Does Gary Neville have the answers?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-city/11446323/How-Manchester-City-can-fix-their-big-game-blues-by-Gary-Neville.html

"The pace of the big Premier League is superb. We see a very fast, aggressive contest. But when you take it to Atletico Madrid, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich or Dortmund, our clubs are falling short. City’s problem in that respect relates to three pairings: Agüero and Dzeko, Silva and Nasri, and Touré and his partner in midfield.
"Here’s why. If you play Toure with a partner in central midfield, I don’t think you can play Silva and Nasri. If you play Dzeko and Aguero, I don’t think you can play Yaya and a partner in midfield. If you play Nasri and Silva, I don’t think you can play the other two pairings, which is why, I believe, Pellegrini left Agüero out in Munich.
"I think he recognises that the physical capacity and/or age of the team is a looming problem for him, and that he can no longer play all of them in the same side.
"City are the only team I have seen so far that can take on Chelsea in the league, but unless they sacrifice the domestic title in favour of Europe and summon the kind of high-intensity performances abroad they lack just now, I don’t think they will win the Champions League."
Gary Neville, Telegraph, Sep 19, 2014
Six months ago I watched Manchester City suffer their latest European setback, a defeat away to Bayern Munich, and reached a conclusion: unless they change their strategy they cannot win the Champions League.

It gives me no pleasure to reaffirm that analysis in the context of City's last two defeats, but nothing has changed. The strategic flaws were as clear against Barcelona last week and at Anfield on Sunday as they have been regularly whenever Manuel Pellegrini’s side has faced top class opposition.
It is the same soup reheated with City, mistakes repeated enabling higher calibre players to punish them, but rather than sit here and reel off a list of their failings I’ve found myself grabbing a pen and paper and trying to work out how they go about fixing it.
The starting point of my argument now, as it was in September, is City are unbalanced when they play 4-4-2 with Yaya Toure, David Silva, Samir Nasri and Sergio Aguero in the starting line-up. They leave themselves exposed too often.
It is not the system that is to blame, but the characteristics of the players within it. I’ve played in great teams that made 4-4-2 work, but fundamental to its success is not only showing the desire to make things happen with the ball, but to be equally combative without it. Quite frankly, the desire of City’s players in transition from having the ball to being without the ball against Liverpool on Sunday was nothing short of appalling in a game of that magnitude.
Silva is a player I admire as much any currently playing in the Premier League, but there was one incident on Merseyside which summed up City. Silva was tackled and it took him 10 seconds to get back to his feet and another 45 seconds to rejoin the game as it proceeded around him.

^{Appalling: David Silva's tracking back at Liverpool was poor}
You may argue Silva is primarily a creative player – and of course you’d be right – but in a 4-4-2 system you can’t have such a dereliction of duty by anyone. It was embarrassing how City’s midfielders approached the tougher aspects of the game. Recovery runs when the ball goes past you or you give it away, screening your centre backs , shifting up and across with the ball to ensure a compact unit and pressing your opponent.
So what does Pellegrini do about it? You can break it down to three options.
First, he can do nothing and simply persist with the same formation as the last 18 months. City will continue to win around 90 per cent of their games in the Premier League when they’re playing well, and maybe 80 per cent when they having a bit of a dip, because they are better than most teams in England no matter what tactics they favour. They won the Premier League title playing that way last season, so can take the attitude that there is not much of a problem.
What will happen then is they’ll be drawn to play Barcelona or Bayern Munich or Real Madrid next season, too, and we can have the same conversations while I redirect you to this column some time around September following their next humbling European defeat. We can all save ourselves time and cut and paste the same articles about City’s flaws.
The second option is trickier for Pellegrini. It involves dropping one of his big names. If he has decided 4-4-2 will always be the way for him, Toure, Aguero or Silva need to be sacrificed.

^{In danger: Sergio Aguero is a superb striker - but is there a place in City's team for him?}
That may serve the broader impact of the team, but what impact does it have around the club? You not only alienate the player you have left out, but possibly others in the dressing room. I’ve been there when the biggest egos are bruised. Trust me, it creates an atmosphere around a club and public pressure the manager does not want if he can avoid it.
The third option, which I believe Pellegrini has no option but to consider to have any chance against Barcelona in the second leg, is a change of system. There may be some accusations of panic, or questions as to whether a change in philosophy has come too late, but when something is patently not working you have to earn your corn as a manager and come up with fresh ideas.
Pellegrini knows the current 4-4-2 won’t work in the Nou Camp, so he could consider a diamond, or a 4-3-3. Even then the fundamental problem remains. If I was picking a City side in a diamond formation, I still could not accommodate Toure, Silva and Aguero in the same line-up.



