Moritz

[boltonboris]

I've played centre half a few times in the past and it's a nightmare.. Clueless midfielders moaning about you not getting tight on the turn, but the reality is, there's spaces on the pitch where (as a defender) you don't want to go and you shouldn't go. That's where N'gog should be picking up the ball.

[bwfcdan94]

Okay if that is the case surely it should be 4-2-2-1-1 or 4-2-2-2. It just putting 3 makes it sound like two wingers and an attacking midfielder. What am I on about anyway this is nit picking.

My position is Anchorman which is basically the opposite to that, you are slightly in front of the defensive line and your job is to find their most creative player (the no 10/ second striker) and kick him. It can only really be played with a back line of 3 centre backs with the AM just in front. with the no 10 being marked and the ball goes to the space out wide where there is no full backs however the wingers gets the ball, looks up and sees the teams 1 centre forward being marked by massive centre backs. the result is the winger has to drive inwards and shoot (which quite a few of them don't like doing) or pass it back the centre of midfield. That is how you stop the number 10 ladies and gents. The best example of a player that plays this role is that dirtie b*stard David Batty so that is who I base my game on.

[SmokinFrazier]

What also worries me, is that Dougie reckons he'll be playing him behind a striker.

I think it's obvious, that since Dougie arrived, we've been nothing but woeful (results wise) when we don't play with 2 up top.

That's what bothers me too. I really don't like Freedman's insistence to go with his preferred system over one which is more successful. That shouldn't be the case at all. A manager should look at his group of players, analyse how they'll play their best and get the best results, and then play that way, not try and mould them into a system he prefers. How anyone could look at our results last year when playing 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 and then insist on playing 4-5-1 is beyond me.

I was vehement about 4-4-2 being better for us last year, even before Freedman started playing it, and someone on here, probably BWFCi, said I was being hypocriticial because when we were in the Premier League, I argued that we should play 4-5-1 and not 4-4-2. However, it's horses for courses. Different styles work in different leagues and in this league, 4-4-2 is more successful for us against the opposition we've been facing. Personally, I prefer 4-5-1 but I wouldn't insist on that if it's not the right decision, so I hope Freedman isn't pig headed about the choice either.

If it works, great, but I worry that the team Freedman is building is designed to play 4-5-1 and I'm not sure whether it'll work for us. If it doesn't, we'll have strengthened positions which aren't necessary, leading to another poor transfer window.

i haven't yet seen your apology for suggesting (quite strongly - and wrongly) that Dougie would not admit that he got the formation wrong against Blackpool...

will there be one?

Fair play to Freedman for that. I was pleasantly surprised to read those comments.

[boltonboris]

Sorry Dan, as funny as I found it "find their number 10 and kick him". If you're in front of a back 3, it's your job (it should be with a 4, actually) to cover your wider defenders, so they don't get caught in 2 v 1's. Sitters aren't there to just man mark. It's a big job.

Anyway, geek time over.

[hi there, i'm chris]

Okay if that is the case surely it should be 4-2-2-1-1 or 4-2-2-2. It just putting 3 makes it sound like two wingers and an attacking midfielder. What am I on about anyway this is nit picking.

My position is Anchorman which is basically the opposite to that, you are slightly in front of the defensive line and your job is to find their most creative player (the no 10/ second striker) and kick him. It can only really be played with a back line of 3 centre backs with the AM just in front. with the no 10 being marked and the ball goes to the space out wide where there is no full backs however the wingers gets the ball, looks up and sees the teams 1 centre forward being marked by massive centre backs. the result is the winger has to drive inwards and shoot (which quite a few of them don't like doing) or pass it back the centre of midfield. That is how you stop the number 10 ladies and gents. The best example of a player that plays this role is that dirtie b*stard David Batty so that is who I base my game on.

[bwfcdan94]

Sorry Dan, as funny as I found it "find their number 10 and kick him". If you're in front of a back 3, it's your job (it should be with a 4, actually) to cover your wider defenders, so they don't get caught in 2 v 1's. Sitters aren't there to just man mark. It's a big job.

Anyway, geek time over.

Yes but Anchorman is a different role to Defensive Midfielder, the Anchor is part of the defence the Defensive midfielder is part of the midfield.

[thebish]

I am still to be convinced that 4-4-1-1 is actually in practice all THAT different to 4-4-2

[BWFC_Insane]

I am still to be convinced that 4-4-1-1 is actually in practice all THAT different to 4-4-2

Depends how it's played. If you have three mobile, interchangeable players in behind a lone central striker that is a bit different.

If its just Ngog being a fanny and waiting on the edge of the box rather than getting in there to miss his header, then no, it's not much different.

[norm the jedi]

Is it dreadfully old fashioned to posit that formations etc are largely Internet nerdly masterbatory bollox?
If your team is well drilled and the players are any good the formation will change dynamically as situations develop, the ability to read situations react to your opponents and team mates and be in the right place at the right moment to do your job is a bit more important than how Gary Neville arranges you on the magic board.. Formation is where you start out at restarts what you do is a bit more important than whether you stand in front or beside a mate fer't kick off etc.
If you're shite, all the formation in the world won't help much

[bwfcdan94]

Some sh*te teams have been very successful over the years though norm. Think of all the teams labelled pub teams, think of all the teams that everyone thought would go down with winning a match and yet stayed up comfortably. Bolton and Stoke are two examples that fulfilled both of those criteria's in their first few seasons in the prem. TBH I think the manager and the formation are more important than the players.

[Bruce Rioja]

I'd say that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, Norm. Imagine BSA's side with SKD up top in a two and Campo in the flat back four of a 4-4-2. Actually, perhaps best that you don't.

[ChrisC]

Sorry Dan, as funny as I found it "find their number 10 and kick him". If you're in front of a back 3, it's your job (it should be with a 4, actually) to cover your wider defenders, so they don't get caught in 2 v 1's. Sitters aren't there to just man mark. It's a big job.

Anyway, geek time over.

Yes but Anchorman is a different role to Defensive Midfielder, the Anchor is part of the defence the Defensive midfielder is part of the midfield.

Did somebody call for an Anchorman?

[hi there, i'm chris]

FFS.

[thebish]

Is it dreadfully old fashioned to posit that formations etc are largely Internet nerdly masterbatory bollox?

maybe - but it's basically where I am!

[BWFC_Insane]

I'd say that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, Norm. Imagine BSA's side with SKD up top in a two and Campo in the flat back four of a 4-4-2. Actually, perhaps best that you don't.

Yep.

I think Norm is basically correct in that the quality of your players dictates everything. But organisation of them and systems effectively can make the difference.

Sam showed this as an almost perfect contrast to what had gone before.

[bobo the clown]

Is it dreadfully old fashioned to posit that formations etc are largely Internet nerdly masterbatory bollox?

maybe - but it's basically where I am!

... a w@nker ?

It has been said !

[norm the jedi]

Is it dreadfully old fashioned to posit that formations etc are largely Internet nerdly masterbatory bollox?

maybe - but it's basically where I am!

... a w@nker ?

It has been said !

shouldn't you be fixin yer car and mixing up custard ? Possibly polishing some big shoes...

I think organised is different from in a formation, my impression was and is that Allerdyce gives everyone a job to do see also Stoke,
Formation is where they end up... but I think that formation and shape are different things.. and change dependant on the position on the field and whether or not you're in possession or out.. saying we play 4-4-2 don't actually mean anything or say anything about how we play other than that's how we line up..

[bwfcdan94]

W@nchorman has been said before about my position as well

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I am still to be convinced that 4-4-1-1 is actually in practice all THAT different to 4-4-2

My interpretation is simple:
In a 4-4-2 you've got two blokes, either one of which can and, to the consternation of the other team's defence, do score.
In a 4-4-1-1 you've got some bloke lurking, holding up the ball, farting about, looking full of skillz but doing nothing of real substance because he's a bloke who if he went down the chippy would no doubt be called a pink faggot, supporting one bloke up front who scores occasionally if he ever gets the ball delivered to him from the bloke who is not another striker.

[thebish]

I am still to be convinced that 4-4-1-1 is actually in practice all THAT different to 4-4-2

My interpretation is simple:
In a 4-4-2 you've got two blokes, either one of which can and, to the consternation of the other team's defence, do score.
In a 4-4-1-1 you've got some bloke lurking, holding up the ball, farting about, looking full of skillz but doing nothing of real substance because he:s a bloke who if he went down the chippy would no doubt be called a pink faggot, supporting one bloke up front who scores occasionally if he ever gets the ball delivered to him from the bloke who is not another striker.

so.. to sum up - we NEVER played 4-4-2 last season?