Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

Bruno Guimarães: £100M release clause has expired (Various)

Fantail Breeze

by Fantail Breeze
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

TheBrownBottle

TheBrownBottle

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 18/12/2023 at 09:35, JNK said:

That's why it's interesting.

 

In classic Brazil the norm would be something like 

 

              9

       11          7

             10

           8

                5

    6   4    3    2

             1

 

 

or 

 

           9  11

         7/8  10 

         7/8  5

       6  4   3   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

 

 

Edited by TheBrownBottle

Link to post
Share on other sites
JNK

JNK

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

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

 

 

 

That's a proper football history lesson mate! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheBrownBottle

TheBrownBottle

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, JNK said:

That's a proper football history lesson mate! 

Cheers haha - and all because I’m irrationally irritated by the nonsense use of numbers to describe positions :) 

 

And your explanation of numbering in Brazilian football simply added to it - the numbering system changed in different football cultures.  So I get annoyed at the obvious pretentiousness of describing a ‘6’ in English football, when that number never matched the position described (while arguing against it in the most pretentious way possible)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oregon_Geordie

Oregon_Geordie

Posted
Posted
Just now, joeyt said:

Love him but his passing was way off it today

Agree but he's flogged to death. Guy plays every second of every fucking game, and it's a rule that everything has to go through him. We need some more creativity and brains to help him. Longstaff was utterly invisible today tbh

Link to post
Share on other sites
WideopenMag

WideopenMag

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

Not sure like, I'd be chuffed with him being club captain after Lascelles and Trippier. Think he's become more of a leader through all this.

See more from the likes of Schar or Botman tbh, his discipline is too poor to be a captain for me. I love him btw not a moan just don't think everyone is suited to be a captain, Joelinton would be similar for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ronson333

Ronson333

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, WideopenMag said:

See more from the likes of Schar or Botman tbh, his discipline is too poor to be a captain for me. I love him btw not a moan just don't think everyone is suited to be a captain, Joelinton would be similar for me.

You love a negative..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...