Did he really? Barcelona was playing with 1 centre forward in this games (with Pedro and Messi playing more wide and tracking back), usually playing 3 at the back against 1 centre forward is considered a no-no among tacticians, as it makes you too weak in other areas of the pitch. Liverpool had some short success with 3 centre backs because they were using it against teams who were playing with 2 forwards, once teams adjusted and it wasn't a novelty anymore Dalglish stopped doing that immediately.
- Status
RFUS
Anustart
Pretty much this.
Some people are set in their ways, and only see what they want to see.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
They played with an extra man between Lucio and Samuel to provide a 5 man wall that Barca could neither go wrong or pass their way through. We all know that Barcelona are so fluid that they can play no one up front and still rip you to bits. Inter conceded midfield and sat on the edge of their own box.
Liverpool played three centrebacks through February, March and in to April. Their results were as follows:
Stoke (H) W2-0
Chelsea (A) W1-0
Wigan (H) D1-1
Sparta P (A) D0-0
Sparta P (H) W1-0
West Ham (A) L1-3
Man U (H) W3-1
Braga (A) L0-1
Braga (H) D0-0
Sunderland (A) W2-0
West Brom (A) L1-2
W5 D3 L3 F12 A8 Clean Sheets = 6/11
There are doubts about using the system against sides such as Wigan, West Ham and West Brom, but it worked perfectly well against teams as diverse as Chelsea, Braga and Stoke. Six clean sheets in eleven games tells it's own story, especially as those defences featured inexperienced youngsters like Flanagan and Wilson. There's no evidence to suggest the system got 'found out'. More likely, once Agger got injured, Dalglish felt that he didn't have the personnel available to play that way.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
Right back at ya.
RFUS
Anustart
Without blowing my own horn, I'd say I'm one of the best examples of a poster who's willing to take other opinions on board and review his own to make up for new information and these new opinions.
The thing is though, I just completely disagree with you (strongly) on almost everything. I can't help that. You seem to rate Yobo as our most reliable CB, Distin as a liability, Coleman as a defensive calamity (despite only playing defence for us about twice) and you seem to think that when a team concedes a goal it isn't down to how the team defended, or the team's tactics, but it's the fault of the individual CBs.
I can't find anything sensible in any of that, and so it's got nothing to do with me being set in my ways. I just can't agree one iota with that opinion. I can't even respect that opinion, as it propagates the outdated and unbalanced "Dustbin" train of thought.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
I used to think that you were one of the more well-balanced and reasoned posters, but everything you've written recently has been highly subjective and relayed as if it's fact. You may not agree with me, but I give evidence and reasons for my arguments. Just because you think your opinion is true doesn't make the contrary viewpoint "naive" and "nonsensical".
The evidence that Yobo was more important to our defence than he has been given credit for is that he is the only variable between a defence that kept a club record number of clean sheets and one that concedes with depressing regularity. He has gone on to win the title in a country where their league is growing increasingly competitive and attracting players from the top leagues. I agree that we haven't defended well as a unit. Why has that been though? Once again you attach emotive labels to players. I never called Distin a liability. I said that he covers well, but that he's ponderous and invites pressure. I never called Coleman a defensive liability. I said that he could be rash in the tackle. That wasn't my argument for keeping him in midfield though. I infact said that he does need to spend some time in defence to learn the position. You make up what you think I say.
Brownie
Player Valuation: £70m
Yobo was a much better defender than Distin. Better in the air, better at tackling, better positioning. Unfortunately he's also absolutely terrible at football, which is what usually led to his horror moments. Distin meanwhile is a decent footballer for a centre back, but has the tactical intelligence of a plum.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
2006-7 Goals For 52 Goals Against 36
2007-8 GF 55 GA 33
2008-9 GF 55 GA 37
2009-10 GF 60 GA 49
2010-11 GF 51 GA 45
Average number of goals conceded with Yobo= 35.3
with Distin= 47
By my maths we've conceded 33% more goals since Distin displaced Yobo in our defence.
2007-8 GF 55 GA 33
2008-9 GF 55 GA 37
2009-10 GF 60 GA 49
2010-11 GF 51 GA 45
Average number of goals conceded with Yobo= 35.3
with Distin= 47
By my maths we've conceded 33% more goals since Distin displaced Yobo in our defence.
RFUS
Anustart
With hindsight I've let my anger at past morons referring to Distin as "Dustbin" and my general frustration with some of your view points allow me to be rude and disrespectful to your good self. For that, I apologise. Any and all football-based debate I engage in on here isn't personal, and it stems more from a personal enjoyment of bouncing ideas and tactics of other posters.
With that in mind, I'll endeavour to counter your post!
First of all, you seem to put too much weight into context-starved statistics. Yes Coleman scored 5 goals... yes Yobo won the title... yes Yobo was a part of our infamous 1-0 defence. That does not immediately mean you're right, however, as there are numerous other variables and things to take into account. Which you do not.
Yobo was not the only difference between our 1-0 mastering defence of old and our more leaky defence of now. For me the main difference is in the way the team defend. For example we had Lee Carsley in that old side, and he defended like his life depended on it. Another thing to take into account is that when we used to play 4-4-1-1 we'd get results. If you're scoring at the other end, you're less likely to concede. By that I mean, this season at least, we've conceded so often as a by-product of not doing the job at the other end. We've missed loads of chances, and then been stung, often on the counter.
If we go back a few seasons, to a time when 4-4-1-1 worked, then we might have been winning in these games. If you're winning then the dynamic of the game changes; the opposition have to come out more, leaving holes in their defence. It also means you may adopt a more defensive approach and attempt to sting teams on the counter yourself. We did that a few times ourselves this season, but only against 'bigger' teams. And this is a really crucial point, because now other teams perceive us to be a good team, and so the 'lesser' sides amongst them set out to defend like their lives depend on it. This makes our job different, and so comparing a team from 4 or so years ago with the one now, then spotting that Yobo was a part then and he isn't now, and concluding that means Yobo is the missing piece and/or Yobo is our best CB is a massive leap. I may be completely wrong about the above, and these may not be major reasons as for why our defensive record has worsened, but that's not my point. My point is that there are numerous other factors to these statistics.
As for putting words in your mouth, I disagree. You've not directly called Distin a liability, but you did say:
Justifying the name "Dustbin", calling him lackadaisical and then saying it would be very hard for us to become watertight with him is, in my opinion, even more scathing than just calling him a liability.
Next up, I'm not saying you think Coleman should stay in midfield as he's bad defensively. You justified why you wanted Coleman to remain in midfield, and I actually said if we didn't sign a proper right winger, I'd want him to remain there too. I just think we need a proper winger, as Coleman is not that. Moyes himself has said so, and said he'll end up at RB.
As for this 3 at the back thing, which started the whole debate, that's what I think is your most disagreeable opinion. You seem to love evidence, well then I ask you, can you provide me with evidence of any recent successful team in this league using 3 at the back? For more than maybe 2 games, anyway. It would not work for us, no matter how great it may sound in principle. I am basing this opinion mainly on the fact that no one else uses it. Because if formations are good, then they get used. Unless your formation is the product of an original thought.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
RFUS>
Carsley was an important factor in our defence, you're right, but he left the club in May 2008 and yet our defensive record wasn't considerably worse for the 2008-9 season. However, we did let in 12 more goals during 2009-10, when Distin pushed Yobo out of the side.
You say "if you're scoring at the other end, you're less likely to concede". I'm sure that Blackpool will disagree with this statement. Whether we put chances away or not has no bearing on how exposed we leave ourselves to the counter attack.
I agree that we used to nick a goal and then defend it for all we were worth. More often than not this season we've conceded the first goal, so we've had to go chasing to get back in to the game. Even two seasons ago that wasn't so much of a problem for us. Why could that be?
Imagine if I wanted to prove conclusively that Distin was the reason why we were leaking so many more goals or that Yobo was the reason that we were better defensively, how would I go about it? If I looked at Sylvain's record for Portsmouth, Newcastle and City you would argue that those teams were more open than us or that the league wasn't so competitive back then. If I looked at Distin's record with Heitinga, you would counter that they haven't had time to develop an understanding. There's no definitive way that either of us can prove our theories. The important thing to remember though is that they are only theories. It does you no credit to dismiss someone else's ideas so readily.
I'd love us to sign Donovan again. In which case playing Coleman behind him would make a lot of sense. Moyes is talking about switching him to right back though before we have even a hint of a winger coming in. In my opinion Coleman's development as a defender has to come second to his attacking contribution to the team for the moment. We can't afford to switch him until we have an option who will add as many goals and create as many openings.
