England vs Bulgaria
- Thread starter Ride The Walrus
- Start date
- Replies 184
- Views 10K
the thing about Uruguay's 4-4-2 is, essentially, it was so much more than a 4-4-2, their two central midfielders operated almost like the double-pivot midfield you see in modern 4-2-3-1's, that combined with forlan dropping deep off suarez, practically made it a 4-2-3-1. Although, i'd stick my kneck out here, and say that the Uruguay boss was on the best tacticians at the world cup, as he changed his tactics suitably for different games/opposition, to brilliant effect...
D
Deleted member 79730
Guest
disappointed not to see Johnson, if Barry, Milner and Johnson keep playing for man city, thats very good for England, they link well and i think Capello could have possibly tried it, ahh well good luck to walcott none the less.
All these people saying they wont watch England disgust me, i live in America and ive just paid 12 dollars (about 8 pounds) to watch the game, if its your country you should do all you can to watch the game.
EDIT: Theres nothing wrong with 4-4-2. so can we stop this boring debate now? gets old.
All these people saying they wont watch England disgust me, i live in America and ive just paid 12 dollars (about 8 pounds) to watch the game, if its your country you should do all you can to watch the game.
EDIT: Theres nothing wrong with 4-4-2. so can we stop this boring debate now? gets old.
Someone's been reading their zonalmarking.
Really, the point I made didn't really scratch the surface. See all of madsheep and andy townsend's points - much more in depth and echo my thoughts on the subject.
D
Deleted member 79730
Guest
Ill make a quick point, Harry Redknapp plays 4-4-2 every game, look at the world class jobs hes done with the teams he has managed, ferguson uses 4-4-2 sometimes, im finding it confusing to see whos arguing on which side.Someone's been reading their zonalmarking.
Really, the point I made didn't really scratch the surface. See all of madsheep and andy townsend's points - much more in depth and echo my thoughts on the subject.
this little spell is exactly what i mean, we didnt get anywhere near this kind of movement before south africa. now its about the thinking of the players, less is more in this case. he has set up a framework in which the players should do their natural thing
Someone's been reading their zonalmarking.
Really, the point I made didn't really scratch the surface. See all of madsheep and andy townsend's points - much more in depth and echo my thoughts on the subject.
i have been reading zonal marking, but i knew most of that anyway (H) and tbf, Andy Townsend talks **** half of the time...
D
Deleted member 79730
Guest
ive always said, the formation is just a framework, which is why i say nothing is wrong with a 4-4-2, this one looks more fluid and more freedom is being used, you could play a fluid 6-3-1 if you wanted, as i said, its just a framework.
N
nilelg5
Guest
Who's vice captain, Barry?
Probably. Either him or Wazza.
maybe so, but its 4-4-2 vs 4-4-2. very different to a 3 man mid where its more important
---------- Post added at 08:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:37 PM ----------
dont get me wrong though. i would be very happy to be proved wrong as it can only be good for england
D
Deleted member 79730
Guest
ive noticed something, when England have the ball, a diamond is formed sometimes, with gerrard playing deeper than barry oO)
When would Gerrard ever play Centre Mid in a midfield 3?
sorry that should be against a 3 man mid, but also for liverpool, when cole plays amc
lol. as ive said its 4-4-2 vs 4-4-2 though. different kettle of fish. i could end up eating a lot of humble pie at the end of this but if it leads to a great england performance i dont careEngland 1-0 Bulgaria
Gerrard 1-0 Madsheep
---------- Post added at 09:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 PM ----------
that would have been a lovely goal
Last edited: