• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

*** OMT: Mighty Spurs vs Scum ***

Can someone help me out? I don't understand football, I just go to games and chant and yell COYS alot!
Several on here have said that we use inverted full backs...what does "inverted" mean for a fullback? Are they a cross between a fullback and a winger?
I was hoping for a Porro thunderbolt yesterday but he didn't seem to get up the pitch enough in the second half...
 
Finney Is Back said:
That moment is why every other keeper in the PL comes to punch that cross delivered to the centre of our six yard box. Until we get ourselves a decent keeper we will concede goals to inswinging crosses with any fans blaming our defenders or the ref
Click to expand...

When you say a 'decent keeper' do you mean like Raya in the opposite goal?

<<Runs for cover>>
 
Mikey10 said:
We’ve been sold this model for a long time. Never reaches fruition though.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure we've ever really done it though.... At least not properly? At various times in ENIC's tenure we have got a DoF in and then signed some good young players only for the club to scrap the plan and swing 180 degrees to something else at the first sign of trouble, whether that is getting rid of the DoF, the manager or both.

At some point we have to see it through.... Might as well be now IMO.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I'm not sure we've ever really done it though.... At least not properly? At various times in ENIC's tenure we have got a DoF in and then signed some good young players only for the club to scrap the plan and swing 180 degrees to something else at the first sign of trouble, whether that is getting rid of the DoF, the manager or both.

At some point we have to see it through.... Might as well be now IMO.
Click to expand...
Fully agree
It’s why I’d like to see more is of the youth in the next group of games
 
lurker of old said:
Can someone help me out? I don't understand football, I just go to games and chant and yell COYS alot!
Several on here have said that we use inverted full backs...what does "inverted" mean for a fullback? Are they a cross between a fullback and a winger?
I was hoping for a Porro thunderbolt yesterday but he didn't seem to get up the pitch enough in the second half...
Click to expand...
Pretty sure this refers to fullbacks who maraud forward quite a bit and do so by often driving into the centre of the pitch rather than simply hugging the touchline and continuing to offer width.
 
JerusalemMan said:
Pretty sure this refers to fullbacks who maraud forward quite a bit and do so by often driving into the centre of the pitch rather than simply hugging the touchline and continuing to offer width.
Click to expand...
Which results in Porro and Udogie being in the #10 position, Maddison floating around on the half way line taking the ball from Romero only to turn and pass it VDV. Other upshot is we don't stretch teams the full width of the pitch, which is a bit of a hindrance when trying to play through balls. Also they end up standing in the space that someone like Son would cut into and shoot from (if he still did that).
 
Finney Is Back said:
That moment is why every other keeper in the PL comes to punch that cross delivered to the centre of our six yard box. Until we get ourselves a decent keeper we will concede goals to inswinging crosses with any fans blaming our defenders or the ref
Click to expand...

Can n ot disagree with that at all, i do like Vicario but he has to work at his weakness coming for a ball. I have read so much rubbish about Romero being to blame for the goal when was pushed and should have got the foul.
 
lurker of old said:
Can someone help me out? I don't understand football, I just go to games and chant and yell COYS alot!
Several on here have said that we use inverted full backs...what does "inverted" mean for a fullback? Are they a cross between a fullback and a winger?
I was hoping for a Porro thunderbolt yesterday but he didn't seem to get up the pitch enough in the second half...
Click to expand...

FWIW…



IMG_4271.jpeg
 
Last edited:
JerusalemMan said:
Pretty sure this refers to fullbacks who maraud forward quite a bit and do so by often driving into the centre of the pitch rather than simply hugging the touchline and continuing to offer width.
Click to expand...
That, but also the positions they take up earlier in buildup.

A more traditional full back or wing back will typically be really wide in buildup (and most other phases of play). Our inverted full backs take up positions more traditionally occupied by midfielders. Wingers staying wide and sometimes midfielders drifting wide.
 
fernadez said:
Which results in Porro and Udogie being in the #10 position, Maddison floating around on the half way line taking the ball from Romero only to turn and pass it VDV. Other upshot is we don't stretch teams the full width of the pitch, which is a bit of a hindrance when trying to play through balls. Also they end up standing in the space that someone like Son would cut into and shoot from (if he still did that).
Click to expand...
A player of Maddison's quality being on the ball deeper really shouldn't be an issue. If anything it should help us play better.

Most teams that use more traditional, but attacking full backs push those full backs fairly high and wide. They then use "inverted wingers" coming inside. It's rather rare to see a team push the winger wide and the full back high and wide before they get the ball.

When we get the ball the full back and winger will often look to combine, as with other approaches. But often with different roles compared to the more traditional setups.

The key isn't what system the manager plays. I don't think inverted full backs is inherently better or worse. But it's about how well the players you have fit those roles. Porro and Udogie are very good fits for those roles. Son unfortunately isn't a perfect fit for the touchline hugging winger role.
 
braineclipse said:
A player of Maddison's quality being on the ball deeper really shouldn't be an issue. If anything it should help us play better.

Most teams that use more traditional, but attacking full backs push those full backs fairly high and wide. They then use "inverted wingers" coming inside. It's rather rare to see a team push the winger wide and the full back high and wide before they get the ball.

When we get the ball the full back and winger will often look to combine, as with other approaches. But often with different roles compared to the more traditional setups.

The key isn't what system the manager plays. I don't think inverted full backs is inherently better or worse. But it's about how well the players you have fit those roles. Porro and Udogie are very good fits for those roles. Son unfortunately isn't a perfect fit for the touchline hugging winger role.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Maddison is deeper because he can’t move quick enough to get up the pitch
I also think he is seeing his boots out taking so many touches
We had a player last year who made many passes with one touch. We know have a pirouetting crab
 
For me it's hiding. You have Bentancur who is just as good on the ball. Maddison should be intelligent enough to leave him to do that initial job and then be 10 yards ahead between the lines.

Instead Romero eventually passes to Bentancur, Maddison takes it off him, turns, looks up sees nobody in the space he should be in then passes it sideways. Three players have been used to move the ball 1 yard forwards and 25 yards sideways. Playing bravely would be Maddison trusting Bentancur to find him, moving into space, picking it off him and turning. He did it once in the second half and drew a foul and a card
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I wonder if Maddison is deeper because he can’t move quick enough to get up the pitch
I also think he is seeing his boots out taking so many touches
We had a player last year who made many passes with one touch. We know have a pirouetting crab
Click to expand...
Different role with Kulusevski in the team imo. With Sarr and a DM Maddison has more of a #10 role. With Kulusevski there Maddison plays deeper because that suits them better as a pair.
 
braineclipse said:
Different role with Kulusevski in the team imo. With Sarr and a DM Maddison has more of a #10 role. With Kulusevski there Maddison plays deeper because that suits them better as a pair.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this and agree with @Bedfordspurs answer to you in that Maddison may not be fit.
After all, Maddison has been playing similarly for months with or without Kulu being in midfield.

The question then has to be asked: if Maddison isn't fit, why is he still starting??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back