Out of position

[Super_Ally 0]

Fabio Capello plays James Milner, who plays right mid for his club, at left midfield. In the last fixture prior to the Brazil game he finished the match at left back.

 

Walter Smith gets pilloried for playing Lafferty (as one of numerous examples) "out of position".

 

So what i'm wondering is, seeing as all mangers do this (see SAF playing Fergie out on the left often last year), is it acceptable when your winning and not when you aren't getting results then?

[pete 2,511]

Fabio Capello plays James Milner, who plays right mid for his club, at left midfield. In the last fixture prior to the Brazil game he finished the match at left back.

 

Walter Smith gets pilloried for playing Lafferty (as one of numerous examples) "out of position".

 

So what i'm wondering is, seeing as all mangers do this (see SAF playing Fergie out on the left often last year), is it acceptable when your winning and not when you aren't getting results then?

 

If you change and win you are a hero if you fail you are a zero. That is not just football Ally that is life.

[Super_Ally 0]

If you change and win you are a hero if you fail you are a zero. That is not just football Ally that is life.

 

Aye, probably sums it up. Just funny what you "get away" with when you're winning compared to when you don't. And sometimes the only difference is luck.

[pete 2,511]

Aye, probably sums it up. Just funny what you "get away" with when you're winning compared to when you don't.

And sometimes the only difference is luck

.

 

Totally agree in fact not only sometimes but mostly.

[gisabeer 409]

Not in smiths case. he plays multitudes of players out of position when he has other more obvious options available. more often than not the players tend to struggle with being played out of position under smith yet he continually perseveres with the shuffling. lafferty is a perfect example of smiths tinkerings.

[maineflyer 0]

Aye, probably sums it up. Just funny what you "get away" with when you're winning compared to when you don't. And sometimes the only difference is luck.

 

Yes but maybe one manager's change is a good change and the other's is a bad change. Not all changes are the same changes.

[Super_Ally 0]

Yes but maybe one manager's change is a good change and the other's is a bad change. Not all changes are the same changes.

 

Look at Mourinho. In one game early in his Chelsea career he made all 3 subs at half time. They turned the game and won the match. On another day though, a player may have got injured and they'd have been down to ten man.

 

A good change is only such when it works out, obviously. But sometimes you can make the right change and not get the right result.

 

I think gisa has a point. Smith does seem to stick with players out of position when it clearly isn't working, such as Lafferty. But it appears all managers do it.

[Gazza_8 233]

I think it's different when a manager plays 3 or 4 players out of position from a manager who plays 1 player out of position.

[Super_Ally 0]

I think it's different when a manager plays 3 or 4 players out of position from a manager who plays 1 player out of position.

 

True. I didn't really look to see if Milner was the only one though. It was just a thought that occured to when I heard that point mentioned watching the Brazil game and Milner is a player I like.

[Totti 0]

Fabio Capello plays James Milner, who plays right mid for his club, at left midfield. In the last fixture prior to the Brazil game he finished the match at left back.

 

Walter Smith gets pilloried for playing Lafferty (as one of numerous examples) "out of position".

 

So what i'm wondering is, seeing as all mangers do this (see SAF playing Fergie out on the left often last year), is it acceptable when your winning and not when you aren't getting results then?

Silly post.

 

James Milner is a versatile (and crucially good) player who can play anywhere in midfield, and is comfortable on either sides of the wing. Not to mention this was a friendly, where the result is irrelevant and the idea is to move things around and be flexible.

 

Smith plays players compeltely out of position even if it doesn't work (which it rarely does).

 

Lets not forget at any one time Smith can have us playing centre backs at fullback, fullbacks at centre back, central midfielders out wide, strikers on the wing...

 

There's nothing wrong with trying a player in another position or doing it as a stopgap. The problem is Smith does it all the time, all over the park, causing great confusion. He also STICKS with players playing out of position, even if it doesn't work. Has Lafferty ever looked good on the left? Has Stevie Smith? If Stevie Smith had any chance of becoming a good player again, being stuck out to dry out of position is ruining his hopes. It's like SAF (to continue that analogy, don't get the Fergie out of position point though) playing Gary Neville on the wing, even with adverse performances. It just wouldn't happen.

FFS, even Christian Daily has played up front for us.

Edited November 18, 2009 by Totti