Haha, I kind of have this too. I agree about Simpson being 11, why not Brady? Koren as 10 kind of makes sense, it used to be the number of the playmaker, and Evans being 8 makes sense to me.
There is always time to add new numbers to the squad but looks like those left out are more than likely not wanted or needed
I don't think it does. It suggests to me that Basso being our player gets the No.1, instead of Gulasci who's on loan
10 for Koren does make sense but it just doesn't suit him in my mind for some reason it used to be the playmaker like you say and suited Geo. I'd say the same about Evans being 8 but I always imagine that going to the more attacking midfielder ie Koren, Cairney, Stewart, Brady, even Harper suit it more IMO.
Harper and Evans are similar sort of players IMO, just with Evans being a lot better at it. You'll get used to these new numbers
What do we reckon about Ghilas, Oli and Bullard then? Bullard looking likely to be sacked, we'll probably be able to shift Oli after he recovers from his injury, what about Kamel?
Am I getting old, since when was the 10 shirt the playmaker, 9 & 10 have always and should always be centre forwards, 4 is the grafter in the middle and 8 more of a playmaker 2- right back 3- left back 5- centre half 6- centre half 4- centre midfield 8- centre midfield 7- right wing 11- left wing 9- centre forward 10- centre forward
If anything you're too young. I'm only 18 but I know what the numbers used to be. What you have put there is right, but it's the more modern adaptation which has been changed to suit a 4-4-2. It started when the teams always wore 1-11 and teams played a 2-3-5 formation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 The 9 was always the big strong one and 10 was usually a playmaker. In the Hull City example Wagstaff always wore 8 and Ken Houghton (playmaker) wore 10. Chilton was 9.
Very true. Although I think it has originated from the old 2-3-5 formation GK:1 FB:2 FB:3 HB:4 HB:5 HB:6 RW:7 IF:8 CF:9 IF:10 LW:11 Ever since, it seems essential that a right back is 2, left back is 3 etc. It does seem to become a bit of an OCD as I seem to get distracted when seeing a left back as no 2 for example!
Waggy did start wearing 8 and Houghton who was already at city wore 10. Then they swapped. Waggy's best days were always in the No,.10 shirt for Hull City I also come from a time when 2,3,5,6 was the back line 4 and 8 the midfield, 7 + 11 the wings and 9 + 10 the strikers. oh well.
Most of us are from that time. It's now. That is the modern interpretation but it comes from the original 2-3-5 thing that I've explained above.
Couldnt care less what numbers the guys wear, as long as they perform on the pitch they can have what ever number they want!
i'll go through it a third time for you. Yes, the numbers you have suggested are traditionally known to represent those positions. It comes from the day when there were no big squads, and the players who started were numbered 1 to 11 based on position. It began with 2-3-5 with the numbers assigned from back to front as follows: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 This has evolved to the modern system where two of those midfielders move back, the two wingers move back into midfield and one of the strikers (either 8 or 10) moves back inot midfield. This is why wingers have become 7 and 11, this is why the back 4 are usually 2, 3, 5 and 6 (although 4 isn't considered out of place at the back) and this is why 8 or 10 is given to a playmaker nowadays, whilst 9 is almost always a centre forward. Get it?
