- This topic has 63 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I think it’s time for you to take a break Griff. Aye, and I bet you will. I know you want to get to 10,000 posts but you don’t seem to want to debate anything anymore.
All you seem to want to do is slag people off and call them for daring to have a different opinion, outlook or post code to you. CAn opinion is neither right nor wrong its just a different view.You appear to be obsessed with making things up that haven’t been said and you quote things that simply aren’t there.
Where in any post has it said that two strikers and two wingers should be played? Name calling again, tut tut.
I also didn’t read anywhere that Donny said McEachran was shite. He said he did one good thing that lead to our goal, is that untrue, or did he have a blinder? Perhaps he did have a blinder and I missed it, after all we always leave after 78 minutes don’t we?? So each time the PR post coders are mentioned it’s aimed at Filmoss alone then.As for RM, I am not obsessed with him I just don’t have the same opinion of him as you do and didn’t think the sun shone out of his arse like some did.
I know its hard for you to accept that not everyone agrees with you, but I think by now you should have realised that others also dare to differ from you on this subject. Evidently??I know you are a wind up merchant most of the time and your aim is to try to piss off as many posters as possible, but surely you could start putting a bit more effort and thought in to your posts, CG: Well, as Our Lord, Jesus Christ once said – it is you who say it
[/quote]
I think it’s time for you to take a break Griff. Aye, and I bet you will. I know you want to get to 10,000 posts but you don’t seem to want to debate anything anymore.
All you seem to want to do is slag people off and call them for daring to have a different opinion, outlook or post code to you. CCG: No shit, well spottedYou appear to be obsessed with making things up that haven’t been said and you quote things that simply aren’t there.
Where in any post has it said that two strikers and two wingers should be played? Name calling again, tut tut.
I also didn’t read anywhere that Donny said McEachran was shite. He said he did one good thing that lead to our goal, is that untrue, or did he have a blinder? Perhaps he did have a blinder and I missed it, after all we always leave after 78 minutes don’t we?? CG: No, the 78-minutes is aimed solely at Phil and Jeff. And he knows it. And he doesn’t care because he knows there’s nothing in itAs for RM, I am not obsessed with him I just don’t have the same opinion of him as you do and didn’t think the sun shone out of his arse like some did.
I know its hard for you to accept that not everyone agrees with you, but I think by now you should have realised that others also dare to differ from you on this subject. CG: Yes, I thought the statement was perfectly clear. Why the question?I know you are a wind up merchant most of the time and your aim is to try to piss off as many posters as possible, but surely you could start putting a bit more effort and thought in to your posts, CG: Well, as Our Lord, Jesus Christ once said – it is you who say it
[/quote][/quote]
CG: Anyway, you may well all get your wish. I have a lot on at the moment and something probably has to give. This site will probably be the thing to go. No, no – don’t try to convince me to stay ;)
Do you still have an outside toilet and send your kids down the mines, too?The lone striker approach has got nothing to do with Martinez, stop being so obsessed!!! Almost nobody plays with 2 strikers and 2 wingers as your mate Donny Dark Ages is advocating. Mind you, he thought McEachran was shite so all he is doing with each post he makes is demonstrating how far out of step he is with most other people’s opinions.Man City 68
Liverpool 58Leicester 52
Burnley 42
Derby 57
Forest 46
Reading 47Brentford 51
Wolves 49
Orient 59
Rotherham 51Leading scorers in top three divisions, all play 2 up front, look at the league tables where they are.
They may not play wingers on both flanks but use full backs to get forward and that fill that roll, but it shows that “having an outside toilet” can be quite successful.
Do you still have an outside toilet and send your kids down the mines, too?
The lone striker approach has got nothing to do with Martinez, stop being so obsessed!!! Almost nobody plays with 2 strikers and 2 wingers as your mate Donny Dark Ages is advocating. Mind you, he thought McEachran was shite so all he is doing with each post he makes is demonstrating how far out of step he is with most other people’s opinions.Man City 68
Liverpool 58Leicester 52
Burnley 42
Derby 57
Forest 46
Reading 47Brentford 51
Wolves 49
Orient 59
Rotherham 51Leading scorers in top three divisions, all play 2 up front, look at the league tables where they are.
They may not play wingers on both flanks but use full backs to get forward and that fill that roll, but it shows that “having an outside toilet” can be quite successful.[/quote]
Well done there, not “bolding” the bit about playing 2 wingers as well as two strikers to competely suit your argument and diminish mine. You’re not a woman are you? ;)
I’ll just respond re the top two in your list because I don’t claim to have the encyclopaedic knowledge of the formations of many teams down to League 1, and if you do, you probably need to get out more.
Liverpool do have two strikers – and two bloody good ones at that – but they do not play as a conventional front two, as in the old typical 442 formation with two wide men – or wingers – which is what our friend Donny has been talking about.