I've already given you evidence of a team using three at the back for more than two games. Liverpool used it for 11 games (until Agger got injured) and kept 6 clean sheets. Didn't Kendall use something like Watson, Ratcliffe and Unsworth for a bit too to shore up a leaky defence? Why do we need to follow other people anyway? Moyes was one of the first managers to use 4-4-1-1. We're supposed to be the School of Science. The Great Innovators. We should play a system that takes best advantage of the players we have available.
Carsley was an important factor in our defence, you're right, but he left the club in May 2008 and yet our defensive record wasn't considerably worse for the 2008-9 season. However, we did let in 12 more goals during 2009-10, when Distin pushed Yobo out of the side.
You say "if you're scoring at the other end, you're less likely to concede". I'm sure that Blackpool will disagree with this statement. Whether we put chances away or not has no bearing on how exposed we leave ourselves to the counter attack.
I agree that we used to nick a goal and then defend it for all we were worth. More often than not this season we've conceded the first goal, so we've had to go chasing to get back in to the game. Even two seasons ago that wasn't so much of a problem for us. Why could that be?
Imagine if I wanted to prove conclusively that Distin was the reason why we were leaking so many more goals or that Yobo was the reason that we were better defensively, how would I go about it? If I looked at Sylvain's record for Portsmouth, Newcastle and City you would argue that those teams were more open than us or that the league wasn't so competitive back then. If I looked at Distin's record with Heitinga, you would counter that they haven't had time to develop an understanding. There's no definitive way that either of us can prove our theories. The important thing to remember though is that they are only theories. It does you no credit to dismiss someone else's ideas so readily.
I'd love us to sign Donovan again. In which case playing Coleman behind him would make a lot of sense. Moyes is talking about switching him to right back though before we have even a hint of a winger coming in. In my opinion Coleman's development as a defender has to come second to his attacking contribution to the team for the moment. We can't afford to switch him until we have an option who will add as many goals and create as many openings.
I've already given you evidence of a team using three at the back for more than two games. Liverpool used it for 11 games (until Agger got injured) and kept 6 clean sheets. Didn't Kendall use something like Watson, Ratcliffe and Unsworth for a bit too to shore up a leaky defence? Why do we need to follow other people anyway? Moyes was one of the first managers to use 4-4-1-1. We're supposed to be the School of Science. The Great Innovators. We should play a system that takes best advantage of the players we have available.
RFUS
Anustart
Right, in order!
Carsley was just an example of there being other factors. In no way am I saying he was the sole reason for anything. Or even a major reason. To put so much emphasis on one player is crazy. *ahem*
Secondly, you've misinterpreted what I mean by scoring makes you less likely to concede. I don't mean setting out to attack means you're less likely to concede. What I mean is, if you're a team attacking and attacking, but to no avail, there's a good chance you'll concede. Conversely, if you do score, that means the opposition have to have the initiative, throw caution to the wind and attack, leaving them more likely to concede on the break. If you're good at breaking down teams, then you can make use of possession and my above comments are irrelevant. But we're not Barca. Last season the midfield were all doing "the crab" for long portions; side to side... slowly, with no penetration and no real success.
Now for Distin, I don't care about his past records. I've said before he's in the form of his career, and he's improved no end since moving to Everton. It's irrelevant to me if he was crap 5 years ago. And he might well have been, as that might explain "Dustbin" and why it clouds the modern perception of him. But using your logic for Coleman and his accolades, Distin similarly has received a lot of praise from those outside the club this year. It's no secret he's been our best CB, and just behind Baines for most fans' player of the season award. So this is why I can't fathom you putting so much blame on his shoulders. Yes, he sometimes makes mistakes, but so does everyone. And in between the United 3-3 and the few games before the end of the season, I don't remember even 1 big mistake. He was magnificent, and I'd personally attribute his dip in form at the very end to tiredness, as he only missed 7 minutes of the entire pl season!
As for Donovan... I'd rather someone younger, but your point is one I wholeheartedly agree with. We do need a proper winger, and a Donovan type player to link up with Coleman is a mouth-watering proposition.
As for Liverpool, well woop-de-doo. It was 11 games. But I guarantee you Kenny won't be going with 3 at the back next season. And your other example... Kendall? How is that recent? It isn't, obviously, and that's my point; it's a completely out of date system. There's a difference between innovation (dictionary definition: A new method, idea, product, etc) and re-using an outdated formation.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
I'm not anti-Distin and I actually voted for him in second place for our player of the season. He pulled Jags out of the brown stuff plenty of times. I think he's a reactive defender though. Rather than reading the game and snuffing out danger before it happens he uses his pace and his physique to get himself out of trouble. It's a risky ploy and it doesn't always come off. My preference would be for a defender who gives nothing away.
I'd love us to get Gradel in, but I'd be just as happy if we could bring Donovan back in on loan. Coleman won't be a midfielder forever but, at the moment, he's possibly our third choice right back. I think that Moyes would see it as too much of a risk playing him at full back in a flat back four. We're already vulnerable down the left flank because of Baines's raids forward. Our defence would be like Swiss cheese with Coleman on the opposite side.
Why do ideas have to be revolutionary to be effective? Kendall and Dalglish both used it because it solved a problem and made use of the players that they had. Our problems are that we're vulnerable defensively, we have very little width and we need to accommodate attack-minded fullbacks. Potentially it could also help us solve the riddle of what to do with Heitinga/Rodwell/Duffy too. Inter used it slightly differently because the middle centreback had the freedom to step in to midfield. That role would be ideal for Jack in particular. We could even encourage Distin to run with the ball in to midfield. Which ever way we worked it, we'd be watertight at the back.
Your posts keep on getting longer an longer but *adopts a heavy Brooklyn accent* I don't see any winner.
RFUS
Anustart
To be fair, that's probably a decent assessment of Distin. But in the end, it shouldn't matter how they deal with danger, just that they do deal with danger. And going on current form and merit, Distin deals with it better than anyone in the team. So to single him out seems odd. Now if you were talking long term, I'd understand, as he's 33.
I disagree with the swiss cheese comment. We're vulnerable down the left when Baines goes forward because no one seems to cover him like Pienaar used to. This season in the first half Pienaar went missing, and then post-Jan whoever has played there hasn't tracked back well enough. But this idea that if you've got 2 attacking fullbacks then you're going to be twice as exposed, really makes no sense. If you actually watch the way we play, Neville/Hibbert do get forward too. And we don't seem to have any problem with them being exposed... or if we do, you're not moaning about it. The only difference with Coleman is that he won't get a nosebleed past the half way line, and might be able to do something productive.
And yes, he won't be as good defensively as the other two. And that is why he is 3rd choice and that is why Moyes is reluctant to play him there. Because Moyes does not take risks, and likes to play it safe. But to account for our lack of width, it would be nice to have attacking fullbacks on both sides. As I've said earlier and Toccy has too, Coleman's better suited to overlapping as a fullback than he is receiving the ball at RM, so don't just say he can provide that width at RM. Because really, he hasn't. Not enough, anyway.
As for the 3 CBs, I'll just leave you to that one. I think it would be ace on FIFA, but this is the real world. Actual football managers would no doubt pick so many holes in it... it would look like swiss cheese, to use your earlier simile. I'm not an actual football manager, obviously, and so there are limitations to my knowledge. But I am smart enough to realise that when the best managers in the world don't do something anymore, then it's probably because it's not a good idea.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
I want us to have a mean defence. Unfortunately, because of the way Sylvain plays, I think our defending is always likely to be touch and go. He takes risks, so we will get caught sometimes.
Baines covers much more ground than the full back on the other side. He is constantly up and down the pitch, getting to the byeline and even in to the box. By contrast it's comparatively rare for either Neville or Hibbert to get in to the final third. They know if they tried to take someone on that they'd get caught on the ball, so once they cross the half way line they tend to look for a high diagonal ball in to the box. If we played both Baines and Coleman in a flat back four and told them to get forward as much as they like I guarantee that we would get mullered.
Haven't I made the point that Coleman would be best suited to being a right wing back? Wouldn't that compensate for his defensive flaws and allow him to get ahead of a midfielder?
I have a lot of respect for Mourinho and Steve Clarke (who no doubt suggested the idea to Dalglish). As far as I'm concerned, they're two of the most intelligent, forward-thinking coaches in the game. If they see fit to use the system, how can it be so bad? Maybe it's just that more 'steady' managers such as Moyes haven't caught on to it yet? He'll no doubt wake up to 4-2-3-1 next season, only 2 years too late! ;-)
- Status
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
