[TheWorthinGer]

Whenever historically have celtic ever "defended in depth" domestically ?   

The very notion they would "sit in" against rangers is ludicrous. Deila has never set up a team that way as far as i know.

Does he set a team up?  He seems to just pick 11 players: makes it look...easy?

He has played the same system from day 1. 

Clearly not working though is it?

Who cares.

 Worthing asked "does he set a team up". He clearly does. They have always played a 4-2-3-1.

That's a defensive formation thought, is it not?  Certainly playing 2 holding midfielders isn't really "attacking". 

Anyway - i don't regard the choosing of a formation as "setting my team up" - it's more about how they will deal with the opposition using that formation and I've seena few games this season were they have been completely ineffective in their chosen formation.

But I'm not here to discuss celtic and their failings.

[supercooper]

Declares that Celtic don't set up defensively and the proceeds to contradict himself by stating that infact they do.

---

Anyhoo back to talk about The Rangers v Dundee.

[Fredstersafool]

When was the last time anyone seen a Celtic team sit back in a domestic game??

[Trusevich]

Last night, when they clung on at home to get a 0-0 draw with Dundee.

[TheWorthinGer]

When was the last time anyone seen a Celtic team sit back in a domestic game??

Sit back or pegged back?

[supercooper]

Last night, when they clung on at home to get a 0-0 draw with Dundee.

Didn't Motherwell give them a doing earlier in the season?
Another booing off the park.

[hibeejim21]

Does he set a team up?  He seems to just pick 11 players: makes it look...easy?

He has played the same system from day 1. 

Clearly not working though is it?

Who cares.

 Worthing asked "does he set a team up". He clearly does. They have always played a 4-2-3-1.

That's a defensive formation thought, is it not?  Certainly playing 2 holding midfielders isn't really "attacking". 

Anyway - i don't regard the choosing of a formation as "setting my team up" - it's more about how they will deal with the opposition using that formation and I've seena few games this season were they have been completely ineffective in their chosen formation.

But I'm not here to discuss celtic and their failings.

I'd say it can be a pretty attacking formation,depending on how far the rows (and the full backs) are pushed forward. When you have the ball it's essentially a 4-3-3. 

[TheWorthinGer]

He has played the same system from day 1. 

Clearly not working though is it?

Who cares.

 Worthing asked "does he set a team up". He clearly does. They have always played a 4-2-3-1.

That's a defensive formation thought, is it not?  Certainly playing 2 holding midfielders isn't really "attacking". 

Anyway - i don't regard the choosing of a formation as "setting my team up" - it's more about how they will deal with the opposition using that formation and I've seena few games this season were they have been completely ineffective in their chosen formation.

But I'm not here to discuss celtic and their failings.

I'd say it can be a pretty attacking formation,depending on how far the rows (and the full backs) are pushed forward. When you have the ball it's essentially a 4-3-3. 

We'll have to disagree - 2 holding midfielders is a defensive outlook.  You are choosing a formation that looks at defence before attack.  When you haven't got the ball it's essentially a back 6 because the layers you pick for that role are generally defensive players.

Anyway they're no great shakes and I think we'd give them a game.

[El Car]

4-2-3-1 is what McCoist played in 2011/12 and it resulted in exactly the same crappy, ugly midfield performance that The Celtics are currently producing. Of course their performances of late haven't been helped by the fact Scott Brown plays football like a stinking pile of shite.

[TheWorthinGer]

4-2-3-1 = "scared to get beat".