As for City, well you can have that one, for two reasons:
a) they hardly fall into the same category as other teams do they and in any case, again, they play far more fluidly than just as a conventional front two. Granted, at least when Dzeko and Aguerro play together, there is a big ‘un and a little ‘un which Donny might recognise from his old Shoot! magazines.
b) I said “almost nobody” plays that way which implies exceptions. I accept that I didn’t make this clear by putting it in bold; but had I done so, you would probably only have removed it.
There! Didn’t insult anybody there, did I? Very sarcastic, I grant you, but a) that’s me and b) so was yours.
so why not try two strikers up front, we certainly wouldn’t score less goals.And how on earth do you prove that? Is there not an argument to suggest that taking a body out of midfield to accommodate the extra striker leaves gaps that may* lead to us conceding more goals too?
* please do not unbold this text. It is important to my point of view
Do you still have an outside toilet and send your kids down the mines, too?
The lone striker approach has got nothing to do with Martinez, stop being so obsessed!!! Almost nobody plays with 2 strikers and 2 wingers as your mate Donny Dark Ages is advocating. Mind you, he thought McEachran was shite so all he is doing with each post he makes is demonstrating how far out of step he is with most other people’s opinions.Man City 68
Liverpool 58Leicester 52
Burnley 42
Derby 57
Forest 46
Reading 47Brentford 51
Wolves 49
Orient 59
Rotherham 51Leading scorers in top three divisions, all play 2 up front, look at the league tables where they are.
They may not play wingers on both flanks but use full backs to get forward and that fill that roll, but it shows that “having an outside toilet” can be quite successful.[/quote]
Well done there, not “bolding” the bit about playing 2 wingers as well as two strikers to competely suit your argument and diminish mine. You’re not a woman are you? ;)
I’ll just respond re the top two in your list because I don’t claim to have the encyclopaedic knowledge of the formations of many teams down to League 1, and if you do, you probably need to get out more.
Liverpool do have two strikers – and two bloody good ones at that – but they do not play as a conventional front two, as in the old typical 442 formation with two wide men – or wingers – which is what our friend Donny has been talking about.
As for City, well you can have that one, for two reasons:
a) they hardly fall into the same category as other teams do they and in any case, again, they play far more fluidly than just as a conventional front two. Granted, at least when Dzeko and Aguerro play together, there is a big ‘un and a little ‘un which Donny might recognise from his old Shoot! magazines.
b) I said “almost nobody” plays that way which implies exceptions. I accept that I didn’t make this clear by putting it in bold; but had I done so, you would probably only have removed it.
There! Didn’t insult anybody there, did I? Very sarcastic, I grant you, but a) that’s me and b) so was yours.[/quote]
Your proposed sabbatical didn’t last very long.
You claimed and have done for a while that 2 up front is consigned to history, my list sort of muddies the water of your opinion would you not think?
Doesn’t matter about the personnel, team or formation whether its 2 wingers, wing backs or fullbacks getting forward all those teams play 2 out and out strikers and they are the highest scoring teams and title challengers or leaders in all three leagues.
Do you still have an outside toilet and send your kids down the mines, too?
The lone striker approach has got nothing to do with Martinez, stop being so obsessed!!! Almost nobody plays with 2 strikers and 2 wingers as your mate Donny Dark Ages is advocating. Mind you, he thought McEachran was shite so all he is doing with each post he makes is demonstrating how far out of step he is with most other people’s opinions.Man City 68
Liverpool 58Leicester 52
Burnley 42
Derby 57
Forest 46
Reading 47Brentford 51
Wolves 49
Orient 59
Rotherham 51Leading scorers in top three divisions, all play 2 up front, look at the league tables where they are.
They may not play wingers on both flanks but use full backs to get forward and that fill that roll, but it shows that “having an outside toilet” can be quite successful.[/quote]
Well done there, not “bolding” the bit about playing 2 wingers as well as two strikers to competely suit your argument and diminish mine. You’re not a woman are you? ;)
I’ll just respond re the top two in your list because I don’t claim to have the encyclopaedic knowledge of the formations of many teams down to League 1, and if you do, you probably need to get out more.
Liverpool do have two strikers – and two bloody good ones at that – but they do not play as a conventional front two, as in the old typical 442 formation with two wide men – or wingers – which is what our friend Donny has been talking about.
As for City, well you can have that one, for two reasons:
a) they hardly fall into the same category as other teams do they and in any case, again, they play far more fluidly than just as a conventional front two. Granted, at least when Dzeko and Aguerro play together, there is a big ‘un and a little ‘un which Donny might recognise from his old Shoot! magazines.
b) I said “almost nobody” plays that way which implies exceptions. I accept that I didn’t make this clear by putting it in bold; but had I done so, you would probably only have removed it.
