So if this 3back sticks what does it mean for the rest of the defenders? Sauerbrunn will have one of the wide slots which isnt where I prefer her but at least she is out there. Long/Sullivan seem to have the center slot. That leaves one slot for someone out of the Johnston, Sonnett, Short, Krieger and maybe Dahlkemper group. Also puts Klingenberg and O'Hara competing against the wide attackers for one WB slot.
Sure there is-- there's been a distinct pattern in these two game friendly series that the visiting team plays better or gets off to a better start in the second game when the jetlag/time zone stress has lessened. Further, if she wants to play Ohai with a particular grouping, and doesn't want to play others in that grouping in the first game... Game one and game two can be interchangeable in your judgement without being so in hers; and she's being paid to use hers, not yours. Difficult to accept, I know-- the rest of us have troubles with it too. Shake it off.
Jill can't be seriously thinking about playing a 3-back against legit talent. There's a reason nobody ever plays that formation. a talented midfield would pick it apart. I'm assuming this formation tho will be used against teams like Sweden who sit back and bunker.
I'm not sure the 3-back system would work against Sweden either. They'd probably score 3 goals on us on counter attacks.
You are just referring to the women's game and not a blanket statement correct? Because 3-5-2 is still used a lot, especially in Serie A. Antonio Conte often uses a 3 back system (and no one can accuse Italy having a great deal of talent nowadays). The weakness is against teams that use the wings very well. Now if you are just talking about the women's game in specific (which may be the case here) then I'll concede the point as you all know it much better than I do.
I'd agree that the same would hold true in the women's game (theoretically...honestly, I haven't seen a 3-5-2 played often in the women's game). My doubts on the formation right now is the players Ellis is choosing to play there...a natural AM in the center and a fullback who likes to go forward on the left (Short getting caught out is part of what led to the Swiss goal). I don't mind seeing it used sometimes although I think we'll have to revert back to a 4-back against top teams. In any case, I'd rather see pure defenders playing it with Sauerbrunn in the middle to cover. Long could develop into that type of defender (and she did well in both games; she really exceeded my expectations), but the line also wasn't tested much.
This was an international game, so i was referencing international teams. both men and women. There's not one women's international team which does. Brazil did in..I believe the German WC... whoever, they had a sweeper also. I'm fairly certain not one men's WC team played with a 3 back in Brazil for the WC either. Besides Antonie Conte, can you name 5, 10 other coaches/teams who often play with a 3 back?
I agree. First this is a different scenario if u world class CB also happens to be a passer who can make this work. Moving a lesser defender into the middle to make this work is strike one. Strike two is moving better central defenders to wide positions to make this work because u r now downgrading two spots. The third strike would be getting greedy and still encourage ur wide players to get forward. That said I really dont mind them spending time on this formation. While it isnt what I would pick for their base formation it could be a nice situational formation. Still the problem isnt how many backs u start with it's having a back line who can handle pressure and advance the ball to the midfield./ I think the jury is still out as to whether Long can do those things let alone handle the increased defensive responsibilities.