boselli & di santo

Forums Latics Crazy Forum boselli & di santo

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 32 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #90485

    I remember the stumbling block on bosellis first time around being the fact that he was unable to play in the lone striker role as has been mentioned on here previously. However, as we now play with 2 strikers with maloney just behind, i can see boselli chipping in with a few goals & di santo notching up a few himself also as di santo can be the “holding” forward laying it off to his fellow striker. I can see this working.

    #90488
    MickyCMike
    Player
      I remember the stumbling block on bosellis first time around being the fact that he was unable to play in the lone striker role as has been mentioned on here previously. However, as we now play with 2 strikers with maloney just behind, i can see boselli chipping in with a few goals & di santo notching up a few himself also as di santo can be the “holding” forward laying it off to his fellow striker. I can see this working.

      Here pull up a sandbag and sit down beside me fella…….

      ……..oh! and put this tin hat on. ;)

      #90489
      I remember the stumbling block on bosellis first time around being the fact that he was unable to play in the lone striker role as has been mentioned on here previously. However, as we now play with 2 strikers with maloney just behind, i can see boselli chipping in with a few goals & di santo notching up a few himself also as di santo can be the “holding” forward laying it off to his fellow striker. I can see this working.

      WE NEVER PLAYED WITH 1 STRIKER UP FRONT!!!

      I dont mean to take this out on you Runcorn but I am sick to death of people saying that! its ignorant and stupid on so many levels and no matter how stubborn certain people are about it it does not change the FACT that we have always primarily played with a front line consisting of 3 forwards.

      But in reply to your post Boselli will take over Sammon’s role either coming on as a late sub for Di Santo or playing alongside him if we switch to a 4-4-2 I would imagine….

      If we play like we did in the latter of last season I have no doubt Boselli will score goals. If he will get the nod ahead of Di Santo I am not sure….

      #90491
      MickyCMike
      Player

        I remember the stumbling block on bosellis first time around being the fact that he was unable to play in the lone striker role as has been mentioned on here previously. However, as we now play with 2 strikers with maloney just behind, i can see boselli chipping in with a few goals & di santo notching up a few himself also as di santo can be the “holding” forward laying it off to his fellow striker. I can see this working.

        WE NEVER PLAYED WITH 1 STRIKER UP FRONT!!!

        I dont mean to take this out on you Runcorn but I am sick to death of people saying that! its ignorant and stupid on so many levels and no matter how stubborn certain people are about it it does not change the FACT that we have always primarily played with a front line consisting of 3 forwards.

        But in reply to your post Boselli will take over Sammon’s role either coming on as a late sub for Di Santo or playing alongside him if we switch to a 4-4-2 I would imagine….

        If we play like we did in the latter of last season I have no doubt Boselli will score goals. If he will get the nod ahead of Di Santo I am not sure….[/quote]

        Mr Salford…..

        shouting will not change history. As Mr Runcorn said in his post “Bosellis first time around” we did in fact play 4-5-1 (it was not until the mid of last season did Roberto change his formation and tactics) but hey let’s not let the euphoria of the last 10 games get in the way of what happened in the past.

        Roberto’s (then) tactics were the main sticking point between most of the light/dark side discussions on here.

        Anyway, I’m looking forward to the man coming back and ‘fitting’ in – onwards and upwards as they say.

        #90493

        You beat me to it mickey. I should have included in my original post that on bosellis first time he did indeed play in a lone striker role & wasn’t suited to it. The late john benson even told martinez this, but the latter wouldn’t listen. Boselli is a striker who feeds off someone else. The previous formation was not suited to boselli, but i believe this new formation (if roberto sticks with it) will suit boselli to the ground.

        #90495

        Well sorry to p*ss on both of your bonfires but you can take it up with Roberto the guy who makes the formations who has said clear as day we have never played with a lone striker!!!!

        It was a 4-3-3

        Going back N’Zogbia wasnt playing as a right winger and Rodallega certainly wasnt playing as a left winger.

        I’d draw you a picture but if you cant be bothered to relaise your own teams tactics why should I bother to teach you?

