3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

[Lazie]

<DIV class=medmainhead>McClaren shifts his pack</DIV><DIV class=medmainhead></DIV><DIV class=topcopy>England will face Croatia in Zagreb with a 3-5-2 formation. Steve McLaren has opted to play three centre-backs in John Terry, Rio Ferdinand and John Carragher with Ashley Cole and Gary Neville as nominal wing-backs. Scott Parker has replaced suspended Steven Gerrard as part of a midfield trio in which Frank Lampard will be given licence to attack in a formation last used in 2000.</DIV>

[OJ]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

thats is why some say in europe its a 3-5-2 and in south america thats a 5-3-2..

[Lazie]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

McClaren can spin it all him want, thats a 5-3-2 formation. Gary is no midfielder, Cole is a pure leftback. Carrick, Parker and Lampard will be the 3 mids, with Rooney dropping deep.

Croatia has a 20+ unbeaten streak at home, McClaren going there to lock up shop and try come catch them on the counter.

[Lazie]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

OJ (10/11/2006)thats is why some say in europe its a 3-5-2 and in south america thats a 5-3-2..

If the midfield had a SWP or Lennon instead of Gary and Cole instead of Cashley, then I'd call then a true 3-5-2.

[OJ]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

its really a 5-3-2... but in europe they dont play 5-3-2 other than geramny experimenting with it but they call it a 3-5-2 its not where you line up but how you utilize it... that was my point to syia.

[OJ]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

i agree, again my point is whats the diff between a 3-5-2 and a 5-3-2.. and its just the roles... you cant play lennon because they dont have the defensive ability as these two.

[Gamma]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

the only relevant numbers are 2 and 0!

[Karl]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

Gamma (10/11/2006)the only relevant numbers are 2 and 0!

Tell dem a-gen! Formations are meaningless! What TEAM does with and without the ball is the only TRUTH! (I hate these emotions - I need the thumbs up from the old forum here!)

[Lazie]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

Karl, Gamma is right, the final score is the most important, however, why is it coaches struggle / tinker with various formations? Formations that lead to the final outcome? Sometimes yuh must think.

[Karl]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

Lazie (10/11/2006)Karl, Gamma is right, the final score is the most important, however, why is it coaches struggle / tinker with various formations? Formations that lead to the final outcome? Sometimes yuh must think.

Did you see the last World Cup?

Which of the TEAMs in the semi-finals had a rigid so-called formation?

Did you see players moving about the field going where the game demanded them to be?

Did you see men who stood up on the right before restarts being at times found on the left? ...and, vice versa?

Did you see men who stood up at the back at restarts being found most forward of his team's players? ...and, vice versa?

Did you see so-called midfielders operate as forwards most forward...sometimes shooting and scoring goals...and, sometimes as last defenders?

Did you see so-called forwards working in midfield or in defense?

Did you not see players rotating and being where the game demanded them to be?

...or, did you only see the T'dad and Tobago '11 man defensive formation'?

...yet, even T'dad and Tobago at times had their players come out of the "11 man defensive formation" and play football!

Formations? What is that? The old dark ages WM where there were men rooted to positions as the unit moved ponderously forward, sidewards or backwards? I seem to remember those old dark days of my youth!

In fact, in 1963 Munro won the D'Cup with such an ancient ploy. Could not work in today's world unless the opponent was Boxhill's ...not mine...St Lucia whipped Reggae Boyz! Poor players vs poorer players!

[OJ]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

wha u seh -2-0

[OJ]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

not meaningless but what you do within them..

[OJ]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

no formation is rigid..

[Siya]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

Exactly! The 5-3-2 hardly ever flows into a 3-5-2 and that happens because of personnel. You will start certain players based off what you are calling the formation - no matter if a coach says the wingbacks will overlap blah blah blah the wingbacks in every 5-3-2 I have ever seen, will still end up playing no higher up fieldthan their stoppers except for a likkle one overlaphere and there.

[Karl]

RE: 3-5-2 or 5-3-2?

OJ (10/12/2006)no formation is rigid..

So... are yousaying during matches players/TEAMs are "moving" through various "formations"?

If yes...does that mean thereare only'formations' duringinstants ofplay...thatmany different 'formations' occur (dictated by dynamics on the field)during the course of each match?

Are you agreeing with me that pre-match determinedformations are irrelevant?