Topic: Should Liverpool Persist With The 3-4-3 Formation?

[Bird Bird Bird The Bird Is The Word]

Haven't seen this point mentioned. With the back three, the amount of passes that Mignolet receives when circulating the ball around the back, and playing it around opposition harrying/pressing is massively reduced, to almost none in open play. That is one weak link we have taken out of the team during possession and its been a refreshing sight to watch Sakho and Can thread passes through opposition players to relieve pressure or start attacks when it looks like we're being pinned back. Not a criticism of Mignolet, he is what he is, so lets let him be that and not force a job on him that he can't do well, that negatively affects the team.

I really, really like this shape. I think it gives us stability and balance, but personnel wise, we're still short of a prolific goal-scorer or two, and no chopping or changing of shape will change that. Though putting another goal-scoring midfielder or striker into this set-up would be very easy, so that's a plus.

Another problem is the way we're playing three at the back, I like the way Rodgers has decided to opt for two conventional centre backs and a half/half centre back, originally Johnson but now Can. Someone who isn't a bona fide centre back but has enough traits to competently play as the third centre back in a back three, whilst also adding something to the midfield and occasionally the attack. Its an attempt to solve the problem of a back three, at times, being overly defensive in possession, someone like Can or Johnson can contribute in possession and attack. Barcelona have been trying to do it for years, using a midfielder at centre back in a back four, but the problem is that you put too much responsibility and pressure on them in a back four and a centre-back partnership, that responsibility is relieved considerably in a back three. My problem is what happens when Can gets injured, I think he is such a fundamentally important cog in the tactical structure of the team, that if he had a long term injury, it would seriously disrupt and limit us, if he wanted to use this shape as a long term solution. Maybe I'm overplaying his importance, but I think his role is a major reason why this shape works so well. Pressure, pressure, pressure, Can, no pressure, attack started.

[PhaseOfPlay]

It depends on the roles given to the other two CMs and how much aggressively the FBs are asked to play in the 4-3-3 though doesn't it? For instance, the manager can ask one of the FBs to always stay back when the other pushes on to effectively make a back three in possession. Alternatively, he could also ask one of the CMs to act as a link and become the extra protection in front of the holding midfielder when he's dropped between the CBs. This provides the same shape as in the diagram of the 3-4-3 you posted.

Yep for sure. I think the way we're playing it, with the personnel we have, right now, is the most workable way to play it. If we put Lovren and Johnson either side of Skrtel instead, I think with their positional recklessness, we would run Lucas into the ground in no time at all.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Haven't seen this point mentioned. With the back three, the amount of passes that Mignolet receives when circulating the ball around the back, and playing it around opposition harrying/pressing is massively reduced, to almost none in open play. That is one weak link we have taken out of the team during possession and its been a refreshing sight to watch Sakho and Can thread passes through opposition players to relieve pressure or start attacks when it looks like we're being pinned back. Not a criticism of Mignolet, he is what he is, so lets let him be that and not force a job on him that he can't do well, that negatively affects the team.

I really, really like this shape. I think it gives us stability and balance, but personnel wise, we're still short of a prolific goal-scorer or two, and no chopping or changing of shape will change that. Though putting another goal-scoring midfielder or striker into this set-up would be very easy, so that's a plus.

Another problem is the way we're playing three at the back, I like the way Rodgers has decided to opt for two conventional centre backs and a half/half centre back, originally Johnson but now Can. Someone who isn't a bona fide centre back but has enough traits to competently play as the third centre back in a back three, whilst also adding something to the midfield and occasionally the attack. Its an attempt to solve the problem of a back three, at times, being overly defensive in possession, someone like Can or Johnson can contribute in possession and attack. Barcelona have been trying to do it for years, using a midfielder at centre back in a back four, but the problem is that you put too much responsibility and pressure on them in a back four and a centre-back partnership, that responsibility is relieved considerably in a back three. My problem is what happens when Can gets injured, I think he is such a fundamentally important cog in the tactical structure of the team, that if he had a long term injury, it would seriously disrupt and limit us, if he wanted to use this shape as a long term solution. Maybe I'm overplaying his importance, but I think his role is a major reason why this shape works so well. Pressure, pressure, pressure, Can, no pressure, attack started.

