5 at the back

[Tuerto]

Re: 5 at the back

Yeah, Rodon not fouling Pulisic on halfway when we got done in exactly that scenario late against the Dutch was really poor, you could see that goal coming the second he got turned by Sargent. Complete lack of situational awareness.

Agreed, although USA still had a bit to do, brilliant run and pass for the goal.

[Divine Wright]

Re: 5 at the back

Started reading then saw "Ninja"......**** that for a laugh.........

3-0 to Wales was your prediction wasn't it :hehe:

[Ninja]

Re: 5 at the back

Started reading then saw "Ninja"......**** that for a laugh.........

3-0 to Wales was your prediction wasn't it :hehe:

Had we won 3-0, you'd not be here gloating like the end of a bell now would you?

[Divine Wright]

Re: 5 at the back

Had we won 3-0, you'd not be here gloating like the end of a bell now would you?

You probably wouldn't be deflecting by starting a thread about Page's crap tactics would you ?

This is not real though, is it ?

Just do some research next time.

...and be happy, 1-1 is a decent result.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Re: 5 at the back

...and be happy, 1-1 is a decent result.

Depends if you thought qualification from the group is possible.

[Ninja]

Re: 5 at the back

You probably wouldn't be deflecting by starting a thread about Page's crap tactics would you ?

This is not real though, is it ?

Just do some research next time.

...and be happy, 1-1 is a decent result.

If you consider 1-1 a decent result, and 5 at the back acceptable, I think you need to get your bell polished. I'll lend you some brasso :thumbup:

We were bent over in that first half because of 5 at the back.
Had we started out more aggressively, 2 or 3 nil would have been very realistic.

[blue matt]

Re: 5 at the back

If you consider 1-1 a decent result, and 5 at the back acceptable, I think you need to get your bell polished. I'll lend you some brasso :thumbup:

We were bent over in that first half because of 5 at the back.
Had we started out more aggressively, 2 or 3 nil would have been very realistic.

It wasnt really 5 at the back though, the 2 wing backs turn into wingers when we get the ball, so its 3 at the back then

the trouble is in the 1st 1/2 was we couldnt get out of our 1/2 / hold the ball up and the wing backs do what they do

2nd have with KM then wing backs became wingers for most of the game as we had more of the ball , which meant 3 at the back

[Ninja]

Re: 5 at the back

It wasnt really 5 at the back though, the 2 wing backs turn into wingers when we get the ball, so its 3 at the back then

the trouble is in the 1st 1/2 was we couldnt get out of our 1/2 / hold the ball up and the wing backs do what they do

2nd have with KM then wing backs became wingers for most of the game as we had more of the ball , which meant 3 at the back

Whether you consider it a back 3 or back 5, it still leaves us short in midfield. I suspect he's doing it because our centre-backs are so piss-poor, so I get why, but I think it's suicidal against any half decent team.
You're inviting them to control the game completely by allowing them to overrun you in midfield.

That first half was terrible.
Moore and Johnson both benched ffs, Johnson looks our most dangerous player at the minute and Moore is a no-brainer.

Page got it very badly wrong yesterday in my humble opinion.
Let's hope he doesn't pull that shit against England.

[Pedro de la Rosa]

Re: 5 at the back

Whether you consider it a back 3 or back 5, it still leaves us short in midfield. I suspect he's doing it because our centre-backs are so piss-poor, so I get why, but I think it's suicidal against any half decent team.
You're inviting them to control the game completely by allowing them to overrun you in midfield.

That first half was terrible.
Moore and Johnson both benched ffs, Johnson looks our most dangerous player at the minute and Moore is a no-brainer.

Page got it very badly wrong yesterday in my humble opinion.
Let's hope he doesn't pull that shit against England.

If you want to play Johnson and Moore, who are you dropping? I don't think you can play those two, Ramsey and Bale. We'd be far too open.

[Ninja]

Re: 5 at the back

If you want to play Johnson and Moore, who are you dropping? I don't think you can play those two, Ramsey and Bale. We'd be far too open.

Daniel James.
I'd go 4-2-3-1, Ramsey in a central 2 with Allen or Ampadu, Wilson, Bale and Johnson as a 3, and Moore up front.

[City123]

Re: 5 at the back

It's 3 at the back. Problem this evening was that our wing backs couldn't get out and play. They're pivotal in how we play. The first half was like watching a Steve Morison side. 2nd half changed simply because the ball stuck up front, allowing players to get into advanced positions. Rodon is a bit thick, isn't he. Got pulled in a few times, and whenever i see him he's making those stretching last ditch challenges that look brilliant and get fans creaming, yet it speaks to me of a Defender who puts himself in poor positions and has to play catch up. Ampadu is sometimes guilty of it when he plays in midfield.

Rodon is a poor defender, constantly out of position and drawn in by forwards. He's slow mentally and physically, his bravery is his only saving grace as it sees him putting in those blocks and challenges.
He's lucky we play with 2 other centre halves, imagine him in a back 4!

Mepham is the better player, I've maintained this for a while and he's starting to prove it with some impressive performances with Bournemouth

[City123]

Re: 5 at the back

If you want to play Johnson and Moore, who are you dropping? I don't think you can play those two, Ramsey and Bale. We'd be far too open.

I think you may able to get away with it if we go with a back 4 and those 4 as forwards, but the midfield 2 would have to be incredibly disciplined and on it all game, who partners Ampadu in there?

[chrisp_1927]

Re: 5 at the back

I think we have the perfect player to make 5 at the back work. Get Ampadu in the centre of that defence. He's got the awareness and talent to step into midfield as and when he is needed. Neco Is brilliant going forward and Roberts has so much energy that I think the wing back system does suit us.

[Divine Wright]

Re: 5 at the back

If you consider 1-1 a decent result, and 5 at the back acceptable, I think you need to get your bell polished. I'll lend you some brasso :thumbup:

We were bent over in that first half because of 5 at the back.
Had we started out more aggressively, 2 or 3 nil would have been very realistic.

Come back to the real world. They were better than us. You were wrong.

[UNDERHILL1927]

Re: 5 at the back

Bore off with your negativity mate

You’re all over these threads like a tramp on chips with negativity. Boring.

Negativity or factual and realistic opinion? It’s a fine line and sadly my fears were proven to be true.