The above would leave a decision for Pellegrini on Yaya or Silva because against the top teams like Barcelona, I don’t believe either of those two have the energy to play the wider midfield roles in a diamond.
If you go to a 4-3-3, I believe you lose too much from Aguero’s game. As was shown at Anfield when Pellegrini sent on James Milner to reinforce midfield, Aguero is not as effective without a strike partner. He thrives with support, but when you pair him with Dzeko, Jovetic or Bony the midfield balance is not right. That’s the coaching dilemma.



The problem with this system is it leaves Aguero upfront on his own which means he can become isolated. He has previously been less effective as a lone striker.
After scribbling a few formations and teams, I decided if you’re going to play Silva, Toure and Aguero the best option is for City to adopt a 3-5-2 formation even though I'm no great fan.



It’s a system that offers extra protection for the back players, enables Silva to drift into the pockets where he works so effectively, Yaya the licence to be a little less disciplined with three centre backs and gives Aguero the support he requires upfront.
City fans might note a certain irony in this selection which demands I make a confession – I’m two years too late. There was someone who thought this was the right way for City to evolve in 2013 - a coach out there who recognised a long time ago City can’t get to the higher level playing 4-4-2 with their star players. I was highly critical of this at the time, arguing it was unnecessary tinkering, meddling with a winning formula.

^{Prophet of doom: Roberto Mancini foresaw City's problems}
For that, I apologise to Roberto Mancini. He saw these issues earlier than us all!
I can imagine Pellegrini has his own blank sheet of paper on which he is currently jotting down names in different formations, trying to figure out how to make City impose themselves in Europe.
All eyes will be on him when City play in the Nou Camp on March 18. Unless the strategy changes the conversation will remain the same.

His comments on 352 are right. I was a big fan of us doing that just before Mancini implemented it as i thought done correctly, it suits the modern game as there is a lack of real wingers.

One of my big gripes with Mancini though was he ditched it too soon too and reverted back to 442.

He's very harsh on Silva, I know the incident he was talking about and that really is one in isolation, he is usually the complete opposite to that. That really is an example of using an isolated out of character example purely to suit the narrative at hand.

I have to agree, Melton. I thought 3-5-2 was a system that could work, especially after Mancini employed a back 3 in the FA Cup game against United after Vinny was sent off. We all questioned it at the time, but it worked. I could see how it would, as it made better use of Kolarov on the left side and we looked better balanced. But I suspect it was dropped too soon after a couple of duff results saw it getting slated by the press.

But I was a fan. It showed me a way to get something else out of the youth team I managed and it worked really well, my lads went on to win seven games in a row and get promotion.

I'd have liked to have seen Mancini defend the strategy a bit more, get it bedded in before picking it to pieces. But now I guess we'll never know...

The major flaw to using 3-5-2 was we never road tested it preseason but just tried to implement it in league games without the players really understanding it which was ridiculous

Hold on.....didn't we win an FA Cup/C1C and 2 PL titles in 4 years, NOT playing 3-5-2 , but a flat back 4?

Back in 2011/12, our top players were playing like top players.  They aren't any more and that prompts a re-think if you want to keep playing them.

We've got to keep evolving because we weren't so far in front of the pack.

Baconface said we should have been miles ahead of everyone with our squad. Even if he was being a bit naughty with his words, he wasn't far off.

I agree, we SHOULD have been miles ahead than everyone else 1/2 years ago....but we haven't added to the top class players we bought.

When we had the following players:

Hart
Zaba
Kompany
TLMLF
Silva
Nasri
Aguero
Tevez

There's 8 top class players....but we surrounded them with bang average players....and some of these above are now 2/3 years older.

Just because Liverpool deployed a 3-4-3 against us on Sunday, remember where they are in the league and cup competitions and what they've won in the same period.

Chelsea are in 3 competitions still....and they have a flat back 4.

I honestly believe it's the personnel in front of our defence that's the main problem.

At the moment, I think we are in a mess. It's not just the defence, but the midfield too. We aren't so good that teams are scared of us and we can't get away playing below par, especially against the top teams.

A midfield of Yaya, Fernando, Nasri and Silva isn't great when we haven't got the ball. Add Dzeko to the mix and that's one big issue.

I honestly believe it's the personnel in front of our defence that's the main problem.
-----------------------------

But we have nobody else who can cover this shortfall in the middle, so why not have a back three? More bodies in the last line and free up a space for someone who can do more damage in midfield.

It's all very well saying "Yeah, we won with a back four", but we were only top for a handful of days, the rest of the time we were playing catch up. And I don't see Chelsea losing the plot in April.

We need a change somewhere, because what we're doing is patently not working and everyone knows it.

If we don't hand Leicester a battering tonight, we can forget any hopes of silver this season. And unless we get shot of Burgervan, we won't be getting any decent players in either.

And I don't see Chelsea losing the plot in April.
...............................

And I don't see Chelsea playing a back 3.

Playing a back 3 takes time to adapt to....now is not the time to be experimenting with the defence. We've all moaned all season over his constant swapping of CB's and LB's....now suddenly we need to accommodate them into a back 3?

I'm all for trying it, but not at this stage of the season.

If he wants to play this system, we need better/different players. Maybe that's why Navas has played so much despite not really offering much going forwards.

As we all discussed yesterday....it's round pegs in square holes, so the Manager will have to make some tough decisions and drop some key players. I'd be really surprised if he went for a 3-5-2 formation, it's just not his style.

You said..."we have nobody else to cover this shortfall"....so let me gets this right, we have the following players to occupy 6 positions and our Manager can't get it right?

Milner
Navas
Fernando
Fernandinho
Nasri
Silva
TLMLF
Lampard
Aguero
Bony
Jovetic
Dzeko


That's 12 players to choose from. Out of those 12, let's imagine that most teams, especially in the PL, play with 4 at the back....what teams wouldn't want at least 6 of those players in their starting 11?

The difference here is that our Manager seems incapable of dropping big names and finding a system that suits THEM, but rather tries to make THEM suit his system. Granted, he may not have the players in the squad that he really wants for his system, but that's tough shit. Change, adapt, make it work....that's what he gets paid to do.

If you read the other thread, he is adamant that he'll play it his way. 442 it is.

Think of a genuine 4-4-3 with what we've got to choose from:

..................................Hart...................................

Zaba....................Vinny..........Mangala...............Clichy

.........Milner..................TLMLF.............Fernandinho.......

Navas...............................................................Silva

.....................................Aguero................................

Just as an example, does that not look a stronger unit, more solid?

I'm sure you could add another 10 different options with different players.

Topdawg wrote:If you read the other thread, he is adamant that he'll play it his way. 442 it is.

I know...he's just stubborn. Let's say we win 4-0 tonight, what does that tell us, really? Not a lot. We should be beating teams like Leicester at home comfortably. Pressure off for a few days, then back to reality.

I honestly would love to see him experiment with a 3-5-2 or a 3-4-3...but it's just his style.

Neville is only pointing out what we've all been sayin throughout the last 2 seasons so if we can all see it why can't the City management 

5 in MF is an absolute must against Barca and most of the better teams. 352 could be worth a gamble but as Blue says its a big gamble at this stage of the season
I'd prefer a 451. Sergio or Bony will still get the support they need from the MF especially as we will still have at least 2 attack minded MFs in the 5 
Against Ur Newcastles Leicesters etc he can revert to his beloved 442 if he likes

To bring impartiality to this debate...read this which goes against what I have posted earlier:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpools-brendan-rodgers-admits-sack-5265738

But both Managers are chalk n cheese.

blueboy wrote:And I don't see Chelsea playing a back 3.

Irrelevant.  Chelsea don't need to change their defence, they're coping well enough.  But we're not, so something needs to change.

blueboy wrote:Playing a back 3 takes time to adapt to....now is not the time to be experimenting with the defence. We've all moaned all season over his constant swapping of CB's and LB's....now suddenly we need to accommodate them into a back 3?

Changing to a back three isn't the same as over-rotating the back four.  He's clearly not found a quartet that works, so why not reduce the scope?  We don't NEED to do it, but we DO need to do something.

blueboy wrote:You said..."we have nobody else to cover this shortfall"....

In CDM.  So, taking your list of 12 players, who is going to play the holding role? 

blueboy wrote:To bring impartiality to this debate...read this which goes against what I have posted earlier:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpools-brendan-rodgers-admits-sack-5265738

But both Managers are chalk n cheese.

So let me get this straight:  Liverpool were sliding inexorably into a position that was untenable and Rodgers was at the last chance saloon.  His answer was to set up a 3 man defence, which he implemented against the rags - ending in a loss, but he persevered.  And how many games have Liverpool lost in 2015?  Erm, I make it just the one, against Besiktas last week.

We're also on a slippery slope.  The only reason we're second at all is because United, Arsenal and Spurs all had a shockingly bad start.  If Arsenal and United had started like they're playing now, we'd be FOURTH.  And still not winning nearly enough games.  And according to the press, Pellers is on his last legs.  But apparently it's too late to change the system.

Why, though?

We're not winning games as it is and the system clearly isn't working.  Teams know how to beat us.  We need to change something.  Maybe a back 3 isn't the answer, but it can't be any worse than what's happening now.  And you say it's too late to change it, but I say bollocks to that.  We've got over a quarter of the season left and our grip on second place is slipping.  The time to change is EXACTLY NOW!  Okay, we play a back three and lose, but the way things are going, we're not guaranteed a win anyway.  And a home game against the team at the foot of the league is the ideal time to test a theory.  And if it's not working, we can change it back.

