Machiavelli
Well-known member
As with [MENTION=35332]Beanstalk[/MENTION], this is an excellent and comprehensive overview. I learnt a lot more reading this than the original link.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Chris Hughton masterclass
- Thread starter bardo
- Start date
As with [MENTION=35332]Beanstalk[/MENTION], this is an excellent and comprehensive overview. I learnt a lot more reading this than the original link.
You need to read more @BG[emoji23][emoji23]
What is the book called?
Our selective pressing and not losing the ball seemed to come as a bit of a shock to Man U. I don't think it will surprise other teams. Watford adapted quite quickly as we lost the ball too often.
Last edited:
Garry Nelson's Left Foot
Well-known member
Yep. On this one he's not far off being right. Put it down to the broken clock if you must.
Yep. This link is excellent.
Total Football: A Graphic History of The World's Most Iconic Soccer Tactics by Sanjeev Shetty and published by Aurum Press.
Loved every second working on it.
Yep, you've got it.
Be warned though, if you disagree with someone and they've got nothing to backup their argument, they'll blame your multi-quotes and say you've deliberately distorted what they said because you have an agenda.
brightn'ove
cringe
I would actually pay to read this.
BensGrandad
New member
I have never said we would play 5 at the back only in perhaps odd away games, in fact I have suggested that we will copy England and Southgate and play 3 and after the performance of Balogun IMHO when Dunk is fir again that is what CH will try.
Perkino
Well-known member
- Dec 11, 2009
- 5,986
England under Southgate have only played 5 at the back. And in doing so they sacrifice any real creativity from wide midfielders. We now have 4 pacey and tricky wingers, I will be gobsmacked if CH ever names a line up without 2 wingers it is essential to his footballing philosophy
TSB
Captain Hindsight
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Exactly. For some reason, three/five at the back was pretty central to the discussion on the pre-season Albion Roar. Despite the fact that we have just three centre backs in our squad. And four wingers. And five full backs. Not to mention that, with the exception of 'matching up' against Chelsea, CH has consistently played four at the back, and has indicated that all of his preferred formations have four at the back.
BensGrandad
New member
What games have you been watching in the World Cup? England played 3-5-2 with Walker Stones and Maguire as the 3 with Trippier and Young as wingbacks in the 5 . Man City did the same v Huddersfield on Saturday and I am sure CH will consider it at some point with Balogun, Duffy and Dunk as the 3 and either Montoya/Bruno and Bernardo/Bong being the wing backs.
Just to make things very clear, we will never play five at the back with two advancing wing-backs, three at the back is simply suicide. Two at the back with advancing full backs is a Moanrho Death Wish.
Four players are optimum for covering the width of the pitch. This does not rule out a notional three/five at the back, with one full back advancing at a time, which effectively leaves four at the back at any one time. Or conceivably we could play three central defenders with one of them playing the ancient attacking centre half system moving into midfield. So any combination of 4-4-1-1 or 4-2-3-1 with a very occasional 4-3-3. Classic 4-3-3 just has one winger.
Last edited:
HastingsSeagull
Well-known member
Thanks for the links, some good articles to show my under 15s on those sites.
Gully Forever
Well-known member
- May 9, 2011
- 1,539
Great site that, thanks. I really wanted to see if they had covered the Watford match, It would be interesting to read if the tactics were wrong or it was the players attitude, commitment.
Whitechapel
Famous Last Words
Perseus and BensGrandad arguing about football...
Things are about to get really, really stupid.
Things are about to get really, really stupid.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
My reading of the Watford game is that they were just better at the gegenpress than we were, causing us to abandon it before a quarter of the game had expired, and also caused our passing radar to misfire.
As bad as we were in that game, Watford were very good and -- just as with United vs us -- the scoreline flattered us. They've quickly quoshed talk of being relegation favourites; few teams beat Burnley at home.
I think Knockaert and Pröpper gave the ball away too often at Watford. Tend to agree after 25 minutes Watford got the upper hand for a mixture of reasons. Still the first goal was a disaster, and the second one came about making a hash of playing out of defence.
Gegenpressing works best against full backs, so much so that the team with inadequate full backs will go down in 17th place!
Hearsay says Watford won at Burnley against the run of play. I thought there was no reason that Watford or Burnley would be any worse this season than last.
Last edited: