Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest firetotheworks

Whenever Beckham plays, we seem to end up in a tactical straitjacket. Despite the fact that we won comfortably last night, I didn't see much of the fluidity and interchanging of positions that we'll need to break down the better defences.

 

The problem with Beckham is that he's very reluctant to move out of that quarterback position ie in space behind the attacking players and spraying passes forward to them. He even tends to get in that kind of position when he's out wide. He never seems to make runs forward, trying to get on the end of passes and flick-ons, like Gerrard or Lampard. That's basically because he's not comfortable receiving the ball in tight spaces under pressure and tends to avoid it, because he lacks pace and close control.

 

At that level, you don't really want a player who's only going to stick to a limited role. He has to be able to respond to opportunities as they arise, because the opportunities aren't that plentiful. His presence means that everyone ends up having to stick to their positions more, and we then look very predictable.

 

Thats all true, but to put a positive spin on it he's still excellent at what he does, so when its required its another way of doing things.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever Beckham plays, we seem to end up in a tactical straitjacket. Despite the fact that we won comfortably last night, I didn't see much of the fluidity and interchanging of positions that we'll need to break down the better defences.

 

The problem with Beckham is that he's very reluctant to move out of that quarterback position ie in space behind the attacking players and spraying passes forward to them. He even tends to get in that kind of position when he's out wide. He never seems to make runs forward, trying to get on the end of passes and flick-ons, like Gerrard or Lampard. That's basically because he's not comfortable receiving the ball in tight spaces under pressure and tends to avoid it, because he lacks pace and close control.

 

At that level, you don't really want a player who's only going to stick to a limited role. He has to be able to respond to opportunities as they arise, because the opportunities aren't that plentiful. His presence means that everyone ends up having to stick to their positions more, and we then look very predictable.

 

Thats all true, but to put a positive spin on it he's still excellent at what he does, so when its required its another way of doing things.

 

 

 

Well, he's not the only one who can take set pieces any more. His crossing is still probably better than anyone else's, but given his other limitations, I wouldn't pick him just for that.

 

Unless you're playing the likes of Andorra, who always play in exactly the same way, no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy. We need players who are flexible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever Beckham plays, we seem to end up in a tactical straitjacket. Despite the fact that we won comfortably last night, I didn't see much of the fluidity and interchanging of positions that we'll need to break down the better defences.

 

The problem with Beckham is that he's very reluctant to move out of that quarterback position ie in space behind the attacking players and spraying passes forward to them. He even tends to get in that kind of position when he's out wide. He never seems to make runs forward, trying to get on the end of passes and flick-ons, like Gerrard or Lampard. That's basically because he's not comfortable receiving the ball in tight spaces under pressure and tends to avoid it, because he lacks pace and close control.

 

At that level, you don't really want a player who's only going to stick to a limited role. He has to be able to respond to opportunities as they arise, because the opportunities aren't that plentiful. His presence means that everyone ends up having to stick to their positions more, and we then look very predictable.

 

You've answered yourself there - fluidity and interchanging of positions wasn't needed against Plumbers XI's defence. But I take your point - we sometimes look static and short quick passes are still often beyond us.

 

The 2nd paragraph is all very true but not a problem as such - we know Beckham's getting old and thus this 'quarterback' position seems a natural move for him. Of course against better sides, no it's unlikely he'll be able to impress like he did last night, but I prefer to see it as a positive, that Beckham still at least has that excellent passing of his, when the opportunity arises. I doubt he'll be played against the better teams. Or at least not starting.

 

My main concern is the wings. Walcott, I know he's young, but he needs to be delivering more now. Next season will be massive for him I think.

 

Gerrard, again, against Andorra etc, can play comfortably from the left, come inside, dictate the game. Against the top teams? I doubt it. He needs to be played centrally I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

Whenever Beckham plays, we seem to end up in a tactical straitjacket. Despite the fact that we won comfortably last night, I didn't see much of the fluidity and interchanging of positions that we'll need to break down the better defences.

 

The problem with Beckham is that he's very reluctant to move out of that quarterback position ie in space behind the attacking players and spraying passes forward to them. He even tends to get in that kind of position when he's out wide. He never seems to make runs forward, trying to get on the end of passes and flick-ons, like Gerrard or Lampard. That's basically because he's not comfortable receiving the ball in tight spaces under pressure and tends to avoid it, because he lacks pace and close control.

 

At that level, you don't really want a player who's only going to stick to a limited role. He has to be able to respond to opportunities as they arise, because the opportunities aren't that plentiful. His presence means that everyone ends up having to stick to their positions more, and we then look very predictable.

 

Thats all true, but to put a positive spin on it he's still excellent at what he does, so when its required its another way of doing things.

 

 

 

Well, he's not the only one who can take set pieces any more. His crossing is still probably better than anyone else's, but given his other limitations, I wouldn't pick him just for that.

 

Unless you're playing the likes of Andorra, who always play in exactly the same way, no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy. We need players who are flexible.

 

What I am saying is that when its needed, as in for a plan B or against teams that wont outpace him he'll still do a very good job. He might not be flexible, but you could say that of a fair few of them. Barry is even less flexible imo. Beckham can play midfield or right wing, and still, even against some of the better teams has that knack of easily finding space to punish teams. Definitely not a starter against tougher opposition, but easily good enough for the bench.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

yeah, hate Sky for England games.

 

Saves having to go to the pub too.

 

Agreed, I hate watching England games with other people. I can't be arsed to fucking go through the merits of the team or listen to their opinions, because I'm not arsed. I just like us to win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither are better than Ashley Cole man

Ashley Cole's attacking play is not that great. He can't cross well, he can't shoot, and his passing is average. It is hard to consider him the best in the world considering how important that position has become in an attacking sense.

 

:facepalm:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...