Jump to content

Anelka quote on Grant


abramovich

Recommended Posts

http://sport.setanta.com/en/Sport/News/ ... -tactics-/

“My status does not annoy me too much,” he told RMC. “The coach explained to me that Chelsea are used to playing in 4-5-1 and that he has the intention to do this 4-4-2 next year.

“We have important and close games. He did not wish to destabilise the group and change tactics.

“It has to be accepted. He knows what he is doing. Whatever happens, I work at training and I know I can play in a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1.

“It permits me to rest a little. We always want to play all the time. Sometimes it is good to see your team-mates from the bench.

“It may be good before Euros.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Thanks for that Abram,

Its nice to see nic saying Grant knows what he's doing and I expect many posts under mine thanking you for giving us this interesting link to what a genuine person playing in our team although like other sources often on the bench has to say icon_wink.gif

He obviously looks forward to playing under Grant in a 4-4-2 next year when some new players have come in to compliment the style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could play 4-4-2 with 10 right backs if you want to but if your plan is to make it work better than a style that has given good results and you are wary of risking losing it's likely best to get the players you think will play to that formation best.

We have all seen it work at the end of the arsenal game but I think the manager believes we can get results in a 4-3-3 better with whats available to him.

As nic says next season he may well be looking to the 4-4-2.

I am sure Grant knows we can play 4-4-2 with the players we have as he has used it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't really explain why he won't use it at the moment though. It's not as if we have been very convincing in recent games playing 4-3-3, whether it's been Drogba or Anelka up front. I tend to agree with Just in that we have plenty of players to play 4-4-2 - I mean we played that for most of last season. It's not really a case of having unsuitable players at all. Not losing is not what''s important now. It's winning that matters. We need to win all our remaining matches and if we can do it then we will pick up two trophies.

And you wouldn't want me to finish without saying: - of course Anelka would say that, after all he's hoping to be first choice striker next year. In fact I would think he was promised that when he signed in January.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you wouldn't want me to finish without saying: - of course Anelka would say that, after all he's hoping to be first choice striker next year. In fact I would think he was promised that when he signed in January.

You beat me to it. icon_wink.gif

Not surprised that it's Anelka saying this, wasn't he bought in by one A Grant?

I'm not trying to pour scorn on Anelka or his words of support for Grant per se just being a tad cynical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


http://sport.setanta.com/en/Sport/News/Foo...elsea-tactics-/

“My status does not annoy me too much,” he told RMC. “The coach explained to me that Chelsea are used to playing in 4-5-1 and that he has the intention to do this 4-4-2 next year.

“We have important and close games. He did not wish to destabilise the group and change tactics.

“It has to be accepted. He knows what he is doing. Whatever happens, I work at training and I know I can play in a 4-4-2 or 4-5-1.

“It permits me to rest a little. We always want to play all the time. Sometimes it is good to see your team-mates from the bench.

“It may be good before Euros.”

or i aint bothered they pay me a lot of money and i'll be fresh for euro 08

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't really explain why he won't use it at the moment though. It's not as if we have been very convincing in recent games playing 4-3-3, whether it's been Drogba or Anelka up front. I tend to agree with Just in that we have plenty of players to play 4-4-2 - I mean we played that for most of last season. It's not really a case of having unsuitable players at all. Not losing is not what''s important now. It's winning that matters. We need to win all our remaining matches and if we can do it then we will pick up two trophies.

We all know that winning is all important to most fans but what Avram is possibly doing is thinking that not losing is the best way of keeping his Job.

And you wouldn't want me to finish without saying: - of course Anelka would say that, after all he's hoping to be first choice striker next year. In fact I would think he was promised that when he signed in January.

Would'nt want you to finish?...I did'nt want you to start icon_wink.gif

You know its a Joke to me to keep being the thorn in the side of you know everything Grant bashers and whats funniest is you all love to underline each others posts as if they look any more credible because the same group of people that wanted him out after he lost the UTD game are the same ones refusing to admit how well he has done and that he deserves everyones respect.

Anelka has as has Joey, JT and others come out with decent comments about the manager but who are they when we can believe the comments of an unnamed source or a disgruntled Jose fan who thinks Avi is the devil incarnate because he replaced his special one,

Keep stroking each others little posts, I will just keeping willing him on ball.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether we have the players to play the 4-4-2 depends on whether we are talking about the orthodox flat midfield 4-4-2 which epitomised English football for donkeys or whether we are talking about the diamond.

