DiamondGooner wrote:theHotHead wrote:Not sure I agree, the traditional 4-4-2 for example, when one fullback bombs on the other doesn't tend to, as cover. If the defending team counter on the opposite side, the remaining full back will engage and the 2 CBs will shift across to that side, doesn't mean for that counter attack they are playing 3 at the back.
Did we say when Ramsey bombed on to the box that we played a 4-2-4 ? Its just a natural by-product of an attack that means a formation naturally morphs during specific scenarios, doesn't mean we have changed formation.
Exactly.
Players positions change during the match, Auba could end up in the area of a CDM but that doesn't mean he's not playing ST.
That still from Zenith is just showing Tierney who was clearly playing LB has just bombed forward meaning the remaining three are covering space.
Once Tierney drops back its the 4-2-3-1 we were playing.
That is why formations are largely unimportant.
It's about the intelligence of the players to operate to within the game and do their job. That shifts the formation continually.
I was not talking about formation - just the absolute fact that Gabriel, White and Tomiyasu are forming 3 at the back when we have possession and are building attacks.
Tierney was not just bombing forward - he was actually taking positions further upfield all game when the 3 had the back had control of the ball.