FAO Chris Davies re: less width (12 replies)
0
84
Hi Chris, thanks for listening to me and ignoring the 85% of idiot posters on here and the 100% of posters on Facebook.
Whilst they all clamour for more width and getting to the by-line (which we don't have the players to do), playing with wingers as wingers, AND they all talk in terms of a conventional 10, instead you went with my view.
4-1-4-1 when defending
3-2-4-1 when attacking
closing down the options for the opposition to play through us and over us when we are pressing, filling those gaps where we were leaving ourselves vulnerable and then, when attacking, positioning the midfielders to allow the ball to come inside rather than going outside.
As i said, it allows us to get forward much much quicker and we can take those risks a little more knowing that any turnovers are swamped.
PS .. to the posters ... both times now .... stick your abuse up your arse - you haven't got a feckin' clue.
Whilst they all clamour for more width and getting to the by-line (which we don't have the players to do), playing with wingers as wingers, AND they all talk in terms of a conventional 10, instead you went with my view.
4-1-4-1 when defending
3-2-4-1 when attacking
closing down the options for the opposition to play through us and over us when we are pressing, filling those gaps where we were leaving ourselves vulnerable and then, when attacking, positioning the midfielders to allow the ball to come inside rather than going outside.
As i said, it allows us to get forward much much quicker and we can take those risks a little more knowing that any turnovers are swamped.
PS .. to the posters ... both times now .... stick your abuse up your arse - you haven't got a feckin' clue.