If we are talking about a flat midfield then I don't think we have the players as I don't think we have sufficient quality on the flanks.

If we are talking about a diamond then I think we are slightly better suited however I still think we are lacking someone to play at the front tip who I can say, with all confidence, would be able to deliver in that position consistently.

I am all for us moving toward a two up front team however I don't think it would be a good idea with the current squad we have. I don't think we have all the necessary component parts and I think doing it would throw away our chances of success this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether we have the players to play the 4-4-2 depends on whether we are talking about the orthodox flat midfield 4-4-2 which epitomised English football for donkeys or whether we are talking about the diamond.

If we are talking about a flat midfield then I don't think we have the players as I don't think we have sufficient quality on the flanks.

If we are talking about a diamond then I think we are slightly better suited however I still think we are lacking someone to play at the front tip who I can say, with all confidence, would be able to deliver in that position consistently.

I am all for us moving toward a two up front team however I don't think it would be a good idea with the current squad we have. I don't think we have all the necessary component parts and I think doing it would throw away our chances of success this season.

I really wanted to put a clap here icon_lol.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would be wrong with a flat midfield four of Essien on the right, Lampard and Ballack in the middle and Joe Cole on the left? Surely you can't argue that there is any lack of quaility? Essien has been at his most effective for us on the right. Cole plays on the left of a four regularly for England and Ballack and Lampard would be playing in their normal positions. In fact, I'd be surprised if you could come up with a midfield that looked any stronger.

But the main point is we need to get both Anelka and Drogba playing together up front. Neither is proving prolific up front on their own and we need to be scoring more goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Please don't use the words "Grant" and "stroking" in the same post chippy, conjures up bad thoughts. icon_wink.gif

Avi is quite a little fiesty devil on the quiet you know. ball.gif As for the devil incarnate he hasn't got that far yet surely!

At least it further confirms what most have realised for some time that Grant has deliberately not changed anything much so as not to distablise things - sensible.

Pity he can't remember that during some of his post match press interviews.

Any way I doubt Anelka will be getting to see much more of Drogba from the Chelsea bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could play 4-4-2 with 10 right backs if you want to but if your plan is to make it work better than a style that has given good results and you are wary of risking losing it's likely best to get the players you think will play to that formation best.

We have all seen it work at the end of the arsenal game but I think the manager believes we can get results in a 4-3-3 better with whats available to him.

As nic says next season he may well be looking to the 4-4-2.

I am sure Grant knows we can play 4-4-2 with the players we have as he has used it.

Chippy. There is so much in that post to pick holes in.

Firstly, your choice of formations is wrong. In the article you are agreeing with, Anelka says we are playing a 4-5-1. There is no mention of a 4-3-3. However, I think you are right Chippy. I don't know what Nic is on about, the Mourinho inspired 4-3-3 is Grants's usual formation.

Secondly, is the belief that Avram was put in charge purely to get results? I don't think that was his initial brief. If all you wanted was results and trophies, we already had the best in the business. TSO. No, results with STYLE was Grant's calling from Roman. Indeed he readily repeated this himself in his early days but, as time goes by, it is a mantra he repeats less and grows further and further from.

Thirdly, with the football we are playing under Grant, who wouldn't benefit from trying a 4-4-2 or 4-3-1-2?

Drogba scored thirtysomething goals in the season he had a strike partner alongside him. Albeit an ageing partner, well past his prime. And as you yourself point out, what happened against Le Arse when were deep in donkey doo? Yes, the bugle sounded and on came Anelka to help Drogs through the middle. The rest is history. Did Grant learn from that? Has he deemed it worthy of another try? Question is, did he even make that decision?

Lastly, why are you so insistent that these players, most of them seasoned Internationals with years of top class football behind them, so regimented and indoctrinated that 4-3-3 is the only formation they can understand and perform in? Surely, they played football in other formations before Jose moulded them into winners?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chippy. There is so much in that post to pick holes in.

Firstly, your choice of formations is wrong. In the article you are agreeing with, Anelka says we are playing a 4-5-1. There is no mention of a 4-3-3. However, I think you are right Chippy. I don't know what Nic is on about, the Mourinho inspired 4-3-3 is Grants's usual formation.

I'm not agreeing with a 4-5-1 as you should be able to tell...I replied to the post as a piss take to see you boys jumping on the bandwagon of anything even lightly praising the manager.

Secondly, is the belief that Avram was put in charge purely to get results? I don't think that was his initial brief. If all you wanted was results and trophies, we already had the best in the business. TSO. No, results with STYLE was Grant's calling from Roman. Indeed he readily repeated this himself in his early days but, as time goes by, it is a mantra he repeats less and grows further and further from.

Grant was put in charge because firstly Roman did'nt want Mourinho and secondly because Roman chose to put him in charge.

Thirdly, with the football we are playing under Grant, who wouldn't benefit from trying a 4-4-2 or 4-3-1-2?

We would'nt (in my opinion) as we have done well with the 4-3-3 and 4-4-2 is ok to switch to if we are behind and running out of time but I for the exact reasons Loz posted and as I have said before dont think it is the best way for us to go into games with the players we have.

Unless of course we were dhoping for that mistake to cost the manager his Job?

Drogba scored thirtysomething goals in the season he had a strike partner alongside him. Albeit an ageing partner, well past his prime. And as you yourself point out, what happened against Le Arse when were deep in donkey doo? Yes, the bugle sounded and on came Anelka to help Drogs through the middle. The rest is history. Did Grant learn from that? Has he deemed it worthy of another try? Question is, did he even make that decision?

Thats your question not mine and I believe the manager makes those decisions...strange thought but one I feel has a possible truth in it.

Lastly, why are you so insistent that these players, most of them seasoned Internationals with years of top class football behind them, so regimented and indoctrinated that 4-3-3 is the only formation they can understand and perform in? Surely, they played football in other formations before Jose moulded them into winners?

I am not insistent and dont doubt they could play 4-4-2 but if you read my post before arguing it you would see that I believe we are better with 4-3-3 and our opinions surprisingly differ.

Grant will get the chance to use 4-4-2 either when he needs it or next year when he feels he has the players that suit it best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drogba scored thirtysomething goals in the season he had a strike partner alongside him. Albeit an ageing partner, well past his prime. And as you yourself point out, what happened against Le Arse when were deep in donkey doo? Yes, the bugle sounded and on came Anelka to help Drogs through the middle. The rest is history. Did Grant learn from that? Has he deemed it worthy of another try? Question is, did he even make that decision?

Remember last season when Mourinho was behind in the FA Cup to Tottenham and made several changes to a very very attacking formation which won us the game?. Well by your logic, because it worked that week, we should have started with that formation every match from that week onwards.

If you really think Grant is so stupid not to be aware of how we played previously and how putting two upfront is an option to be used when chasing a game then arguing with you is pointless.

To my mind, Grant prefers to play two upfront but hasn't because he knows the team best understands the 4-3-3 and sticking with a formation that the team understands best makes sense for a team looking to get the best results possible in the short term.

As for playing two up top, I have no doubt that Grant is aware of the fact that it is an option, something we can if we need to chase a goal (something we haven't had to do much of thanks to our strong starts this season).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qaz, firstly, what got us back in the game against Spurs last season was Jol inexplicably taking off Berbatov, (who was causing problems everytime he had the ball), and Lennon. If you don't believe me I can put you contact with a dozen Spurts fans who will tell you the same. They were livid with Jol.

Secondly, when we brought Anelka practically everyone on here was anticipating a Drogba/Anelka partnership. With Anelka's arrival no-one felt we were going to stick so rigidly to the 4-3-3. It was generally viewed as a step towards Roman's wish of more attacking, entertaining football. Not many people were talking of an "either/or" situation with the two players. It was believed both were going to play TOGETHER. After all, Drogba had been brilliant the season before with a striker partner alongside him sharing the load.

Thirdly, IMO, the overall quality of our football, (certainly defensively), has gone backwards under Grant. The games against Fenerbache, Boro, Sunderland even the 2-0 victory at City for me have been turgid, dire affairs. And Liverpool at home! Christ, that was truly appalling. In fact apart from Derby and the 2nd half against Le Arse, the last game I felt we have played really well for the whole 90 is Wet Spam away. So why, when the 2nd period of the Arsenal game proved how good a Drogba/Anelka partnership can be, hasn't it been looked at again. Don't you believe it is something that is worth looking at again? Don't you think they could make a formidable pairing? Don't you believe it's a move that may also help us get the absolute maximum effect out of Drogba? Don't you think it's worth looking at, for even part of game against, say, the likes of Wigan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Qaz, firstly, what got us back in the game against Spurs last season was Jol inexplicably taking off Berbatov, (who was causing problems everytime he had the ball), and Lennon. If you don't believe me I can put you contact with a dozen Spurts fans who will tell you the same. They were livid with Jol.

