4-1-4-1

[LeazesMag 0]

You don't need to just hoof aimless long balls forward to make use of a centre forward with arial ability though.  Football played properly can make use of the ball on the deck and in the air but with two small players up front you are cutting down your options.

 

What I think you really need is options on the bench so that if you can't beat a team one way you can change your point of attack.  This is something that I think we are close to having now with the likes of Shearer, Owen, Dyer, Luque, Emre & Solano.  I just hope our management can take advantage of it!

51806[/snapback]

 

I agree about covering options on the bench and there is a value to a striker with physical strength (rather than say pure aerial ability), but if you're good enough you don't have to have that option all the time. Arsenal have the likes of Henry who's shite in the air and he's played alongside and with other players who aren't exactly dominant in the air like Reyes, Bergkamp etc.

 

Meanwhile Chelsea have shown with Drogba the value of having a physical presence, so it depends what you are working with and how well your team is playing and what style of football they're playing.

 

And just to be annoying, i would have loved to see Owen/Bellamy up front as any defence would struggle to handle those two playing together and if you had Dyer in the same line up we would be lethal on the break!

51807[/snapback]

 

I think the only thing you need really, is an outlet. To keep the ball. Whether this is to a strong player who can hold the ball, or a fast player who you play it into space for, doesn't really matter. The point is you can get the ball, keep it or get to it first, and move up the field and attack. Owen and Bellamy would have been fantastic. Owen is a penalty box player, Bellamy would have played as he always did, and Owen would have benefited from his partner like Shearer did, or more like Shearer if he had been in his prime.

 

Meanwhile, it never ceases to amaze me why teams bring everyone back for corners etc. You should always leave someone up. If you have 2 players like this standing near the halfway line, every team we play would be forced to keep back at least 3 players of their own. Take the initiative, put them on the back foot. Turn them, make them worry about your pace in that situation.

Edited November 9, 2005 by LeazesMag

[Howaythelads 0]

You don't need to just hoof aimless long balls forward to make use of a centre forward with arial ability though.  Football played properly can make use of the ball on the deck and in the air but with two small players up front you are cutting down your options.

 

What I think you really need is options on the bench so that if you can't beat a team one way you can change your point of attack.  This is something that I think we are close to having now with the likes of Shearer, Owen, Dyer, Luque, Emre & Solano.  I just hope our management can take advantage of it!

51806[/snapback]

 

I agree about covering options on the bench and there is a value to a striker with physical strength (rather than say pure aerial ability), but if you're good enough you don't have to have that option all the time. Arsenal have the likes of Henry who's shite in the air and he's played alongside and with other players who aren't exactly dominant in the air like Reyes, Bergkamp etc.

 

Meanwhile Chelsea have shown with Drogba the value of having a physical presence, so it depends what you are working with and how well your team is playing and what style of football they're playing.

 

And just to be annoying, i would have loved to see Owen/Bellamy up front as any defence would struggle to handle those two playing together and if you had Dyer in the same line up we would be lethal on the break!

51807[/snapback]

 

I think the only thing you need really, is an outlet. To keep the ball. Whether this is to a strong player who can hold the ball, or a fast player who you play it into space for, doesn't really matter. The point is you can get the ball, keep it or get to it first, and move up the field and attack. Owen and Bellamy would have been fantastic. Owen is a penalty box, Bellamy would have played as he always did, and Owen would have benefited from his partner like Shearer, or more like Shearer if he had been in his prime.

 

Meanwhile, it never ceases to amaze me why teams bring everyone back for corners etc. You should always leave someone up. If you have 2 players like this standing near the halfway line, every team we play would be forced to keep at least 3 players of their own. Take the initiative, put them on the back foot. Turn them, make them worry about your pace in that situation.

54582[/snapback]

Wow! A football comment to reply to. Whatever next.......

 

Well here goes....

 

Aye, but you need the pace. Which is why it's even more galling what Mr Souness has done.

Edited November 9, 2005 by Howaythelads

[Papa Lazaru 0]

You don't need to just hoof aimless long balls forward to make use of a centre forward with arial ability though.  Football played properly can make use of the ball on the deck and in the air but with two small players up front you are cutting down your options.

 

What I think you really need is options on the bench so that if you can't beat a team one way you can change your point of attack.  This is something that I think we are close to having now with the likes of Shearer, Owen, Dyer, Luque, Emre & Solano.  I just hope our management can take advantage of it!

51806[/snapback]

 

I agree about covering options on the bench and there is a value to a striker with physical strength (rather than say pure aerial ability), but if you're good enough you don't have to have that option all the time. Arsenal have the likes of Henry who's shite in the air and he's played alongside and with other players who aren't exactly dominant in the air like Reyes, Bergkamp etc.

 

Meanwhile Chelsea have shown with Drogba the value of having a physical presence, so it depends what you are working with and how well your team is playing and what style of football they're playing.

 

And just to be annoying, i would have loved to see Owen/Bellamy up front as any defence would struggle to handle those two playing together and if you had Dyer in the same line up we would be lethal on the break!

51807[/snapback]

 

I think the only thing you need really, is an outlet. To keep the ball. Whether this is to a strong player who can hold the ball, or a fast player who you play it into space for, doesn't really matter. The point is you can get the ball, keep it or get to it first, and move up the field and attack. Owen and Bellamy would have been fantastic. Owen is a penalty box player, Bellamy would have played as he always did, and Owen would have benefited from his partner like Shearer did, or more like Shearer if he had been in his prime.

 

Meanwhile, it never ceases to amaze me why teams bring everyone back for corners etc. You should always leave someone up. If you have 2 players like this standing near the halfway line, every team we play would be forced to keep back at least 3 players of their own. Take the initiative, put them on the back foot. Turn them, make them worry about your pace in that situation.

54582[/snapback]

 

The corner thing has pissed me off for years and it defies belief when managers and coaches can't see it or see it and choose to ignore it.

 

If you have a fast player (Owen, Bellamy, Dyer or whoever) and put them just before the halfway line they are onside and any decent clearance from the box is going to leave the possibility of a breakaway goal or at least them being fouled and possibly a red card.

 

Then as you say another advantage is that the other team has to leave acouple of defenders back to watche them, meaning less people crowding our box to score for the opposition.

 

And what exactly is the argument for not doing it, that we'd miss the defensive aerial ability of Dyer/Owen/Bellamy etc. in our box!!!

 

FFS how can any fan in the ground see this yet it was beyond the current and past management.

[LeazesMag 0]

You don't need to just hoof aimless long balls forward to make use of a centre forward with arial ability though.  Football played properly can make use of the ball on the deck and in the air but with two small players up front you are cutting down your options.

 

What I think you really need is options on the bench so that if you can't beat a team one way you can change your point of attack.  This is something that I think we are close to having now with the likes of Shearer, Owen, Dyer, Luque, Emre & Solano.  I just hope our management can take advantage of it!

51806[/snapback]

 

I agree about covering options on the bench and there is a value to a striker with physical strength (rather than say pure aerial ability), but if you're good enough you don't have to have that option all the time. Arsenal have the likes of Henry who's shite in the air and he's played alongside and with other players who aren't exactly dominant in the air like Reyes, Bergkamp etc.

 

Meanwhile Chelsea have shown with Drogba the value of having a physical presence, so it depends what you are working with and how well your team is playing and what style of football they're playing.

 

And just to be annoying, i would have loved to see Owen/Bellamy up front as any defence would struggle to handle those two playing together and if you had Dyer in the same line up we would be lethal on the break!

51807[/snapback]

 

I think the only thing you need really, is an outlet. To keep the ball. Whether this is to a strong player who can hold the ball, or a fast player who you play it into space for, doesn't really matter. The point is you can get the ball, keep it or get to it first, and move up the field and attack. Owen and Bellamy would have been fantastic. Owen is a penalty box player, Bellamy would have played as he always did, and Owen would have benefited from his partner like Shearer did, or more like Shearer if he had been in his prime.

 

Meanwhile, it never ceases to amaze me why teams bring everyone back for corners etc. You should always leave someone up. If you have 2 players like this standing near the halfway line, every team we play would be forced to keep back at least 3 players of their own. Take the initiative, put them on the back foot. Turn them, make them worry about your pace in that situation.

54582[/snapback]

 

The corner thing has pissed me off for years and it defies belief when managers and coaches can't see it or see it and choose to ignore it.

 

If you have a fast player (Owen, Bellamy, Dyer or whoever) and put them just before the halfway line they are onside and any decent clearance from the box is going to leave the possibility of a breakaway goal or at least them being fouled and possibly a red card.

 

Then as you say another advantage is that the other team has to leave acouple of defenders back to watche them, meaning less people crowding our box to score for the opposition.

 

And what exactly is the argument for not doing it, that we'd miss the defensive aerial ability of Dyer/Owen/Bellamy etc. in our box!!!

 

FFS how can any fan in the ground see this yet it was beyond the current and past management.

54600[/snapback]

 

yes, but we are only fans, they are professionals and know best !

 

Anyone care to point out the playing backround of Wenger, Mourinho and Ferguson as proof ?

Edited November 9, 2005 by LeazesMag

[Smooth Operator 10]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

[Howaythelads 0]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

You're running out, aren't you?

 

Some people have posted stuff about football, why not respond to that, mate?

[Dr Kenneth Noisewater 0]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

 

Think hypocrite is the word you're looking for S.O

[LeazesMag 0]

Think hypocrite is the word you're looking for S.O

54660[/snapback]

 

Depends on your point of view.

 

In mine, the hypocrites are those who

 

1. had nothing but admiration for Craig Bellamy when he played for Newcastle, and turned a blind eye to the fact he opens his mouth too much because he was a great player, but now he is gone focus on the fact he opens his mouth too much rather than the fact he was/is a great player.

 

Hypocrites. Of the highest degree.

 

2. Those who were against Souness when he came, who said he would sell all our flair players, and didn't want him, that now say

 

a. He has done right to get rid of our flair players at the expense of top 4/5 results.

 

b. Give him time.

 

Hypocrites, Whichever way you care to look at it. Someone who stays true to their convictions, is certainly not a hypocrite, and I suggest if you think they are, you should look in the dictionary.

 

They know who they are.

Edited November 10, 2005 by LeazesMag

[shakermaker 0]

You don't need to just hoof aimless long balls forward to make use of a centre forward with arial ability though.  Football played properly can make use of the ball on the deck and in the air but with two small players up front you are cutting down your options.

 

What I think you really need is options on the bench so that if you can't beat a team one way you can change your point of attack.  This is something that I think we are close to having now with the likes of Shearer, Owen, Dyer, Luque, Emre & Solano.  I just hope our management can take advantage of it!

51806[/snapback]

 

I agree about covering options on the bench and there is a value to a striker with physical strength (rather than say pure aerial ability), but if you're good enough you don't have to have that option all the time. Arsenal have the likes of Henry who's shite in the air and he's played alongside and with other players who aren't exactly dominant in the air like Reyes, Bergkamp etc.

 

Meanwhile Chelsea have shown with Drogba the value of having a physical presence, so it depends what you are working with and how well your team is playing and what style of football they're playing.

 

And just to be annoying, i would have loved to see Owen/Bellamy up front as any defence would struggle to handle those two playing together and if you had Dyer in the same line up we would be lethal on the break!

51807[/snapback]

 

I think the only thing you need really, is an outlet. To keep the ball. Whether this is to a strong player who can hold the ball, or a fast player who you play it into space for, doesn't really matter. The point is you can get the ball, keep it or get to it first, and move up the field and attack. Owen and Bellamy would have been fantastic. Owen is a penalty box player, Bellamy would have played as he always did, and Owen would have benefited from his partner like Shearer did, or more like Shearer if he had been in his prime.

 

Meanwhile, it never ceases to amaze me why teams bring everyone back for corners etc. You should always leave someone up. If you have 2 players like this standing near the halfway line, every team we play would be forced to keep back at least 3 players of their own. Take the initiative, put them on the back foot. Turn them, make them worry about your pace in that situation.

54582[/snapback]

 

i'm not so sure they would have worked as a partnership as neither player is comfortable taking the ball back to goal and neither has "presence " that we need.

 

another thing about bellamy,all on the pitch stuff aswell,he seems lost as to wether he should play through the middle or hit the channels(or even wider).

 

 

re your corner thing...estonia do it,and a couple of years back scotland were lost,estonia left 3 forwrds up when the scots had a corner and scotland din't have a clue what to do...it would be good to see,if the oppo got a corner vs nufc, leave owen up front,emre 10 yds off him,n'zogbia inside him,and see what the other team would do ?

[Smooth Operator 10]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

You're running out, aren't you?

 

Some people have posted stuff about football, why not respond to that, mate?

54647[/snapback]

 

Running out of what? Insults? Not a chance mate when it come to hypocritic numbskulls like yourself who believe their opinion is the be all and end all.

 

I'll post in my own time, mate.

[Dr Gloom 22147]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

You're running out, aren't you?

 

Some people have posted stuff about football, why not respond to that, mate?

54647[/snapback]

 

Running out of what? Insults? Not a chance mate when it come to hypocritic numbskulls like yourself who believe their opinion is the be all and end all.

 

I'll post in my own time, mate.

54735[/snapback]

 

this forum may as well merge back with newcastle-online tbh

[Howaythelads 0]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

 

Think hypocrite is the word you're looking for S.O

54660[/snapback]

Think vindictive is the word you're looking for mate. Unable to let things go, aren't you?

 

All I want to do is talk about football, I can't help it if I find sarcasm to be an insult and you don't. Why not drop it and let the forum move onto proper discussions?

Edited November 10, 2005 by Howaythelads

[Howaythelads 0]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

You're running out, aren't you?

 

Some people have posted stuff about football, why not respond to that, mate?

54647[/snapback]

 

Running out of what? Insults? Not a chance mate when it come to hypocritic numbskulls like yourself who believe their opinion is the be all and end all.

 

I'll post in my own time, mate.

54735[/snapback]

Sigh

 

Personal insults in your post toward me, caused by what exactly? I don't see any insults from me toward you.

 

As for believing my opinion is the be all and end all, I certainly don't believe that, but if you want to think my opinion is the be all and end all, that's upto you. As far as I'm concerned my opinion is worth no more than yours.

 

I think you need to be reminded that you're the one who implied your opinion was more worthy on the basis you sit in the Gallowgate and people around you think the same way you do. Otherwise why mention it?

 

Anyway, as I said to the last bloke, why not let this fade away? I'm not that bothered, mate. Unless you have a reason for not wanting to drop the subject like?

Edited November 10, 2005 by Howaythelads

[ChocChip 0]

...........er, anyway.

 

I still think 4-1-4-1 might work becasue Dyer's instinct will always be to push up and if Luque is the attacking left sided forward he's said to be, he'll push up too thus Owen having plenty of support. Then Solano tucks in, as he has been doing, and before you know it we've got a 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-2-1 if you're being pedantic.

 

Just trying to think of ways to play without Shearer or Ameobi.

 

[Howaythelads 0]

...........er, anyway.

 

I still think 4-1-4-1 might work becasue Dyer's instinct will always be to push up and if Luque is the attacking left sided forward he's said to be, he'll push up too thus Owen having plenty of support.  Then Solano tucks in, as he has been doing, and before you know it we've got a 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-2-1 if you're being pedantic.

 

Just trying to think of ways to play without Shearer or Ameobi.

 

54991[/snapback]

I don't think formations matter too much, just quality players managed well by a quality manager. Apart from 3 at the back, which is cack.

[ChocChip 0]

...........er, anyway.

 

I still think 4-1-4-1 might work becasue Dyer's instinct will always be to push up and if Luque is the attacking left sided forward he's said to be, he'll push up too thus Owen having plenty of support.  Then Solano tucks in, as he has been doing, and before you know it we've got a 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-2-1 if you're being pedantic.

 

Just trying to think of ways to play without Shearer or Ameobi.

 

54991[/snapback]

I don't think formations matter too much, just quality players managed well by a quality manager. Apart from 3 at the back, which is cack.

54992[/snapback]

Wasn't that employed by the great Dutch teams, and West Germany to great effect?

[Howaythelads 0]

...........er, anyway.

 

I still think 4-1-4-1 might work becasue Dyer's instinct will always be to push up and if Luque is the attacking left sided forward he's said to be, he'll push up too thus Owen having plenty of support.  Then Solano tucks in, as he has been doing, and before you know it we've got a 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-2-1 if you're being pedantic.

 

Just trying to think of ways to play without Shearer or Ameobi.

 

54991[/snapback]

I don't think formations matter too much, just quality players managed well by a quality manager. Apart from 3 at the back, which is cack.

54992[/snapback]

Wasn't that employed by the great Dutch teams, and West Germany to great effect?

54995[/snapback]

Aye, but they don't play in the English Premier League. I don't think any team has won the league championship or either of the cup competitions in England using 3 at the back, certainly not the league championship. I may be wrong, but I'd be interested if someone can mention a team that has.

 

As I understand it, in Germany 3 at the back is employed as routine through all levels of football, just as 4 at the back is in England. So, through childhood to turning pro', lads throughout a team are used to the 3 at the back system in Germany, but for English players it's a completely different way of playing, and not just for the defenders either.

 

I don't think it's easy for players, even though they are pro's, to adjust to the different requirements of that system. Hence it doesn't work over here and never has really. Do you have an example of a successful team in England using that system?

[ChocChip 0]

...........er, anyway.

 

I still think 4-1-4-1 might work becasue Dyer's instinct will always be to push up and if Luque is the attacking left sided forward he's said to be, he'll push up too thus Owen having plenty of support.  Then Solano tucks in, as he has been doing, and before you know it we've got a 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-2-1 if you're being pedantic.

 

Just trying to think of ways to play without Shearer or Ameobi.

 

54991[/snapback]

I don't think formations matter too much, just quality players managed well by a quality manager. Apart from 3 at the back, which is cack.

54992[/snapback]

Wasn't that employed by the great Dutch teams, and West Germany to great effect?

54995[/snapback]

Aye, but they don't play in the English Premier League. I don't think any team has won the league championship or either of the cup competitions in England using 3 at the back, certainly not the league championship. I may be wrong, but I'd be interested if someone can mention a team that has.

 

As I understand it, in Germany 3 at the back is employed as routine through all levels of football, just as 4 at the back is in England. So, through childhood to turning pro', lads throughout a team are used to the 3 at the back system in Germany, but for English players it's a completely different way of playing, and not just for the defenders either.

 

I don't think it's easy for players, even though they are pro's, to adjust to the different requirements of that system. Hence it doesn't work over here and never has really. Do you have an example of a successful team in England using that system?

54997[/snapback]

 

Well, the best i can come up with is Leicester under O'Neill. Hardly a good start though they did win a cup. Otherwise i can only think of Spurs plummeting under Hoddle. Not much of an advertisement........

[Smooth Operator 10]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

You're running out, aren't you?

 

Some people have posted stuff about football, why not respond to that, mate?

54647[/snapback]

 

Running out of what? Insults? Not a chance mate when it come to hypocritic numbskulls like yourself who believe their opinion is the be all and end all.

 

I'll post in my own time, mate.

54735[/snapback]

Sigh

 

Personal insults in your post toward me, caused by what exactly? I don't see any insults from me toward you.

 

As for believing my opinion is the be all and end all, I certainly don't believe that, but if you want to think my opinion is the be all and end all, that's upto you. As far as I'm concerned my opinion is worth no more than yours.

 

I think you need to be reminded that you're the one who implied your opinion was more worthy on the basis you sit in the Gallowgate and people around you think the same way you do. Otherwise why mention it?

 

Anyway, as I said to the last bloke, why not let this fade away? I'm not that bothered, mate. Unless you have a reason for not wanting to drop the subject like?

54989[/snapback]

 

OK HTL lets bury the hatchet. Tell me more about formations not mattering much.

 

Not sure a professional manager would be on your wavelength, not even Gazza!

[Howaythelads 0]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

You're running out, aren't you?

 

Some people have posted stuff about football, why not respond to that, mate?

54647[/snapback]

 

Running out of what? Insults? Not a chance mate when it come to hypocritic numbskulls like yourself who believe their opinion is the be all and end all.

 

I'll post in my own time, mate.

54735[/snapback]

Sigh

 

Personal insults in your post toward me, caused by what exactly? I don't see any insults from me toward you.

 

As for believing my opinion is the be all and end all, I certainly don't believe that, but if you want to think my opinion is the be all and end all, that's upto you. As far as I'm concerned my opinion is worth no more than yours.

 

I think you need to be reminded that you're the one who implied your opinion was more worthy on the basis you sit in the Gallowgate and people around you think the same way you do. Otherwise why mention it?

 

Anyway, as I said to the last bloke, why not let this fade away? I'm not that bothered, mate. Unless you have a reason for not wanting to drop the subject like?

54989[/snapback]

 

OK HTL lets bury the hatchet. Tell me more about formations not mattering much.

 

Not sure a professional manager would be on your wavelength, not even Gazza!

55006[/snapback]

Well ok.

 

Formations matter up to a point, but I think it's best to use your players to their strengths. If you have a group of players able to successfully play 4-3-3, then go for it, but I think it's more important to use the players at your disposal correctly, than to doggedly stick to a formation because a manager prefers a certain formation.

 

An example is that Souness tried to change our formation last season, it failed because he didn't have the right players for it. He had the players for 4-4-2, which was why we improved when he went back to it. It wasn't because 4-4-2 is always better than 4-3-3.

 

Bottom line is you need a quality manager organising a group of quality players correctly. 3 at the back could work here, but only if you have a team full of the right players, so it's not really a cack formation. I don't think those players are easy to come by in England, which is why that way of playing has never really worked here.

[Smooth Operator 10]

FAO Howay the lads (or is that lasses?)

 

http://img213.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tampax2hx.png

53675[/snapback]

As I said to Alex. You got a problem with me ( don't know why like ) go to PM.

 

Surprised you're up and about at 2154, school tomorrow like.

53694[/snapback]

 

Cos you're a prize twat.

 

Ooops, sorry, i'll send you a PM like a real man would.

 

No school, just graft, got a life see, don't go on forums looking for fights.

54129[/snapback]

Who does? Apart from you that is, unless you think calling a stranger a 'twat" to their face might not start a fight, like. Why don't you go out tonight and call a stranger a twat, just to test whether this might start a fight or not? How ironic your comment is.

 

All I want to talk about is football. It would be nice if people would accept that being asked why they have an opinion is not abuse, but that being called a twat, cunt, bastard, or anything else you lot find acceptable, is abuse.

54523[/snapback]

 

You have an incredibly selective memory htl!

54633[/snapback]

You're running out, aren't you?

 

Some people have posted stuff about football, why not respond to that, mate?

54647[/snapback]

 

Running out of what? Insults? Not a chance mate when it come to hypocritic numbskulls like yourself who believe their opinion is the be all and end all.

 

I'll post in my own time, mate.

54735[/snapback]

Sigh

 

Personal insults in your post toward me, caused by what exactly? I don't see any insults from me toward you.

 

As for believing my opinion is the be all and end all, I certainly don't believe that, but if you want to think my opinion is the be all and end all, that's upto you. As far as I'm concerned my opinion is worth no more than yours.

 

I think you need to be reminded that you're the one who implied your opinion was more worthy on the basis you sit in the Gallowgate and people around you think the same way you do. Otherwise why mention it?

 

Anyway, as I said to the last bloke, why not let this fade away? I'm not that bothered, mate. Unless you have a reason for not wanting to drop the subject like?

54989[/snapback]

 

OK HTL lets bury the hatchet. Tell me more about formations not mattering much.

 

Not sure a professional manager would be on your wavelength, not even Gazza!

55006[/snapback]

Well ok.

 

Formations matter up to a point, but I think it's best to use your players to their strengths. If you have a group of players able to successfully play 4-3-3, then go for it, but I think it's more important to use the players at your disposal correctly, than to doggedly stick to a formation because a manager prefers a certain formation.

 

An example is that Souness tried to change our formation last season, it failed because he didn't have the right players for it. He had the players for 4-4-2, which was why we improved when he went back to it. It wasn't because 4-4-2 is always better than 4-3-3.

 

Bottom line is you need a quality manager organising a group of quality players correctly. 3 at the back could work here, but only if you have a team full of the right players, so it's not really a cack formation. I don't think those players are easy to come by in England, which is why that way of playing has never really worked here.

55015[/snapback]

 

IMO a team like Chelsea could play 442, 433, 451, 541, 343, 352 or any other realistic formation you can think of with all the talent they have bought, therefore you could argue that formation doesn't matter, but take us for example, we need to play 442, cos 433 isn't viable as our midfield wouldn't have enough of a physical presence, 451 isn't an option imo either as it would mean Owen upfront alone which is not gonna get the best out of him. And with our defence playing any variation o f3 at the back is a huge risk.

 

So I think what you're saying is right if you've got a squad like Chelsea but no-one else does, maybe the likes of Barca or Milan might manage it at a push?