        #90496

        3 points:

        1) I believe that what Mr Salford means is that system played in Bobby’s first 2 seasons was 4-3-3 & I do believe that Bobby himself always used to respond with “we don’t play 1 up front we play 3 up front” when questionned by fans as to why he persisted with a lone striker. My own personal opinion is that is b0ll0x – it was 1 bloked isolated up front on his own & 2 wingers who were told to push up when the striker had possession , cut in when they had the ball & take shots. No way was it 3 up front simply coz the wingers used to push up in support – so do traditional wingers in a 4-4-2 yet the formation is still called 4-4-2.

        2) Runcorn – where do you get that Latics now play 2 up front with Maloney in behind? The formation is widely acknowledge as a 3-4-3 – not by me admittedly (to me its more a 3-2-2-2-1 if that makes any sense) To me the other 2 in the “3” up front are Moses & Maloney & both play in pretty much the same position (albeit different sides of the pitch)

        3) Salford – I’d still say that the current formation is a lone striker. I consider a striker to be a specific position & it’s not the one Moses & Maloney play. yeah they can be up front at time but they aint strikers

        #90498

        Hi Tyldsley thought you would be lurking around this debate somewhere B)

        In reply to point 1 you must then think either Roberto is lying to trick people for whatever reason or he is that numb that he does not know his own tactics. What Roberto is doing with the front three is not a new thing Barcelone have been doing it for years but you dont hear people saying Villa & Messi etc. are wingers do ya…

        In reply to point 3 Im not saying any of them are strikers I have and always will maintain they are 3 forwards ;)

        Like Roberto has said n the past there is too much focus on what a 4-4-2 4-4-3 or whatever should look like/ should be. the tactics and positions of players is far more in depth than assigning them to a section of a 100 year old tactic and expecting them to do the same things as the thousands of players before them.

        You have said yourself (might not have been you) Di Santo can receive the ball and drop back with Maloney and Moses advancing ahead of him and looking more like classic strikers?

        I do realise where your point comes from though Tyldsley as when we have been poor or under pressure the outside forwards drift back into midfield.

        I just think you are very strict with your idea of what a forward should be and do.

        #90499

        Yes, yes, yes, but you’re all wrong. :)

        The reason he was pants was because he wasn’t happy in in Wigan and couldn’t settle. Never really bought all that “not happy in my new house so I’ll start playing shite at football” nonsense myself but he isn’t the first and won’t be the last to have this excuse/reason used when not perfoming at new club.

        Anyhoo, you don’t get picked as a striker for Argentina if you can’t score the odd goal so let’s just see how he does if/when he starts playing for us again, in whatever formation.

        One thing is for sure, neither the 1 nor the 3 striker take on the formation is likely to allow Boselli and Di Santo to play together as I would guess they would both need to be central. At a push, Di Santo might be OK playing a bit wider but not, I wouldn’t have thought, Boselli.

        #90504
        Hi Tyldsley thought you would be lurking around this debate somewhere B)

        In reply to point 1 you must then think either Roberto is lying to trick people for whatever reason or he is that numb that he does not know his own tactics. What Roberto is doing with the front three is not a new thing Barcelone have been doing it for years but you dont hear people saying Villa & Messi etc. are wingers do ya…

        In reply to point 3 Im not saying any of them are strikers I have and always will maintain they are 3 forwards ;)

        Like Roberto has said n the past there is too much focus on what a 4-4-2 4-4-3 or whatever should look like/ should be. the tactics and positions of players is far more in depth than assigning them to a section of a 100 year old tactic and expecting them to do the same things as the thousands of players before them.

        You have said yourself (might not have been you) Di Santo can receive the ball and drop back with Maloney and Moses advancing ahead of him and looking more like classic strikers?

        I do realise where your point comes from though Tyldsley as when we have been poor or under pressure the outside forwards drift back into midfield.

        I just think you are very strict with your idea of what a forward should be and do.

        To be fair Salford, I have said in a few debates on this that the current system cannot be pigeon holed into any set formation as it is way too fluid – at times it can look like 5-4-1, at other times it can look like 3-4-3, at other times it can even look like 3-6-1.
        I do pick holes coz essentially even if you consider Latics to play with 3 forwards, whoever plays that Di Santo/Sammon/Rodallega is asked to play as your more traditional “striker” the other 2 (whoever they may be) aren’t, so technically the Di Santo role is still the lone stiker – that’s my story & I’m sticking to it ;)
        Also, whereas I’s always describe Di Santo’s role as a forward, the other 2 aren’t always forwards. They are not always a front 3, are not always asked to perform the role of forwards & so therefore aren’t forwards :whistle:

        I’ve said that Di Santo drops deep to get the ball & allow others to get ahead of him but that doesn’t make those players (& McArthur often gets forward a la Bolton away) look more like a striker than him

        I don’t get how you can say in Bobby’s system that players don’t play traditional roles & in the same breath say that Moses & Maloney are forwards!! They’re not forwards & they’re not midfielders – to me they’re a bit of both so I wouldn’t class the system as 3-4-3. Likewise I wouldn’t class the wing backs as midfielders (or defenders for that matter), hence if I had to pigeon hole the system it wold be my 3-2-2-2-1 thing I mentioned before

        #90507
        One thing is for sure, neither the 1 nor the 3 striker take on the formation is likely to allow Boselli and Di Santo to play together as I would guess they would both need to be central. At a push, Di Santo might be OK playing a bit wider but not, I wouldn’t have thought, Boselli.

        Agreed which is kind of one of the reasons why I’ve had the debate with Standish as to why will Boselli suit this system any more than he suited the last one when he was here
        If he plays, he will take the Di Santo position & not play alongside him. That position needs somebody with Di Santo’s skill set – Boselli doesn’t appear to have those & will be wanting someone to get him the ball near goal. yes the new system creates more crosses but Di Santo’s running, droppin deep etc.. is essential to that & take that away & I think the whole system suffers.
        In all honesty I hope Boselli proves me wrong but I still have a sneaking feeling that he’ll be sold before the end of August rather then let him go for nothing next year

        #90508

        This link does a decent job of adding weight to the three strikers/lone striker debate. http://striker.askdefine.com/

        Some relevant extracts:

        The first striker: advanced forwards or target men
        Modern team formations usually include one to three strikers….Coaches typically field one striker who plays over the shoulder of the last defender….and another attacking forward who plays somewhat deeper and assists in making goals as well as scoring.

        …Less frequently, some strikers operate on the wings of the field and work their way goalward.

        The second striker: deeper lying attackers

        …Originally such players were termed inside forwards, or deep-lying centre forwards. More recently, two more variations of this old type of player have developed: the second or support or auxiliary striker and, in what is arguably a distinct position unto its own, being neither midfield nor attack the Number 10, or playmaker, an advanced as opposed to a deep-lying playmaker.

        The second striker position is a loosely-defined and often misapplied one somewhere between the out-and-out striker…and the Number 10 or Trequartista, while possibly showing some of the characteristics of both…

        Notable examples of current second strikers include Robinho, Lionel Messi, Kaká, Wayne Rooney, Carlos Tevez, Del Piero,Francesco Totti and Ronaldinho.

        The third striker: Wingers or flanking attackers
        A winger is an attacking player who is stationed in a wide position near the touchlines. They can be classified as forwards, considering their origin as the old “outside-forward” position, and continue to be termed as such in most parts of the world, especially in Latin and Dutch footballing cultures. However, in the Anglo-Saxon world, they are usually counted as part of the midfield.

        In recent years there has been a trend of playing ‘unorthodox’ wingers – wide men stationed on the ‘wrong’ side of the pitch, in order to enable them to cut inside and shoot on their stronger foot. One example of this is the tactical use of Robin van Persie by Netherlands coach Marco van Basten at the 2006 World Cup; the Netherlands played with a front three ofArjen Robben wide left, target-man Ruud van Nistelrooy in the middle and the left-footed van Persie wide right.

        #90509
        Agreed which is kind of one of the reasons why I’ve had the debate with Standish as to why will Boselli suit this system any more than he suited the last one when he was here

        Simple for me. In the early Martinez days we never got those two wider forwards anywhere close to the most advanced, central forward. Neither did the other midfielders get anywhere close to helping out. It’s the fact that we get more people forward in total than we used to that gives me confidence that he will do better this time around.

        But you might also be right – he may only have come back to be sold ;)

        #90514
        filmossfilmoss
        Player

          I am just glad people are talking about him again !! Remember the times I queried his whereabouts etc !! I have always said he would do well given the right circumstances ! B)

          #90516

          We have not started the season yet,and now he is the bloody bees knees, :whistle:

        Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 32 total)
        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        Forums Latics Crazy Forum boselli & di santo