4 at the back?
Why? We only have one winger that’s good enough (and I’m sure some on here would debate that). Lloyd Jones is unbelievable in the middle of a 3, he’s still good in a 4 but it’s definitely not his best role. And our strikers - I don’t think any of them have what it takes to lead the line in the championship, they’re all better in a 2. Kelman might be able too, Leaburn has the potential too, but not now
So why are we changing formation? I honestly think we are only maybe 3 good signings off a good 3-5-2 squad, if we add at RWB and in midfield then we are nearly there. If we are changing formation then we still need a new midfield but we’d also need at least 2 wingers (and they’d have to be very good ones for this change to work) and the need for a striker would increase too. This feels like way too much work to do this summer unless we have some significant money waiting to be spent as good wingers are not cheap
I hope this is just Jones preparing a plan B, and that we will soon return to plan A for the season once we’ve got a right wing back or 2 signed. I’m probably more confident than most fans about this season but I’d become a lot more concerned if we are actually going to change to a new system when we are imo quite far off having a squad that can play it
Comments
-
I have a feeling we’ll start the season with a four but within a few games we’ll be back to 3-5-2.1
-
I think it’s just because we don’t have two fit players capable of playing either wing back role at the moment without dipping too far into the academy2
-
I hope so but we’ve had Asiimwe and Apter in the first 2 games. Fullah has played wing back before (not his position but neither is where he played today)fenaddick said:I think it’s just because we don’t have two fit players capable of playing either wing back role at the moment without dipping too far into the academy0 -
Jones has also had a lot of success in his career managing with a 3-5-2. He has not done well when managing a 4-2-3-1. Again I hope I’m jumping the gun and we are back to normal at home to Derby but after 3 games I’m starting to get a little concerned1
-
Think it's pretty clear he doesn't want to play Apter at RWB anymore and he's trying to see how good Fullah is further up the pitch than at WB. Maybe I'm wrong but it just feels much more down to circumstance than anything else to meNabySarr said:
I hope so but we’ve had Asiimwe and Apter in the first 2 games. Fullah has played wing back before (not his position but neither is where he played today)fenaddick said:I think it’s just because we don’t have two fit players capable of playing either wing back role at the moment without dipping too far into the academy
2 -
Think until we get an out and out RWB signed that Jones is comfortable with we'll play this 4231 just so we have it as a Plan B. Can't see us playing it against Derby opening day.
1 -
We spent the 24/25 preseason playing Ramsay at RCB and then proceeded to use him at RWB exclusively until January, and that was only after Small had established himself on the right after Ramsay’s injury lay off. Preseason is for fitness and trying new things in a game scenario. I really wouldn’t be that surprised if after getting more players in we started the season in the familiar shape1
-
Haven't watched any of the pre-season games so far but can only guess maybe Jones is keen to get us playing on the front foot on the ball as you would expect against weaker opposition in friendlies and get used to attacking with 4 at the back, after all, we would revert to a back 5 when defending to which the team is probably still well drilled at, at least we did when we got promoted and the start of last season. Convinced this is what Jones wants to go back to if we can get the right player in at RWB.0
-
Thing is thou out of the 3 preseason games playing 4 at the back, it's generally been a 3 with either Ivan overlapping very far fwd and the RB tucking in to a three or it's been whoever the RB is attacking and the LB tucking in to form a 3. It's causing is to get at least 1 more body pushing up. If we can get 2 decent CMs who can find s fwb pass at least we'll have bodies forward.0
-
Sponsored links:
-
In a "normal" 4231 or 433, you'd expect at least one or both of the fullbacks to get forward anyway, and provide the width outside the "inverse wingers". Think Trent and Robertson at Liverpool for an extreme example.scruffle said:Thing is thou out of the 3 preseason games playing 4 at the back, it's generally been a 3 with either Ivan overlapping very far fwd and the RB tucking in to a three or it's been whoever the RB is attacking and the LB tucking in to form a 3. It's causing is to get at least 1 more body pushing up. If we can get 2 decent CMs who can find s fwb pass at least we'll have bodies forward.
I would like to see Mesik and TC together, as that would be a really good combination, Mesik on the overlap, TC cutting in.0 -
Still quite concerned about this. Feels like we might be trying to run before we can walk in this league with this change.I think we will be more open defensively, but I don’t think we will score the goals to make up for it.Maybe it will look a lot better when we’ve got a proper right wing option and some new midfielders. Just have a bad feeling we will sign players for 4-2-3-1, realise we can’t play it and then end up switching back to wing backs without the players to do it4
-
The hope I’m clinging too is we were pretty poor on the counter attack last season. As a team with low possession we need to be better on the counter, a couple of wingers with pace will help that a lot2
-
Let's be patient. All Clubs at our Championship level are in same boat. Of course we know where we need 'change'. So do those are decision makers. Please don't do more Dykes/Leaburn stuff. Boring0
-
I’ll take “boring” survival over exciting relegation.BarnehurstBob said:Let's be patient. All Clubs at our Championship level are in same boat. Of course we know where we need 'change'. So do those are decision makers. Please don't do more Dykes/Leaburn stuff. Boring4 -
Why complain about it when the squad building isn't complete yet?
