The Fish

Couldn't they just give me a fucking cake?

Declan Rice would be an amazing fit for us.

No, I'm not. If someone had said "We've got to get through two banks of four" I wouldn't have blinked and the last 4 pages of this thread would have been Jacob Murphy memes. I say Low Block and everyone loses their minds. I said "Low block", then people were incredulous and derisory about it. I defended it and myself. Nobody's been able to explain why else people would push back on simple shit like 'low block' or whatever.

If they ever get back up it'll be "Just our luck, the Premier League has been shit for ages, the minute we're back every other team is having a purple patch. Obviously raising their performances for their FA Cup final, the Sunderland games. Throwing their games against Newcastle as well because it's a conspiracy. Obviously the referees are corrupt against us as well, clearly in the Saudi pocket."

Gonna take a leaf out of your book and apologise. This cavalcade of crusty cunts have me on the defensive. What's a low block? It's this Eurgh I don't wannnna leeaaarn

Makes you yearn for a clearly defined term for a larger concept... doesn't it?

To be fair, I just used the term, it was Tom and then others who threw a geriatric fit because it wasn't the same term used 40yrs ago or whatever.

No, neither is wrong, but for those who watch just for the action to tell the people who look for arcs, meanings and whatever that they're doing it wrong is galling. Look, it's fine if someone calls it defensive, I don't think it's particular specific but whatever, I do mind if someone says I'm wrong for calling it a Low Block.

I refer you to striker v false 9. One is a vague umbrella term, the other has specificity. If you took a moment to learn, it makes it explicit.

Pretty condescending there Rayvin. I'm not less informed because I don't cling to the remnants of outdated language. I use some of the language the experts use, because they're using straightforward terms to describe larger concepts.

Getting into them isn't pressing the opponent within seconds of losing the ball. Allardyce's team, Stoke's teams would 'get into them' but they're not gegenpressing are they? As Strawb says, it's not reinventing the wheel, it's just using language to better describe things. I guess what I don't understand, and I mean this genuinely, I don't understand why it bothers anybody? I used to say I watched a match online, now I stream it. I used to text people, now I message them. I used to search on the internet, now I google it. Haaland, Vardy, Aguero and Salah would all have been called strikers, now they'd be called Striker, poacher, False 9, and wide forward. ASM and Almiron would be called wingers. Bruno and Joelinton would both be called centre mids, but they're not the same are they? So, given all that, why not use a term or phrase that better explains what they do? Genuinely, why?

Beasant wasn't described at the time as a sweeper keeper. He was a goal keeper. But someone who never saw him play would hear that position's name and expect him to behave like every other goal keeper. It's not that the role didn't exist, just that it wasn't defined. No, it's not, it's simply evolving the terms. Just like the terms have evolved for music, for film, for everything. You can stand pushing back against the tide if you want, but it's both pointless and pointlessly ornery. There was no simple term for pressing in packs within the short timeframe after your team has lost possession. Now there is; Gegenpressing and everyone knows what that means. There was no simple description of a striker who dropped deeper into the half spaces between defence and midfield and yet was still the tip of the spear in attack, now there is; false 9. The sake for this change is clarity, it's accuracy, it's accessibility.

Racism and bullying? Lets hope not.

Same reason it's not called a half back any more. As football and the reporting on it evolves, so does the terminology. The casual fan is more educated on the styles of play, the formations, the systems than they've ever been. So now, when you say Howe's team plays a high press, the majority of fans immediately knows what that looks like. When someone said Aguero is a False 9, people pushed back on it, but now that role is understood as distinct and separate from an attacking midfielder or classic number 9 striker. Sweeper keepers weren't called that until fairly recently. Inverted Wingers... the list goes on. Change is inevitable, especially in language. Nobody 'googled' for shit on the internet before the late 90s, now everyone knows what that means.

It's not about sexiness, (well, the foreign terms like trequartists and Mezzala... maybe), it's about clarity and accuracy.

Everything is made up bollocks. They use 'Low' because in the collection of terms it's more in-keeping than deep. High, Deep or Mid doesn't scan as well as High, Low or Mid. It's like the resistance to 'Transition' "Why can't you just call it counter-attack". Well, obviously, it's because not every transition happens when one team is attacking. Sometimes it's when a team is dicking about at the back, or playing possession based football in the centre. It's a better description of what is actually being described. But old men shouting at clouds will moan on and say it's overly complicating it. It's not, it's just better specificity. Tell me something, if you put your cantankerous hat to one side for a moment, would you be able to work out what someone meant by Low Block? You would, wouldn't you? It makes sense, it's a short description of a more complex idea. Low Block is to football what 'parking the bus' is to football. It's what pressing is to football. It's what counter-attack is to football. Just an evolution of the simple terms used to describe a more complicated idea.

And the point I'm making is, Low Block is a perfectly good way to describe an entrenched defensive shape low down the pitch. I can kind of understand why grumpy old men resist Mezzala and Trequartista, but Low Block? Howay man, that's just being obstinate.

Hey, Toonpack, what's the opposite of "high"? gtfooh

Longstaff does more defensive work than Willock, I'm not letting you drop Sean.

He's not running the channels, he's rarely coming deep to collect. He seems to be playing more and more like a targetman, when he just isn't that kind of player. Isak had more touches in 25 minutes than Wilson did in 67. ASM did too.

Drop Willock or Joelinton?

Nah, mine's going to be QLED screen scrolling through my final words. When the sun dies, it will be the only thing on Earth still going.

Then, and I don't say this lightly, Jesus Wept.

Everyone just looked a little jaded. They need a break, a little competition for their place. Honestly think we need another midfielder or two just to give Bruno a break.