What's the difference?

[Gray]

Don't really care about formations for me it was the fact that we actually played with some pace for a change and got the ball forward quicker so that the opposition didn't have any time to get themselves organised.

When we play sideways and backward at a slow pace we are just asking the opposition to get all then men behind the ball which makes any team difficult to break down.

 

[blueinsa]

Don't really care about formations for me it was the fact that we actually played with some pace for a change and got the ball forward quicker so that the opposition didn't have any time to get themselves organised.

When we play sideways and backward at a slow pace we are just asking the opposition to get all then men behind the ball which makes any team difficult to break down.

A man after my own heart ;-)

Football is a very simple game made way too complicated at times.<br /><br />-- Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:59 pm --<br /><br />

4-4-2 and that from behind the goal in the south stand where you cant see jack fucking shit!

Well from my lovely warm padded seat on the halfway line it was most definitely a 4-4-2....

;-)

Dont worry mate. I often give an envious glance up from my lowly position ;-)

 

[samharris]

Have watched the aftermatch interview with Bobby (sky sports) and the first thing the interviewer says to Bob is about the 4-4-2 formation and that it worked well..Bob agreed.

so from the horses mouth it was 4-4-2. :)

 

[redmizzle]

the most important :

*Playing Rested key Players

I think that was key too, maybe the ''they're tired'' line wasn't bullshit afterall.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Have watched the aftermatch interview with Bobby (sky sports) and the first thing the interviewer says to Bob is about the 4-4-2 formation and that it worked well..Bob agreed.

so from the horses mouth it was 4-4-2. :)

Case closed then.

;-)

 

[samharris]

Have watched the aftermatch interview with Bobby (sky sports) and the first thing the interviewer says to Bob is about the 4-4-2 formation and that it worked well..Bob agreed.

so from the horses mouth it was 4-4-2. :)

Case closed then.

;-)

in fact...here it is.. :)
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11679_6851110,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 10,00.html</a>

 

[taconinja]

Case closed then.

;-)

in fact...here it is.. :)
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11679_6851110,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 10,00.html</a>

Are you sure you linked the correct article? I don't see formation there. Or I may be sleepy.

 

[Deleted member 14625]

We created fewer chances than we did at home to Birmingham, Blackburn and Fulham but we put them away this time.

Correct. We just took our chances. I thought we actually played better against Bolton a while back. I maintain that was our best performance of the season, even moreso than yesterday, Villa at home and Fulham away even if we did only win 1-0. I'm not getting carried away. We raised our game, yes. Sunderland are actually a good team and i think team and manager knew that so we had to put in a good performace. But they played terribly.; we were gifted space, time, chances, goals... and for once we took advantage of that. Yes we had to do well to create the chances and we were ruthless enough to finish them but just like Villa in December - the opposition were in the midst of a horrendous run of form and low on confidence.

But i am pleased we had the confidence to put them to the sword. But now is not the time to be overly pleased about one game. We need to push on from there. We will need to play even better than yesterday to get a result at Anfield, and if we want 4th, 3rd or even 2nd and to be in full confidence and form for the semi-final, we will need a result there. I'm sure Mancini and all the players will think exactly the same as this.

 

[samharris]

in fact...here it is.. :)
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11679_6851110,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 10,00.html</a>

Are you sure you linked the correct article? I don't see formation there. Or I may be sleepy.

scroll down a tad and clic the vid bit..wait 20 seconds for advert and you'll see the interview.

 

[taconinja]

Are you sure you linked the correct article? I don't see formation there. Or I may be sleepy.

scroll down a tad and clic the vid bit..wait 20 seconds for advert and you'll see the interview.

Ah, it's in the interview! Thanks! :)