I think your kinda missing the point of my post here Just. I was trying to say that just because a tactic changes a game on one occassion doesn't necessarilly mean you should start with it for your next match. Surely thats something you can agree with...

Secondly, when we brought Anelka practically everyone on here was anticipating a Drogba/Anelka partnership. With Anelka's arrival no-one felt we were going to stick so rigidly to the 4-3-3. It was generally viewed as a step towards Roman's wish of more attacking, entertaining football. Not many people were talking of an "either/or" situation with the two players. It was believed both were going to play TOGETHER. After all, Drogba had been brilliant the season before with a striker partner alongside him sharing the load.

I would like to see it too, we just differ on the timing.

Thirdly, IMO, the overall quality of our football, (certainly defensively), has gone backwards under Grant. The games against Fenerbache, Boro, Sunderland even the 2-0 victory at City for me have been turgid, dire affairs. And Liverpool at home! Christ, that was truly appalling. In fact apart from Derby and the 2nd half against Le Arse, the last game I felt we have played really well for the whole 90 is Wet Spam away. So why, when the 2nd period of the Arsenal game proved how good a Drogba/Anelka partnership can be, hasn't it been looked at again. Don't you believe it is something that is worth looking at again? Don't you think they could make a formidable pairing? Don't you believe it's a move that may also help us get the absolute maximum effect out of Drogba? Don't you think it's worth looking at, for even part of game against, say, the likes of Wigan?

Yes I beleive its worth looking at

Yes I think they could make a very formidable pairing

Yes it would help get more out of Drogba and

Yes, again, I beleive it is worth looking at

However, unless we get special dispensation from Fifa/the FA to play 12 players during a match fact is it will change the the way we play in midfield, it will mean we will have to do without that defensive midfielder that acts as a outlet and allows us to take control in midfield. Ultimately I think we need to ween our side out of having that 3rd central midfielder, but for the moment the players are used to having one there and removing him to bring on an extra striker would be unsettling during the business end of the season when we simply cannot afford to drop any points if we want any chance at winning the title.

Remember the Fenerbache game (2nd leg), remember how Grant brought on an extra defender and half the team was looking at each other unsure where to go and what their role/position was in the side?, thats what happens when you change your formation at short notice without properly training your players for the change.

So yeah, I would like to see us play two up top too. But there is a time for it and I don't beleive that time is now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qaz, firstly, what got us back in the game against Spurs last season was Jol inexplicably taking off Berbatov, (who was causing problems everytime he had the ball), and Lennon. If you don't believe me I can put you contact with a dozen Spurts fans who will tell you the same. They were livid with Jol.

I think your kinda missing the point of my post here Just. I was trying to say that just because a tactic changes a game on one occassion doesn't necessarilly mean you should start with it for your next match. Surely thats something you can agree with...

Yes, but if that change had been so succesful, commonsense would make damn sure I had a good look at again. And soon.

Secondly, when we brought Anelka practically everyone on here was anticipating a Drogba/Anelka partnership. With Anelka's arrival no-one felt we were going to stick so rigidly to the 4-3-3. It was generally viewed as a step towards Roman's wish of more attacking, entertaining football. Not many people were talking of an "either/or" situation with the two players. It was believed both were going to play TOGETHER. After all, Drogba had been brilliant the season before with a striker partner alongside him sharing the load.

I would like to see it too, we just differ on the timing.

Grant has had plenty of time and oportunities against weaker opponents, to have a close look at it before now.

Thirdly, IMO, the overall quality of our football, (certainly defensively), has gone backwards under Grant. The games against Fenerbache, Boro, Sunderland even the 2-0 victory at City for me have been turgid, dire affairs. And Liverpool at home! Christ, that was truly appalling. In fact apart from Derby and the 2nd half against Le Arse, the last game I felt we have played really well for the whole 90 is Wet Spam away. So why, when the 2nd period of the Arsenal game proved how good a Drogba/Anelka partnership can be, hasn't it been looked at again. Don't you believe it is something that is worth looking at again? Don't you think they could make a formidable pairing? Don't you believe it's a move that may also help us get the absolute maximum effect out of Drogba? Don't you think it's worth looking at, for even part of game against, say, the likes of Wigan?

Yes I beleive its worth looking at

Yes I think they could make a very formidable pairing

Yes it would help get more out of Drogba and

Yes, again, I beleive it is worth looking at

However, unless we get special dispensation from Fifa/the FA to play 12 players during a match fact is it will change the the way we play in midfield, it will mean we will have to do without that defensive midfielder that acts as a outlet and allows us to take control in midfield. Ultimately I think we need to ween our side out of having that 3rd central midfielder, but for the moment the players are used to having one there and removing him to bring on an extra striker would be unsettling during the business end of the season when we simply cannot afford to drop any points if we want any chance at winning the title.

Au contraire Rodney. Who dares wins. We don't have to lose a holding midfielder. Thre are several formations we could employ to accomodate a dual strike force and a defensive/holding midfielder. This is one example::

..................Cech

Paulo/Bell......Carv....JT..........Cole/Bridge

...............Maka/Mikel/Essien

........Cole......Ballack........Lamps

...........Anelka ....Drogba

Remember the Fenerbache game (2nd leg), remember how Grant brought on an extra defender and half the team was looking at each other unsure where to go and what their role/position was in the side?, thats what happens when you change your formation at short notice without properly training your players for the change.

Wow. Did you really mean that to come out the way it has? Because that says more about Grant's lack of preparation and management than anything else. Incidentally, while we're on the subject. Remember Jose's substitutions? Each sub coming on with a hand-written note from the manager containing precise instructions telling the outfield players exactly what was required? Clever wasn't it?

So yeah, I would like to see us play two up top too. But there is a time for it and I don't beleive that time is now.

Rather now against a side like Wigan at home than if we are 15 minutes away from going out of the CL and using it as a last-ditch, Hail Mary throw of the dice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a bit of a worthless argument really,

We all would love to see a 4-4-2 with Anelka Drogba up front, to be honest I'd like to see Anelka Sheva up front.

Some of us use the fact that we dont employ the system as a stick to beat the manager with (as if any more a needed).

some of us feel he is justified in playing 4-3-3 which we can see has done well for us so far and we think may be safer, we also think although it might be ideal if chasing a game late on, that we dont really have the players to compliment 4-4-2 although we do realise the ones we have could obviously play with that formation.

I myself if we used 4-4-2 would want to see Lampard, Ballack and Essien with either Makalele or Mikel which would leave no place for Kalou or Joey in the setup, Can you imagine the stick Grant would get if he tried that and it went tits up?.

Really we are arguing over our feelings for Grant and the fact that some of us can give him the benefit of the doubt and some can't.

Instead of talking tactics why dont we all just put something on our Avatar that states either view and post about something else while all our mates put claps and arrows pointing to the avatars?

I think I'll design a we are ok with Avi one and patent it...how many would I need? 1 maybe 2? icon_lol.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a bit of a worthless argument really,

Why? It's no more worthless than any other debate we have on here.

We all would love to see a 4-4-2 with Anelka Drogba up front, to be honest I'd like to see Anelka Sheva up front.

Some of us use the fact that we dont employ the system as a stick to beat the manager with (as if any more a needed).

A slightly paranoid perspective. Grant has used the combination once. It worked. A central pairing of two top quality forwards that had us looking more potent up front than we have for most of the season. You don't have to be tactically gifted or highly paid EPL coach to appreciate it might be worth using again. 4-3-3. 4-4-2. 4-5-1. Personally, I don't think you should stick rigidly to any one formation. It makes it too easy for the opposition to counter. I believed this was a flaw when Jose was in charge and I believe it is the same now with Grant. However, IMO, Jose was more adept at changing formations and personnel to suit situations in a game than Grant has so far proven to be.

some of us feel he is justified in playing 4-3-3 which we can see has done well for us so far and we think may be safer, we also think although it might be ideal if chasing a game late on, that we dont really have the players to compliment 4-4-2 although we do realise the ones we have could obviously play with that formation.

Get off the fence. Which is it? Do we have the players to play a different formation, accomodating two central forwards, or not? Surely, if you believe we could readily utilise such a formation to chase a game in a pressure situation, we could also use that same formation as a starting line-up depending upon the opponents. My personal take on it is that players like Lampard, Ballack, Drogba, Cole etc are clever enough and good enough to make formations other than a 4-3-3 work, and work well. As indeed they did 2nd half against Le Arse.

I myself if we used 4-4-2 would want to see Lampard, Ballack and Essien with either Makalele or Mikel which would leave no place for Kalou or Joey in the setup, Can you imagine the stick Grant would get if he tried that and it went tits up?.

Again why? It doesn't add up. Why would a man who professes that the type of football Mourinho gave us in his last two seasons was not to his personal tastes, want to put out such a defensively inclined line-up?

Really we are arguing over our feelings for Grant and the fact that some of us can give him the benefit of the doubt and some can't.

I'm sorry Chippy, but I feel that comes across as another slightly paranoid perspective. This has nothing to do with personal feelings. At least it hasn't for me. It's questioning the ability of Grant to be flexible and utilise the players at his disposal in the best way. That's what the great managers do. It's not a "one size fits all" scenario. It can change from week to week, game to game, according to the players we have available, the opposition we are playing and the circumstances of a game.

Instead of talking tactics why dont we all just put something on our Avatar that states either view and post about something else while all our mates put claps and arrows pointing to the avatars?

I think I'll design a we are ok with Avi one and patent it...how many would I need? 1 maybe 2? icon_lol.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading all this really makes me miss Jose.

The truth is im ammazed that we have done so well this season.

NOT ammazed because grant has come in and done so well, and bewildered me with his tactical prowess.

Im ammazed for precisely the opposite reason, because he has come in and looked clueless!!

Under Jose winning looked delibrate, we went out and we outplayed teams, contained them when we needed to and beat them because we where clearly better all over the park, not always but most of the time. Any one remmeber the last season under CR where i dont think we scored from a corner all season, we didnt seem to have a plan, jose came in and all of a suden set pieces looked delibrate, designed. both deffending and attacking. players could adjust to substitutions easly and quickly thus why i was never to concerned if we conceeded an early goal.

I also believed that boring boring chealsea was a myth created by the media which all neutral and some fans on here bought in to to easliy. we where never arsenal but i never wanted to be, i kind of liked winning when the good football didnt always come together!! in the two seasons we wont the league we played some fantastic football IMO just as entertaining as anything united put toghether!! in jose's last season he had a stupid ammount of injuries to contend with and pathed things together and as ive said many times before i dont think another manager in the world could have run united so close and won two cups agasint two top teams with the problems we had!

Under grant we dont seem to have a clear shape, you couldnt say "they play like a grant team" so to speak, he dosnt seem to have a phillosiphy in terms of how he wants us to play, he doesnt seem very prepeared.

I want to go on recored now and by recored i want it pinned to the CSR some where so i can say a big i told you so and have it throwen in my face.

IF grant stay's in charge we will go backwards in the coming seasons. we are where we are now puerly because of the stubernes of the current group of players and unflintching will to batter throught and get results despite poor and disjointed perfomances. a group of players that Jose put togther and instilled a never say die, im better than you attitude.. a winning attitude but as time goes on and the players move on that will fade and we will fall in to decline under the current manager!! i garantee it!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The team is second in a very tough premier league, the same as they were last year under Mourinho...if the players can do that under a clueless manager than what exactly was the huge input of Mourinho last season?

I want it pinned to the same place that I believe any decent manager could challenge for most things with this team and I think any decent manager given a proper transfer window to bring players in will get them playing some more entertaining stuff if that is his aim.

Yes I count Grant as a decent Manager and I dont think a team could challenge and be second in the League or in the last four of the CL without a decent Manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but if that change had been so succesful, commonsense would make damn sure I had a good look at again. And soon.

Of course you look at it again, but you don't throw out a formula that has gotten you to where you are just because it worked on one or two occassions.

I have another example for you. Remember Ole Gunnar Solskjaer (I think i have the spelling right)?. He used to sit on the bench a watch the match looking for the soft point in an opposition defence. After Yorke and Cole had pounded the opposition centre backs for 60 mins he'd come on, play differently to how they did and often pop up with a goal (hence the super sub tag). This was a deliberate strategy and change in tactics and something that was done to change a game.

Moving the second striker up to partner Drogba is a good strategy and a good way to change a match, but I feel the disruption it would cause out midfield means its not worth doing it at this late stage in the season.

Grant has had plenty of time and oportunities against weaker opponents, to have a close look at it before now.

I agree, perhaps we should have experimented more earlier in the season (though you could counter that the terrible injury run we suffered at the time limited our options and meant it wasn't a great time to be messing around with things too much).

That doesn't however mean we should be experimenting and making changing to our matchday tactics now.

Au contraire Rodney. Who dares wins. We don't have to lose a holding midfielder. Thre are several formations we could employ to accomodate a dual strike force and a defensive/holding midfielder. This is one example::

..................Cech

Paulo/Bell......Carv....JT..........Cole/Bridge

...............Maka/Mikel/Essien

........Cole......Ballack........Lamps

...........Anelka ....Drogba

That looks suspiciously like the formation we played last season that failed miserably because we couldn't hold onto the ball and left us lumping the ball up to Drogba for all our goals.

Wow. Did you really mean that to come out the way it has? Because that says more about Grant's lack of preparation and management than anything else. Incidentally, while we're on the subject. Remember Jose's substitutions? Each sub coming on with a hand-written note from the manager containing precise instructions telling the outfield players exactly what was required? Clever wasn't it?

Yes I remember and yes it was clever and its a pity Grant hasn't done more preparation to help the side be able to make changes during a match without the players becomming confused as to their role in the side at the time.

That doesn't however convince me that changing tactics is a good idea, in fact it convinces me even more that we should stick with what we know for the moment.

Rather now against a side like Wigan at home than if we are 15 minutes away from going out of the CL and using it as a last-ditch, Hail Mary throw of the dice.

Saying that suggests that we can learn a new formation that we haven't previously used to any great extent and break the old habits of expecting to find a player in a certain position on the park at any one time (eg. defensive midfielder) in a match or two and a handful of training sessions.

Just imagine this, we are playing in the Champions League Final. Grant decides to change the formation his used all season to a traditional 4-4-2 so we can have two up top. Ballack in on the ball and being pressurised by two Man Utd midfielders. Ballack then instinctively passes back to where Makelele and Mikel have been positioning themselves all season till now only they aren't there because the formation has been changed. Man Utd then run off and score a goal.

That scenario isn't necesarilly going to happen, in fact its unlikely as Ballack is going to look for Makelele or Mikel in the holding role before he passes, but its quite conceivable in this situation he will see no one there and find theres no one to pass to and be pannicked into lumping the ball up the field or into touch because theres no one to pass to. Yes its the wingers job as much as any to play deeper and provide that passing option, but this is something they haven't had to do previously in the 4-3-3, so once again, they have to learn to play their roles differently too.

Changing to a two up top formation is a fairly big change tactically regardless of how you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A slightly paranoid perspective. Grant has used the combination once. It worked. A central pairing of two top quality forwards that had us looking more potent up front than we have for most of the season. You don't have to be tactically gifted or highly paid EPL coach to appreciate it might be worth using again. 4-3-3. 4-4-2. 4-5-1. Personally, I don't think you should stick rigidly to any one formation. It makes it too easy for the opposition to counter. I believed this was a flaw when Jose was in charge and I believe it is the same now with Grant. However, IMO, Jose was more adept at changing formations and personnel to suit situations in a game than Grant has so far proven to be.

But we HAVE stuck fairly rigidly to one formation and its the formation the players are most familiar with. I agree with you its good to be be able to change tactics seemless, but that takes time and we don't have time right now.

Pre-season?, now thats another story. Anelka has come out himself and said that the side intends on moving to a two up top formation next season.

Again why? It doesn't add up. Why would a man who professes that the type of football Mourinho gave us in his last two seasons was not to his personal tastes, want to put out such a defensively inclined line-up?

Oh come on Just, any Chelsea fan worth his salt knows that Grant is playing the formation which he feels is most likely to get us the results on the park. Perhaps if his still manager next season and he has made some purchases which means he feels confident that he can play a formation which better suits his "personal tastes", until then, he will play whatever he feels will get him the results with the players available.

An interesting thing about Mourinho was that he seemed to pick his tactics first and then bring in the players to suit that formation. This worked well when the manager had the opportunity (and the cash available) to dip into the transfer market and buy the players needed to make his desired formation work, but most managers don't have this luxury, most managers have to play whatever tactics suit the players at hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but if that change had been so succesful, commonsense would make damn sure I had a good look at again. And soon.

Of course you look at it again, but you don't throw out a formula that has gotten you to where you are just because it worked on one or two occassions.

