I want overlapping CBs. The inverted square root of 10 can drop back to cover.
How do you define what is 'tactical', and what isn't, though? Seems rather nebulous to me. Is a suggested line-up tactical? Then every OMT will have to be moved here. Is talking about a specific player's ability to fit into a system we play tactical? In that case, most of the ITK/transfer crap thread will have to be moved here.
Where do you draw the line? Genuinely curious.
-------Sweeper keeper
Walker---Kaboul---Verts----BAE
-----------Sandro
-----Rafa--------Moutinho
-Sig/Lennon---------Bale
------------Ade
Nah, he's no good with his left foot.
...Would love a tactical discussion but everyone seems to be in too jokey a mood and I have no jokes to add!
You're doing that on purpose now.
Anyway i'm one that believes VDV can play in the centre but partnering him with Moutinho? hmmmmm no way.
-------Sweeper keeper
Walker---Kaboul---Verts----BAE
-----------Sandro
-----Rafa--------Moutinho
-Sig/Lennon---------Bale
------------Ade
But if you had a deep lying libero playing in the conquistador mold, that would free up our wingbacks to create supply to the inside forwards and we wouldn't need a false nine. That would also cover us sufficiently to drop the defensive midfielder and line up instead with a holding quarterback and, and, and... GISM!
Moutinho is as good defensively as Modric. Sandro in there as well. Remember he effectively carried Veloso and Meireles through the big matches at the Euros.
Good question.
And you're right that there is no way to define it precisely.
But I think it's usually pretty obvious when a tactical discussion has derailed what was previously a good thread and taken it far from its original purpose.
And mid-table here we would come. First physical team we'd come up against would turn us right over.
...Would love a tactical discussion but everyone seems to be in too jokey a mood and I have no jokes to add!