Napoli too, and some tricky teams left too. It isn’t as easy as you think it is. We’re a big club in name only but our squad at best is bang average, taken out 4 or 5 players. We be doing well to win this or get top 4 with our defense . We’re not bigger then any competition, we haven’t won a damn CL or won a title in 15 years. What makes you think we deserve better.
The days of Wenger luckily saving his ass with a top 4 position are long gone, 5 top teams and us in the mix up now, and most of those teams barely drop points.
3-4-3 vs United- D (Holding injury) - (Ozil back injury)
3-1-4-2 vs Huddersfield - W - (Ozil back injury)
3-4-3 vs Southampton - L - (Ozil came in from the bench)
4-3-1-2 vs Burnley - W - (Ozil starts)
4-3-1-2 vs Brighton - D - (Ozil starts)
4-2-3-1 vs Liverpool - L - (Ozil knee injury)
3-4-3 vs Fulham- W - (Ozil knee injury)
3-4-3 vs WHU - L - (Ozil not in the squad)
4-3-1-2 vs Chelsea - W (Bellerin Injury) - (Ozil unused sub)
4-3-1-2 vs Cardiff - W - (Ozil starts)
4-4-2 vs City - L - (Ozil unused sub)
3-4-3 vs Huddersfield - W - (Ozil not in the squad)
As you can see he started with 4-3-1-2 in 11 out of our first 12 games. He then switched to 3-4-3 (which you call 5 at the back) after our 3 consecutive draws (obviously seeking to change something). It seems to have worked as we won the next two games (one of which vs Spurs). Then the Holding and Ozil injuries happened vs United and you can clearly see he has been tinkering with our formation ever since. You can clearly see Emery uses 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-1-2 everytime he has Ozil available.
Also the treatment Emery gets from the fans for the Ozil situation is hugely unfair in my opinion. Ozil started 10 from our first 12 games (missed one due to illness and one because of his “back” injury. Unused sub in one game and then missed 3 games straight after that because of, you guessed it, “back” injury. Two more starts after that and then a knee injury for two games.
So, the correct answer is ‘yes we moved to 5 at the back before Holding got injured’. So it’s a nonsense to say we moved to 5 at the back because of injuries, he didn’t.
Note I didn’t mention Ozil. And those Ozil injuries are largely unsubstantiated and tie into the peroid being perma-dropped from the match squad. Meanwhile Emery is entrusting his playmaking to Kolasinac.
And 5-3-2 or 4-3-1-2 is creating fuck all and defending ineptly. It worked for 2 games, great.
The Ozil comments weren’t directed at you, they were general.
It’s 3 at the back, not 5. If you can’t get basic arithmetics, I am not willing to argue with you.
Semantics, it’s wingback versus fullback and in the modern game fullbacks are nearly as attacking as wingbacks and wingbacks are still expected to track the wide forwards
Ultimately it still boils down to committing less men forward
That’s not necessarily true though. It’s manager dependent and in a 3 at the back formation when you’re attacking you often only play with 2 CBs because one of them is expected to operate almost as a modern day “libero” and step forward to help launch attacks. The wing backs push so far up the pitch and when you’re in the attacking phase you often only have players in your own half. That’s a proper 3 at the back formation.
The reason 3 at the back can be seen as a weakness is because of how high up the wing backs need to push to make the formation successful in the attacking phase. Which inevitably leaves space between the CB and the wing back which good wingers exploit time and time again.
In a 3-4-3 formation you’re basically often left with only 2 CBs in your half and a modern take on the “libero” basically operating as a deep lying playmaker.
Most formations can be made defensive if a manager puts a certain spin on it but the 3-4-3 or 3-5-2, when executed correctly, mean you end up committing just as many men forward as you would in a standard 4 at the back formation
Why is it always people who skew reality to fit their narrative call it semantics? How about you tell it as it is without making “semantic” alterations?
Surely 3 at the back is less defensive than 4 or 5 at the back… But, it puts more of a strain on the wingbacks and weaker personal will cause you problems.
Also, I quite evidently showed you that 3-4-3 is not Emery’s preferred formation. That’s what Romain’s quotes implied and that is quite clearly backed up by evidence. But if that will bring you piece, yes, it weren’t the injuries to Holding and Bellerin that made him do it. Ozil’s absence from the squad is the reason Emery reverted to that formation, in every instance that Ozil is available for selection and starts the game Emery would pick a formation with 4 people at the back (2 CBs and 2 fullbacks). Romain’s point still stands though, the injuries to Holding and Bellerin make matters much worse for us.
And LOL at saying Ozil’s injuries are unsubstantiated.
Good points tbh and obviously Brazil 2002 certainly weren’t defensive with a similar formation, albeit with 3 world class forwards. Lucio would roam forward and Carlos and Cafu would frequently be offside. It made sense for them because they had the best attacking fullbacks in the world. It solidified their defensive problems too as they were consistently slipping up in qualifying. Comparatively Argentina were favourites that year IIRC, they dominated qualifying with the same system but couldn’t put it together in the WC.
However our system doesn’t really function in the same way does it? We don’t have the quality in the front 3 or the wingbacks.
This seems BS. As @Gladiator has posted in this thread 3-4-3 was played against Bournemouth, Spurs, United and Southampton. Bellerin started all those games.
Also. Fine that we are a Europa League team. But if you lose against Bate Borisov you will get shat upon.
We’ve lost 3 times and drawed against Brighton during his absense. Not sure his injury has been such a killer. Two of those games were against Liverpool and City. Those we would have lost regardless.
You could argue that going forward we miss an outlet in comparison to Lichtsteiner or Maitland-Niles. But it says a lot about the limitations of this team if the right back is so essential for the attacking play.
