forwards' or 'backwards' formation, but you have to ensure the players you have suit the formation and gets the best out of them. My dad knew a thing or 2 about the game and would always say you don't start with a formation and fit players in, you look at your players and work out the best formation for them. I don't really see why anything should be different these days compared to 30 or 40 years ago, because the game hasn't changed. It's still 11 v 11. The dimensions of the pitch haven't changed and the rules of the game are the same, bar from some very small tweaks.

Case in point: Why did Ollie's 4-3-3 work? Because the full backs naturally enjoyed going forward and providing width. Because the midfield 3 of Southern, Vaughan and Adam totally complimented each other to create perfect balance and the front 3 - whoever played there - generally had players like GTF/Brett who understood the 'inside forward role properly to offer maximum fluidity and movement. The forward players probably had the most to learn in the system, but for everyone else the system was set up to let them play to their strengths.

Compare with the current situation and you have a right wing back who is left footed and thrives in playing in the oppositions half and by running into space behind the back 4 - which is generally not where a wing back tends to find themselves without leaving huge amounts of space for the opposition to operate in. We also have a left wing back who is totally right footed, much prefers the 'industrial' side of the game and isn't particularly good on the ball for someone who is likely to receive a lot of the ball.

I'm not sure I need a coaching badge or badges to work out what's going to happen here...
 
straightatthewall said:
No such thing as a 'forwards' or 'backwards' formation, but you have to ensure the players you have suit the formation and gets the best out of them. My dad knew a thing or 2 about the game and would always say you don't start with a formation and fit players in, you look at your players and work out the best formation for them. I don't really see why anything should be different these days compared to 30 or 40 years ago, because the game hasn't changed. It's still 11 v 11. The dimensions of the pitch haven't changed and the rules of the game are the same, bar from some very small tweaks.

Case in point: Why did Ollie's 4-3-3 work? Because the full backs naturally enjoyed going forward and providing width. Because the midfield 3 of Southern, Vaughan and Adam totally complimented each other to create perfect balance and the front 3 - whoever played there - generally had players like GTF/Brett who understood the 'inside forward role properly to offer maximum fluidity and movement. The forward players probably had the most to learn in the system, but for everyone else the system was set up to let them play to their strengths.

Compare with the current situation and you have a right wing back who is left footed and thrives in playing in the oppositions half and by running into space behind the back 4 - which is generally not where a wing back tends to find themselves without leaving huge amounts of space for the opposition to operate in. We also have a left wing back who is totally right footed, much prefers the 'industrial' side of the game and isn't particularly good on the ball for someone who is likely to receive a lot of the ball.

I'm not sure I need a coaching badge or badges to work out what's going to happen here...
Click to expand...

Agreed with that but logic doesn't interest Critchley. I bet you any money there isn't one fan out there who can understand what Critchley is trying to achieve. It's that bad.
 
I understand why pre season he thought 3-5-2 as we didn’t have strong wingers and we did have a good collection of centre backs.

Then we recruited and then we also saw the formation didn’t work as planned with the squad we had. I’d say that Thompson was his big disappointment as there’s your LWB with Lyons RWB.
He tried them both in preseason, in training matches and in the cup. Neither shone at all.

Now he needs to re-assess. His newly recruited squad would fit a 4-3-3 or a 4-4-2. Even a diamond formation (which again I’m not a fan of tbf) as he has a few attacking central midfielders, a couple of holding midfielders and a few box to box midfielders. He’s got a couple of fit soon to be 3 strikers and a potential ace card in Dembele.

CJ as I always state has a role. Against attacking teams or when 1 up he is an asset. In the dirge which is most teams in this division he has to be on the bench and he can’t break down a packed defence. It was no different in the Championship either for him.
 
Excellent coach and man manager.

It’s only a matter of time before one of the big boys come calling with a lucrative offer and he goes. That’s when the Brentford bubble will burst.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top