McClaren Out !!!

There ARE other teams(we'd have no-one to play otherwise) and here's where all-comers can discuss the wider world of football......

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 31626
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:31 pm

442 seemed to me to bring it level. Then our central-midfield superstars didn't bother tracking back, so Croatia went in front, so McClueless tried throwing strikers at the problem because he'd fluked his way out like that before in the Uefa Cup.

norm the jedi
Dedicated
Dedicated
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:11 pm
Location: Near a Shandy
Contact:

Post by norm the jedi » Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:33 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
Batman wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
Batman wrote:i reckon he'll play crouch on his own, and Gerrard as the 'support striker'

5 in midfield

boring or what
Can't see it. Trying a new formation against Croatia didn't work out too well last time, he's at home in front of a newly-expectant audience, we need to win (although a draw would do, playing for draws isn't England's strong suit), Darren Bent has been called up and I can't think of a single game where Gerrard, who loves coming on to the game like Captain Hollywood rather than playing with his back to goal, has ever played well in that role.
i was riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
You were very right. He was very wrong. My reasons for us not to play that system seem to stand up to hindsight far better than his reasons for playing it, or indeed the FA's reasons for employing him at all.
Aye but the 4-4-2 hardly did any better second half. When you've got a one paced lumbering midfield and a completely useless back four where Sol Campbell is supposedly "the rock who will hold it together" I think systems go out the window.
? 4-4-2 got us level and en route to Clockwork Chocolate Land..
Then the other Ginger Minger got up put his brolly down and withdrew Defoe to back to a 5 and keep what we had..
with predictable results.. If we'd stayed on the front foot and in 4-4-2 after the second goal we could have got our equaliser in early and killed them off
Are we in League 2 yet - Three seasons and we'll be away to Chesham

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38819
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Post by BWFC_Insane » Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:41 pm

norm the jedi wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
Batman wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Can't see it. Trying a new formation against Croatia didn't work out too well last time, he's at home in front of a newly-expectant audience, we need to win (although a draw would do, playing for draws isn't England's strong suit), Darren Bent has been called up and I can't think of a single game where Gerrard, who loves coming on to the game like Captain Hollywood rather than playing with his back to goal, has ever played well in that role.
i was riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
You were very right. He was very wrong. My reasons for us not to play that system seem to stand up to hindsight far better than his reasons for playing it, or indeed the FA's reasons for employing him at all.
Aye but the 4-4-2 hardly did any better second half. When you've got a one paced lumbering midfield and a completely useless back four where Sol Campbell is supposedly "the rock who will hold it together" I think systems go out the window.
? 4-4-2 got us level and en route to Clockwork Chocolate Land..
Then the other Ginger Minger got up put his brolly down and withdrew Defoe to back to a 5 and keep what we had..
with predictable results.. If we'd stayed on the front foot and in 4-4-2 after the second goal we could have got our equaliser in early and killed them off
Thats oversimplification.

We came out all guns blazing second half as we would have done with any system. We scored 2 goals, and then Croatia made some changes, freshened things up and pushed us back once again. The 4-4-2 was ridiculously open, mind 4-3-3 wasn't any better.

The problem came from players performances not the system.

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 31626
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Thu Nov 22, 2007 1:56 pm

Problems came from all angles last night, BWFCi, but one of them was definitely the formation.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38819
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Post by BWFC_Insane » Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:01 pm

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Problems came from all angles last night, BWFCi, but one of them was definitely the formation.
We'll have to agree to differ on this one. I thought the problems stemmed for abject performances across the pitch from our players.

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 31626
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:05 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Problems came from all angles last night, BWFCi, but one of them was definitely the formation.
We'll have to agree to differ on this one. I thought the problems stemmed for abject performances across the pitch from our players.
Oh I agree with that. But I think a major contributory factor was the formation they were being asked to play in, which suited none of the central three, left Crouch isolated up top and allowed Croatia to hold us off then pick us off.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38819
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Post by BWFC_Insane » Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:09 pm

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Problems came from all angles last night, BWFCi, but one of them was definitely the formation.
We'll have to agree to differ on this one. I thought the problems stemmed for abject performances across the pitch from our players.
Oh I agree with that. But I think a major contributory factor was the formation they were being asked to play in, which suited none of the central three, left Crouch isolated up top and allowed Croatia to hold us off then pick us off.
Theoretically the system should have worked. However, neither Joe Cole nor Wright Phillips (or maybe McClaren if they were playing to instruction) understand how to make the system work. Crouch won a lot of the ball. But there was noone to feed it to. Thats because when the ball came across say from the left, Wright Phillips should have been just in behind Crouch in the hole, and visa versa when it came from the right Cole should have been in the hole behind Crouch. Neither did this and so it was left to the midfield three to make up 30 yards every time.

Tombwfc
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2912
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 5:37 pm

Post by Tombwfc » Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:23 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Problems came from all angles last night, BWFCi, but one of them was definitely the formation.
We'll have to agree to differ on this one. I thought the problems stemmed for abject performances across the pitch from our players.
Oh I agree with that. But I think a major contributory factor was the formation they were being asked to play in, which suited none of the central three, left Crouch isolated up top and allowed Croatia to hold us off then pick us off.
Theoretically the system should have worked. However, neither Joe Cole nor Wright Phillips (or maybe McClaren if they were playing to instruction) understand how to make the system work. Crouch won a lot of the ball. But there was noone to feed it to. Thats because when the ball came across say from the left, Wright Phillips should have been just in behind Crouch in the hole, and visa versa when it came from the right Cole should have been in the hole behind Crouch. Neither did this and so it was left to the midfield three to make up 30 yards every time.
Then we shouldn't have been playing it if none of our lot can make it work, thus the tactics were at fault. Nobodies saying 4-3-3 is inherently a useless formation, we of all people should be able to see it's benefits, but it's not and never had been the right formation for England. And what McLaren was thinking trying it out in such an important game is beyond me. Aside from the front three, Gareth Barry was asked to do a job that he simply isn't that good at, when Hargreaves or Carrick would've been the better bet.

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38819
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Post by BWFC_Insane » Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:28 pm

Tombwfc wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Problems came from all angles last night, BWFCi, but one of them was definitely the formation.
We'll have to agree to differ on this one. I thought the problems stemmed for abject performances across the pitch from our players.
Oh I agree with that. But I think a major contributory factor was the formation they were being asked to play in, which suited none of the central three, left Crouch isolated up top and allowed Croatia to hold us off then pick us off.
Theoretically the system should have worked. However, neither Joe Cole nor Wright Phillips (or maybe McClaren if they were playing to instruction) understand how to make the system work. Crouch won a lot of the ball. But there was noone to feed it to. Thats because when the ball came across say from the left, Wright Phillips should have been just in behind Crouch in the hole, and visa versa when it came from the right Cole should have been in the hole behind Crouch. Neither did this and so it was left to the midfield three to make up 30 yards every time.
Then we shouldn't have been playing it if none of our lot can make it work, thus the tactics were at fault. Nobodies saying 4-3-3 is inherently a useless formation, we of all people should be able to see it's benefits, but it's not and never had been the right formation for England. And what McLaren was thinking trying it out in such an important game is beyond me. Aside from the front three, Gareth Barry was asked to do a job that he simply isn't that good at, when Hargreaves or Carrick would've been the better bet.
I think Mourinho would have made 4-5-1 work with those players.

We wouldn't have played it had we had another decent striker fit.

How many times did Defoe touch the ball after he came on at half time? 3?

Tombwfc
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2912
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 5:37 pm

Post by Tombwfc » Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:39 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Tombwfc wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:
BWFC_Insane wrote:We'll have to agree to differ on this one. I thought the problems stemmed for abject performances across the pitch from our players.
Oh I agree with that. But I think a major contributory factor was the formation they were being asked to play in, which suited none of the central three, left Crouch isolated up top and allowed Croatia to hold us off then pick us off.
Theoretically the system should have worked. However, neither Joe Cole nor Wright Phillips (or maybe McClaren if they were playing to instruction) understand how to make the system work. Crouch won a lot of the ball. But there was noone to feed it to. Thats because when the ball came across say from the left, Wright Phillips should have been just in behind Crouch in the hole, and visa versa when it came from the right Cole should have been in the hole behind Crouch. Neither did this and so it was left to the midfield three to make up 30 yards every time.
Then we shouldn't have been playing it if none of our lot can make it work, thus the tactics were at fault. Nobodies saying 4-3-3 is inherently a useless formation, we of all people should be able to see it's benefits, but it's not and never had been the right formation for England. And what McLaren was thinking trying it out in such an important game is beyond me. Aside from the front three, Gareth Barry was asked to do a job that he simply isn't that good at, when Hargreaves or Carrick would've been the better bet.
I think Mourinho would have made 4-5-1 work with those players.

We wouldn't have played it had we had another decent striker fit.

How many times did Defoe touch the ball after he came on at half time? 3?
Mourinho would've been playing it for 18months. Not play two up top throughout qualifying, only to bottle it half a week before the most important game. If he's decided Defoe isn't good enough, don't call the feck* up for England. He should've just gone like for like when Owen got injured, not overhauled the whole thing on a wing and a prayer.

User avatar
Dave Sutton's barnet
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 31626
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: Hanging on in quiet desperation
Contact:

Post by Dave Sutton's barnet » Thu Nov 22, 2007 4:02 pm

Joe Cole played well in that position under Mourinho...
And I thought he was unlucky to go off last night for Massimo Maccarone, sorry, Darren Bent...

WhiteArmy
Hopeful
Hopeful
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 10:47 am

Post by WhiteArmy » Thu Nov 22, 2007 4:49 pm

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Joe Cole played well in that position under Mourinho...
And I thought he was unlucky to go off last night for Massimo Maccarone, sorry, Darren Bent...
Thought it was Kris Akabussi myself :D

Batman

Post by Batman » Thu Nov 22, 2007 9:17 pm

Dave Sutton's barnet wrote:Joe Cole played well in that position under Mourinho...
And I thought he was unlucky to go off last night for Massimo Maccarone, sorry, Darren Bent...
sweet jesus

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests