Cybereagles

The bowl's barely emptied its cake mix into the baking tray and yet the Mundial has already served up a healthy slice of layer cake, a madeira sponge base of orthodoxy, flavoured by a thick and fruity layer of unorthodox jams. David has met his Goliath with 'pults packed with pebbles of tactical vicissitude that coursed the air with weightless ease and yet impressed upon their leviathanic adversaries like the prodigious meteorite. Crash. Bang. Wallop. Stretched out on the hammock or heavily reclined on the easy boy, Hamlet in hand, Stetson Vallejo dipped to cast an obscuring shade of super cool savvy and abstruseness, the conveniently and certainly circumstantially capricious back three/five. A shape shifting Optimus Primian autobot that has thrown the would be Hulk Hogans in a Jake Roberts sleeper-hold, the songs of suffocation calling Damien to dance his way out of the bag.



Needless to say, the approach was exact, granted luck was indeed flirted with and perhaps much more transpired between the two. Licentious and leisurely as ever, she lay bare her concupiscence for Spain, who, upon satisfying their own carnal desires, left a poverty of orgasm and plenty post coital tristesse. The Dutch were not least warm recipients of the concubine, but did her well, very well and reaped fair reward of a woman well pleasured. For all of Spain's midfield supremacy, there was an obvious struggle against the aggressive press of De Jong and Guzman and width of Blind. Interestingly, Sneijder was nothing like the number ten expected, the midfield was bypassed, those passes direct and attack, devastating. A truly ingenius tactical masterclass by Van Gaal.

“I didn’t expect the result but I did expect goals. We have players who can turn a match,”

Far from the 3-4-3 orthodoxy of Ancient Ajax, more Pulisian than puritan, but well up on the score cards after the first round. Does Van Gaal stick of twist? Against a counterattacking outfit sitting deep, would it prove as effective?

To 4-3-3 or not 4-3-3, that is the question.

More unchanging Dorian Gray than shape shifting Optimus Prime, the ever employed 4-3-3 may be more hindrance than help. The link man about the Albiceleste is the divinely gifted, aptly named, Angel in midfield. Mother Mary couldn't made him much better. Left-centre of a trio, fleet-footed and shuttling wide, not only does he carry Argentina towards a top heavy attacking motif, but the trajectory of his runs wreaks chaos within the opposition. Who tracks him? Assuming his opposite number follows him out wide, the obvious faux pas becomes the concession of numerical parity centrally with the free man, Lionel Messi dropping deep. Zabaleta will hold width on the right forcing the fullback to stay wide, further isolating the centrebacks, already occupied by two centre-forwards and charged with picking up Messi. Should the midfield drop deep, Gago, a gloriously gifted passer on his day, steps up to prominence.

...The opposition certainly warrants greater thought and consideration than a casual rolling out of the same old. A sit at home right back, man marker on Messi even, 4-1-4-1 possibly, if back fours must be a must be.

There is talk that Sabella is flirting with a 3-5-2 atm

It allows him play three CBs, then push Rojo and Zabeletta forwards as wingbacks, with Mascherano and Gago in CM, behind Di Maria with license to attack spaces vacated by teams foolish enough to overload on Messi

But I'm impressed by the French 4-3-3

Its the quality of the players that makes the system.

A deep anchor who is a ball player, with two box to box workhorses beside him; then two very fundaments-type fullbacks who can squeeze centrally when necessary.

Talking about England, British orthodoxy is the death of woy...

Rooney is a misfit in the system he is playing, as is Wellbeck.

He's better off returning Sterling to the flanks, playing wide and diagonally, or alternatively, bring in a 3rd MF and sacrifice Wellbeck.

The team lacks so much balance, I thought I was watching a Samson Siasia team!

3-5-2 for Argentina. Interesting.

txj wrote:But I'm impressed by the French 4-3-3

Its the quality of the players that makes the system.

A deep anchor who is a ball player, with two box to box workhorses beside him; then two very fundaments-type fullbacks who can squeeze centrally when necessary.

That's what the smart $$$ is. That's what has precipitated Van Gaal's back 3/5. Use the system that suits your personnel best and brings out their strengths while covering up weaknesses.

France is almost an exception, they have such a complete squad.

Argentina is best playing 433.If they try this system against Keshi boys then e go do them like film trick just like e do spain vs Holland

@Kaji, the 3-5-2 was as pointless as a blunt needle to a Red Hot Chili Pepper. Absent from Sabella's debacle adorned was the union jack suit and St George flag, resplendent, in a Charles Twynham bowler hat, with a "Fingers off our Falklands" banner in the background. Ridiculous. If such was the desire to switch a back three/five, a 5-2-3 would've been the better fit.

Aguero..........Messi..........Di Maria


..........Mascherano.....Gago............

Rojo...................................Zabaleta

.....Fernandz....Garay....Campag....

Alternatively, an asymmetrical, 3-4-2-1, with Messi off Aguero and Di Maria breaking left from a central role ala Candreva vs Spain, Confeds Cup.


In as much as Sabella's 4-3-3 presents its challenges with Di Maria opening up the midfield with wide running diagonals, a 3-4-3 would be a more formidable shape and fabulously flexible. Again, Messi at false nine, shock inclusion Lavezzi and Di Maria of a deep counter-attacking disposition, similar to that of Arjen Robben vs Barca season before last.

txj wrote:Talking about England, British orthodoxy is the death of woy...
...Rooney is a misfit in the system he is playing, as is Wellbeck.
...He's better off returning Sterling to the flanks, playing wide and diagonally, or alternatively, bring in a 3rd MF and sacrifice Wellbeck.
...The team lacks so much balance...

Absolutely. Such instances show how far behind in thought process the founding fathers of the glorious game are. The crimes of the Lion Keepers read like a bedtime story, obvious from the outset with a predictable ending. No left-side of genuine quality, history's fetish for repetition, yet added emphasis on left-sidedness tactically. The England team should pick itself, round pegs falling effortlessly into round holes.

Glenn Johnson remains as far from best of both worlds as a flat chest rivaled only in planate by a pancaked derriere. Mastering neither of his positional chores, he's more burden than blessing. Tis not unthinkable to rid the lineup of his irrelevance and for want of balance, tactically, include a Jones or Smalling, possibly better defensively. Neither of continental class, but of such limitation offensively as to allow for a more aggressive approach from the right winger, with less emphasis on him tracking back. The good old stay at home full back. Wilshere, though the lesser in comparison to Lallana, the left-footedness adds balance. Rooney plays off Sturridge and Sterling adds the balancing asymmetry, irony, as a solitary wide forward. Inability to play a back three and all.

---

That's all there is to say about Nigeria today.

txj wrote:---

That's all there is to say about Nigeria today.

That much?

Cellular said I should watch the game as I didn't see it live. I'm at the 65th minute and I'm actually embarrassed.

Embarrassed. And a bit ashamed. Somehow made worse by the bright opening period. I mean, some of the elementary mistakes I'm seeing... It's not often I feel embarrassment bordering on shame.

Not sure I'll get through this tbh... Might try again tomorrow. Might not.

The YeyeMan wrote:

txj wrote:---

That's all there is to say about Nigeria today.

That much?

Cellular said I should watch the game as I didn't see it live. I'm at the 65th minute and I'm actually embarrassed.

Embarrassed. And a bit ashamed. Somehow made worse by the bright opening period. I mean, some of the elementary mistakes I'm seeing... It's not often I feel embarrassment bordering on shame.

Not sure I'll get through this tbh... Might try again tomorrow. Might not.

Please tell us the tactical problems you saw...

Remember I faulted the players... 6 of them chose this game to play one of the worst games.

Cellular wrote:

The YeyeMan wrote:

txj wrote:---

That's all there is to say about Nigeria today.

That much?

Cellular said I should watch the game as I didn't see it live. I'm at the 65th minute and I'm actually embarrassed.

Embarrassed. And a bit ashamed. Somehow made worse by the bright opening period. I mean, some of the elementary mistakes I'm seeing... It's not often I feel embarrassment bordering on shame.

Not sure I'll get through this tbh... Might try again tomorrow. Might not.

Please tell us the tactical problems you saw...

Remember I faulted the players... 6 of them chose this game to play one of the worst games.

There needs to be tactics in order for there to be tactical problems..

And yes, some of the players are equally culpable - Onazi has passed the ball to so many Iranians I'm starting to think his name is Onazihadeen.

Onazi is not a passer of note, and more of a stopper on the edge of being in foul trouble.
Mikel is too causual. He might be termed a 'holding midfielder' and sometimes he holds the ball too long.
Mikel needs to be shifted to the attacking midfield role where he can 'spray' passes after he's tired
of 'holding' onto the ball long enough not to lose it.

Of the myriad tactically faux pas, the pathetically rampaging Moses and Musa charging in-field to collapse vs the culdesac. The use of fullbacks for no apparent reason, the bizarre midfield orientation which saw no runners from deep and yet lofted balls to s striker renowned for everything but his aerial prowess. It was a 4-3-3 with no interconnection between either zone. Perhaps the greatest ga-ga was the belief a bullsh*t, playground strategy would yield anything other than f*ck all vs a deep lying defence. It was thoughtlessly lazy and absolutely languid.

Coach wrote:Of the myriad tactically faux pas, the pathetically rampaging Moses and Musa charging in-field to collapse vs the culdesac. The use of fullbacks for no apparent reason, the bizarre midfield orientation which saw no runners from deep and yet lofted balls to s striker renowned for everything but his aerial prowess. It was a 4-3-3 with no interconnection between either zone. Perhaps the greatest ga-ga was the belief a bullsh*t, playground strategy would yield anything other than f*ck all vs a deep lying defence. It was thoughtlessly lazy and absolutely languid.

Those two points are VERY good.

Throughout the dang game I kept shouting about the CM's making runs WITH or WITHOUT the ball to support the top 3 who were obviously well shackled and swimming in their own mess.
The second point is a bit worrying, we've seen those balls from deep work before, that mikel to emenike connection has worked BUT it's worked against teams who're not parking their butts in their 6yd zone, the point of the long ball BEHIND the defense is moot when the defense doesnt give you the space to run into, at that point Ameobi was necessary to hold up play and handle those long balls, I'd argue that a pairing of Nwofor and Ameobi would have been better than Emenike whose movement was atrocious on the day.

platinum wrote:

Coach wrote:Of the myriad tactically faux pas, the pathetically rampaging Moses and Musa charging in-field to collapse vs the culdesac. The use of fullbacks for no apparent reason, the bizarre midfield orientation which saw no runners from deep and yet lofted balls to s striker renowned for everything but his aerial prowess. It was a 4-3-3 with no interconnection between either zone. Perhaps the greatest ga-ga was the belief a bullsh*t, playground strategy would yield anything other than f*ck all vs a deep lying defence. It was thoughtlessly lazy and absolutely languid.

Those two points are VERY good.

Throughout the dang game I kept shouting about the CM's making runs WITH or WITHOUT the ball to support the top 3 who were obviously well shackled and swimming in their own mess.
The second point is a bit worrying, we've seen those balls from deep work before, that mikel to emenike connection has worked BUT it's worked against teams who're not parking their butts in their 6yd zone, the point of the long ball BEHIND the defense is moot when the defense doesnt give you the space to run into, at that point Ameobi was necessary to hold up play and handle those long balls, I'd argue that a pairing of Nwofor and Ameobi would have been better than Emenike whose movement was atrocious on the day.

We fortunately have the benefit of hindsight.

My fear is that Keshi does not appear to have the know how to read game & make expedient changes.

The good is defensively & athletically we can match any team in the world and we did not lose.

I believe there will be a vast improvement against Bosnia.

^From the depths of the basement, the only way is up, cue the peroxide blonde, eighties babe, bouncing on stage in oversized apparels, indelibly endowed with a couple bee stings. Bosnia will indeed be a different affair, ome doubts they'll play as comparatively cautiously as they did vs Argentina, reference mark being their qualification campaign. Two forwards may be their offering with Pjanic all the more talismanic. Time to engage brain.

@BeniTx, the back three falling into a five proving a refreshing revelation thus far.

Again, for as long as England believe they can employ a back four, they're finished.

Coach wrote:^From the depths of the basement, the only way is up, cue the peroxide blonde, eighties babe, bouncing on stage in oversized apparels, indelibly endowed with a couple bee stings. Bosnia will indeed be a different affair, ome doubts they'll play as comparatively cautiously as they did vs Argentina, reference mark being their qualification campaign. Two forwards may be their offering with Pjanic all the more talismanic. Time to engage brain.

@BeniTx, the back three falling into a five proving a refreshing revelation thus far.

Not as cautious vs Argentina, but still with safety first, playing to the weakness of the opponent, in possession, ie turnovers ratios and the tendency to leave undefended zones behind the CM...

Focus on doubling up in wide areas and preventing the diagonals, a la Robben.

Focus will not be Emenike, but the supply lines to him...

@BeniTx, the Mayweather thesis under fire, possibly? Costa Rica willfully conceding midfield and yet proving so arduous a task to topple and so potent an attacking strategy. The collapsing of the front three into a midfield four, the flat back five on the back foot, brilliant.