Trequartista

[INF-AMOS]

Here's a thought Brad. How's about not posting in threads that don't interest you?

Alternatively, get one of the admins to set up a new private forum, where you can give all new threads the once over, before deciding if they're fit for consumption. I can't help thinking you'd enjoy the feeling of power.

Quality.

Not taking sides like, just thought it was funny.

 

[Feed Me]

This season, when he was on form, I thought his most prominent attributes were his vision and eye for a killer pass. Whenever he played alongside Rooney, which wasn't a lot once he had gotten settled unfortunately, he was always looking for the killer ball in behind to him or Ronaldo and he picked them out beautifully plenty of times.

And I'd say that description of Cantona is exactly how I'd describe Berbatov, so I'm surprised you think he's not like Berbatov.

As I said in my post, I think Berbatov's main attribute as an attacker is his ability to score. Granted, that didn't exactly work out this season, but throughout his career, my summary stands up to scrutiny I reckon. I don't think he is as creative as Cantona or Bergkamp were. He has a brilliant touch, but not the ability to execute a killer pass in the same way as these players.

(I believe these stats are domestic league games)

Cantona's club career - 162 goals in 439 games = 0.37 goals per game.
Bergkamp's club career - 234 goals in 648 games = 0.36 goals per game.
Zola's club career - 192 goals in 599 games = 0.32 goals per game.

Berbatov's club career (thus far) - 130 goals in 305 games = 0.43 goals per game.

Berbatov has an even better strike rate in European competition than he does in domestic. He also outstrips all of the above players in the international arena. This is obviously not conclusive, but I'd say it goes some way to backing the idea up that Berbatov is more of a centre forward than a traditional number 10. His first season at United was something of an anomaly.

If we were talking about playing a system with a creative, in the hole player, then we'd be better served sticking Rooney there in my opinion, with Berbatov as the most advanced attacker. I think Rooney is more creative and Berbatov more deadly in front of goal.

 

[Feed Me]

OK, can we say:

9.5/withdrawn striker - Rooney, Dalglish.
Trequartista/punta mezzo - Baggio, Bergkamp (10s?)
Enganche/inside forward - Zidane, Riquelme (also 10s)

Ie spectrum that runs from a pure forward to a pure midfielder?

I'd go with that. And say that Berbatov fitted none of those categories.

 

[Spoony]

As I said in my post, I think Berbatov's main attribute as an attacker is his ability to score. Granted, that didn't exactly work out this season, but throughout his career, my summary stands up to scrutiny I reckon. I don't think he is as creative as Cantona or Bergkamp were. He has a brilliant touch, but not the ability to execute a killer pass in the same way as these players.

(I believe these stats are domestic league games)

Cantona's club career - 162 goals in 439 games = 0.37 goals per game.
Bergkamp's club career - 234 goals in 648 games = 0.36 goals per game.
Zola's club career - 192 goals in 599 games = 0.32 goals per game.

Berbatov's club career (thus far) - 130 goals in 305 games = 0.43 goals per game.

Berbatov has an even better strike rate in European competition than he does in domestic. He also outstrips all of the above players in the international arena. This is obviously not conclusive, but I'd say it goes some way to backing the idea up that Berbatov is more of a centre forward than a traditional number 10. His first season at United was something of an anomaly.

If we were talking about playing a system with a creative, in the hole player, then we'd be better served sticking Rooney there in my opinion, with Berbatov as the most advanced attacker. I think Rooney is more creative and Berbatov more deadly in front of goal.

Even though, Berbatov's natural position is probably just off the main striker, he played the majority of his games as a number 9 at Spurs(well, at least a hight proportion of them). Whereas the likes of Cantona, Zola et al always played a deeper role. And this probably reflects in the goal stats. Oh and the Cantona comparisons are valid - the only difference being that Cantona had more drive - but both suited the withdrawn role.

 

[Brwned]

As I said in my post, I think Berbatov's main attribute as an attacker is his ability to score. Granted, that didn't exactly work out this season, but throughout his career, my summary stands up to scrutiny I reckon. I don't think he is as creative as Cantona or Bergkamp were. He has a brilliant touch, but not the ability to execute a killer pass in the same way as these players.

(I believe these stats are domestic league games)

Cantona's club career - 162 goals in 439 games = 0.37 goals per game.
Bergkamp's club career - 234 goals in 648 games = 0.36 goals per game.
Zola's club career - 192 goals in 599 games = 0.32 goals per game.

Berbatov's club career (thus far) - 130 goals in 305 games = 0.43 goals per game.

Berbatov has an even better strike rate in European competition than he does in domestic. He also outstrips all of the above players in the international arena. This is obviously not conclusive, but I'd say it goes some way to backing the idea up that Berbatov is more of a centre forward than a traditional number 10. His first season at United was something of an anomaly.

If we were talking about playing a system with a creative, in the hole player, then we'd be better served sticking Rooney there in my opinion, with Berbatov as the most advanced attacker. I think Rooney is more creative and Berbatov more deadly in front of goal.

All I know is that since he moved to England he's never looked like a particularly good finisher, nor would I ever even consider putting it as his best attribute.

Since he's moved to England this is his stats in the league:
08/09 - 9 goals, 9 assists
07/08 - 15 goals, 11 assists
06/07 - 12 goals, 11 assists

He's always seemed just as likely to create a goal for someone else as to score it himself.

And in his last season at Spurs he played behind Robbie Keane, and has played there for us, which leads me to believe that Juande Ramos and Sir Alex both see him as more of a creative player than a finisher.

 

[vijay]

OK, can we say:

9.5/withdrawn striker - Rooney, Dalglish.
Trequartista/punta mezzo - Baggio, Bergkamp (10s?)
Enganche/inside forward - Zidane, Riquelme (also 10s)

Ie spectrum that runs from a pure forward to a pure midfielder?

Probably correct yet the term inside forward is more synonymous with English football not in the continental style of play. Even Cruyff and Platini operated a lot on the inside left of a three man midfield but they were like No 10's a mix of a midfielder and a forward.

Of the recent times Zidane, Riquelme, or Fabregas are more about distributing the ball to two wide forwards and the CF, holding the ball up and bringing the fullbacks in to play not necessarily an old fashioned inside forward and also retarded like Gerrard running around like a headless chicken.apart frto play this role.

 

[peterstorey]

Probably correct yet the term inside forward is more synonymous with English football not in the continental style of play. Even Cruyff and Platini operated a lot on the inside left of a three man midfield but they were like No 10's a mix of a midfielder and a forward.

Of the recent times Zidane, Riquelme, or Fabregas are more about distributing the ball to two wide forwards and the CF, holding the ball up and bringing the fullbacks in to play not necessarily an old fashioned inside forward and also retarded like Gerrard running around like a headless chicken.apart frto play this role.

I think you're describing what a classic passing inside forward did in the British and (continental game) - Haynes, Hoddle, Brady. No need to cheapen the discussion by bringing Gerrard into it.

 

[Mozza]

So you need three central defenders to defend against two strikers?

No, one fullback stays back

 

[Mozza]

Would a proper defender, or a defensive minded midfielder be more accustomed to the sweeper role?

You'd think they'd have to be fairly mobile if they're going to do all the mopping up/distribution which would obviously rule out big powerful CB's, like Vidic. Would someone like Hargreaves be suited to a 'Sweeper' role?

Hargreaves can't pass

 

[friendlytramp]

we played with three at the back most games last season anyway with evra predominantly spending most of his time in the oppositions half.

--------VDS---------
--RB--Rio--Vidic------
-----Carrick---------
--Fletcher------Evra-
Ronaldo-----Park----
-------Berbatov-----
----Rooney---------

cock

 

[vijay]

Hargreaves can't pass

He's bit shite at football but not as bad as the media and fans make him out to be.

 

[Addis]

Hargreaves can pass the ball into the net from a dead ball.

Vidic has good distribution, overall technique for a CB and passing ability, so he could play a sweeper I think. He's not extremely quick though.

 

[Redfighter]

It is an interesting system and I think England has the personnel to make it work. It takes a brave man to introduce such tactical innovation though.

---Terry-Ferdinand-Lescott---
Hargreaves---------------Cole
-------Carrick----Gerrard-----
------------Cole-------------
--------Heskey-Rooney-------

Ferdinand building the play from the back and making a third central midfielder when England are in possession. Cole definetly has the creativity to play the role. The wing backs have a key role.

It's a formation that is very popular in the states, but that is mainly due to the lack of real quality wide players who can do damage on the flanks. The problem with the back three, or Catenaccio, is that it becomes unstable against teams who can quickly switch the play from one flank to another as the when the defence slides across the space appears on the opposite flank. The wing back can obviously fill in but that in turn negates their ability to provide width in a counter attack.

Italy played in this way during Euro 2000 with much success but as we all know, the Italian style can be very negative at times and they tend to rely on the forwards to do much of the flank running.