| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? 23:22 - Dec 16 with 1105 views | GerkensBeard |
––––––––-Norris––––––
JD––-Woolf–––––Chambo––-Garbutt
––––Skuse–––––-Downes–––––––-
–––––––-Keane––––––––––––-
Jackson––––––––––––––Sears
–––––––-Norwood–––––––––
The back 6 providing a solid base. The front 4 do as you like and score us some bloody goals |  | | |  |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 02:42 - Dec 17 with 1033 views | pablovian |
The mention of 4-2-4 has brought on a severe attack of nostalgia.
In primary school in the late 1950's, we lined up in a traditional 2-3-5. After the whistle blew, everyone except for the goalkeepers swarmed after the ball. Some of us discovered that by by staying back and chatting with the goalkeeper, we could avoid a lot of running. By the mid-1960's, at secondary school, we played in 4-2-4 or 4-3-3 formations. I played right back or left back, depending on whether anyone else was available to play right back. My role models during that time were Mick McNeil, Billy Houghton and Tommy Carroll. I never understood how barrel-chested Mick Mills, who appeared to lack pace, could be so effective. My playing career ended after Terry Cooper of Leeds became a hugely successful overlapping full back. Robust, well-timed shoulder-to-shoulder challenges and hoofing the ball into touch were no longer enough. Geoff Hammond persevered with the classic style for a while longer.
Since then, people have used almost every formation that can be constructed using a combination of non-zero integers that adds up to 10.
I still miss the excitement of swarming after the ball ...
A more detailed discussion of formations is available at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formation_(association_football)#WM |  | | |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 03:03 - Dec 17 with 1025 views | jeera |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 02:42 - Dec 17 by pablovian |
The mention of 4-2-4 has brought on a severe attack of nostalgia.
In primary school in the late 1950's, we lined up in a traditional 2-3-5. After the whistle blew, everyone except for the goalkeepers swarmed after the ball. Some of us discovered that by by staying back and chatting with the goalkeeper, we could avoid a lot of running. By the mid-1960's, at secondary school, we played in 4-2-4 or 4-3-3 formations. I played right back or left back, depending on whether anyone else was available to play right back. My role models during that time were Mick McNeil, Billy Houghton and Tommy Carroll. I never understood how barrel-chested Mick Mills, who appeared to lack pace, could be so effective. My playing career ended after Terry Cooper of Leeds became a hugely successful overlapping full back. Robust, well-timed shoulder-to-shoulder challenges and hoofing the ball into touch were no longer enough. Geoff Hammond persevered with the classic style for a while longer.
Since then, people have used almost every formation that can be constructed using a combination of non-zero integers that adds up to 10.
I still miss the excitement of swarming after the ball ...
A more detailed discussion of formations is available at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formation_(association_football)#WM |
It really was like that wasn't it.
I mean, I can't speak for the 50s - I didn't exist.
But even i the later 70s at primary we lined up like that.
5 up top, albeit the 2 'wingers' were encouraged to drop back a few feet, but it was fundamentally the same.
3 in the middle and, as you rightly say, a couple at back chatting to each other and the goalie until reluctantly called upon to try to stall an attack. |  |
| |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 06:36 - Dec 17 with 958 views | WeWereZombies |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 02:42 - Dec 17 by pablovian |
The mention of 4-2-4 has brought on a severe attack of nostalgia.
In primary school in the late 1950's, we lined up in a traditional 2-3-5. After the whistle blew, everyone except for the goalkeepers swarmed after the ball. Some of us discovered that by by staying back and chatting with the goalkeeper, we could avoid a lot of running. By the mid-1960's, at secondary school, we played in 4-2-4 or 4-3-3 formations. I played right back or left back, depending on whether anyone else was available to play right back. My role models during that time were Mick McNeil, Billy Houghton and Tommy Carroll. I never understood how barrel-chested Mick Mills, who appeared to lack pace, could be so effective. My playing career ended after Terry Cooper of Leeds became a hugely successful overlapping full back. Robust, well-timed shoulder-to-shoulder challenges and hoofing the ball into touch were no longer enough. Geoff Hammond persevered with the classic style for a while longer.
Since then, people have used almost every formation that can be constructed using a combination of non-zero integers that adds up to 10.
I still miss the excitement of swarming after the ball ...
A more detailed discussion of formations is available at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formation_(association_football)#WM |
I can only read this with unparalleled jealousy, as a natural winger at a school that had only just changed from playing nothing but rugby union in the winter in the mid 1960s my fate was to be seen by teachers, who insisted on being referee and part of one of the teams at the same time, as offside the moment I crossed the half way line. In honour of the Town's recently elevated manager I think the idea was that anyone who tried to play on the wing in an era of wingless wonders should be rendered ineffective. |  |
| |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 07:31 - Dec 17 with 905 views | TractorCam |
I'd shove Roberts in there as well for Skuse, Downes can handle the holding position on his own. |  |
| |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 08:02 - Dec 17 with 871 views | GeoffSentence |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 02:42 - Dec 17 by pablovian |
The mention of 4-2-4 has brought on a severe attack of nostalgia.
In primary school in the late 1950's, we lined up in a traditional 2-3-5. After the whistle blew, everyone except for the goalkeepers swarmed after the ball. Some of us discovered that by by staying back and chatting with the goalkeeper, we could avoid a lot of running. By the mid-1960's, at secondary school, we played in 4-2-4 or 4-3-3 formations. I played right back or left back, depending on whether anyone else was available to play right back. My role models during that time were Mick McNeil, Billy Houghton and Tommy Carroll. I never understood how barrel-chested Mick Mills, who appeared to lack pace, could be so effective. My playing career ended after Terry Cooper of Leeds became a hugely successful overlapping full back. Robust, well-timed shoulder-to-shoulder challenges and hoofing the ball into touch were no longer enough. Geoff Hammond persevered with the classic style for a while longer.
Since then, people have used almost every formation that can be constructed using a combination of non-zero integers that adds up to 10.
I still miss the excitement of swarming after the ball ...
A more detailed discussion of formations is available at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formation_(association_football)#WM |
Mick Mills made up for his lack of pace with his fine posture. When opponents are in awe of your grace and poise they will give way to you voluntarily. |  |
| |
| So how’s about we go all out attack with a front 4? on 08:22 - Dec 17 with 858 views | Herbivore |
In fairness, we used this under Mick a few times in early 2017/18 and made it work. It's a bit bonkers and it's hard to control possession playing that way but it might be a bit of a laugh. Plus it's one of only a handful of formations Lambert hasn't tried yet this season so we may as well get it out of the way. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
