|
|
Post by maine on Oct 16, 2024 23:59:07 GMT
Dave the bass said
'I can still remember the names for every position in that formation lol'.
O'Neil Stuart Asprey Allen Clamp Skeels Violett Mudie Matthews Ratcliffe Ritchie is probably wrong, I haven't checked. Thompson as inside forward, maybe Nibloe at CF, A different keeper (perhaps the equally poor Irvine or Leslie), maybe the excellent Burrows. Remembering that lot in those positions takes me back. Serious nostalgia. Maybe 60 years on Stoke fans will be romanticizing the skills of Junho and Manhoef, the toughness of Wilmott and the reflexes of Victor? I actually really hope so.
|
|
|
|
Post by davethebass on Oct 17, 2024 0:11:21 GMT
Dave the bass said 'I can still remember the names for every position in that formation lol'. O'Neil Stuart Asprey Allen Clamp Skeels Violett Mudie Matthews Ratcliffe Ritchie is probably wrong, I haven't checked. Thompson as inside forward, maybe Nibloe at CF, A different keeper (perhaps the equally poor Irvine or Leslie), maybe the excellent Burrows. Remembering that lot in those positions takes me back. Serious nostalgia. Maybe 60 years on Stoke fans will be romanticizing the skills of Junho and Manhoef, the toughness of Wilmott and the reflexes of Victor? I actually really hope so. I meant the names of the positions, like inside right, outside left and so on. But well done remembering all them! Sounds like you were going before I was, the only ones of those I remember seeing play were Skeels Ritchie and Burrows. Though I do remember Mr Violett had a fruit shop in Hartshill after he retired (if my memory serves me right). And Eric Skeels ran the Noah's Ark for a while too. And as for romanticising our present players in 60 years, I hope so too! |
|
|
|
Post by loustokiefc on Oct 17, 2024 4:17:06 GMT
Just go for simple 442 and tell your players kick lumps out of em you'll be fine! 😁 It worked for Pulis!!! 😁 Pulis was actually 4-5-1 towards the end of his tenure with us. With Charlie Adam our most advanced midfielder behind Peter Crouch. Possibly the slowest partnership of all time? That’s not an exaggeration by the way, can anyone think of a slower, less mobile duo… ever?🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by wilcopotter on Oct 17, 2024 6:36:37 GMT
Can never understand why teams play out from the back giving the ball to full backs who obviously do not have the capability to do so, then end up dropping themselves in the shite. We seem to do it regularly.
|
|
|
|
Post by femark on Oct 17, 2024 8:03:57 GMT
Can never understand why teams play out from the back giving the ball to full backs who obviously do not have the capability to do so, then end up dropping themselves in the shite. We seem to do it regularly. You lose the ball far less playing out from the back than going long, which means you can control the game, build attacks and reduce the chances for the opposition. Obviously if you do lose the ball, you lose it in a much more dangerous position. There are pros and cons to all styles of play but I'd much prefer to see us play attacking possession based football. |
|
|
|
Post by str8outtahampton on Oct 17, 2024 9:07:25 GMT
I'd never make it as a manager..... It gives me headache just reading it, nevermind working it out!!! 😵💫 Ha! Same here. I'm a bit like Frank Skinner on this. Inverted full backs, diamond formation, Christmas tree. Meaningless to me. And wtf is a False 9? I never moved on from my Subbuteo formation. 2-3-5. |
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Oct 17, 2024 12:29:41 GMT
I'd never make it as a manager..... It gives me headache just reading it, nevermind working it out!!! 😵💫 Ha! Same here. I'm a bit like Frank Skinner on this. Inverted full backs, diamond formation, Christmas tree. Meaningless to me. And wtf is a False 9? I never moved on from my Subbuteo formation. 2-3-5. That's pretty much where I'm at, I'm just getting to grips with wing-backs....... I think!!! 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Oct 18, 2024 9:43:10 GMT
That's a fascinating read that, never heard about all that, or the Austrian Wunderteam. The fact intelligentsia were so much more involved in football on the continent than in UK explains a lot about the differences in styles of play between. The tactics of modern football in general owe a lot to Stoke City. I was reading in a book called The Potteries Derbies (I'll try find it and find the reference) about how in the early days of the original football league the game was mainly a series of 'scrimmages', with everybody piling in trying get the ball, and when a player managed to get the ball and break free he'd try and get as far up the pitch as he could with it before the next scrimmage broke out. Then Stoke developed the new tactic of spreading their players all over the pitch to make use of all the space, and passing the ball between team mates, and around the oppositions attempts at scrimmaging for it. These tactics bewildered other teams and we went on a series of massive wins, until the other teams sussed it out and started copying what we were doing. So the way the game has been played ever since those early days owes a lot to Stoke! I remember as a kid at Primary School we all got to pick a free book out of some club the school was in and everyone picked basically kids books whereas I went with the history of the World Cup. Even at 10 was absolutely fascinated reading about the early ones. Doubt there's many players today with the ability to round the keeper like that and smash goals in top bins with either foot: On a separate point look how small the keepers are - bet nobody in those days was shouting for the size of the goals being reduced. |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Oct 18, 2024 9:58:50 GMT
Can never understand why teams play out from the back giving the ball to full backs who obviously do not have the capability to do so, then end up dropping themselves in the shite. We seem to do it regularly. You lose the ball far less playing out from the back than going long, which means you can control the game, build attacks and reduce the chances for the opposition. Obviously if you do lose the ball, you lose it in a much more dangerous position. There are pros and cons to all styles of play but I'd much prefer to see us play attacking possession based football. However over playing at the back can be anything other than attacking |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Oct 18, 2024 10:01:28 GMT
That's a fascinating read that, never heard about all that, or the Austrian Wunderteam. The fact intelligentsia were so much more involved in football on the continent than in UK explains a lot about the differences in styles of play between. The tactics of modern football in general owe a lot to Stoke City. I was reading in a book called The Potteries Derbies (I'll try find it and find the reference) about how in the early days of the original football league the game was mainly a series of 'scrimmages', with everybody piling in trying get the ball, and when a player managed to get the ball and break free he'd try and get as far up the pitch as he could with it before the next scrimmage broke out. Then Stoke developed the new tactic of spreading their players all over the pitch to make use of all the space, and passing the ball between team mates, and around the oppositions attempts at scrimmaging for it. These tactics bewildered other teams and we went on a series of massive wins, until the other teams sussed it out and started copying what we were doing. So the way the game has been played ever since those early days owes a lot to Stoke! Not sure that's right Scots were first to do that and then when a load went to PNE they won the league unbeaten playing that way There were some key rule changes brought about as a result of early Stoke games though |
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Oct 18, 2024 10:02:08 GMT
You lose the ball far less playing out from the back than going long, which means you can control the game, build attacks and reduce the chances for the opposition. Obviously if you do lose the ball, you lose it in a much more dangerous position. There are pros and cons to all styles of play but I'd much prefer to see us play attacking possession based football. However over playing at the back can be anything other than attacking I'm not convinced being honest especially when lesser sides do it. At best it seems to slowly rotate around the back four ending up at the keeper to be subsequently launched. To me there seems a lot of risk for very little reward. The new one with defenders taking goal kicks and passing it to the goal keeper is even more bizarre. |
|
|
|
Post by onionman on Oct 18, 2024 10:54:26 GMT
That's a fascinating read that, never heard about all that, or the Austrian Wunderteam. The fact intelligentsia were so much more involved in football on the continent than in UK explains a lot about the differences in styles of play between. The tactics of modern football in general owe a lot to Stoke City. I was reading in a book called The Potteries Derbies (I'll try find it and find the reference) about how in the early days of the original football league the game was mainly a series of 'scrimmages', with everybody piling in trying get the ball, and when a player managed to get the ball and break free he'd try and get as far up the pitch as he could with it before the next scrimmage broke out. Then Stoke developed the new tactic of spreading their players all over the pitch to make use of all the space, and passing the ball between team mates, and around the oppositions attempts at scrimmaging for it. These tactics bewildered other teams and we went on a series of massive wins, until the other teams sussed it out and started copying what we were doing. So the way the game has been played ever since those early days owes a lot to Stoke! Not sure that's right Scots were first to do that and then when a load went to PNE they won the league unbeaten playing that way There were some key rule changes brought about as a result of early Stoke games though Think Stoke tried to emulate Scotland and Preston, but played an ageing rag and bone man and fat chimney sweep at wingback, with disastrous consequences. |
|
|
|
Post by davethebass on Oct 18, 2024 13:05:29 GMT
That's a fascinating read that, never heard about all that, or the Austrian Wunderteam. The fact intelligentsia were so much more involved in football on the continent than in UK explains a lot about the differences in styles of play between. The tactics of modern football in general owe a lot to Stoke City. I was reading in a book called The Potteries Derbies (I'll try find it and find the reference) about how in the early days of the original football league the game was mainly a series of 'scrimmages', with everybody piling in trying get the ball, and when a player managed to get the ball and break free he'd try and get as far up the pitch as he could with it before the next scrimmage broke out. Then Stoke developed the new tactic of spreading their players all over the pitch to make use of all the space, and passing the ball between team mates, and around the oppositions attempts at scrimmaging for it. These tactics bewildered other teams and we went on a series of massive wins, until the other teams sussed it out and started copying what we were doing. So the way the game has been played ever since those early days owes a lot to Stoke! Not sure that's right Scots were first to do that and then when a load went to PNE they won the league unbeaten playing that way There were some key rule changes brought about as a result of early Stoke games though Haha it's funny you say that cos I was having doubts myself, thinking the guy who wrote the book I was reading might be biased...so i asked Alexa, and the robot AI voice said it was Aston Villa. Lol. So, we got Stoke, Scots, and Villa so far. You know thinking about it I wouldn't the surprised if it was thought up simultaneously in several different places by different groups of people. Weird shit like that does happen, it happens sometimes with discoveries in mathematics and science. |
|
|
|
Post by davethebass on Oct 18, 2024 13:22:31 GMT
That's a fascinating read that, never heard about all that, or the Austrian Wunderteam. The fact intelligentsia were so much more involved in football on the continent than in UK explains a lot about the differences in styles of play between. The tactics of modern football in general owe a lot to Stoke City. I was reading in a book called The Potteries Derbies (I'll try find it and find the reference) about how in the early days of the original football league the game was mainly a series of 'scrimmages', with everybody piling in trying get the ball, and when a player managed to get the ball and break free he'd try and get as far up the pitch as he could with it before the next scrimmage broke out. Then Stoke developed the new tactic of spreading their players all over the pitch to make use of all the space, and passing the ball between team mates, and around the oppositions attempts at scrimmaging for it. These tactics bewildered other teams and we went on a series of massive wins, until the other teams sussed it out and started copying what we were doing. So the way the game has been played ever since those early days owes a lot to Stoke! I remember as a kid at Primary School we all got to pick a free book out of some club the school was in and everyone picked basically kids books whereas I went with the history of the World Cup. Even at 10 was absolutely fascinated reading about the early ones. Doubt there's many players today with the ability to round the keeper like that and smash goals in top bins with either foot: On a separate point look how small the keepers are - bet nobody in those days was shouting for the size of the goals being reduced. Right choice! And great old film that, you're right hardly anyone rounds the keeper these days, they tend to just smash it and it's 50/50 whether it hits the goalie. Seems like there's more emphasis on physicality and athleticism than technical skills these days. Which might explain the small goalies as well I guess. Just thought, we've got a 'small' goalie now....maybe we're going go proper old school?  |
|
|
|
Post by headsgoup on Oct 19, 2024 11:04:10 GMT
I saw Yokohama play in Japan, using a 334 formation, that was fun.
The offside trap was five yards behind the halfway line.
It was like tennis.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Oct 19, 2024 11:46:18 GMT
Pulis was actually 4-5-1 towards the end of his tenure with us. With Charlie Adam our most advanced midfielder behind Peter Crouch. Possibly the slowest partnership of all time? That’s not an exaggeration by the way, can anyone think of a slower, less mobile duo… ever?🤣 I agree. We were only creative when Etherington was in the side. At one point one season he had more assists than any other Prem player, but when he was crock we changed to 10 men behind the ball and hoof up up the pitch to the big man. The tactics were: 1. Stop the other side scoring. 2. Play for a set piece (free kick, corner, or throw-in in our case) and flood the area with big men to try and get a goal. There was one season when at one point Huth was our highest scorer with 5. Ferguson called us a team of giants. W-M was devised by Herbert Chapman, who was the first to use numbers on shirts, and one of the first to use floodlights. He did everything at the clubs he managed from team manager, office manager, contracts, catering, you name it. He won the league repeatedly with Huddersfield and then went on to do the same with Arsenal. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Chapman |
|
