The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
OK, with all that's going on at Manchester United at the moment I thought I'd take a minute to discuss formations. Everyone knows that for seven out of the last nine seasons Man U have taken the Premiership by storm, playing a simple 4-4-2 formation and being good at it. However, Ferguson in his infinite wisdom has taken it upon himself to change this. What happens? United aren't 10 points clear by Christmas and the Premiership is much better and wide open because of it. But what is the best formation?
4-4-2: Favoured by England (under Erikksonsonson) and making our national team look slightly better than the pub sides they've resembled for the last few years. The players seem comfortable in this. No need for wing-backs (come on, name a good wing-back!) and played well it can be devastating (see United for last nine years!). However, as Ferguson has noted, teams which become reliant on their wingers can be easily stopped, which led him to try...
4-1-4-1: In this system the back four are given extra protection by a holding midfielder (for United this is Keane) which allows the other four midfielders to go further forward. This system looks good on paper. With four international midfielders you should be able to get amazing movement, with all of them joining the lone striker, who's main job would be to hold up the ball and bring others into play. However, as United have found, the lone striker can be very isolated.
3-5-2: The wing-back system, favoured by the continental style teams, such as Chelsea, any Hoddle team, West Ham, etc. The idea being that when the other team have the ball, the wing-backs can drop back to form a 5-man defence, then move forward again when the ball is won back to create extra presence in midfield. Main problem is that no-one is good enough to play the position. Wingers aren't good enough at defending, and full-backs aren't creative enough.
4-3-3: Favoured by some continental teams, and Leeds often play like this. Basically, when the team lose the ball, the two wide strikers drop back to help the midfield out. Your midfielders need to be very fit for this formation, but in Leed's case it works because Mills and Harte get forward to help them well.
3-4-1-2: The ultimate Champ Man formation! You need three brilliant centre halfs, but if you can get them, this is a goals galore formation. (OK, no team is ever gonna play this, but I thought I'd put it in to see if anyone else uses it in Champ Man!)
3-1-4-2: How I reckon Man U could play. Put in the three centre-halfs Neville, Brown, Silvestre. All are quick and could probably play this way. Stick Keane just in front of them, keep the four in midfield, but give van Nistelrooy a partner up front, doesn't really matter who. OK, so its not gonna stop them letting in goals, but neither has playing 4-1-4-1, so just say "OK, you might score three, but we're gonna score seven!"
Personally, I'm a 4-4-2 man myself. It stops all this confusion. I don't think good players need to be told how to play, but when they are all playing in the same positions as each other, you are bound to get problems. As for United, bring back 4-4-2, or just go for it, and stick another striker on anyway! At least we might have some nice high scoring games!
4-4-2: Favoured by England (under Erikksonsonson) and making our national team look slightly better than the pub sides they've resembled for the last few years. The players seem comfortable in this. No need for wing-backs (come on, name a good wing-back!) and played well it can be devastating (see United for last nine years!). However, as Ferguson has noted, teams which become reliant on their wingers can be easily stopped, which led him to try...
4-1-4-1: In this system the back four are given extra protection by a holding midfielder (for United this is Keane) which allows the other four midfielders to go further forward. This system looks good on paper. With four international midfielders you should be able to get amazing movement, with all of them joining the lone striker, who's main job would be to hold up the ball and bring others into play. However, as United have found, the lone striker can be very isolated.
3-5-2: The wing-back system, favoured by the continental style teams, such as Chelsea, any Hoddle team, West Ham, etc. The idea being that when the other team have the ball, the wing-backs can drop back to form a 5-man defence, then move forward again when the ball is won back to create extra presence in midfield. Main problem is that no-one is good enough to play the position. Wingers aren't good enough at defending, and full-backs aren't creative enough.
4-3-3: Favoured by some continental teams, and Leeds often play like this. Basically, when the team lose the ball, the two wide strikers drop back to help the midfield out. Your midfielders need to be very fit for this formation, but in Leed's case it works because Mills and Harte get forward to help them well.
3-4-1-2: The ultimate Champ Man formation! You need three brilliant centre halfs, but if you can get them, this is a goals galore formation. (OK, no team is ever gonna play this, but I thought I'd put it in to see if anyone else uses it in Champ Man!)
3-1-4-2: How I reckon Man U could play. Put in the three centre-halfs Neville, Brown, Silvestre. All are quick and could probably play this way. Stick Keane just in front of them, keep the four in midfield, but give van Nistelrooy a partner up front, doesn't really matter who. OK, so its not gonna stop them letting in goals, but neither has playing 4-1-4-1, so just say "OK, you might score three, but we're gonna score seven!"
Personally, I'm a 4-4-2 man myself. It stops all this confusion. I don't think good players need to be told how to play, but when they are all playing in the same positions as each other, you are bound to get problems. As for United, bring back 4-4-2, or just go for it, and stick another striker on anyway! At least we might have some nice high scoring games!
Page:
Okay. Some of you may remember me writing these famous words earlier in this discussion:
"I also thought maybe Keane could drop back into the back four. Play 4-4-2, and get rid of Blanc, play the same back four, then when United get the ball, Keane moves forward into the midfield, and they change to 3-5-2 with Schole pushed slightly forward. Or maybe even 3-1-4-2."
So come on Fergie, own up, who are you? Or is it just coincidence that the game after I suggest this Keane drops into the back four? (With, I must admit, awful results!) Obviously there is a Man U spy somewhere in this forum. So watch out people - they're everywhere!
I would also like to point out that I take no responsibility for united's awful performance against Chelsea. If Ferguson had done it properly and dropped Blanc it would have been fine.
"I also thought maybe Keane could drop back into the back four. Play 4-4-2, and get rid of Blanc, play the same back four, then when United get the ball, Keane moves forward into the midfield, and they change to 3-5-2 with Schole pushed slightly forward. Or maybe even 3-1-4-2."
So come on Fergie, own up, who are you? Or is it just coincidence that the game after I suggest this Keane drops into the back four? (With, I must admit, awful results!) Obviously there is a Man U spy somewhere in this forum. So watch out people - they're everywhere!
I would also like to point out that I take no responsibility for united's awful performance against Chelsea. If Ferguson had done it properly and dropped Blanc it would have been fine.
I agree with the 3-1-4-2 formation myself.
Defenders: Silvestre, Blanc, G.Neville
Defensive Midfielder: Keane (c)
Midfielders: Giggs, Veron, Scholes, Beckham
Strikers: Cole, Van Nistelrooy
This way we'd be rippin' defnces apart again!!!!
Defenders: Silvestre, Blanc, G.Neville
Defensive Midfielder: Keane (c)
Midfielders: Giggs, Veron, Scholes, Beckham
Strikers: Cole, Van Nistelrooy
This way we'd be rippin' defnces apart again!!!!
Anyone saying Beclham doenst cover the match only has to watch the England Greece MAtch at Old trafford. Beckham looked as though he was playing in every position on the park!
Would you believe you're not the only person who has said that when I suggested it? Actually, in June I'm supposed to take a year out from my degree course. Might apply to give the Old Trafford board a bit longer to find a replacement for Sir Alex!!
Nomad_Soul wrote:
> The GingerLord wrote:
> I also thought maybe Keane could drop back into the
> back four. Play 4-4-2, and
> get rid of Blanc, play the same back four, then
> when United get the ball, Keane
> moves forward into the midfield, and they
> change to 3-5-2 with Schole pushed
> slightly forward. Or maybe even
> 3-1-4-2.
I agree. You've hit on the perfect solution. Have you applied for
> the soon to be vacant managerial post at the Theatre of Dreams yet?
Nomad_Soul wrote:
> The GingerLord wrote:
> I also thought maybe Keane could drop back into the
> back four. Play 4-4-2, and
> get rid of Blanc, play the same back four, then
> when United get the ball, Keane
> moves forward into the midfield, and they
> change to 3-5-2 with Schole pushed
> slightly forward. Or maybe even
> 3-1-4-2.
I agree. You've hit on the perfect solution. Have you applied for
> the soon to be vacant managerial post at the Theatre of Dreams yet?
