Because it switches the full-backs to wing backs who can then play in a more attacking role. Am I really having to explain this? It's like going back to when my son was asking me questions at games when he was six.
I remember when we went through a phase of adding an extra goalkeeper from the subs bench in the early 90s. Good move he score a couple.
The first link is from Football Manager ffs. I presume all the teams that have deployed asymmetrical formations 'very effectively' usually have some of the best players in the world who are capable.
It is, some are good, some are not so good (as I said)- are you saying they are all worthless? But you ignore the others? You ignore the expert references to playing to talents (players). When I have time I will search for specific team examples, as I know they are there, but right now I am reading the board and watching the last episode of Thirteen. But, yes, again, they will have some of the best players in the world; lower teams rarely draw a mention when it comes to tactical invention. Do I take it that you believe the tactics of 'The Greats' cannot be adapted at lower levels by skillful, forward thing coaches? Why does that amuse you?
"Just played Frieburg and was down 4-0 at H/T. Changed it back to full backs and pulled two back. Might need a bit of work needed!!" - **** me you're right Fez, 'Tommy Ayton' here commentating on his impressive switch of tactics while playing Freiburg can teach us all a bucket load when it comes to asymmetrical effectiveness. Actually no, 'Viggo Vickers' makes a great point here: "I'm not so sure positioning Wing Backs with Wingers would work so well. Maybe a single winger, more so a single Inside Forward in an asymmetric formation might work. Traditionally, the only Wingbacks I've used with Wingers is DR kind. Generally a 4-3-3, the flat defensive 4, I turn my right Fullback into an attacking Wingback (in the DR position), and the AMR Winger in a support role, so the Wingback overlaps and occasionally get's in to the box. Often results in a lot of assists from that position with crosses to my single striker or the AML Inside Foward. Note, I use the right side fullback as the attacking Wingback, as it's a lot harder to find left footed attacking Wingbacks, though the more two footed the player, the better shooting threat he becomes." I MEAN IF VIGGO SAYS IT AND HE WON THE LEAGUE WITH FULHAM BRUV FFS
The real question is,which Lambretta did our very own Lambrettaman sit astride off ? Does he go back to the LD series? Could he survive a session on a TV model ? Was he around for the '63 pacemaker? Could he handle my own GT 200 '64 ? Or,was he a simple SX fusilier who really wanted his bird sat on a late sixths GP pulling Machine? Did you ever pose at top of Whitfrigate? Allam OUT.
This is part of the problem; as long as the two wing-backs are considered defenders that is always what they will revert to. Think of them as midfielders, even with an attacking bias, which is why you have the additional defender and a centre midfield three with a strong (and fit) defensive player (although Hudds??). Do you think our fullbacks (that's how we play them) have a more defensive instinct than an attacking one. How many games do we start with our attacking threats on the bench? How many of them do we give points away in? Have we missed Harry?
I took a quick glance at it and qualified it, but you still focus on it and ignore the others? Are you interested in discussing it or just arguing FFS
Are you on the rise mate? OLM's never had anything but a Honda 70, complete with piss pot helmet and that's common FACT. Looks a right nugget so he does.
I/m getting bollocked for being on our third brasndy coffee and missing too much and asking questions - I sometimes wonder why I bother fanning City!
I've come up with a brilliant new formation, i'll post details tomorrow, once I've collated the required evidence from Minecraft and Candy Crush Saga. Actually, it's a C50.