Good points, but A) we'd probably have to change shape if that happened, or put Johnson there, and B) Can doesn't get injuries. Injuries get Can'd

[L666KOP]

Yep for sure. I think the way we're playing it, with the personnel we have, right now, is the most workable way to play it. If we put Lovren and Johnson either side of Skrtel instead, I think with their positional recklessness, we would run Lucas into the ground in no time at all.

[Noclio]

snip

Great point about Mignolet having less involvement in possession with this system. I observed that too and like you said, in combination with Sakho and Can being really comfortable playing out from the back, Rodgers seems to have found a good balance between defense and attack. That's why, despite my opinion that going back to a back four is the natural progression if we want to pack more attacking power in the team, I'm happy for Rodgers to continue with this system as it brings so many positives in areas we were lacking previously. 

[DeLeiva]

Great point about Mignolet having less involvement in possession with this system. I observed that too and like you said, in combination with Sakho and Can being really comfortable playing out from the back, Rodgers seems to have found a good balance between defense and attack. That's why, despite my opinion that going back to a back four is the natural progression if we want to pack more attacking power in the team, I'm happy for Rodgers to continue with this system as it brings so many positives in areas we were lacking previously.

Are we not playing in more of a 3421 rather than a pure 343?

Surely we could flip the front 3 into one player in behind 2 strikers and keep our defensive shape.

[L666KOP]

Great point about Mignolet having less involvement in possession with this system. I observed that too and like you said, in combination with Sakho and Can being really comfortable playing out from the back, Rodgers seems to have found a good balance between defense and attack. That's why, despite my opinion that going back to a back four is the natural progression if we want to pack more attacking power in the team, I'm happy for Rodgers to continue with this system as it brings so many positives in areas we were lacking previously.

The absolute key in this system is that our WB's and CB's transition as one. And so far we've pretty much got it right.

There's no space behind our FB's like Mourinho suggests if we continue, because like PoP has said, with our CB's pulling wide there's always a man there, if push comes to shove Lucas can drop in besides Martin. Played right, we should always have bodies available, and I think the trade off in getting shot of the diamond in favour of an 'extra' CB and the inclusion of Lucas is that those that are playing further forward have more confidence knowing our back door has a lock on it that can no longer be opened with a wet five pound note.

Skrtel gets to play deep, Mignolet sees less of the ball and is not having to be a sweeper, Lucas plays in his natural position, Henderson gets to be a link again in the centre of the field as opposed to being shoved out on the right.
Playing Markovic as WB is a genius move as well, so many times he's picked the ball up deep and run at the defence from inside our half. Watching our opposition defence wondering whether they should come and meet him, and thus leave gaps behind, or hold position and let him build up a head of steam is very satisfying. Moreno causing similar problems on the other side as well.

I really like this system, and if we can get Daniel  back up top I think we'll see a lot more wins than not.

[Bird Bird Bird The Bird Is The Word]

Good points, but A) we'd probably have to change shape if that happened, or put Johnson there, and B) Can doesn't get injuries. Injuries get Can'd

That's my worry, having to leave those blissful three digits - 3-4-3.

[L666KOP]

Are we not playing in more of a 3421 rather than a pure 343?

Surely we could flip the front 3 into one player in behind 2 strikers and keep our defensive shape.

3421/3412.

Just easier to type 343.
 

[B0151?]

I'd hope we stick with the 1 striker as our attacking midfielders are much more talented than our strikers bar Sturridge.

2 strikers is an option of course but we've been creating enough chances for the 1 striker to put away.

[Noclio]

Are we not playing in more of a 3421 rather than a pure 343?

Surely we could flip the front 3 into one player in behind 2 strikers and keep our defensive shape.

You're right of course. The front three could be reorganized to fit two strikers in a similar set up. What I meant is that using a back four provides more options in the attacking positions as you can use four attacking players + two FBs. Whether we'd lose defensive solidity or not is up for debate but I agree there's a good argument for not changing the system at this moment.

[PhaseOfPlay]

You're right of course. The front three could be reorganized to fit two strikers in a similar set up. What I meant is that using a back four provides more options in the attacking positions as you can use four attacking players + two FBs. Whether we'd lose defensive solidity or not is up for debate but I agree there's a good argument for not changing the system at this moment.

You're right about the possibility of not losing defensive solidity, but I think we would certainly lose some balance. This formation balances out the strengths and weaknesses of the main players in a good way, and exposes less of our weaknesses than the back 4 systems do. Change of personnel, though, might mitigate that - a Can-Sakho central defence, with Lucas in front, would probably be equally strong, but leaves Skrtel out, which doesn't seem likely to happen the way things have played out.

[Noclio]

The absolute key in this system is that our WB's and CB's transition as one. And so far we've pretty much got it right.

There's no space behind our FB's like Mourinho suggests if we continue, because like PoP has said, with our CB's pulling wide there's always a man there, if push comes to shove Lucas can drop in besides Martin. Played right, we should always have bodies available, and I think the trade off in getting shot of the diamond in favour of an 'extra' CB and the inclusion of Lucas is that those that are playing further forward have more confidence knowing our back door has a lock on it that can no longer be opened with a wet five pound note.

Skrtel gets to play deep, Mignolet sees less of the ball and is not having to be a sweeper, Lucas plays in his natural position, Henderson gets to be a link again in the centre of the field as opposed to being shoved out on the right.
Playing Markovic as WB is a genius move as well, so many times he's picked the ball up deep and run at the defence from inside our half. Watching our opposition defence wondering whether they should come and meet him, and thus leave gaps behind, or hold position and let him build up a head of steam is very satisfying. Moreno causing similar problems on the other side as well.

I really like this system, and if we can get Daniel  back up top I think we'll see a lot more wins than not.

Agree with everything you wrote. The only concern/dilemma is who will make way for Sturridge. Unless Rodgers drops Sterling at WB, it means he'll be selecting three out of Sterling, Lallana, Coutinho, Gerrard and Sturridge and that's leaving our other three strikers out of the equation.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Agree with everything you wrote. The only concern/dilemma is who will make way for Sturridge. Unless Rodgers drops Sterling at WB, it means he'll be selecting three out of Sterling, Lallana, Coutinho, Gerrard and Sturridge and that's leaving our other three strikers out of the equation.

I think my main concern is not who he drops (I'd say any combination of Coutinho/Lallana/Sterling behind Sturridge is physically and technically strong, while Gerrard drops in for Sterling for certain games) - rather, my main concern is that he fudges it by trying to keep too many players happy. If he is indecisive, and comes up with a whole new formation just to accommodate every attacker possible, the recent progress could collapse like a house of cards.

[L666KOP]

Agree with everything you wrote. The only concern/dilemma is who will make way for Sturridge. Unless Rodgers drops Sterling at WB, it means he'll be selecting three out of Sterling, Lallana, Coutinho, Gerrard and Sturridge and that's leaving our other three strikers out of the equation.

We do appear top heavy on face value, however, with all the games we 'hopefully' have coming up it means we can rotate without losing quality of depth. We are obviously weak at the tip with only Daniel as our recognised number 9.

Sterling at LWB would be bonkers. 

Natural progression trims Gerrard from the equation, and hopefully takes care of Mario, and Fabio also. Origi coming in gives a bit more depth across the front 3, unless Brendan sees him as competition/backup for Daniel.

I'll be honest, I'd like a player somewhere between Daniel, and Origi/Lambert in terms of quality, a player like Daniel was when we bought him. I certainly don't think he can be thought of as number 1 anymore until he stays injury free for a decent run.

[L666KOP]

I think my main concern is not who he drops (I'd say any combination of Coutinho/Lallana/Sterling behind Sturridge is physically and technically strong, while Gerrard drops in for Sterling for certain games) - rather, my main concern is that he fudges it by trying to keep too many players happy. If he is indecisive, and comes up with a whole new formation just to accommodate every attacker possible, the recent progress could collapse like a house of cards.

Hopefully stevie's announcement, and the removal of the 4231 has put that to bed.

[Noclio]

You're right about the possibility of not losing defensive solidity, but I think we would certainly lose some balance. This formation balances out the strengths and weaknesses of the main players in a good way, and exposes less of our weaknesses than the back 4 systems do. Change of personnel, though, might mitigate that - a Can-Sakho central defence, with Lucas in front, would probably be equally strong, but leaves Skrtel out, which doesn't seem likely to happen the way things have played out.

That's the way I see it too. In my opinion, if we want to operate with a similar high line with a back four and also remain efficient playing it out from the back, Skrtel would ideally have to make way. I think Lovren is the only alternative (not convinced Can would be comfortable there long term but maybe he could) but as you said, I don't think Rodgers believes we can do without Skrtel at the back at the moment.

I think my main concern is not who he drops (I'd say any combination of Coutinho/Lallana/Sterling behind Sturridge is physically and technically strong, while Gerrard drops in for Sterling for certain games) - rather, my main concern is that he fudges it by trying to keep too many players happy. If he is indecisive, and comes up with a whole new formation just to accommodate every attacker possible, the recent progress could collapse like a house of cards.

I see where you're coming from and I agree, the balance of the whole team is what needs to be conserved. All the positives of the last few weeks can be attributed to each player having a better understanding of their roles and the partnerships that have been struck throughout the whole team. In that respect, the formation is only a means to an end. 

[Beninger]

If we persist with 3 at the back when Sturridge comes in, I could see a 1-2 or 2-1 up top.  Sterling and Coutinho behind Sturridge.  Coutinho behind Sturridge and Sterling with Balo as an option as well (if he gets on board in training).  Lallana in the mix.  It would seem to me, either one could work depending on opposition and also very fluid within the game as well.

[Noclio]

We do appear top heavy on face value, however, with all the games we 'hopefully' have coming up it means we can rotate without losing quality of depth. We are obviously weak at the tip with only Daniel as our recognised number 9.

Sterling at LWB would be bonkers. 

Natural progression trims Gerrard from the equation, and hopefully takes care of Mario, and Fabio also. Origi coming in gives a bit more depth across the front 3, unless Brendan sees him as competition/backup for Daniel.

I'll be honest, I'd like a player somewhere between Daniel, and Origi/Lambert in terms of quality, a player like Daniel was when we bought him. I certainly don't think he can be thought of as number 1 anymore until he stays injury free for a decent run.

Yep, that was always going to be a problem going into the season with four strikers while playing only one up top.

I'm happy with Gerrard playing further forward as long as his minutes are well managed. He lights up in advanced positions and still performs to a high standard attacking wise when removed from the rigors of a central midfield birth.

As for adding another option in attack, it will have to be done by first getting rid of someone else. I think it's Gnurglan who has been saying it for a while but we arguably have to many senior squad players in back up roles that could instead be filled with youth/fringe prospects.   

[Gnurglan]

3-4-3 works, so let's build on it. Generally, I'm not a fan of playing three at the back. My concern is the role of the wing-backs. They get a lot of ground to cover and it can come at the expense of fairly limited CBs, or limited roles for them. We don't have that, our players are more active, which is good. Most important though, is that the system works.

