They do the exact same thing now. I already told you. That´s what teams always do. Push you out wide and frustrate you in the middle. You can´t be new to football? The benefits of the system are being more solid. Not being more attacking.
Isak and Gakpo as CF (where he scored his goal from yesterday).
You think teams can´t ever press if they play 4 4 2 diamond? Good lord, what has Sky done to football fans 
So we’re debating a 442 diamond midfield with no wingers having brought in a manager we know likes to utilise pacey wingers, spent all summer chasing two pacey wing options and have spent £35m on another one already.
And that’s 442 with two centre forwards even though we’ve only got one fit one, two proper ones in total and are possibly going to sell the only other option we have who has played there a bit even though we’re all pretty much in agreement that’s not his best role.
And no one actually thinks it’s what we should do but we’re having an argument about it anyway. The start of the season and the end of the transfer window is such a harmonious time in this place. At least this discussion found its way to the right thread, that’s something to be thankful for at least.
I have shot down why it doesn’t work.
No more to say and as my name states I come from a sporting background with numerous coaching qualifications in numerous sports including a UEFA B coaching license, but thankfully my knowledge is all down to Sky Sports.
Does this mean I am more knowledgeable than others not necessarily.
But I don’t just pluck what google says, I assess from what I see and understand and also listen to others.
But google is better than all the top coaches in picking formations that work at the top level.
Yes people are discussing and debating (on a discussion forum) about potential options for the midfield using the CURRENT players we have in the Central Midfield thread.
Don´t think your sneering comment was really necessary.
Ha you didn´t shoot it down at all. Your argument was that we would be short in midfield, while using a formation specifically designed for numerical superiority in midfield.
That our full backs providing width would be limited is a fair complaint and the reason I wouldnt use it.
The Google image was just a basic guide to the formation as you weren´t grasping the formation and how it works. Must be covered on the next level fo the UEFA license eh! 
Good for you for getting it though. Truly. Good thing to do.
I explained why we would be short in midfield!
But as Rab said why have this conversation when it ain’t happening, I just got involved because people thought it would be a good idea and I put why it wouldn’t for a top team.
It was a long time ago!
Well for me it doesnt make much sense. If one midfielder is covering a full back you still have 2 remaining (3 if you include Wirtz).
Fair enough. You´re welcome to your opinion and good discussion. All good.
@rab you tried! Blessed are the peacemakers…
It’s a thread to discuss the central midfield. A midfield which will not operate without some form of width from the wide players we have or aim to have, that the new manager literally builds his team around and has recently commented we don’t have enough of.
It’s an entirely moot discussion you yourself have said you wouldn’t do. The only way it remotely becomes a topic worthy of talking about is if we fail to bring in any other wingers and sell Gakpo before the window closes.
That’s not sneering, it’s just the reality of the situation and the ridiculousness of the argument being laid out for you to see.
All discussion is moot. It´s a discussion forum. People discuss things, including theoreticals.
We could play it right now. Gakpo could be our other forward. He scored from that position against Newcastle.
Again, not ideal but an expedient in the absence of all these top wingers we don´t have. That was the point of the discussion. I wouldn´t be opposed to it until wingers are signed, even if it woouldnt be my first choice.
its basically 3 5 2 in possession and 4 4 2 out of it isnt it?
i understand why it wouldnt work, but can see how it would, given where we are at the moment.
tactics, like everything in life nowadays, seems so aggressively debated… as the guy said, its an option, on a discussion forum. i can see the sense in popping Nyoni in that role to release what is basically two wing backs playing as full backs.
i also like the idea of Wirtz tucked up there, he is very hard working and no amount of propaganda could convince me otherwise, so he would float vertically and more importantly horizontally.
i could also see this getting the best out of Isak and Ekitike when the moment occurs.
i can see why it wouldnt work.
ultimately id rather Iraola spend every waking moment on his plan A until we get it right, and if that means square pegs in round holes for a window or two, so be it. plan B,C and D can wait.
We could play Nyoni and Jay Spearing in a double pivot too but that’s about as likely to happen as playing without any wingers.
You cannot survive in the Premier League with 0 winger.
Average position showed that our midfield structure was more of a narrow 1-2 shape (and of course, Wirtz playing a bit higher than Szobo), rather than a strict 2-1. And we know from Bournemouth that Iraola likes asymmetrical shapes in different areas of the pitch, such as full backs, wingers and also midfielders.
Lots of questions still over what the hell do we construch with this group of players, both in the short and long term. I’m personally not a fan of Szoboszlai and Gravenberch mainly as double pivots (even if it seems Szobo might have the freedom to push up).
It’s why it’s very hard for me to get properly excited about more big signings. Yes, we may need something in wide areas, but it’s not like in other positions it’s all full of clarity and cohesion. We will hopefully improve with time, but we’ll see what’s our ceiling with these players.
Posting this one here, a good addition to the discussion we’ve had in this thread and in the post match thread. More about the collective positioning for counter pressing.
One thing I’d like to add: for the first Newcastle goal, a lot of analysis seem to be focusing on what Gravenberch did wrong - the final decision/execution - with very little mention of how brilliantly he did to get into the position.
That’s something basically no other central midfielder would give us, the ability to turn a nothing situation into a great opportunity by driving the ball forward like that.
This is a good review of the challenges posed by the demands of Iraola’s system
A point they make early on that is worth really reiterating is that a lot of what fans are identifying as problems, things caused by flaws of the players in the midfield, are in fact simply demands of the system. The result is so much of the discussion is around demands for specific fixes that are anathema to what Iraola is trying to implement.
This is obviously not to say we did everything right as Iraola himself is calling out specifically what he didnt like. The issue is what just looks scary to people who dont like the approach vs something that actually went wrong, when it went wrong what precisely was the failure, and how do we go about fixing that. No we don’t need a DM to shield the back 4. No we don’t need a CM to drop off and fill the space the FB has vacated. No we dont need to add another body in midfield or at the back to fill in spaces where the opposition hurt us when the point of failure for that move was often 50 yards higher up the pitch.
People have their preferences for what they like to see and they have different levels of comfort with managers doing different things and those are totally fine to express. The part of this that is a bit unproductive is how much of the conversation is being dominated by criticism of players not doing what a manager would hate to see them do, and how we’re failing because we’re not employing solutions that would undermine the entire philosophy of football the new manager has brought in.
It’s definitely worthwhile to consider Iraola’s system at Bournemouth. I think one of the concerns, though, is how that system will adapt to a different set of circumtances here.
Bournemouth weren’t some sort of minnow that sat back, of course - they were positively middle of the pack in terms of possession statistics during Iraola’s tenure. But they also had far fewer touches in their opponent’s box and my sense is that they did a better job maintaining their shape as a result.
In the end, it comes down to coaching the players in the formation that Iraola wants and that is what he is paid to do.
The players do have the tools to do what he wants defensively, maybe apart from matching Elanga’s pace, they just need a change in mindset in how they challenge, commit to recovery runs, or do the ugly side of the game, commit a foul
Both goals we conceded could have been prevented by players making the right decisions; even in the 1st one, where the rest defence was poor, a decision by Virg to press rather than retreat could have prevented the goal.
But a lot of ifs, buts and maybes.
It is now down to Iraola to improve the players.
this is also important and in fact, what I advocate. Because most big clubs just go out to buy solutions but I really like what Klopp did to our team and his philosophy of respecting the feelings of players who are already at the club and he has made his team punch above their weight alot of times. He and his coaches made many of the superstars that came out of his era.