Search results

I was really impressed with Webster, great feet, doesn't panic. Can see why we paid big bucks for him. The flexibility Webster and Burn are giving us is great, far from 4 centre backs, we have real alternatives across the back line as Saturday showed.

When I said asymmetrical what I mean was while Webster went to a more traditional right back, on the left Burn still remained more of a wing back. I agree with your points as it happened, I just didn't see it as a 'traditional' back 4 as didn't really see Burn playing full back in the same way...

:facepalm::dunce: I'm losing it Jerry!

It was very fluid, and using that brilliant architectural word, 'asymmetrical' for much of the time and didn't really fit into our typical symmetrical notations of a formation. That's why the Guardian write up saying 'Brighton switch to a back 4 on the half hour' is a bit misleading really...

Good read again. I didn't really see it as a back 4, it all just seemed very asymmetrical to allow March a more advanced role, Maupay and Murray to play closer together, and Gross freed to try to knit things together. Burn played much higher than Webster who remained a sort of full back /...