• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* English Football Season 2005-06

BoyBrumby

Englishman
I really wasn't convinced by the 4-5-1 gubbins for us yesterday. Nor, for that matter, was I convinced about Sven's protestations that it was "all my own work, honestly guv..."; Sven is an absolute, dyed-in-the-wool 4-4-2 man. I thought it was a bit of slap in the face to Defoe too, who's started the season v well (and this from an Arsenal fan, so you know I don't praise their players lightly!) & looks ready-made replacement for Mickey O.

What I predicated actually happened, we had shed-loads of possession but didn't create anything like enough chances. At HT the possession was 81%-19% in our favour! I can't ever recall stats like those in any game, yet our only clear-cut chance was Rooney's effort which the Welsh keeper did v well with.

Our goal had more than a slice of jam about it (massive deflection) & then when we are ahead Sven hauls off Wright-Phillips for Defoe and we're back to 4-4-2! We seemed to spend the last 10 minutes or so hanging-on rather more than I would've liked to see, but all-in-all, the 3 points were the crucial thing.
 

Craig

World Traveller
Name me one Swede who doesn't like 4-4-2?

I think it is an automatic thing in the coaching schools over there?
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Craig said:
Name me one Swede who doesn't like 4-4-2?

I think it is an automatic thing in the coaching schools over there?
Very possibly, which makes me think all the more that it was "player-power" that got things moved over to the five in the middle we saw yesterday. I think Sven needs to tell Becks, Gerrard, Fat Frank & Rio (or whoever the players' reps were) a few home-truths about who picks the team.

Moreover, Rooney's game isn't suited to playing as a lone striker. His best postion is always going to be behind that out-and-out striker.
 

twctopcat

International Regular
I don't see formation being the issue here at all, a rather fruitless argument. It is merely a question of motivating these club players to play well for England, something which very few of them ever seem to do. Somebody needs to clone Vince Lombardi because Sven couldn't motivate a lion to hunt in a pack of Wildebeests.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
twctopcat said:
I don't see formation being the issue here at all, a rather fruitless argument. It is merely a question of motivating these club players to play well for England, something which very few of them ever seem to do. Somebody needs to clone Vince Lombardi because Sven couldn't motivate a lion to hunt in a pack of Wildebeests.
Fair enough point about motivation, although I still maintain 4-4-2 is the best formation for the players we have, but if players need motivation to play for England then they shouldn't be picked!

Also I suspect Sven has more steel in his soul than we give him credit for. I doubt anyone could be as successful as him without it.
 

Craig

World Traveller
BoyBrumby said:
Very possibly, which makes me think all the more that it was "player-power" that got things moved over to the five in the middle we saw yesterday. I think Sven needs to tell Becks, Gerrard, Fat Frank & Rio (or whoever the players' reps were) a few home-truths about who picks the team.
And I think you can apply that to many cases about player's having too much of an influence in not just football but in a lot of sports (one of the rumours is that Roberto Carlos and his mates have had their way in having a manager sacked by RM).

That is way Brian Clough was/is my favourite all-time managers, he went in and told them who was boss (even to the board) and if a player didn't like it, he was gone (personally I think banning him training and playing until he changes his ways is better then selling him is what he wants. And if he has a long term contract he would buck up his ideas as after not playing or training for 2 seasons he will be of no use to anybody).
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Craig said:
And I think you can apply that to many cases about player's having too much of an influence in not just football but in a lot of sports (one of the rumours is that Roberto Carlos and his mates have had their way in having a manager sacked by RM).

That is way Brian Clough was/is my favourite all-time managers, he went in and told them who was boss (even to the board) and if a player didn't like it, he was gone (personally I think banning him training and playing until he changes his ways is better then selling him is what he wants. And if he has a long term contract he would buck up his ideas as after not playing or training for 2 seasons he will be of no use to anybody).
a club would never dare do that toa big player, their contracts are far to expensive to attempt such a feat.
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
Craig said:
Name me one Swede who doesn't like 4-4-2?

I think it is an automatic thing in the coaching schools over there?
so what? its a tried and tested formation that has proven time and time again that it works well.
 

Craig

World Traveller
It was a joke mate in refrence as 4-4-2 is favoured by the Swedish national team for years and how it is favoured by all things Swedish football.

*shakes head in disbelief*
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
i often use a tool called sarcasm, many say its the lowest form of wit, but yet craig falls for it every time. poor lad *pat on head* ;)
 

steds

Hall of Fame Member
I didn't think sarcasm was supposed to sound realistic, or no one would realise you're using the lowest form of wit?
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
well i suppose it could be a really sophisticated form of the lowest form of witt in which you are convincly sarcastic and therefore sarcastic in a way that no one realised and thefore it is no longer the lowest form of wit
 

Top