[L666KOP]

3-4-3 works, so let's build on it. Generally, I'm not a fan of playing three at the back. My concern is the role of the wing-backs. They get a lot of ground to cover and it can come at the expense of fairly limited CBs, or limited roles for them. We don't have that, our players are more active, which is good. Most important though, is that the system works.

And shouldn't be over reliant on individual players.

We'll obviously have our best 11. But we wont be reliant on Gerrard to constantly ping 40 yard passes to make it work, neither will we rely on a nutter up front to bamboozle defences.

Playing a 343, the team will be the best player.

[peachybum]

In all his time here Brendan has never shown he can get defensive stability playing a back 4. But for some reason this system gives us a much more stable base to play from. Of course we're not getting points at home but that's more to do with the lack of a top striker not the system. We're stable at the back and having a billion shots a game. I don't see any need to go back to 442D even if we get another striker.

I would like us to stick with this system for a period of time and see where it gets us rather than chop and change. I know people will say systems don't matter and it's how you play not where you stand etc that counts but i'm really not sure how you can recruit when you don't know if the club plays 3 at the back or 4. Look at our squad now. We have 3 fullbacks in Manquillo, Flanagan and Enrique who don't suit this system at all. If we stick with this system heading into the next few months we'd be so much better off without any of those 3 and having another offensive wing back but we're going to have to make do because we didn't recruit for 3421.

[Giono]

The obvious solution is to go back to 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-1-2 and use Coutinho as part of the midfield trio alongside Henderson with Lucas at the base.

I really like the idea of Coutinho playing as part of a midfield 3. He is looking so much more at home in our current formation than as a wide striker. But I think he'd really be at home with 3 forwards plus Henderson to pick out.

The question with going 4-3-3 is our defenders. But I think that having Lucas as the 1 of a 1-2 midfield with Henderson and Coutinho ahead of him could protect Sakho and Can/Skrtel.

[Giono]

I agree, Sterling dropping back is the most likely option. As you said, it would mean less game time for Lallana and Gerrard if Rodgers persist with 3-4-3. Breaking the Henderson-Lucas partnership should be avoided at all cost unless it's for rest/fatigue.

Returning to a back four gives the option to use four out of Coutinho, Lallana, Markovic, Sterling, Gerrard and Sturridge in advanced positions. Can could also be introduced in midfield in a rotation with Lucas and Henderson at some point. It could maintain the improvements in attack but like POP and SerbianScouser said, it may jeopardize the new found defensive solidity so Rodgers might not want to risk it.

There should be adequate game time for Lallana and Gerrard with 4 competitions (hopefully for a while more).
I'd like to see us try a 4-3-3 with Can - Sakho partnership to get the most out of our attacking options, but I can see how 3-4-3 has neutralised the weaknesses of Skrtel and Mignolet and maybe going back to 4, even with alucas as DM could disturb the solidity we have now.

[Giono]

I think my main concern is not who he drops (I'd say any combination of Coutinho/Lallana/Sterling behind Sturridge is physically and technically strong, while Gerrard drops in for Sterling for certain games) - rather, my main concern is that he fudges it by trying to keep too many players happy. If he is indecisive, and comes up with a whole new formation just to accommodate every attacker possible, the recent progress could collapse like a house of cards.

One of the great things about this formation is so many players are playing deservedly on merit because they are good at their role. If we go back to shoehorning in players like Lovren into defence or Stevie into midfield, it won't matter what formation we play.

[Redcap]

I think we need a bigger sample size of games before we call it.

It's working now though, and there's no reason to change it beyond wanting to fit more of our attacking midfielders into the team.

What's great about the 3-4-3 is that, even if we do discover a more effective Plan A, it remains a very viable and effective Plan B, which we lacked until this season.

[Gerrard#1]

I think Maureen could be playing mind games with Brendan when he talks about exploiting the space in behind. Trying to get him to second guess himself and change players/the formation.

The 2nd leg should be an indication of how useful this formation will be in the long term.