I can't believe this, but Sky and ITV's stats are actually coming in use. Apparently Beckham runs an average of 12.1 km per game. I think most run about 8-9.
missing the classic 2-5-3 fuseball setup = guaranteed to let in loads of goals at both ends.
VenomByte wrote:
> CJ007 wrote:
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back
> enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the
> world.
Simply not true.
Beckham could make a very good wingback. His
> stamina and workrate are astounding - it's been measured that he runs something
> like 8km during the course of a game. I think the average midfielder does about
> half that. He can easily be in defence one minute, and sprinting up the wing the
> next. In fact, if you've taken much notice of him, even before tha major fuss in
> the last few months about how well he's come on, you'd notice this.
True,
> he's not the greatest tackler in the world, but he DOES win quite a few, and
> even if he doesn't make a tackle, he's always putting pressure on players.
Very True. My point exactly.
> CJ007 wrote:
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back
> enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the
> world.
Simply not true.
Beckham could make a very good wingback. His
> stamina and workrate are astounding - it's been measured that he runs something
> like 8km during the course of a game. I think the average midfielder does about
> half that. He can easily be in defence one minute, and sprinting up the wing the
> next. In fact, if you've taken much notice of him, even before tha major fuss in
> the last few months about how well he's come on, you'd notice this.
True,
> he's not the greatest tackler in the world, but he DOES win quite a few, and
> even if he doesn't make a tackle, he's always putting pressure on players.
Very True. My point exactly.
VenomByte wrote:
> CJ007 wrote:
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back
> enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the
> world.
Simply not true.
Beckham could make a very good wingback. His
> stamina and workrate are astounding - it's been measured that he runs something
> like 8km during the course of a game. I think the average midfielder does about
> half that. He can easily be in defence one minute, and sprinting up the wing the
> next. In fact, if you've taken much notice of him, even before tha major fuss in
> the last few months about how well he's come on, you'd notice this.
True,
> he's not the greatest tackler in the world, but he DOES win quite a few, and
> even if he doesn't make a tackle, he's always putting pressure on players.
Very Treu. My point exactly.
> CJ007 wrote:
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back
> enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the
> world.
Simply not true.
Beckham could make a very good wingback. His
> stamina and workrate are astounding - it's been measured that he runs something
> like 8km during the course of a game. I think the average midfielder does about
> half that. He can easily be in defence one minute, and sprinting up the wing the
> next. In fact, if you've taken much notice of him, even before tha major fuss in
> the last few months about how well he's come on, you'd notice this.
True,
> he's not the greatest tackler in the world, but he DOES win quite a few, and
> even if he doesn't make a tackle, he's always putting pressure on players.
Very Treu. My point exactly.
CJ007 wrote:
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the world.
Simply not true.
Beckham could make a very good wingback. His stamina and workrate are astounding - it's been measured that he runs something like 8km during the course of a game. I think the average midfielder does about half that. He can easily be in defence one minute, and sprinting up the wing the next. In fact, if you've taken much notice of him, even before tha major fuss in the last few months about how well he's come on, you'd notice this.
True, he's not the greatest tackler in the world, but he DOES win quite a few, and even if he doesn't make a tackle, he's always putting pressure on players.
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the world.
Simply not true.
Beckham could make a very good wingback. His stamina and workrate are astounding - it's been measured that he runs something like 8km during the course of a game. I think the average midfielder does about half that. He can easily be in defence one minute, and sprinting up the wing the next. In fact, if you've taken much notice of him, even before tha major fuss in the last few months about how well he's come on, you'd notice this.
True, he's not the greatest tackler in the world, but he DOES win quite a few, and even if he doesn't make a tackle, he's always putting pressure on players.
CJ007 wrote:
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the world.
Beckham has one of the best "engines" in the game. You're telling me he couldn't be a wing-back. I think you're wrong. He is also a very discipled player tactically, as is Giggs - they both could do the wing-back roll no probs.
> You cannot put beckham as a wingback he doesn't run back enough and tackle.
> Anyway he is the worst tackler in the world.
Beckham has one of the best "engines" in the game. You're telling me he couldn't be a wing-back. I think you're wrong. He is also a very discipled player tactically, as is Giggs - they both could do the wing-back roll no probs.
Page: