Hometactics right personal wrong the two things are so inextricably linked that must we the worst post ever. its like saying 4-4-2 is the right system for a given situation but playing 2 CD up front and 2 FW t the back and dsaying he got the system right but the personal wrong
+26
The-Frank-Tavern
SteveOoO
Zack
Deluded F*ck™
Isco Benny
Mistletoe.
Brian2468
NCFC
The Pröfessör
theflyingfrenchman
blutgraetsche
d gorgeous one haz spoken
forza_rossi
Pirlo
christmasborocooper
Torrente
Kimbo
Fey
TM
fcb
Sheffield gunner
Machiavel
Parks lives
Batman
Owen Thomas
Nightwing
30 posters
Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
The-Frank-Tavern- Number of posts : 8505
Age : 55
Supports : Atlético de Madrid
Registration date : 2006-08-07
- Post n°301
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by The-Frank-Tavern Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:49 pm
Saintsar- Guest
The-Frank-Tavern wrote:tactics right personal wrong the two things are so inextricably linked that must we the worst post ever. its like saying 4-4-2 is the right system for a given situation but playing 2 CD up front and 2 FW t the back and dsaying he got the system right but the personal wrong
Personnel?
You don't get it, do you? Tactics = gameplan. Personnel = actual on-pitch ability. One is ideal, the other is material. One is metaphysical, the other is physical.
Again, you don't understand a thing.
The-Frank-Tavern- Number of posts : 8505
Age : 55
Supports : Atlético de Madrid
Registration date : 2006-08-07
- Post n°303
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by The-Frank-Tavern Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:26 pm
saints you said the tactics were right but the line up (i say personnel, sory my speeling was off) as i said the two are inextricably linked this has fuck all to do with how rooney or o´shea played he imho got his tactics slightly wrong end of as he picked the wrong players.
Saintsar- Guest
A plan is a plan. Tools are tools. One can have the right plan but try to use the wrong tools.
Am I getting through on this?
Am I getting through on this?
Parks lives- Number of posts : 34521
Age : 43
Favourite Player : The Ginger One
Registration date : 2006-08-06
- Post n°305
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by Parks lives Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:39 pm
Sorry Frank, I agree with Saints.
The set up was fine, he just should of played Carrick instead of O'Shea (he's excuse was that Carrick started the last two games) and Ole should of come on for Rooney much earlier.
The set up was fine, he just should of played Carrick instead of O'Shea (he's excuse was that Carrick started the last two games) and Ole should of come on for Rooney much earlier.
COTR- Number of posts : 26580
Age : 40
Supports : Liverp8-0l
Favourite Player : Xabier Alonso, Fabio Aurelio, Daniel Agger, Pepe Reina, Alberto Aquilani, Elano, Luis Suarez, Glen Johnson
Registration date : 2006-08-06
I can see the difference but what you are essentially saying is united don't have the players to play the system you imply or simply these players are capable but had an off day... (we saw this off day many times last year with similar players)...saintgoingmarching wrote:The-Frank-Tavern wrote:one thing i think fergie may have underestaimated was the arsenal 4-5-1. he was q´d about it pre-match and he said that they may play it like they did in the cup final a few years ago, but anybody who has seen arsenal in the interim must know that their 4-5-1 has developed a lot since then and is now a v effective alternative system which the players almost seem more comfortable with than their 4-4-2/4-4-1-1, i think he may have not given it enough consideration as to how offensive it can be for them
Absolute rot. Man U losts due to poor performances and a lack of energy and bite in midfield. The tactics were spot on from Fergie, but the line-up wasn't and he took too long to change it.
united were not bad at all yesterday but arsenal were just a whole lot better..
COTR- Number of posts : 26580
Age : 40
Supports : Liverp8-0l
Favourite Player : Xabier Alonso, Fabio Aurelio, Daniel Agger, Pepe Reina, Alberto Aquilani, Elano, Luis Suarez, Glen Johnson
Registration date : 2006-08-06
of course you do.... that's hardly a shockParks Lives wrote:Sorry Frank, I agree with Saints.
The set up was fine, he just should of played Carrick instead of O'Shea (he's excuse was that Carrick started the last two games) and Ole should of come on for Rooney much earlier.
would carrick have added 'energy and bite' into the midfield... on the evidence of the celtic match the answer is a resounding no... carrick isnt that sort of player.. arsenal would have passed just as easily through carrick as they did through scholes and o'shea... carrick would obviously have had more effect on the team going forward but arsenal would still have created the many chances they did...
Parks lives- Number of posts : 34521
Age : 43
Favourite Player : The Ginger One
Registration date : 2006-08-06
- Post n°308
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by Parks lives Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:44 pm
Clue....less
The-Frank-Tavern- Number of posts : 8505
Age : 55
Supports : Atlético de Madrid
Registration date : 2006-08-07
- Post n°309
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by The-Frank-Tavern Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:46 pm
tactics and personnel are inextricably linked, i ain´t saying the system was wrong, but the personnel were hence overall he got his TACTICS wrong, as i said on an extreme level its like saying his tactics were right but personnel wrong if he had played rooney and saha at CB yesterday and Rio and Wes up front, the two are not inseperable and need to be looked at overall.
i´m sure its what wenger did he looked at it overall whose available, whose fully fit, who experienced in the english game enough to perform at a high enough level, that led him to a 4-5-1 and then fitted his best players available for this match into the system getting it spot on, the way both teams play utd were always going to have chances, you didn´t take them, arsenal created several and were close to creating a good few more except for an odd misplaced final ball, overall tactically wenger got it better, which imho is unusual for him in a v big match
i´m sure its what wenger did he looked at it overall whose available, whose fully fit, who experienced in the english game enough to perform at a high enough level, that led him to a 4-5-1 and then fitted his best players available for this match into the system getting it spot on, the way both teams play utd were always going to have chances, you didn´t take them, arsenal created several and were close to creating a good few more except for an odd misplaced final ball, overall tactically wenger got it better, which imho is unusual for him in a v big match
Saintsar- Guest
COTR wrote:I can see the difference but what you are essentially saying is united don't have the players to play the system you imply or simply these players are capable but had an off day... (we saw this off day many times last year with similar players)...saintgoingmarching wrote:The-Frank-Tavern wrote:one thing i think fergie may have underestaimated was the arsenal 4-5-1. he was q´d about it pre-match and he said that they may play it like they did in the cup final a few years ago, but anybody who has seen arsenal in the interim must know that their 4-5-1 has developed a lot since then and is now a v effective alternative system which the players almost seem more comfortable with than their 4-4-2/4-4-1-1, i think he may have not given it enough consideration as to how offensive it can be for them
Absolute rot. Man U losts due to poor performances and a lack of energy and bite in midfield. The tactics were spot on from Fergie, but the line-up wasn't and he took too long to change it.
That isn't what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that the plan to sit deep and play balls up to a mobile front three nearly worked (i.e. Man U created as many if not more clear chances as Arsenal, despite having less possession) but that a combination of tiredness in midfield (i.e. not having the energy to close Arsenal down effectively, win second balls, move quickly when you win the ball to create options for the passer - all these things were evident), Rooney playing very poorly by his standards, and not playing Carrick (whose long passing is second only to Scholes in Man U's squad) contributed to a very good plan not working well enough.
united were not bad at all yesterday but arsenal were just a whole lot better..
Totally untrue - Man U created the better chances, despite their problems. Arsenal had more possession, but that was always Man U's intention. They didn't actually play much better - they just had a bit higher tempo in midfield than the tired Man U players could deal with. That's where all of Arsenal's chances came from, except for the intial penalty/resultant corner. If Arsenal were so much better then why did they not create as many good chances?
This is your Liverpool hat speaking. Or you just didn't watch the game. I suspect the former.
Parks lives- Number of posts : 34521
Age : 43
Favourite Player : The Ginger One
Registration date : 2006-08-06
- Post n°311
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by Parks lives Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:50 pm
The-Frank-Tavern wrote:tactics and personnel are inextricably linked, i ain´t saying the system was wrong, but the personnel were hence overall he got his TACTICS wrong, as i said on an extreme level its like saying his tactics were right but personnel wrong if he had played rooney and saha at CB yesterday and Rio and Wes up front, the two are not inseperable and need to be looked at overall.
i´m sure its what wenger did he looked at it overall whose available, whose fully fit, who experienced in the english game enough to perform at a high enough level, that led him to a 4-5-1 and then fitted his best players available for this match into the system getting it spot on, the way both teams play utd were always going to have chances, you didn´t take them, arsenal created several and were close to creating a good few more except for an odd misplaced final ball, overall tactically wenger got it better, which imho is unusual for him in a v big match
Not helped at all by the fact Henry and Van Persie were out.
The-Frank-Tavern- Number of posts : 8505
Age : 55
Supports : Atlético de Madrid
Registration date : 2006-08-07
- Post n°312
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by The-Frank-Tavern Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:54 pm
Parks Lives wrote:oh yeah i agree parky its what i was saying he didn´t have huge options other than the baptista up front in a 1-1 with adebayor, which he reverted to late on when they scored, but fergie too had injury problems and dealt with those less effectively, he should have played carrick, i´m sure you´d have kept possession much better then and not been so tired late on, this imho is all tactics.The-Frank-Tavern wrote:tactics and personnel are inextricably linked, i ain´t saying the system was wrong, but the personnel were hence overall he got his TACTICS wrong, as i said on an extreme level its like saying his tactics were right but personnel wrong if he had played rooney and saha at CB yesterday and Rio and Wes up front, the two are not inseperable and need to be looked at overall.
i´m sure its what wenger did he looked at it overall whose available, whose fully fit, who experienced in the english game enough to perform at a high enough level, that led him to a 4-5-1 and then fitted his best players available for this match into the system getting it spot on, the way both teams play utd were always going to have chances, you didn´t take them, arsenal created several and were close to creating a good few more except for an odd misplaced final ball, overall tactically wenger got it better, which imho is unusual for him in a v big match
Not helped at all by the fact Henry and Van Persie were out.
Tweesus- Number of posts : 34851
Age : 41
Registration date : 2006-08-06
RVP wouldn' have started IMO - Wenger does seem to like Adebayor agaisnt the big 4.
Saintsar- Guest
COTR wrote: but arsenal would still have created the many chances they did...
Ronaldo had 4 shots - one from the wide free kick (blazed over, as per usual), one from a chest and volley when Scholes tackled Fabregas, one from a long-range curler after Fabregas misplaced a pass, the other being the close range volley that laid out Lehmann. Saha had his header that beat Lehmann but just missed, Solskjaer was denied by a wonderful save. Ronaldo played through Rooney first half and he dragged his shot wide from a good position. All the rest were mediocre/poor chances.
Arsenal had the goal, the Rosicky drive, the Baptista break from midfield, the penalty and the scramble from the following corner. All the rest were mediocre-poor chances.
By my count that's 6-5 in terms of good goalscoring opportunities. Maybe I've missed something, but in terms of good chances created (the true measure of any game, in the absence of any horrific blunders by defenders or suchlike), it was either even, or Man U just edged it.
COTR- Number of posts : 26580
Age : 40
Supports : Liverp8-0l
Favourite Player : Xabier Alonso, Fabio Aurelio, Daniel Agger, Pepe Reina, Alberto Aquilani, Elano, Luis Suarez, Glen Johnson
Registration date : 2006-08-06
saints pointless arguing much over this... you are often accused of being the most bitter anti arsenal person on here so i do laugh when you accuse my view of being tainted by being a liverpool supporter... it's up there with the most hypocritical things that has ever been said.. but not to worry..
we can all see different things watching a football game... i got the impression as did the 40 united fans i was watching the game with that arsenal played the better football, had the better chances and were the better team... not one single fan moaned about the result or argued against them bein outplayed.. so i am hardly alone in my view.. united had a few great chances... ronaldo's obviously and ole's at the end.saha's header was excellent as well...from that you can easily say united deserved a goal and maybe something from the game... but arsenal IMo had the just as many and i thought more chances during the game... the penatly, rosicky, adebayor (numerous times), baptista, the chance that hit the post early on, many many 2 on two situations that were not taken advantage of... i just thought arsenal were the better team and had the better situations throughout the game... sorry if you cannot accept this opinion
we can all see different things watching a football game... i got the impression as did the 40 united fans i was watching the game with that arsenal played the better football, had the better chances and were the better team... not one single fan moaned about the result or argued against them bein outplayed.. so i am hardly alone in my view.. united had a few great chances... ronaldo's obviously and ole's at the end.saha's header was excellent as well...from that you can easily say united deserved a goal and maybe something from the game... but arsenal IMo had the just as many and i thought more chances during the game... the penatly, rosicky, adebayor (numerous times), baptista, the chance that hit the post early on, many many 2 on two situations that were not taken advantage of... i just thought arsenal were the better team and had the better situations throughout the game... sorry if you cannot accept this opinion
The-Frank-Tavern- Number of posts : 8505
Age : 55
Supports : Atlético de Madrid
Registration date : 2006-08-07
- Post n°316
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by The-Frank-Tavern Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:00 pm
cotr my point exactly there was a superb saving tackle from one of the utd defenders on adebayor inthe 1H if he hadn´t done that he´d have a had a good goal opportunity yes excellent defending but thats no difference to a good save, this 6 good chances (1 a long range effort) to 5 (excl. some long range efforts of rosicky which just didn´t quite come off) is far too simplistic and is just and excuse to rubbish arsenal at every opportunity
Saintsar- Guest
The-Frank-Tavern wrote:tactics and personnel are inextricably linked,
That is precisely what I'm disputing. Formations and personnel are inextricably linked, tactics and personnel aren't, because tactics are a plan in the abstract. They're metaphysical. Like God, logic, mathematics, natural laws and so on.
Fergie had a very good plan, but executed it poorly. i.e. he gave the right instructions to the players, but picked the wrong players (and suffered from poor games from his holding midfielder and star striker) and so a very good plan wen't wrong.
i ain´t saying the system was wrong, but the personnel were hence overall he got his TACTICS wrong, as i said on an extreme level its like saying his tactics were right but personnel wrong if he had played rooney and saha at CB yesterday and Rio and Wes up front, the two are not inseperable and need to be looked at overall.
That's formation, not tactics. I know that pundits and journalists invariably mention formations when talking about tactics, but they are almost exclusively a moronic, ignorant bunch who couldn't manage a pub side (hence why they aren't coaches or managers).
A prime illustration of this is that in the BBC caption, and Dixon's 'analysis' (i.e. boring comments about triangles that were beneath contempt) they had Man U lining up in a 4-4-2 when anyone with the faintest idea could have told you it was a 4-3-3.
i´m sure its what wenger did he looked at it overall whose available, whose fully fit, who experienced in the english game enough to perform at a high enough level, that led him to a 4-5-1 and then fitted his best players available for this match into the system getting it spot on, the way both teams play utd were always going to have chances, you didn´t take them,
I wasn't playing, so of course I didn't take the chances United created.
arsenal created several and were close to creating a good few more except for an odd misplaced final ball, overall tactically wenger got it better, which imho is unusual for him in a v big match
As I think I've demonstrated, Man U created more or at least as many good chances as Arsenal, despite Rooney doing little except give the ball away and O'shea do little except... give the ball away.
COTR- Number of posts : 26580
Age : 40
Supports : Liverp8-0l
Favourite Player : Xabier Alonso, Fabio Aurelio, Daniel Agger, Pepe Reina, Alberto Aquilani, Elano, Luis Suarez, Glen Johnson
Registration date : 2006-08-06
i also find it priceless that saints includes ronaldo's free kicks as a chance or rooney from the far side of the box... these situations would take a special goal to score from yet he is including them as great opportunites.. very very funnyThe-Frank-Tavern wrote:cotr my point exactly there was a superb saving tackle from one of the utd defenders on adebayor inthe 1H if he hadn´t done that he´d have a had a good goal opportunity yes excellent defending but thats no difference to a good save, this 6 good chances (1 a long range effort) to 5 (excl. some long range efforts of rosicky which just didn´t quite come off) is far too simplistic and is just and excuse to rubbish arsenal at every opportunity
The-Frank-Tavern- Number of posts : 8505
Age : 55
Supports : Atlético de Madrid
Registration date : 2006-08-07
- Post n°319
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by The-Frank-Tavern Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:06 pm
saints - tactics at the lowest level i accept,eg who marks who at corners, wherea nd how to attack, what specific things to do to counteract the opposition attacking threat, but the first point of any tactical assessment, is your own formation without this you cannot do any of thos eother things, hence imho he got his tactics werong by picking the wrong players, the formation was fine.
Parks lives- Number of posts : 34521
Age : 43
Favourite Player : The Ginger One
Registration date : 2006-08-06
- Post n°320
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by Parks lives Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:07 pm
This is just going round and round in circles (I'm even tempted to lock this).
Saints, me and most Man United fans excepted Arsenal deserved to win the game, now people want to throw into your face, Saints defends it and people make out he's being biased for explaining Man United had chances.
Saints, me and most Man United fans excepted Arsenal deserved to win the game, now people want to throw into your face, Saints defends it and people make out he's being biased for explaining Man United had chances.
Tweesus- Number of posts : 34851
Age : 41
Registration date : 2006-08-06
Why is it you are always so defensive with regards to SAFs tactics Saints?
I remember debating Man Utds tactics with you before and you always seem insistent that it is the fault of the personnel rather than the tactics deployed.
Surely tactics are also based upon the players that are chosen and vice versa?
So by choosing to play O'shea, SAF made a huge error - his opinion was likely based on O'Shea's performnce in their 4-2 vitory at Highbury.
I remember debating Man Utds tactics with you before and you always seem insistent that it is the fault of the personnel rather than the tactics deployed.
Surely tactics are also based upon the players that are chosen and vice versa?
So by choosing to play O'shea, SAF made a huge error - his opinion was likely based on O'Shea's performnce in their 4-2 vitory at Highbury.
Saintsar- Guest
COTR wrote:saints pointless arguing much over this...
So don't.
you are often accused of being the most bitter anti arsenal person on here so i do laugh when you accuse my view of being tainted by being a liverpool supporter...
Arsenal fans cannot take the heat. That you'd say 'you are accused of being' rather than showing how I am 'the most bitter anti arsenal person on here' illustrates that you haven't a clue about me, or how to counter what I've said.
it's up there with the most hypocritical things that has ever been said.. but not to worry..
I'm not anti-Arsenal. I watched the game, I congratulated Arsenal afterwards, I came on here and posted on their team thread saying well done.
I'm just not accepting the bullshit people are talking about why Arsenal won. I've explained what Man U's failings were and how Arsenal exploited them. You've said things like 'they taught them a lesson'.
we can all see different things watching a football game...
Yes, and some people's opinions are much more valuable than others. Given a choice between Obispo's opinion of the Liverpool-Chelsea game and, say, Arnaud's view of the same, you'd pick Obispo's because his is more informed and makes a lot more sense.
i got the impression as did the 40 united fans i was watching the game with that arsenal played the better football, had the better chances and were the better team...
So some Man U fans are depressed cretins who didn't watch the game properly.
not one single fan moaned about the result or argued against them bein outplayed.. so i am hardly alone in my view..
No, you have the same view as Lee Dixon expressed on MOTD last night, and that Scot expressed throughout the game on Sky. Since most football fans are no smarter than the players, they take the views of commentators and pundits as gospel. Does this prove that you are right, or that most people are foolish, uncritical sheep?
united had a few great chances... ronaldo's obviously and ole's at the end.saha's header was excellent as well...from that you can easily say united deserved a goal and maybe something from the game...
You've changed your tune. First it was 'Arsenal taught Man U a lesson' and 'Arsenal were by far the better side'. Now it's 'you could say Man U deserved something from the game'. Why not just admit that it was a close game where Arsenal had more possession but about the same number of chances, Man U were a bit slack at times and this eventually cost them the single goal? I'll tell you why you can't admit that - because as a Liverpool fan of your kind you simply have to gloat about the loss and make out that it was worse than it really was.
but arsenal IMo had the just as many and i thought more chances during the game... the penatly, rosicky, adebayor (numerous times), baptista, the chance that hit the post early on, many many 2 on two situations that were not taken advantage of...
I cited actual incidents. You talked of 'numerous' and 'many many'. This is weak and you know it. The stats show Arsenal had only 2 more shots than United, don't they? And I'd argue Man U's chances were clearer.
i just thought arsenal were the better team and had the better situations throughout the game... sorry if you cannot accept this opinion
I can't accept it, because it isn't true. Besides, you've already shifted your position and basically accepted that what I've said is true, so I'm happy to leave it there.
Tweesus- Number of posts : 34851
Age : 41
Registration date : 2006-08-06
Parks Lives wrote:This is just going round and round in circles (I'm even tempted to lock this).
Saints, me and most Man United fans excepted Arsenal deserved to win the game, now people want to throw into your face, Saints defends it and people make out he's being biased for explaining Man United had chances.
Well I've also said we were a bit lucky but we've been out of luck in the last three games so we deserved some
Saintsar- Guest
COTR wrote:i also find it priceless that saints includes ronaldo's free kicks as a chance or rooney from the far side of the box... these situations would take a special goal to score from yet he is including them as great opportunites.. very very funnyThe-Frank-Tavern wrote:cotr my point exactly there was a superb saving tackle from one of the utd defenders on adebayor inthe 1H if he hadn´t done that he´d have a had a good goal opportunity yes excellent defending but thats no difference to a good save, this 6 good chances (1 a long range effort) to 5 (excl. some long range efforts of rosicky which just didn´t quite come off) is far too simplistic and is just and excuse to rubbish arsenal at every opportunity
I never said Ronaldo's free kick was a good chance. This is just bollocks.
Parks lives- Number of posts : 34521
Age : 43
Favourite Player : The Ginger One
Registration date : 2006-08-06
- Post n°325
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by Parks lives Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:14 pm
Tweedledum wrote:Why is it you are always so defensive with regards to SAFs tactics Saints?
I remember debating Man Utds tactics with you before and you always seem insistent that it is the fault of the personnel rather than the tactics deployed.
Surely tactics are also based upon the players that are chosen and vice versa?
So by choosing to play O'shea, SAF made a huge error - his opinion was likely based on O'Shea's performnce in their 4-2 vitory at Highbury.
He didn't even start that game? He just came on for Fletcher to score the late goal.
I thought O'Shea did well last season but he's not what you need against top opposition as seen against Liverpool and Chelsea last season and Arsenal yesterday.
Parks lives- Number of posts : 34521
Age : 43
Favourite Player : The Ginger One
Registration date : 2006-08-06
- Post n°326
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by Parks lives Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:17 pm
http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8699_1515987,00.html
Just seen this article. This is the kind of thing we're/Fergies up against.
Played 6, won 5, scored 14, conceded 5 and its end of the world time.
Just seen this article. This is the kind of thing we're/Fergies up against.
Played 6, won 5, scored 14, conceded 5 and its end of the world time.
Cesc- Guest
Most of your fellow posters are the doom merchants like l r d and N18WNG.Parks Lives wrote:Played 6, won 5, scored 14, conceded 5 and its end of the world time.
Tweesus- Number of posts : 34851
Age : 41
Registration date : 2006-08-06
Parks Lives wrote:http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8699_1515987,00.html
Just seen this article. This is the kind of thing we're/Fergies up against.
Played 6, won 5, scored 14, conceded 5 and its end of the world time.
Its only because its Arsenal.
If you had lost to say Blackburn then it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as this.
If we lost to Spurs I would expect un uproar down here, but no way wuld we be calling for the managers head.
Just thought I'd add that I was on the tube last night and there were some spurs fans being complete and utter CUNTS - scum of the earth
Parks lives- Number of posts : 34521
Age : 43
Favourite Player : The Ginger One
Registration date : 2006-08-06
- Post n°329
Re: Man Utd (Redbloods) v Arsenal (Match Thread!)
by Parks lives Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:25 pm
Tweedledum wrote:Parks Lives wrote:http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8699_1515987,00.html
Just seen this article. This is the kind of thing we're/Fergies up against.
Played 6, won 5, scored 14, conceded 5 and its end of the world time.
Its only because its Arsenal.
If you had lost to say Blackburn then it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as this.
If we lost to Spurs I would expect un uproar down here, but no way wuld we be calling for the managers head.
Just thought I'd add that I was on the tube last night and there were some spurs fans being complete and utter CUNTS - scum of the earth
Thats why he hurts for me, I just wish our next game was midweek, so we could put it behind us.
What were the Spurs fans doing?
Saintsar- Guest
Tweedledum wrote:Why is it you are always so defensive with regards to SAFs tactics Saints?
I'm not. It just so happens that he was one of the first managers in the Premiership to realise that pressing Arsenal high up the pitch is far more dangerous than sitting back and letting them into your half.
The natural instinct against a side you fear (as most teams rightfully fear Arsenal) is to 'get in their faces, don't give them time to get their passing going' and other English football cliches. This is completely the wrong idea, in my view, and it so happens that Fergie has finally realised this. How many goals do Arsenal get from passes from 10-15 yards inside the opposition half? Very few, because they don't play the long ball much. How many goals do they get from, one way or another, getting behind the opposition and slotting 10 yard passes in and around the box? Most of them, albeit in different manners. So, if you leave the first 10 or 15 yards of your half to them, you give them far less space in the area where most of their goals come from and most of their attacking talent is effective.
Take my point?
Fergie usually plays a high-pressing style where his team try to win the ball all over the pitch. Now, Man U did a bit of that yesterday, when Arsenal played the ball back, but got little to no joy out of it. Primarily they sought to win the ball 20-30 yards from their own goal and hit long balls up to the front three. Fergie isn't the most astute tactician in the world, but he realised this long before most Premiership managers (many of which still don't get it). This is, in part, why Man U had a 4 year unbeaten streak against you until yesterday.
I remember debating Man Utds tactics with you before and you always seem insistent that it is the fault of the personnel rather than the tactics deployed.
That's because I can often see how the team is trying to play but is failing. Like I say, tactics are metaphysical - visions of how the match should pan out. Selecting personnel, making substitutions and so on relate to tactics, but they aren't tactics. They are practical decisions with the aim of producing the tactical vision. It's like the difference between something a painter might be trying to produce (vision, metaphysical) and what they actually produce given the colours and brushes at their disposal.
I know, this goes against the grain in terms of most people's understandings of football, but I couldn't care less. Most people's understanding of football is taken from pundits and tabloid journalists, i.e. morons repeating the slogans of morons.
Surely tactics are also based upon the players that are chosen and vice versa?
Not as I see it.
So by choosing to play O'shea, SAF made a huge error - his opinion was likely based on O'Shea's performnce in their 4-2 vitory at Highbury.
Quite probably, and had O'Shea played better it might just have worked yesterday - indeed he was one of the two players who closed Fabregas down for the goal but didn't react to the loose ball quickly enough. This gave Cesc a second bite (he tried to pass it out wide first) so he took a moment and then slotted the through ball.
The goal itself is a prime example of everything I've said, and since it was the defining moment of the whole game I think I'm vindicated in my views. I keep saying that Arsenal played well, yet keep being accused of being antiArsenal. That's just stupid.
Do you see where I'm going with this? You're a smart guy, so I've given you a bit more to chew on than the others.