[sturridginho]

Im really happy with the formation ad think this could be a long term option. Rodgers has tried 3 at the back a few times with mixed succes but has ever really had the WB for the system.
 Also thinking about longterm got me thinking about Illori and how he would fit into this team, wouldn't the RCB role be perfect for him? From what I have seen he is very strong on the ball, quick turn of pace and a good 1v1 defender allowing Can to eventually make CM his own

[DanA]

Think POP is spot on. This is a time that Rodgers needs to show strength of character and leadership. To my thinking it's a key moment in his management career and one that could make or break his tenure with us. We have quite a few big names (Lovren, Balotelli, Gerrard & Johnson) that I think perhaps present a challenge for Rodgers. By my thinking none of them are in our best XI and Gerrard is the only one I'd regularly look to use in rotation but it requires making some uncomfortable calls and possibly an admission of mistakes in the transfer windows.

Last season Rodgers had to make the right call pulling Lucas from the starting line up which arguably cost the Brazilain a place in the national team for the world cup. From what we've seen in press conference it looks the likes he's made a similarly good call with Balotelli. I think from Rodgers perspective it's a lot harder to pull Gerrard from big games though, from what we've seen (rested last game) it doesn't look like he's going to do it.  Given contract fresh negotiations I also worry Rodgers might favour Johnson and will look for an opportunity to play Lovren over Sakho as he has done for a lot of this season. There is no real evidence to suggest he will do this but it something I think is possible.



                                    Mignolet
                      Can           Skrtel          Sakho
Markovic                                                             Moreno
                           Henderson     Lucas
                   Lallana                         Coutinho
                                    Sterling



By my thinking that's our best line up and what we should be looking to play against Chelsea tonight (assuming Sturridge is not fit to start). I think ideally Gerrard and Sturridge come on around 70 minutes as impact subs. Rather than this though I think Rodgers will go for Gerrard instead of Lallana and possible Johnson instead of Markovic. By my thinking both decisions weaken us and these are the type of decisions I think could cause Rodgers to come undone.

[DanA]

Im really happy with the formation ad think this could be a long term option. Rodgers has tried 3 at the back a few times with mixed succes but has ever really had the WB for the system.
 Also thinking about longterm got me thinking about Illori and how he would fit into this team, wouldn't the RCB role be perfect for him? From what I have seen he is very strong on the ball, quick turn of pace and a good 1v1 defender allowing Can to eventually make CM his own

I think you are spot on about Ilori, the question there I suppose is can he keep fit and does he have the quality to succeed at the highest level. Actually it'll be interesting to see how quite a few of the loanees fit in because I see a few potentially benefiting from this setup. Coates, Ilroi and Wisdom all seem a better fit in a three CB defence and potentially there is room for Texiera or Alberto in this system with Gerrard and Suso gone.

The one issue I'm not sure about is our RB options. It looks like we're better with wingers playing the WB roles and with Wisdom, Flanagan and Manquillo all being defensive minded RB's it might be an awkward fit in the longer term. I'm not discounting them, Manquillo looked solid when used there but unquestionably we've looked better with Markovic.

[Trendisnotdestiny]

I think you are spot on about Ilori, the question there I suppose is can he keep fit and does he have the quality to succeed at the highest level. Actually it'll be interesting to see how quite a few of the loanees fit in because I see a few potentially benefiting from this setup. Coates, Ilroi and Wisdom all seem a better fit in a three CB defence and potentially there is room for Texiera or Alberto in this system with Gerrard and Suso gone.

The one issue I'm not sure about is our RB options. It looks like we're better with wingers playing the WB roles and with Wisdom, Flanagan and Manquillo all being defensive minded RB's it might be an awkward fit in the longer term. I'm not discounting them, Manquillo looked solid when used there but unquestionably we've looked better with Markovic.

Well, I think we are getting more athletic and good on the ball at these positions over time.  I think this speaks to Brendan's belief about being able to play, press and dominate the ball.  To do this well, we need real hardened pace on the flanks to expand the defense (like an accordian) --- and the players you name tend to be more athletic (Marko, Moreno, Manquillo) and dangerous ---- less powerful though.

[GrkStav]

And shouldn't be over reliant on individual players.

We'll obviously have our best 11. But we wont be reliant on Gerrard to constantly ping 40 yard passes to make it work, neither will we rely on a nutter up front to bamboozle defences.

Playing a 343, the team will be the best player.

I know I speak for Sangria and many others here: THIS!

[GrkStav]

Hopefully stevie's announcement, and the removal of the 4231 has put that to bed.

I think it would be a big and gratuitous mistake if BR concludes that 4231 has to be removed for good.

It's a very useful formation and we actually have the personnel, with the pedigree and the skills, to play it to a high standard, both as a 'defensive' formation and as a more 'attacking' formation.

[GrkStav]

If we have two sitting defensive mids in front of a back four, with none of them dropping in between the central defenders, then there is less work. As soon as the central defender splits, and the defensive mid has to drop in, then he ceases to be a defensive mid, and becomes a central defender, especially if the other team attacks directly through the middle. The sweeper behind the defensive mid, as Skrtel more or less is, means that the central area is covered, so he only has to think of his own zone, and then maybe pushing forward occasionally. Less work, less space to cover, because he has cover behind him.

Right. Therefore, the progression would be 3421 to 4231 to 4123 to 41212 in terms of getting the best out whoever is playing as the most withdrawn midfielder or the most withdrawn midfielders (holders) or the most defensively minded of the 2 central (not advanced) midfielders. Right?

[DanA]

Well, I think we are getting more athletic and good on the ball at these positions over time.  I think this speaks to Brendan's belief about being able to play, press and dominate the ball.  To do this well, we need real hardened pace on the flanks to expand the defense (like an accordian) --- and the players you name tend to be more athletic (Marko, Moreno, Manquillo) and dangerous ---- less powerful though.

I don't think Manquillo or Flanagan will ever offer the attacking threat of players like Moreno and Markovic. I'm not sure how integral to the system that attacking threat is but it seems to be pretty important, both have been attacking outlets with numerous shots on goal between them and both have scored over the last 4-5 games playing these roles. 

[Tobez]

Interesting to see a few posters making the point about a potential lack of out-and-out wing-backs at the club. I agree that the likes of Wisdom and even Flanagan aren't best suited to the role (although Flanagan has played it before, reasonably, at Arsenal last season) but I think Manquillo is better suited than some are giving him credit for - Enriqué as well. Manquillo is still young and has shown a willingness to get forward from full-back, and while his end product could be worked on he's fine as back-up in that position and can grow into it. Likewise Enriqué has experience of playing further forward under Rodgers, and showed some good performances there in the 2012/2013 season (the thrashing of Swansea at Anfield springs to mind).

Then we've got the likes of Markovic, Sterling and even Henderson who can play there in a pinch, so I'm not so sure it's a hugely limiting factor in keeping the formation.

[DanA]

Interesting to see a few posters making the point about a potential lack of out-and-out wing-backs at the club. I agree that the likes of Wisdom and even Flanagan aren't best suited to the role (although Flanagan has played it before, reasonably, at Arsenal last season) but I think Manquillo is better suited than some are giving him credit for - Enriqué as well. Manquillo is still young and has shown a willingness to get forward from full-back, and while his end product could be worked on he's fine as back-up in that position and can grow into it. Likewise Enriqué has experience of playing further forward under Rodgers, and showed some good performances there in the 2012/2013 season (the thrashing of Swansea at Anfield springs to mind).

Then we've got the likes of Markovic, Sterling and even Henderson who can play there in a pinch, so I'm not so sure it's a hugely limiting factor in keeping the formation.

I'm more worried about Enrique's knee than his talent. He's not played back to back games since returning from injury. If his knee is incapable of doing so then that needs to be considered. I think Henderson was terrible as RWB.

[Jookie]

The one issue I'm not sure about is our RB options. It looks like we're better with wingers playing the WB roles and with Wisdom, Flanagan and Manquillo all being defensive minded RB's it might be an awkward fit in the longer term. I'm not discounting them, Manquillo looked solid when used there but unquestionably we've looked better with Markovic.

If we persist with 3-4-3 into next season then my biggest concern is the wing back options. Markovic has done brilliantly in the role so far. Offers an attacking threat plus has been defensively sound. Moreno has done well in the position also. Again because defensively he is good enough to play the role but mainly because he offers an attacking threat also.

Beyond Markovic and Moreno I don't think our other options for the wing back positions are a natural fit. As you said Wisdom, Manquillo and Flanagan could do a job there but I think they would be too defensive minded.  Maybe away from home they would be an option. At home I think with the current squad, we need Moreno and Markovic in those positions for it to work.

At Bolton at the weekend I thought Brendan's biggest problem was having Manquillo and Enrique in the wing back positions. They didn't offer enough going forward and didn't give us the desired width. With our front 3 having a tendency to want to play centrally we made it easier for Bolton to crowd us out in central areas with the knowledge that we didn't have any threat out wide. It's a physically demanding role so I understand why Brendan gave Markovic and Moreno a rest.

The physical nature of the role means that someone like Glen Johnson, and to a lesser extent Enrique, don't have the physical attributes to do the position justice. If we persist with the system long term then I seen no place in the squad for Enrique. If retained, Johnson, could only really play on the RHS of the 3 CB's.

[peachybum]

The thing with wing backs for me it's first and foremost an offensive position. You're not playing five at the back you're playing three. So when you look at a potential wing back you need to ask yourself a question. Could this player be used on the wing in a 442? If the answers yes they can be a wing back if it's no then they can't. It's why Moreno, Markovic and Sterling works and Manquillo, Flanagan, Enrique and Wisdom don't. The reality whilst those four could play the position they are going to hurt the team offensively and for what they give you in defensive stability it's really not worth it. Even Venables knew that back in 96. His used McManaman and Anderton as wing backs instead of great full backs like Pearce and Neville.

If we persist with this system we should recruit with purely this system in mind. That means selling the likes of Flanagan and Enrique, giving Manquillo back to Madrid. Wisdom could be kept as a CB i suppose. Start looking at players who suit the position. Players who won't hurt the side if they're selected like we saw against Bolton.

[DanA]

The thing with wing backs for me it's first and foremost an offensive position. You're not playing five at the back you're playing three. So when you look at a potential wing back you need to ask yourself a question. Could this player be used on the wing in a 442? If the answers yes they can be a wing back if it's no then they can't. It's why Moreno, Markovic and Sterling works and Manquillo, Flanagan, Enrique and Wisdom don't. The reality whilst those four could play the position they are going to hurt the team offensively and for what they give you in defensive stability it's really not worth it. Even Venables knew that back in 96. His used McManaman and Anderton as wing backs instead of great full backs like Pearce and Neville.

If we persist with this system we should recruit with purely this system in mind. That means selling the likes of Flanagan and Enrique, giving Manquillo back to Madrid. Wisdom could be kept as a CB i suppose. Start looking at players who suit the position. Players who won't hurt the side if they're selected like we saw against Bolton.

It's a big jump though to go from playing out the season in a 3-4-3 to building the the future around it. I think it's possible to hedge our bets a bit by find versatile players like Coentrao or Cuadrado. Those two are obviously on the upper end of the talent spectrum but I'm guessing there are others out there that are more obtainable. The point being it's possible at least in theory that we could recruit with more than just a 3-4-3 system in mind. It could in practice be too limiting in terms of a playing pool though, a question for the scouts I suppose.