Jump to content

TheBrownBottle

Member
  • Posts

    17,663
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TheBrownBottle

  1. Yep. Trippier was an incredible signing, and he was a boost and played really well in his six appearances that season - but he was injured in early Feb when the table looked like it did below. He definitely didn’t keep us up ‘single-handed’; I’m not keen on re-writing history. We were still in the clarts when he played his last game that year.
  2. That makes sense that Brazil would have that number sequencing - W-M was in use when Brazil first adopted numbers. So: 11 9 7 10 8 6 5 4 3 2 And W-M was often really a 3-2-5, which makes it clearer: 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 So they would have moved the left-half to left back, so the 6 is the new LB. The inside right is moved into midfield, because in Brazil 4-2-4 becomes the norm in the mid-50s after W-M loses favour. In England, the numbers were first introduced when W-M was somewhat established, but many teams would still line up in the only formation football had actually had for over half a century - 2-3-5 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 In England (UK generally), the centre-half (5) first slotted into centre-back, then when W-M became 4-4-2 in the late 50s, the 6 (left-half) also became a CB, with the inside right slotting into midfield - usually RCM. So the 4 & 8 were your centre mids TBF it was mainly in France and Germany were the ‘6’ was a midfielder and the ‘4’ a centre back. Which is why football hipsters love wanking on about ‘number 6s’ - as if a defensive midfielder who can play a bit is an invention of mainland Europe. Therefore, anyone who calls a defensive mid a ‘6’ is immediately suspicious and should be treated with extreme caution (I’m joking!) edit: for anyone who actually managed to get through that and somehow is curious as to why the team numbers seem to go backwards, that’s because football formations were usually shown in the inverse of what they are today - often in the program the two teams would be shown as if they were on the pitch against each other. So: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
  3. Best thing about football - the disappointment doesn’t last because there’s always another game soon after
  4. Also, hopefully if Trippier plays, he channels what another great NUFC right back did at Luton instead of fluffing a clearance …
  5. *sigh* back to the grind of league football Could do with an away win to cheer me up before Xmas. I think we’ll get it, as well. 1-3 for me
  6. It’s more that the reason that Hall’s transfer is permanent in the summer is to avoid FFP restrictions in the current football financial year. So his permanent transfer doesn’t hit the FFP books until the 24/25 season. Cancelling his transfer will have zero impact on what we can spend in January, as anything spent in Jan will be on the 23/24 season books. FFP doesn’t run by calendar year - it’s not rolling in the sense of a moving 36 month window
  7. We’re all guessing because Howe isn’t likely to come out with what he thinks on it. But if the lad isn’t getting mins when we can’t field a fit XI, then there is absolutely a rabbit off.
  8. Hall not signing in the summer doesn’t free up any FFP funds in January
  9. The injuries aren’t coincidental nor are they bad luck. We haven’t adjusted our style of play particularly well to accommodate the fixtures. We go hell for leather at home and cower away because we’re fucked. This can’t continue - we could spend £400m in the summer but if we have the same number of fixtures the same thing will happen again.
  10. Yep, those injuries keep racking up. It really, really does need looking into.
  11. Playing like this for 90 mins is just inviting this sort of thing happening. Our away form is just incredibly poor
  12. Yep. Wolves away was a classic example. He’s not been particularly well managed.
  13. Got to start Livramento when all are fit. Trippier needs some time out - poor sod looks cooked. I’m fucking annoyed still with that soft shite goal at the end, but he’s clearly not right atm
×
×
  • Create New...