A Fluid Front-Three Or An Amalgamation Of Roles?

[Rousseau 9,916]

I would argue that Suarez is an out and out striker.

 

I agree, but I've not mentioned Suarez. Are you mixing him up with Sanchez?

[Rousseau 9,916]

Will it work against better opposition though?

It may well do but I think we'll need a better calibre of striker than we've currently got.

 

I think it will, but I also don't think we're challenging Celtic with the squad we have at the moment. We do need extra quality added throughout the side IMO; not wholesale changes, but good additions in certain areas.

[Rousseau 9,916]

it doesnt cause extra difficulty as i said earlier because most opposition have already set both sides to counter the winger fullback attack so doesn't change anything tactically for them to counter since our wingers basically are copies of each other.

 

That's where inverted wingers and false-nines come into it; the same position, but individuals playing it differently give the opposition something else to think about. Our basic model/system of playing will remain the same, as will the opposition's zonal defense, but by allowing players to play different roles, we mix it up, giving them something else to think about.

 

Again, you do want a settled front-three that can do it week-in, week-out, but, while it's possible, it gives the opposition more opportunities to find a solution for it. I do want a strong, pacey striker with two good wingers, but I also think that having a wide-forward in there and a false-nine in there doesn't do any harm. Again, it's good to have different options.

 

We know how teams are going to play against us -- sit back and hit on the counter -- it's boring and predictable. It's up to us to find a solution. I don't think there is just one solution (the string, pacey striker), but several ways we can go about it.

 

The technical deficiency in the few Premiership games I've seen is astonishing. It's Sunday League but with 'better' players. We can do the same, but with even better quality players that we should be able to attract, or go down the more technical route, carving a better path for Scottish football. I want to see us do something different, rather than the standard Scottish formula.

[Frankie 8,313]

Enjoyed that insightful piece mate.

 

Now online:

 

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/news-category/match-analysis/596-a-fluid-front-three-or-an-amalgamation-of-roles

 

 

Interesting, in the first half at least on Friday, I though the attack was more fluid than usual with McKay and MOH both interchanging with Miller and Holt. In fact, I thought it was too fluid as we started very well then seemed to struggle in the final third as we often ended up with MOH and Miller both playing centrally with no-one on the right hand side. I felt a bit sorry for MOH as we didn't really get him involved enough and perhaps should be looking to play the ball a bit earlier from the back - even if that means being more direct than the manager would like at times.

[Rousseau 9,916]

Enjoyed that insightful piece mate.

 

Now online:

 

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/news-category/match-analysis/596-a-fluid-front-three-or-an-amalgamation-of-roles

 

 

Interesting, in the first half at least on Friday, I though the attack was more fluid than usual with McKay and MOH both interchanging with Miller and Holt. In fact, I thought it was too fluid as we started very well then seemed to struggle in the final third as we often ended up with MOH and Miller both playing centrally with no-one on the right hand side. I felt a bit sorry for MOH as we didn't really get him involved enough and perhaps should be looking to play the ball a bit earlier from the back - even if that means being more direct than the manager would like at times.

 

Thanks.

 

I missed the game on Friday, and I'm now sorry I did if that was the case. I suppose it indicates the progress Warburton is trying to impress on the team. It's not just a static way of playing, but something more progressive. Very interesting; I need to find the highlights.

[pete 2,499]

I agree, but I've not mentioned Suarez. Are you mixing him up with Sanchez?

 

No I was talking about Barcelona and Messi is not really a striker at all. Suarez is their main striker and I would class Messi as a midfield player

[Rousseau 9,916]

No I was talking about Barcelona and Messi is not really a striker at all. Suarez is their main striker and I would class Messi as a midfield player

 

I agree defining Messi as a striker is wrong, but I don't think he's a midfielder; He's more of a winger/wide-forward/Second-Striker. They play with a front-three of Messi, Suarez and Neymar. Suarez is usually the main striker, but Neymar and Messi are on either side, drifting about. I wouldn't class either as midfielders; they are forwards.