Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Steve Earle said:

Ha! I won’t keep playing but you really don’t need WBs with 3 CBs. Man C don’t. Very good piece in The Athletic on this this week.

 

3-box-3 is the way!

 

Just now, ClaphamFox said:

 

The debate over whether a back three necessitates wing backs has the potential to get really interesting...

Two completely different things 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Steve Earle said:

Ha! I won’t keep playing but you really don’t need WBs with 3 CBs. Man C don’t. Very good piece in The Athletic on this this week.

 

3-box-3 is the way!

I've put some things related to this in a Tactics thread. 

 

John Stones starts on paper at right back for Man City, but moves in field to play as a double pivot alongside Rodri. We just signed a player who started as a central midfielder, then moved back to defence and is known for having good passing and being very influential... Or we might try Ricardo in a position like that, though it takes away from his running and driving at the opposition, which i think is too good to pass up.

  • Like 2
Posted
15 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

I've put some things related to this in a Tactics thread. 

 

John Stones starts on paper at right back for Man City, but moves in field to play as a double pivot alongside Rodri. We just signed a player who started as a central midfielder, then moved back to defence and is known for having good passing and being very influential... Or we might try Ricardo in a position like that, though it takes away from his running and driving at the opposition, which i think is too good to pass up.

I’ll dip in!

  • Haha 1
Posted

Doesn’t strike me as a player who would back himself to make the step up. He’s had a very easy ride from Rodgers regarding his overall contribution to games for the last few years and won’t get that elsewhere I hope he is asked to add more in overall contribution if he stays 

Posted
5 minutes ago, FLAN said:

Doesn’t strike me as a player who would back himself to make the step up. He’s had a very easy ride from Rodgers regarding his overall contribution to games for the last few years and won’t get that elsewhere I hope he is asked to add more in overall contribution if he stays 

Btw his recultance to move is far more human and family reasons than ambition of his career 

  • Like 1
Posted
52 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

I've put some things related to this in a Tactics thread. 

 

John Stones starts on paper at right back for Man City, but moves in field to play as a double pivot alongside Rodri. We just signed a player who started as a central midfielder, then moved back to defence and is known for having good passing and being very influential... Or we might try Ricardo in a position like that, though it takes away from his running and driving at the opposition, which i think is too good to pass up.

PS - I’m not sure you can still say Stones ‘starts on paper’ at RB? We all know where he starts, it’s RH. 
Anyway @StriderHiryu I look forward to joining you on the tactics thread!

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dan LCFC said:

It's kind of a given no?

My comment was more personal than the actual positional i.e. the view that we need to play a traditional fullback at wide in a 3-back formation, like Thomas, Justin,  Castange, Ricardo,  kristiansen.

 

Chelsea won a league with Victor Mose playing wingback, Man City just won a league with proper fullbacks. 

 

1 hour ago, Ricey said:

...because if not then it's either a flat back 5 at all times or you play wingers and get killed on the flanks.

I've only seen two LCFC managers play a good 3 back.....

 

1) Martin O'Neill who often used  Guppy and Impey as the wide men in a 3 back who were both wingers!

 

2) Nigel Pearson convert to a 3 back as part of the great escape and often used Schlupp and Albrighton both wingers.

Edited by coolhandfox
  • Like 1
Posted

I think we all just assume footballers are greedy mercenaries now and always looking for their next payday.

 

Barnes doesn’t strike me as that kind of footballer. If we wants to stay for family reasons good for him.

  • Like 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

 

 

I've only seen two LCFC managers play a good 3 back.....

 

1) Martin O'Neill who often used  Guppy and Impey as the wide men in a 3 back who were both wingers!

 

2) Esteban Cambiasso convert to a 3 back as part of the great escape and often used Schlupp and Albrighton both wingers.

Fixed for you.

  • Haha 3
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, EnderbyFox said:

The only issue I can see with him staying is where does he play? From the players we've been linked with so far it suggests the main system we are pushing for is 3 at the back. Does he switch to a second striker? Can't see him as a wing back?

 

 

Anywhere in the front 3, be it in a 343 or a 3412.

Edited by JimJams
Posted
1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

Btw his recultance to move is far more human and family reasons than ambition of his career 

BUT CAN HE AFFORD HIS NEW MORTGAGE PAYMENTS?!?!?!

Posted

Looks quite simple with Barnes. Think if he gets a move to a team where he doesn’t need to move house he goes, so probably anyone other than Newcastle.

 

If he stays, I’d hope we protect ourselves from a Tielemans situation.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Steve Earle said:

 

50m feels pretty much the max we could get and on that basis we should sell and reinvest in 2/3 players.

  • Like 1
Posted

Cheers Barnsy, knew we’d fleece at least one club this summer. It’s what we do best lol 

Posted
20 minutes ago, CrazyKopCorner said:

£50m would do the trick wouldn’t it - we could bring in another 5 or 6 players with that 

I think we might need the money for the financial hole rather than spending it.  
 

can’t see 50m although now we have madders money in and Barnes has two years left, we should push our case and ask fir it 

Posted

Anything north of £40m with the potential to reach/exceed £50m would be great.

 

I still feel angry about last season & while the board & the poison dwarf take most of the blame, the players must take their share. 
 

Barnes’ utter uselessness out of possession isn’t something I’ll miss.

 

#DrainTheSwamp

  • Like 2
Guest Electric Yetis
Posted

Would be disappointed with £50m.

Posted

Once done. Then Vesty (no chance) followed by the Belgian contingent and Ward.  Come on Rudkin this is a frigging walk in the park…..

Posted
3 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

Once done. Then Vesty (no chance) followed by the Belgian contingent and Ward.  Come on Rudkin this is a frigging walk in the park…..

The feeling of relief if we could rid ourselves of all of the deadwood and have a tight 25/26 man squad would be great 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...