shows what you know then. Barcelona as an example used that many times last season. 3 at the back is OK if you have a defensive midfielder to protect. City may not have a choice for example. but i would accept that NP is not known for risk taking apart from the last 10 mins of a game when city are behind.
Agree with OLM's team although I'd say those two midfield spots are still up for grabs and McKenna could claw his way in. Up front is anybody's guess. I would probably start with the same two you've gone for but wouldn't complain if Adebola started.
Many times? I don't remember any, they normally play a back four of: Alves Pique Puyol/Milito Maxwell (with Abidal in the mix until he got ill)
At first when you mentioned 3 at the back I thought you was talking about the centre backs with Busquets dropping into make it 3 when the full backs go forward. But adding that it is okay to play 3 with a defensive midfielder just proves you haven't got a clue what you are talking about seeing as Barcelona have never done that. They play 4-3-3. The reason it works so well is because the front 3 play as a front 3, not dropping back into a 4-5-1 without the ball, they stay as a 3 up there all the time. When they have the ball, the centre backs split, the full backs move right up the pitch to create the width and Busquets drops back in between the centre backs to effectively form that 3 at the back. The only thing is, neither Xavi or Iniesta drop back and play defensive midfielder... they are constantly up the field creating the chances.
Beat me to it. I particularly liked the line "you havent got a clue what you are talking about". But this man has reliable sources that keep him informed allegedly- like fuk.
So - how was Tom Cairney in today's game? The OWS report mentions him twice, but did he look like he was after a place now?
They where even willing to play Mascherano at Cb instead of playing 3 at the back in the Champions League final. A back three can work if you have three centre halfs and possibly two wing backs, but that is more of an older tactic than anything recent. And considering playing two full backs and one centre back is just plain silly.
Good again. McKenna and Evans didn't work, they created nothing and Harper still looks pants, I think it will be McKenna/Cairney or Evans/Cairney on Friday.
Just posted a match report Olm. Surely now its Cairney and A N Other. He has been far and away our best CM. I think he and Evans are the right pairing.
agreed; they will be one of the contenders.. this will be an immediate benchmark for us re Cairney.. look out this is a new improved model TC.. he means business and from what I've seen via tigersplayer and the Liverpool game we could have a very good midfielder on our books.. I think the initial hype following his goal vs Everton in the PL maybe affected him but he seems to have taken it on board and IMO it will be to ours and Tom's benefit.. Kid's now got both the ability AND the physique to cut it.. pick him NP.
Cheers OLM! Out in the sticks, with only Rick Skelton's Twitter, I didn't get much of a picture of how it was.
well I'd go with McKenna /Cairney.. Tom can do the creative stuff if he knows Paul is there as back-up.. like when he played with George..
Based on today's performance alone, you'd definitely go Cairney and McKenna, but I can't see NP dropping Evans and McKenna has been fairly weak in some of the other pre-seasons, it's a hard one to call.
suprised me how he will actually fight for the ball, in the short highlights he won the ball back by his strength alone against liverpool and bradford, long may it continue!
cairney and evans for me. mckenna and evans yesterday were a bit drab and lifeless . second half much more livelier and inventive.