There! Didn’t insult anybody there, did I? Very sarcastic, I grant you, but a) that’s me and b) so was yours.[/quote]
Your proposed sabbatical didn’t last very long.
You claimed and have done for a while that 2 up front is consigned to history, my list sort of muddies the water of your opinion would you not think?
Doesn’t matter about the personnel, team or formation whether its 2 wingers, wing backs or fullbacks getting forward all those teams play 2 out and out strikers and they are the highest scoring teams and title challengers or leaders in all three leagues.[/quote]
A majority of teams in the Premier League play the same formation that we do – including the team currently at the top of the league and the one in third place.
Liverpool certainly don’t play a conventional 4-4-2, and for large parts of the season when either Suarez or Sturridge have been injured, they’ve played with one up front.
City have also varied it with 1, 2 and even 3 up front.
So it would appear that playing 4-4-2 doesn’t necesarily mean you’ll win more games than those who don’t play it.
Do you still have an outside toilet and send your kids down the mines, too?
The lone striker approach has got nothing to do with Martinez, stop being so obsessed!!! Almost nobody plays with 2 strikers and 2 wingers as your mate Donny Dark Ages is advocating. Mind you, he thought McEachran was shite so all he is doing with each post he makes is demonstrating how far out of step he is with most other people’s opinions.Man City 68
Liverpool 58Leicester 52
Burnley 42
Derby 57
Forest 46
Reading 47Brentford 51
Wolves 49
Orient 59
Rotherham 51Leading scorers in top three divisions, all play 2 up front, look at the league tables where they are.
They may not play wingers on both flanks but use full backs to get forward and that fill that roll, but it shows that “having an outside toilet” can be quite successful.[/quote]
Well done there, not “bolding” the bit about playing 2 wingers as well as two strikers to competely suit your argument and diminish mine. You’re not a woman are you? ;)
I’ll just respond re the top two in your list because I don’t claim to have the encyclopaedic knowledge of the formations of many teams down to League 1, and if you do, you probably need to get out more.
Liverpool do have two strikers – and two bloody good ones at that – but they do not play as a conventional front two, as in the old typical 442 formation with two wide men – or wingers – which is what our friend Donny has been talking about.
As for City, well you can have that one, for two reasons:
a) they hardly fall into the same category as other teams do they and in any case, again, they play far more fluidly than just as a conventional front two. Granted, at least when Dzeko and Aguerro play together, there is a big ‘un and a little ‘un which Donny might recognise from his old Shoot! magazines.
b) I said “almost nobody” plays that way which implies exceptions. I accept that I didn’t make this clear by putting it in bold; but had I done so, you would probably only have removed it.
There! Didn’t insult anybody there, did I? Very sarcastic, I grant you, but a) that’s me and b) so was yours.[/quote]
Your proposed sabbatical didn’t last very long.
You claimed and have done for a while that 2 up front is consigned to history, my list sort of muddies the water of your opinion would you not think?
Doesn’t matter about the personnel, team or formation whether its 2 wingers, wing backs or fullbacks getting forward all those teams play 2 out and out strikers and they are the highest scoring teams and title challengers or leaders in all three leagues.[/quote]
A majority of teams in the Premier League play the same formation that we do – including the team currently at the top of the league and the one in third place.
Liverpool certainly don’t play a conventional 4-4-2, and for large parts of the season when either Suarez or Sturridge have been injured, they’ve played with one up front.
City have also varied it with 1, 2 and even 3 up front.
So it would appear that playing 4-4-2 doesn’t necesarily mean you’ll win more games than those who don’t play it.
I hate to rain on your parade Standish but you and your mate griff may not have realised just yet, we are not in the premier league any longer and from where I sit the all the teams at the top of our league are scoring goals and playing two strikers in tandem.
If you have two good goal scorers, it is probably a good idea to play them together.
We have a large squad of midfield players, several of whom have experience of the Premier League. I did hope that our strength in midfield would allow us to play two forwards in the Championship this season. Unfortunately, we’ve lost McCarthy (permanently) and Maloney (for most of the season) and haven’t had two forwards who can score regularly. (We haven’t even had one!)
Teams reach the top of their league for many reasons. One good goal scorer is usually necessary, two may well be better. But the top teams may have bigger and better squads too. They may have better players in midfield and defence, allowing them to play two men up front.
I enjoyed the match last night immensely. Mourinho produced a disciplined performance from a team probably less gifted than their opponents. Chelsea played a flexible 3-3-3-1, with Eto’o as the single conventional forward. Manchester City played 4-4-2, with Negredo and Dzeko as the two forwards. Chelsea emerged the clear winners.
I think I would agree with Michael Owen when he said,
“Manchester City should be unbeatable. They are the best team in the league by a mile but I am afraid you can’t play at the top level playing 4-4-2.
“You can swat away 95% of teams playing it as most teams are average but what happens when Chelsea or Munich come to town?”
I hate to rain on your parade Standish but you and your mate griff may not have realised just yet, we are not in the premier league any longer and from where I sit the all the teams at the top of our league are scoring goals and playing two strikers in tandem.Yes, I did notice we were relegated last year, but only because I was able to move my seat to a more central, even less vocal area of the West Stand.
I used these Premier League figures as they are the most readily available, and disprove the theory that the most successful teams play 4-4-2, score more goals, and therefore fare much better in the league. I also tend to watch more Premier League game because of the TV coverage.
I don’t have the data available for the Championship, but I do know that outside the Championship, League One and League Two, there aren’t that many teams across Europe who play 4-4-2.
Had Coyle not given everyone a ten point start, we may have been doing a bit better with Rosler’s one-up-front tactics.
I would say that we haven’t done too well in the past when we have adopted a lone striker role ! Now I don’t really care what formation we play as long as it isn’t one that has us with said lone striker struggling on his own up front !
This long standing obsession of 2 up front is a perfect example of Wiganer’s being ten years behind the rest of the world…
I called for 2 strikers under Coyle as it would of suited his hit and hope schoolyard football “style” but whatever Rosler has changed it is certainly for the better so lets leave it to him for now.
But lets hope it doesn’t take 3 years to sink in again that we are back to playing a front three!!!!!!!!
If you are ever confused about the above there is a simple test you can do.
Comapare where Mcmanaman and Mclean were in possession of the ball under Coyle to where they are in the possession of the ball now.
Hey presto your wingers just became forwards.
Your proposed sabbatical didn’t last very long.I never actually said when it would start. But as usual, you have read things that weren’t written and/or not read things that were.
You claimed and have done for a while that 2 up front is consigned to history, my list sort of muddies the water of your opinion would you not think?“Almost nobody” plays that way was the phrase I used, not “consigned to history”. But you crack on, just make shit up like you always do.
Doesn’t matter about the personnel, team or formation whether its 2 wingers, wing backs or fullbacks getting forward all those teams play 2 out and out strikers and they are the highest scoring teams and title challengers or leaders in all three leagues.Maybe it doesn’t to you, but I was addressing the specific desire of Donny for us to play with two strikers and two wingers. But again, that would require you to read what was written rather than make up stuff to suit your argument.
Bored now. Standish, WGTB and others seem to have got it and are in the process od successfully blowing a hole in your opinion or whatever other over the top, ridiculous phrase it was that you used.
Your proposed sabbatical didn’t last very long.
I never actually said when it would start. But as usual, you have read things that weren’t written and/or not read things that were.
You claimed and have done for a while that 2 up front is consigned to history, my list sort of muddies the water of your opinion would you not think?“Almost nobody” plays that way was the phrase I used, not “consigned to history”. But you crack on, just make shit up like you always do.
Doesn’t matter about the personnel, team or formation whether its 2 wingers, wing backs or fullbacks getting forward all those teams play 2 out and out strikers and they are the highest scoring teams and title challengers or leaders in all three leagues.Maybe it doesn’t to you, but I was addressing the specific desire of Donny for us to play with two strikers and two wingers. But again, that would require you to read what was written rather than make up stuff to suit your argument.
Bored now. Standish, WGTB and others seem to have got it and are in the process od successfully blowing a hole in your opinion or whatever other over the top, ridiculous phrase it was that you used.[/quote]
Plenty accusations of what I have and haven’t read or digested yet you do the same in your very last statement about my opinion, when you don’t have a clue what my opinion is.
My contribution in this debate is about you and your opinions and the way you dismiss with sarcasm or insults anyone who differs from you, so I pointed out all the teams that are playing a front two and the success they are having doing so, despite anything you claim.If you want to know my preferred line up or formation it is exactly the same as what Martinez wanted to play – in general a mobile front 3 with no player tied to a fixed role like we played with Kone, McManaman and Maloney or the season before with Moses, Di Santo and Maloney, but as Martinez also said he also didn’t want to be tied to any one system and unlike you neither do I.
My contribution in this debate is about you and your opinions and the way you dismiss with sarcasm or insults anyone who differs from you, so I pointed out all the teams that are playing a front two and the success they are having doing so, despite anything you claim.If you want to know my preferred line up or formation it is exactly the same as what Martinez wanted to play – in general a mobile front 3 with no player tied to a fixed role like we played with Kone, McManaman and Maloney or the season before with Moses, Di Santo and Maloney, but as Martinez also said he also didn’t want to be tied to any one system and unlike you neither do I.
Why the fuck would I be interested in what you think?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
