| Would you prefer... 17:13 - Aug 25 with 1055 views | kizaitfc |
play football from back to front and have the players that can't do it either improve or become noticed as the players that just aren't up to it, OR
Go back to playing long balls to Jackson and Norwood.
For me the decision is an easy one, we have to get back to having ITFC play entertaining football it has been far too long since we did this (probably talking Royle and Magilton era of management).
If that means we find out Chambers is not capable of doing it and we can see we need to sign an alternative or play a youngster there then so be it.
The system of playing football is the wrong one and if the players aren't up to it then they need to be shown the door |  |
| |  |
| Would you prefer... on 17:17 - Aug 25 with 1027 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
I think we need to mix it up, and be able to switch between playing out from the back and being more direct. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 17:22 - Aug 25 with 1002 views | kizaitfc |
| Would you prefer... on 17:17 - Aug 25 by Marshalls_Mullet |
I think we need to mix it up, and be able to switch between playing out from the back and being more direct. |
I think your right and we probably will end up in that place, I think now we can see where the work is needed and they are perhaps over playing to get used to playing from the back.
I'd imagine PL would normally prefer goals like the one given away by Cornell against Spurs to be launched up the pitch. | |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 17:23 - Aug 25 with 1003 views | Steve_M |
This is basically the "Throw out all McCarthy's players and sign just anyone and we'll be better" logic of Summer 2018 re-hashed.
There is a balance between existing squad members players we can afford to bring in, youngster coming through and the nature of the division. Just getting rid of Chambers and playing anyone on the assumption they are bound to be better is not a solution.
Also Royle's team in 2004-05 was the most consciously direct ITFC team I've seen, they could play a bit in midfield but the main tactic was to hit Bent and Kuqi early. Frankly, if the team wins more than it loses then the debate about style becomes secondary. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 17:31 - Aug 25 with 973 views | kizaitfc |
| Would you prefer... on 17:23 - Aug 25 by Steve_M |
This is basically the "Throw out all McCarthy's players and sign just anyone and we'll be better" logic of Summer 2018 re-hashed.
There is a balance between existing squad members players we can afford to bring in, youngster coming through and the nature of the division. Just getting rid of Chambers and playing anyone on the assumption they are bound to be better is not a solution.
Also Royle's team in 2004-05 was the most consciously direct ITFC team I've seen, they could play a bit in midfield but the main tactic was to hit Bent and Kuqi early. Frankly, if the team wins more than it loses then the debate about style becomes secondary. |
I'm not being funny but most of MMs players have already gone.
I'm not saying we need to get rid of anyone just yet, give the players a chance to fit a system, the club needs an identity atm, last season the whole team was lost, I'm not really sure what our tactic was.
Royle's team was direct but they played football they didnt just hoof hopeless balls forwards.
I am not saying the only way to do that is from playing out of the back but it is a darn site better then seeing KJ and Norwood jumping for hopeless balls in the air. | |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 17:56 - Aug 25 with 921 views | longtimefan |
| Would you prefer... on 17:31 - Aug 25 by kizaitfc |
I'm not being funny but most of MMs players have already gone.
I'm not saying we need to get rid of anyone just yet, give the players a chance to fit a system, the club needs an identity atm, last season the whole team was lost, I'm not really sure what our tactic was.
Royle's team was direct but they played football they didnt just hoof hopeless balls forwards.
I am not saying the only way to do that is from playing out of the back but it is a darn site better then seeing KJ and Norwood jumping for hopeless balls in the air. |
You can still play football without defenders passing it amongst themselves forever. To be honest I find the passing it backwards and sideways approach tedious and prefer a more direct approach. It’s one of the reasons I don’t particularly enjoy watching many Premiership games anymore. Yes it can work for really good teams but it’s not really my cup of tea. There’s nothing that frustrates me more than seeing a defender passing it forwards to a midfielder facing his own goal, only for him to pass it straight back, despite there being no opposing player within 5 m of him. | | | |
| Would you prefer... on 17:57 - Aug 25 with 915 views | Illinoisblue |
It doesn’t have to be either/or. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 18:01 - Aug 25 with 898 views | Mullet |
| Would you prefer... on 17:31 - Aug 25 by kizaitfc |
I'm not being funny but most of MMs players have already gone.
I'm not saying we need to get rid of anyone just yet, give the players a chance to fit a system, the club needs an identity atm, last season the whole team was lost, I'm not really sure what our tactic was.
Royle's team was direct but they played football they didnt just hoof hopeless balls forwards.
I am not saying the only way to do that is from playing out of the back but it is a darn site better then seeing KJ and Norwood jumping for hopeless balls in the air. |
Who have people been gunning for after these friendlies? How is it any different to the same logic Steve mentions?
Your qualification of Royle's team also gives the game away when it comes to style and entertainment cobblers coming back again. We just need to start beating teams. We haven't done that since getting rid of Mick.
It's been the biggest disaster to beset our club, those that wanted it so badly need to face up to that rather than scrabbling around for more revised nonsense. We need an identiy and players who will run through walls for the manager and us, now it's the salary cap not ME limiting us doing anything else. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 18:02 - Aug 25 with 893 views | Wickets |
| Would you prefer... on 17:57 - Aug 25 by Illinoisblue |
It doesn’t have to be either/or. |
Yes your right . Playing out from back has cost us a goal in each of the last two Pre season games and we dropped it previously because it did not suit us . We can still play football and mix it up as all the best teams tend to do . |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Would you prefer... on 19:51 - Aug 25 with 803 views | southnorfolkblue |
It doesn’t have to be either/or though. There is nothing wrong with getting the ball forward quickly, winning the second ball and starting to play from there.
It’s far too simplistic to say that those players who can’t match up need to be shown the door, when they are all under contract.
Makes far more sense at the moment to play to the strengths that we have rather than play a style that highlights our deficiencies. | |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 23:08 - Aug 25 with 743 views | Ryorry |
| Would you prefer... on 19:51 - Aug 25 by southnorfolkblue |
It doesn’t have to be either/or though. There is nothing wrong with getting the ball forward quickly, winning the second ball and starting to play from there.
It’s far too simplistic to say that those players who can’t match up need to be shown the door, when they are all under contract.
Makes far more sense at the moment to play to the strengths that we have rather than play a style that highlights our deficiencies. |
I'm assuming PL is just trying things out atm - ie one of the reasons that PSFs are played. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 08:04 - Aug 26 with 661 views | pointofblue |
| Would you prefer... on 19:51 - Aug 25 by southnorfolkblue |
It doesn’t have to be either/or though. There is nothing wrong with getting the ball forward quickly, winning the second ball and starting to play from there.
It’s far too simplistic to say that those players who can’t match up need to be shown the door, when they are all under contract.
Makes far more sense at the moment to play to the strengths that we have rather than play a style that highlights our deficiencies. |
There’s nothing wrong with it if we can make something of it. I can’t remember the last time we played it long and won a second ball. | |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 08:49 - Aug 26 with 618 views | textbackup |
| Would you prefer... on 17:57 - Aug 25 by Illinoisblue |
It doesn’t have to be either/or. |
exactly, if we have 1 style/way to play we become predictable and easy to defend against. mix it up and teams wont know whats coming and when |  |
| |
| Would you prefer... on 09:09 - Aug 26 with 589 views | Vaughan8 |
I hate this it's one way or the other.
Should be we try to pass it out from the back but if under pressure, play it longer. Not sure why this is so hard?
We aren't man city who can play out from the back in our own area.
3 of our 4 senior CBs do not look comfortable on the ball. The other one isn't brilliant either.
Surely we should play a way that fits our players instead of playing a way we think without the players need for that system? | | | |
| Would you prefer... on 09:59 - Aug 26 with 551 views | Wickets |
| Would you prefer... on 09:09 - Aug 26 by Vaughan8 |
I hate this it's one way or the other.
Should be we try to pass it out from the back but if under pressure, play it longer. Not sure why this is so hard?
We aren't man city who can play out from the back in our own area.
3 of our 4 senior CBs do not look comfortable on the ball. The other one isn't brilliant either.
Surely we should play a way that fits our players instead of playing a way we think without the players need for that system? |
Stop talking sense . | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
