• 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

Cristian Romero

It's not viewed as negative play. I just prefer having creative players on the ball further up rather than having a defensive minded player that can do nothing on the ball involved.


Given we are talking about our in-possession phase of play i expect the fullbacks to be advanced anyway - winning the ball back in the middle third/towards the opposition defensive third in theory should allow us to maintain our advanced position more so than not winning winning the ball back and with the full backs even further forward.
 
Given we are talking about our in-possession phase of play i expect the fullbacks to be advanced anyway - winning the ball back in the middle third/towards the opposition defensive third in theory should allow us to maintain our advanced position more so than not winning winning the ball back and with the full backs even further forward.
They shouldn't both be advanced and leave only the two CBs covering. That;s basically what was wrong with Anges system, only 2 CBs covering the whole defence. It allowed a simple long ball to the wings to cut us open. Having the DM drop in between the two CBs allows them to cover the FB positions.
 
They shouldn't both be advanced and leave only the two CBs covering. That;s basically what was wrong with Anges system, only 2 CBs covering the whole defence. It allowed a simple long ball to the wings to cut us open. Having the DM drop in between the two CBs allows them to cover the FB positions.
It all ends up with 3 at the back, either the 2 CBs and one of the FBs, or the 2 CBs and the DM.
 
Back