These are top grade professionals and paid a fortune to be where they are.  They aren't low level functionaries who are paid to do a repetitive job the same way, over and over, they're supposed to be free-thinking individuals who can adapt to suit the situation.  This is a results business.  Adapt or die.  Right now, we're dying.  If they can't adapt to a new formation then they should be replaced with someone who will.

If Pellers really gives a shit about his position then he needs to show some balls and do something to stop the rot.  And if he can't, then he should leave now, because he's winning nothing this season.

I should stress that winning nothing in itself doesn't bother me.  Chelsea have been the superior side this season and they deserve it.  What pisses me off is the loss being caused by someone who's too stubborn to change a bad situation.

Wooah....I posted that to show some impartiality. I'm certainly not saying I am correct in what I say, just my opinion.

You posted this:

These are top grade professionals and paid a fortune to be where they are. They aren't low level functionaries who are paid to do a repetitive job the same way, over and over, they're supposed to be free-thinking individuals who can adapt to suit the situation. This is a results business. Adapt or die. Right now, we're dying. If they can't adapt to a new formation then they should be replaced with someone who will.

.......................................................................................

So, a team that is pretty much the same team as as last seasons double winning 4-4-2 team, with the inclusion of:

Fernando
Sagna
Bony
Mangala
Lampard

alleged top grade professionals, not functionaries, cannot play in a 4-5-1, 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 this season?

You also posted:

blueboy wrote:
You said..."we have nobody else to cover this shortfall"....
In CDM. So, taking your list of 12 players, who is going to play the holding role?
.............................................

Why are we so obsessed with a CDMF holding role?

We can accommodate 4 across the middle of the park without having an assigned DFM role as long as whoever pushes forward, one sits a little deeper and the CB's push on further.

Read all the replies on here, and a lot of valid points have been made.
But the bottom line is, no matter what the system is; 442, 352, 343, 550, or even my schooldays favourite 109, the players we have aren't motivated enough. There's not enough hunger or fight in this squad, and that needs addressing rapidly.
The players are good enough, they've proved that in the past, but they appear rudderless at times.
We need a new rudder!
And preferably a rudder that's not too inflexible in his (or her's Reg) tactics when things aren't going as planned.
Yes, MP is a charming man, but how's the time for a more pragmatic and ruthless approach.

agree..

Liverpool play 4 in MF
Difference is they have 4 unspectacular but hard working MFs
We normally have one in Milner or Dino & until that is addressed we will always be overrun in that area which in turn causes problems for the defence

Looking at Nevilles "4-4-2 Diamond" formation, and changing a few players about, i reckon this would work (as he won't play 3 at the back):

 ...................Fernandinho
.....Navas........................Milner
......................Yaya
............Aguero.........Silva/Bony

and also agree with that TMG.

It depends on how he wants to set up the team. Does he want stability in MF and know that one or two creative players will get us a goal or two, or does he go all out attack and try and outscore the opposition, because that happened at times last season...or a mixture of the two, which I think he isn't getting as certain players are either not good enough or bang out of form right now...which in turn, doesn't help when our defenders on the whole haven't hit top form....which then exacerbates the poor performances?

So, to answer your question, we need 'workers' who can track back, but get forward as well. It's also no surprise that we have been overrun in the MF in the last 2 games, and who wasn't playing? Jesus Navas.

The workers:

Milner
Fernandinho
Navas

possibly Lampard.

The creative players:

Nasri
Silva

The luxury players:

Fernando
TLMLF

He somehow has to find a balance between them.

Sacrifice one for another.

Out of all of them....for me, Silva is a shoe in. We know MP will always pick TLMLF....so he's in.

That leaves 4 spaces available and a decision on where to accommodate these 2 players and whether we play 2 up front or not.

For me, to accommodate these 2 players and still remain with some semblance of defensive work ethic, we can only play with one recognised striker - and for me that will always be Aguero.

Therefore on that premise:

......................................Hart....................................

Zaba.....................Vinny..............Another............Clichy

.......Navas....................Fernandinho...............Milner.....

........TLMLF.........................................Silva..................

.................................Aguero.......................................

shakencity wrote:Looking at Nevilles "4-4-2 Diamond" formation, and changing a few players about, i reckon this would work (as he won't play 3 at the back):

 ...................Fernandinho
.....Navas........................Milner
......................Yaya
............Aguero.........Silva/Bony

great minds think alike!!

blueboy wrote:

shakencity wrote:Looking at Nevilles "4-4-2 Diamond" formation, and changing a few players about, i reckon this would work (as he won't play 3 at the back):

 ...................Fernandinho
.....Navas........................Milner
......................Yaya
............Aguero.........Silva/Bony

great minds think alike!!

haha.......but he won't play it, as Dzeko, Fernando and Nasri will probabaly all be in