Old School Formation.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Inside right, that would be like a Steven Naismith kind of role no ? not quite a striker but not quite a winger ?

 

 

Much appreciated BH, It would be cool to see if we can get it to work.

 

I did a search for the pyramid you mention and it displayed this.

 

 

looks about right....

 

yet another interesting formation.

 

look forward to it.

 

Apparently the "pyramid" was the 2-3-5; what you have shown is the WM formation!

 

The WM system was created in the mid-1920s by Herbert Chapman of Arsenal to counter a change in the offside law in 1925. The change had reduced the number of opposition players that attackers needed between themselves and the goal-line from three to two. This led to the introduction of a centre-back to stop the opposing centre-forward, and tried to balance defensive and offensive playing. The formation became so successful that by the late-1930s most English clubs had adopted the WM. Retrospectively, the WM has either been described as a 3–2–5 or as a 3–4–3, or more precisely a 3–2–2–3 reflecting the letters which symbolised it. The Gap in the centre of the formation between the two wing halves and the two inside forwards, allowed Arsenal to counter-attack effectively. The W-M was subsequently adapted by several English sides, but none could apply it in quite the same way Chapman had. This was mainly due to the comparative rarity of Alex James in the English game. He was one of the earliest playmakers in the history of the game, and the hub around which Chapman's Arsenal revolved. (Wikipedia).

 

More later.........

 

This might give you something else to pass the time https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=football+formations&hl=en&qscrl=1&rlz=1T4DSGQ_en___GB502&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=WABlUp_pFoOe0QWdpoHQDw&ved=0CD4QsAQ&biw=1600&bih=721

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

I always have had a thought that the formation should be balanced out over the pitch, 3-4-3 being the most obvious. Wigan showed in spells last season that when playing it right its effective.

3 at the back works well for the odd Serie A team or Chile under Bielsa but 99% of the time a back four is vastly superior.

 

3 at the back is often something you see managers do when they are completely and utterly out of ideas. Man City were dire last season when they deployed it.

[Super Cooper 0]

Inside right, that would be like a Steven Naismith kind of role no ? not quite a striker but not quite a winger ?

 

 

Much appreciated BH, It would be cool to see if we can get it to work.

 

I did a search for the pyramid you mention and it displayed this.

 

 

looks about right....

 

yet another interesting formation.

 

look forward to it.

 

Inside right was very similar to that inside forward position on the right. Behind the striker and inside a right winger. It felt almost like an attacking RCM with no defending duties!

[Little General 80]

I was an inside right in primary school.

 

I played there as well as inside left.

There was a lot more emphasis on attacking football then. I played during 70's.

[Little General 80]

Now, who to play where???

 

GK:Brown

Right back:Young

Left back:Shaw

Centre Half:Woodburn

Right Half:McColl,

Left Half:Cox

Right Winger:Waddell

Inside Right: Duncanson

Centre Forward:Thornton

Inside Left: Williamson

Left Winger:Rutherford

 

First Treble winning team 1948/49:champs:

[compo 6,964]

as long as you score one more goal than the other team your laughing .

[54andcounting 0]

GK:Brown

Right back:Young

Left back:Shaw

Centre Half:Woodburn

Right Half:McColl,

Left Half:Cox

Right Winger:Waddell

Inside Right: Duncanson

Centre Forward:Thornton

Inside Left: Williamson

Left Winger:Rutherford

 

First Treble winning team 1948/49:champs:

 

Also the positions determined what shirt number the players wore...

 

The 1966 Scottish Cup winning team for example:

 

Goalie (1) Billy Ritchie

Right Back (2) Kai Johansen

Left Back (3) David Provan

Right Half (4) John Greig

Centre Half (5) Ronnie McKinnon

Left Half (6) Bobby Watson

Right Winger (7) Willie Henderson

Inside Right (8) George McLean

Centre Forward (9) Jimmy Millar

Inside Left (10) Willie Johnston

Left Winger (11) Davie Wilson

 

This was after a 0-0 draw in the first match, in which Jim Forrest played Centre Forward (9). Jimmy Miller was Inside Right (8).

Stein replaced his Right Back (2) for the replay, we kept ours - the rest is history

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Also the positions determined what shirt number the players wore...

 

The 1966 Scottish Cup winning team for example:

 

Goalie (1) Billy Ritchie

Right Back (2) Kai Johansen

Left Back (3) David Provan

Right Half (4) John Greig

Centre Half (5) Ronnie McKinnon

Left Half (6) Bobby Watson

Right Winger (7) Willie Henderson

Inside Right (8) George McLean

Centre Forward (9) Jimmy Millar

Inside Left (10) Willie Johnston

Left Winger (11) Davie Wilson

 

This was after a 0-0 draw in the first match, in which Jim Forrest played Centre Forward (9). Jimmy Miller was Inside Right (8).

Stein replaced his Right Back (2) for the replay, we kept ours - the rest is history

 

Thanks for the memory; I was a teenager high up on the Hampden terracing that night and have often desribed the last 20 minutes after Kai Johnasen scored, as the longest 20 minutes of my life.

[Guest Night Owl]

lol Thanks for the input people I'm enjoying this thread.

 

I don't really see why It wouldn't be possible to play a vintage formation, the key would be having the right players and understanding how the formation moved and performed in action.

 

 

 

^ This is looks very......

 

Exciting....

Edited October 21, 2013 by Night Owl

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Inside right was very similar to that inside forward position on the right. Behind the striker and inside a right winger. It felt almost like an attacking RCM with no defending duties!

 

"Inside forward" was simply the collective name that was given to the inside right and inside left, no difference that I can recall.