Tactical thought on the poor display against Southampton
Whenever United played with a back three, the players were struggling in both attacking and defensive phase of the game as they were all over the place. But it doesn’t mean that United should abandon this system of play altogether because the 3 men defence provides the solution to the lack of genuine fullbacks and holding players or in the case of against Arsenal and Southampton, to mitigate the high pressing tactics of both teams. Besides, with an additional defender, it can release an extra player to move forward, contrary to the general opinion that 3 at the back is a defensive system.
But it is not easy to execute this system of play because of the demand being put on the 3 centre-back as their roles are the hybrid of fullback, centre-back and midfielder. In defensive phase, they have to move to the touchlines like a fullback to stop the wide players and go into midfield areas to press like a midfielder, apart from the responsibility of a centre-back. Due to the extra player in the 3 men defence, in the attacking phase, the centre-backs have bigger responsibility in building up the play because the holding player wouldn’t able to drop deep to help them to start the attack as in the case of playing 2 centre-backs because it will create congestion. Thus, either one of them have to release the ball forward or bring the ball out to build up the play either through the centre or wide areas. When the play is in the final third, sometimes, they also required to move higher up the pitch to support the play at the touchlines or half-spaces. All these are akin to the role of a fullback and holding player.
United’s centre-backs – Jones, Smalling, Rojo and Evans – have the right attributes to carry out this 3 men defence system as they have the mobility to play in different positions and comfortable enough on the ball but just do not have the enough know-how and understanding of the game to make the right decisions in different situations as they have been playing with a back-four in their whole career. Hence, this explained for the poor display whenever they were playing with at 3 the back.
In the 2-1 win against Southampton, there were a few good signs that they were starting to understand the role a bit more better but still lack the audacity and quick decision-making to impose themselves better in the play. The poor positional play by the midfielders did not help the matter and in fact, it was the main reason for the awful performance against Southampton. As mentioned in my previous piece, Michael Carrick was the better option to play in the holding role in front of a back-four as he can drop deep to buildup the play using his passing ability and defensively, he can offer better protection as he is a good reader of the game but with the 3 men defence, Daley Blind’s mobility and positional sense will be better suited. It was the case against Southampton as Carrick unable to impose himself in the game due his positioning which caused some congestion at the back when building up the play.
Illustration 1 : With Southampton pressing high up the pitch, Carrick’s decision to drop deep with a opponent following, it effectively blocking the space for Evans to bring the ball out. In the end, Evans had to return a pass back to De Gea.
Illustration 2 : Carrick’s propensity to drop in line with the centre-back, allowed Southampton to press much more effectively.
Mcnair was on the ball. Carrick could have move towards the right open up space for Mcnair.
Instead, Carrick dropped deep, inviting more opponents towards them and blocking the space.
McNair switched the ball to Rojo on the other side. Carrick could have move forward to the right to bring the opponent away.
By moving away from Rojo, he could have bring the opponent away to allow Rojo the space to play to the other side to progress the play.