Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: »World Cup Discussion
This WC looks nice - some favourites are underperforming, like Espana, or Nederland[HUGE]. Some great games of smaller countries - Kiwis :)) really nice...today Germany dominated Suomi...wow :)
Nederland is a real big surprise. But the Kiwis are the biggest for me.
Our (Germany's) game was a result of the same tactic from Ripa's Suomi like in last game. Looking at this: no real surprise.
@Ganzengeile: if you look at the game exactly, you will see that the tactic's were very different in at least three important aspects:
-winger
-crossing strikers
-real defensive Midfielder
result: much more space for our players to pass. I don't believe Suomi's passing is lower then our's
Nederland is a real big surprise. But the Kiwis are the biggest for me.
Our (Germany's) game was a result of the same tactic from Ripa's Suomi like in last game. Looking at this: no real surprise.
@Ganzengeile: if you look at the game exactly, you will see that the tactic's were very different in at least three important aspects:
-winger
-crossing strikers
-real defensive Midfielder
result: much more space for our players to pass. I don't believe Suomi's passing is lower then our's
flemings goal was amazing...he bearly got in to the game and then he bearly gets in to his position and then the winger makes a cross and goal...lol
Germany's passing has been beautiful the past two matches. It may not be statistically better then Finland (I don't know), but it was far more effective. The passing to the wing was key - Germany often hit their winger in stride, while Finland's winger usually had to start from a stop (part of this is tactical - part is just really nice passing).
Do you really think criss-crossing your strikers is advantageous? Half the time they hold hands in the middle of the opposition defense. I've always thought it was far better to "wobble" strikers then to actually cross them.
Do you really think criss-crossing your strikers is advantageous? Half the time they hold hands in the middle of the opposition defense. I've always thought it was far better to "wobble" strikers then to actually cross them.
I don't really think England was lucky, we certainly controlled most of the game.
I will accept however that Uraguay's two chances were both very dangerous situations indeed.
I will accept however that Uraguay's two chances were both very dangerous situations indeed.
Do you really think criss-crossing your strikers is advantageous? Half the time they hold hands in the middle of the opposition defense. I've always thought it was far better to "wobble" strikers then to actually cross them.
There are some advantages. If you remember me, i will tell you after worldcup.
It really doesn't work in every game, but sometimes it is very efficient.
(edited)
There are some advantages. If you remember me, i will tell you after worldcup.
It really doesn't work in every game, but sometimes it is very efficient.
(edited)
Uruguay focussed too much on attack ... example: 4 vs 1 situation for uruguay, and only the 3 defenders left on own half.
risky from england to play very high with the defs, knowing uruguay has fast strikers but not that technical (clearly visible).
And why would England play with only 1 striker against the weakes member of the group?
Anyway:
England through on player's quality
risky from england to play very high with the defs, knowing uruguay has fast strikers but not that technical (clearly visible).
And why would England play with only 1 striker against the weakes member of the group?
Anyway:
England through on player's quality
CrissCrossing is useful if you use it in the right tactic ;)
there was a point were uruguay was playing in your side of the field...they had 2 very nice chances...
today's England tactic sucks. The 5 defenders in line and in a offside line is deadly against stronger teams.
Your luck is that you played against Uruguay today. :D
Please, dont use this tactic again.. :P
and Congrats for the victory! [cool]
Your luck is that you played against Uruguay today. :D
Please, dont use this tactic again.. :P
and Congrats for the victory! [cool]
I think playing with a high defensive line can be very effective as long as you can back your defenders to be good enough to be able to almost never miss a tackle against the opponents strikers. This seemed to work well, apart from with Fleming who I know is a very nice defender, but not really quick enough to be used in that formation in my opinion, I would say he is more of a DM.
Anyway it certainly helps keeps the opponents pinned back in their own half.
I believe that England's idea with our tactic was to keep as much territory as possible and that eventually the chances would come from through-balls or crosses.
To me it worked well, the only issues I could see is that our wingers were not positioned high/wide enough at times to ensure they are always in behind the opposition defence, and that the throw-in situations were not good for England, we couldn't manage to find a man in space enough and often lost the ball from a throw-in.
Anyway it certainly helps keeps the opponents pinned back in their own half.
I believe that England's idea with our tactic was to keep as much territory as possible and that eventually the chances would come from through-balls or crosses.
To me it worked well, the only issues I could see is that our wingers were not positioned high/wide enough at times to ensure they are always in behind the opposition defence, and that the throw-in situations were not good for England, we couldn't manage to find a man in space enough and often lost the ball from a throw-in.
I've tried it lots of times. In my experience what criss-crossing accomplishes is taking your strikers out of passing lanes half of the time. I like wobbling much better. :)
Your luck is that you played against Uruguay today. :D
Have you considered that the manager did realise he would be playing against Uraguay from the start today!!??
He clearly backed our defence against their offensive players and it was rare that they could even get out of their half.
Have you considered that the manager did realise he would be playing against Uraguay from the start today!!??
He clearly backed our defence against their offensive players and it was rare that they could even get out of their half.
yes, I considered it, but I dont think the manager can play again with this tactic. Uruguay had a lot of chances to shoot and if they have a little more tech they will shoot more and maybe the score board had a little change.
anyway, the tactic name tells me that the manager will thing about modify a lot this tactic for the future!! :D
anyway, the tactic name tells me that the manager will thing about modify a lot this tactic for the future!! :D
if you look at the game exactly, you will see that the tactic's were very different in at least three important aspects:
-winger
-crossing strikers
-real defensive Midfielder
I did look excactly, I was watching the match live! ;-)
Of course you're right, but finally neither the DEF-MIDs nor the crossing strikers did have any influence on the match.
The wingers, yes, probably that could have been important to leave them at the outline.
But like Seca wrote, the passing to the winger was the key.
While almost all German players (including DEF and ATT) successfully passed to your winger, most of the Suomi passes to their winger were inaccurate.
-winger
-crossing strikers
-real defensive Midfielder
I did look excactly, I was watching the match live! ;-)
Of course you're right, but finally neither the DEF-MIDs nor the crossing strikers did have any influence on the match.
The wingers, yes, probably that could have been important to leave them at the outline.
But like Seca wrote, the passing to the winger was the key.
While almost all German players (including DEF and ATT) successfully passed to your winger, most of the Suomi passes to their winger were inaccurate.