Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) That seems unbalanced to me! (It's a back 3 when in possession!) To be fair, when Milan attacked it was 3-4-1-2. British sides play a bog-standard back 4, so by your argument they have the perfect balance (in the sense that they don't roam too much)? but then you also say they are miles behind the continental sides? I think British sides are poor in comparison to continental sides because they are one-dimensional in attack. Aggressive full-backs, providing width and options, would improve that -- if managed correctly. They still had a back 4 and when Cafu attacked Gattuso would cover his runs. I specifically said Milan had the perfect balance, since they had one full back extremely strong going forward, other exceptional at defending, then a centre back pairing where one is more of a ball player and the other is a ball winner. If we go into any European tie playing 2 defenders we will get horsed. Edited October 2, 2015 by Ser Barristan Selmy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,427 Posted October 3, 2015 Author Share Posted October 3, 2015 I'm not saying we'll be playing with 2 centre-backs and that's it, like now. I think we must have a DM/pivot (preferably 2) in there to cover the full-backs. However, I maintain, it is perfectly manageable to have both full-backs playing high and wide. Too often, Scottish sides go into these games looking to defend, but why can't we play on the front-foot? Play our attacking game? Sure, we need to be pragmatic, but as long as we manage it correctly we can play our own game. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.933227737d9b1db3d025cd3f6cbbf371.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.