We don't have the personnel for a 352 either at the moment4 -
It’s not just personnel it’s the structure and style that comes with the formation as well. Taking a group of players who aren’t good enough and playing in a way that doesn’t maximise their limited potential is asking for issuessam3110 said:Why complain about it when the squad building isn't complete yet?
We don't have the personnel for a 352 either at the moment2 -
I was just checking in on the U21s and wondered whether our change to a formation with wingers could be influenced by the fact we seem to have so much wide firepower coming through the youth ranks?0
-
Interesting jones didn’t mention Fullah, who admittedly doesn’t look like a wide player to me , but has been used there in pre seasonAddickhead86 said:I was just checking in on the U21s and wondered whether our change to a formation with wingers could be influenced by the fact we seem to have so much wide firepower coming through the youth ranks?0 -
I think he’s just been used there while we are short of options in pre-season. He’s definitely not a winger and even when he’s playing there he drifts inside a lotwmcf123 said:
Interesting jones didn’t mention Fullah, who admittedly doesn’t look like a wide player to me , but has been used there in pre seasonAddickhead86 said:I was just checking in on the U21s and wondered whether our change to a formation with wingers could be influenced by the fact we seem to have so much wide firepower coming through the youth ranks?1 -
Sponsored links:
-
EDITED - Personally think 4 at the back is a big mistake, my main reasoning around it is it just doesn't play to Lloyd's strengths. I think personally it makes us weaker defensively, than last season's 3-5-2/5-3-2 - EDITED - Well that proves i know absolutely sweet FA! Got Claude to run the facts...
Yes — there is a very clear pattern: Charlton’s results with Lloyd Jones starting have been considerably better with a back four.
I reviewed his competitive Charlton appearances from 2023/24 through the end of 2025/26 and classified each match by Charlton’s published starting formation.
Starting defence Starts Wins Draws Losses Win rate Points/game Back four 54 27 13 14 50.0% 1.74 Back three 59 14 16 29 23.7% 0.98 Back five 6 2 3 1 33.3% 1.50 Total 119 43 32 44 36.1% 1.35 Back four versus wing-back systems
Because 3-5-2 and 5-3-2 often describe effectively the same three-centre-back/wing-back system:
System Starts Wins Draws Losses Win rate Points/game Back four 54 27 13 14 50.0% 1.74 Back three/five combined 65 16 19 30 24.6% 1.03 Charlton have therefore:
- Won twice as frequently with Jones starting in a back four.
- Averaged 0.71 more points per game.
- Lost only 25.9% of his back-four starts, compared with 46.2% using three/five at the back.
Most-used individual formations
Formation Starts W D L Win rate PPG 4-2-3-1 33 19 5 9 57.6% 1.88 3-5-2 29 7 10 12 24.1% 1.07 3-1-4-2 20 3 5 12 15.0% 0.70 4-3-3 16 6 7 3 37.5% 1.56 5-3-2 6 2 3 1 33.3% 1.50 The standout shape is clearly 4-2-3-1. The weakest has been 3-1-4-2, with only three wins from 20 starts.
Season-by-season comparison
Season Back four PPG Back three/five PPG 2023/24 1.26 0.60 2024/25 2.30 1.35 2025/26 1.50 1.00 That is important because it shows the back-four advantage occurred in all three seasons, rather than being entirely caused by the successful 2024/25 promotion campaign.
These figures cover all competitive matches, including the play-offs and cups. They exclude five substitute appearances because Charlton’s starting formation does not necessarily represent the shape Jones actually entered. The abandoned Portsmouth match in December 2025 is also excluded because it produced no official result. Jones’s Charlton record totals 124 competitive appearances, of which 119 were starts. Formation labels were checked against FotMob’s match archive, FootballCritic’s formation log and published team sheets; his appearance totals are listed in his career record.
The evidence strongly favours Jones playing in a back four, particularly a 4-2-3-1. It does not necessarily prove the formation caused the results, but the difference is both substantial and remarkably consistent.
1 -
Agree with this, won’t be long until we go back to it which will make having wingers in the club an issuese9addick said:I have a feeling we’ll start the season with a four but within a few games we’ll be back to 3-5-2.0 -
All depends though, if we have strong enough central midfielders and a focal point striker, then we can play 343 and have 2 wingers tucking in with 2 wingbacks wider, and a solid 5 behind them.000__Jaaaaay__000 said:
Agree with this, won’t be long until we go back to it which will make having wingers in the club an issuese9addick said:I have a feeling we’ll start the season with a four but within a few games we’ll be back to 3-5-2.
1 -
Claude is chatting shit here. A lot of these 4 at the back games we have been defending in a back 5 during our league 1 time. Your original point is correct imo, Jones is unbelievable in the middle of the back 3. He’s still good in a back 4 but it just means he’s not always in the middle, which is where we need him to be.CAFCDAZ said:EDITED - Personally think 4 at the back is a big mistake, my main reasoning around it is it just doesn't play to Lloyd's strengths. I think personally it makes us weaker defensively, than last season's 3-5-2/5-3-2 - EDITED - Well that proves i know absolutely sweet FA! Got Claude to run the facts...Yes — there is a very clear pattern: Charlton’s results with Lloyd Jones starting have been considerably better with a back four.
I reviewed his competitive Charlton appearances from 2023/24 through the end of 2025/26 and classified each match by Charlton’s published starting formation.
Starting defence Starts Wins Draws Losses Win rate Points/game Back four 54 27 13 14 50.0% 1.74 Back three 59 14 16 29 23.7% 0.98 Back five 6 2 3 1 33.3% 1.50 Total 119 43 32 44 36.1% 1.35 Back four versus wing-back systems
Because 3-5-2 and 5-3-2 often describe effectively the same three-centre-back/wing-back system:
System Starts Wins Draws Losses Win rate Points/game Back four 54 27 13 14 50.0% 1.74 Back three/five combined 65 16 19 30 24.6% 1.03 Charlton have therefore:
- Won twice as frequently with Jones starting in a back four.
- Averaged 0.71 more points per game.
- Lost only 25.9% of his back-four starts, compared with 46.2% using three/five at the back.
Most-used individual formations
Formation Starts W D L Win rate PPG 4-2-3-1 33 19 5 9 57.6% 1.88 3-5-2 29 7 10 12 24.1% 1.07 3-1-4-2 20 3 5 12 15.0% 0.70 4-3-3 16 6 7 3 37.5% 1.56 5-3-2 6 2 3 1 33.3% 1.50 The standout shape is clearly 4-2-3-1. The weakest has been 3-1-4-2, with only three wins from 20 starts.
Season-by-season comparison
Season Back four PPG Back three/five PPG 2023/24 1.26 0.60 2024/25 2.30 1.35 2025/26 1.50 1.00 That is important because it shows the back-four advantage occurred in all three seasons, rather than being entirely caused by the successful 2024/25 promotion campaign.
These figures cover all competitive matches, including the play-offs and cups. They exclude five substitute appearances because Charlton’s starting formation does not necessarily represent the shape Jones actually entered. The abandoned Portsmouth match in December 2025 is also excluded because it produced no official result. Jones’s Charlton record totals 124 competitive appearances, of which 119 were starts. Formation labels were checked against FotMob’s match archive, FootballCritic’s formation log and published team sheets; his appearance totals are listed in his career record.
The evidence strongly favours Jones playing in a back four, particularly a 4-2-3-1. It does not necessarily prove the formation caused the results, but the difference is both substantial and remarkably consistent.
The back 4 will mean we are more open and concede more, the question is whether we score more than enough to make up for that. I don’t think we have the quality at the top end of the pitch so think the move is the wrong idea4 -
Yeah when did we actually last last play in a 4 anyway . There was that brief spell when we happened to beat Birmingham .
0 -
thinking about it, didn't Nathan Jones say in an interview this summer we exclusively played a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3 or did i dream that? if the stats are right, i'm wrong, but i've always felt under jones in particular we have played a 3 at the back for 90% of our games, which like Naby says, suits our game, or more particularly Jones's.0
-
We did pretty much exclusively start in those formations. In L1 we played a 4-box-2 against Birmingham but other than that it's basically exclusively been 352 or 3-4-3 (I'd actually say 5-box-1 because it was narrower but that's splitting hairs)CAFCDAZ said:thinking about it, didn't Nathan Jones say in an interview this summer we exclusively played a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3 or did i dream that? if the stats are right, i'm wrong, but i've always felt under jones in particular we have played a 3 at the back for 90% of our games, which like Naby says, suits our game, or more particularly Jones's.1 -
The reason Claude got it so wrong is because it will be scraping data from Fotmob, Sky Sports, BBC website etc. and they often get our line up badly wrong. I just went back to check a game I wasn't sure about and FotMob had Bell playing on the right of a double pivot5
-
Problem we have now is if we resort back to a 352 we don’t really have anyone who is really a RWB.Ramsay and McNamara are too defensive, Alli/Apter too attacking.
We really don’t have anyone who could do a bit of both
likewise on the left we don’t have a wingback who could play as a winger if we wanted to play the reverse 352/4231.0 -
Alli has played LWB but reviews don't sound too positive. I suppose you could have TC play the Small role on the left but I really wouldn't want to see thatCrispywood said:Problem we have now is if we resort back to a 352 we don’t really have anyone who is really a RWB.Ramsay and McNamara are too defensive, Alli/Apter too attacking.
We really don’t have anyone who could do a bit of both
likewise on the left we don’t have a wingback who could play as a winger if we wanted to play the reverse 352/4231.0
