I was wondering how much of this was a reflection of Southgate’s experience as a player - I think he featured in several teams using this sort of formation didn’t he?
3 Likes
Yeh, I think Venables used to use it a lot.
This was our line up for the Euro 96 semi final:
Seaman
Southgate Adams Pearce
Ince Platt
Anderton Gascoigne Mcmanaman
Sheringham
Shearer
Southgate Adams Pearce
Ince Platt
Anderton Gascoigne Mcmanaman
Sheringham
Shearer
He also played 3-5-2 against Scotland.
If we were to replicate that I guess it would look something like this…
Pickford
Walker Stones Mings
Henderson Bellingham/Rice
Foden Mount Grealish
Sterling
Kane
Walker Stones Mings
Henderson Bellingham/Rice
Foden Mount Grealish
Sterling
Kane
2 Likes
6 Likes
Criticised him this week but he is a bloody good ambassador for that group of lads at this time.
Considering the alternative would have been Fat Sam…
And sadly I feel his approach would have been more “let’s keep politics out of sport eh”
1 Like
It seems that Southgate is insistent on 3CBs as a cover for not having any who are good enough…if you cannot defend individually, flood the zone and try and be difficult to play through that way. The problem is it makes it difficult to play Mount, possibly the form England player, in a natural role in that formation. For me the out is that you dont need good attacking wingbacks AND wide forwards, so switch to a midfield diamond and 2 forwards. That makes more room for Mount to play a familiar role.
Keeper
Back 3
Walker Rice Chilwell
Hendo, Mount
Kane
2 Likes
I love what Gareth Southgate has done here, I’m surprised it isn’t getting more coverage, nothing about in the BBC etc.
2 Likes
The question that i pose is which area of the field can he flood?
I mean normally if defense is weak you look to place more players in midfield, yet he seems to think 2 will do which poses the question who have England got as midfielders? (is this also a weak area?)
He also insists on 3 or 4 attacking playerswhich also decreases the number in midfield.
This is the opposite to what international football requires which is about slowing the tempo and dominating midfield (particularly in the group stages).
Which is why England have won fuck all since 1966.
2 Likes
Even that was a fluke with a mega advantage.
I know as I was born that year. 
1 Like
So England won’t win anything again until you are reincarnated? 
3 Likes
Well, your midfield isn’t supposed to be isolated like that. Depending on your set up the two midfielders will be supported by the wingbacks and perhaps either one of the CBs moving into the space between midfield and defence, or from attackers dropping back when needed.
When teams play a flat back four, its common for at least one of the full backs to push forward leaving 3 at the back, creating a 4 in midfield (if it is normally a 3).
You don’t say?
I was really thinking along the lines of specialists more than tactical rigidity, just saying.
What does that even mean?
1 Like
Just go back to the original post and try and keep up!
I answered your original question. Your follow up comment didn’t add any clarity to it. This one doesn’t either.
No you didn’t!
The OP by @Limiescouse talked of flooding the defense and I kept on subjet!
Been all over Radio 5 today…
4 Likes
Fair enough, not seen anything on the website
Won’t happen but Southgate needs to go IMO.
Small mentality manager. Not good enough. Not flexible / creative enough. Not brave enough.
He has a very minimalistic approach to the game. Trying to win like the Italians did in the past or how Greece won it in 2004.
England were not able to win something with the golden generation of Terry, Ferdinand, Carragher, Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard and Rooney and I think similar will happen if Southgate stays.
4 Likes