But he hasn't looked at it again has he? Not even once since the Arsenal game. Qaz, read back through your posts. You're contradicting yourself without seeming to notice. And because we change formation for a match doesn't mean we discard the 4-3-3, or any other formation, entirely. Read my last post to you again and think about it. It's about picking the right players and formations dependant on the opposition you are playing and the personnel you have available to you.

I have another example for you. Remember Ole Gunnar Solskjaer (I think i have the spelling right)?. He used to sit on the bench a watch the match looking for the soft point in an opposition defence. After Yorke and Cole had pounded the opposition centre backs for 60 mins he'd come on, play differently to how they did and often pop up with a goal (hence the super sub tag). This was a deliberate strategy and change in tactics and something that was done to change a game.

With respect. I think thats complete twaddle. I honestly don't know enough about all of Solksjaer's appearances to comment on that as certain fact. I very much doubt you do either. I'm sure there were times Solksjaer's introduction would have coincided with a change in formation. I'm also as sure that there were many times when it was simply a case of one forward on for another. All, of course, dependant on the circumstances United were in at the time. Which gets us back to what I was saying previously about how formation changes should be used, doesn't it?

Moving the second striker up to partner Drogba is a good strategy and a good way to change a match, but I feel the disruption it would cause out midfield means its not worth doing it at this late stage in the season.

Grant has had plenty of time and oportunities against weaker opponents, to have a close look at it before now.

I agree, perhaps we should have experimented more earlier in the season (though you could counter that the terrible injury run we suffered at the time limited our options and meant it wasn't a great time to be messing around with things too much).

That doesn't however mean we should be experimenting and making changing to our matchday tactics now.

And yet you said in your earlier post;

Yes I beleive its worth looking at

Yes I think they could make a very formidable pairing

Yes it would help get more out of Drogba and

Yes, again, I beleive it is worth looking at

Au contraire Rodney. Who dares wins. We don't have to lose a holding midfielder. Thre are several formations we could employ to accomodate a dual strike force and a defensive/holding midfielder. This is one example::

..................Cech

Paulo/Bell......Carv....JT..........Cole/Bridge

...............Maka/Mikel/Essien

........Cole......Ballack........Lamps

...........Anelka ....Drogba

That looks suspiciously like the formation we played last season that failed miserably because we couldn't hold onto the ball and left us lumping the ball up to Drogba for all our goals.

Is it? Is that what happened? Did we play that formation all last season? Funny, because as I remember it we did still use the 4-3-3 quite alot last year. But on the occaisons when Jose did change tack, and employed two strikers together up front, the general consensus of opinion was that we played some pretty decent passing football. And it certainly got the best out of Drogba didn't it?.

Wow. Did you really mean that to come out the way it has? Because that says more about Grant's lack of preparation and management than anything else. Incidentally, while we're on the subject. Remember Jose's substitutions? Each sub coming on with a hand-written note from the manager containing precise instructions telling the outfield players exactly what was required? Clever wasn't it?

Yes I remember and yes it was clever and its a pity Grant hasn't done more preparation to help the side be able to make changes during a match without the players becomming confused as to their role in the side at the time.

That doesn't however convince me that changing tactics is a good idea, in fact it convinces me even more that we should stick with what we know for the moment.

You know full well I didn't make that point in relation to my argument for trying a change in formation. I made it in answer to your point regarding the confusion surrounding our substitution against Fenerbache. I used it to illustrate the detail Jose went in to and to highlight the difference in preparation from Grant. And thank you. You've just re-iterated the point for me.

Rather now against a side like Wigan at home than if we are 15 minutes away from going out of the CL and using it as a last-ditch, Hail Mary throw of the dice.

Saying that suggests that we can learn a new formation that we haven't previously used to any great extent and break the old habits of expecting to find a player in a certain position on the park at any one time (eg. defensive midfielder) in a match or two and a handful of training sessions.

Just imagine this, we are playing in the Champions League Final. Grant decides to change the formation his used all season to a traditional 4-4-2 so we can have two up top. Ballack in on the ball and being pressurised by two Man Utd midfielders. Ballack then instinctively passes back to where Makelele and Mikel have been positioning themselves all season till now only they aren't there because the formation has been changed. Man Utd then run off and score a goal.

That scenario isn't necesarilly going to happen, in fact its unlikely as Ballack is going to look for Makelele or Mikel in the holding role before he passes, but its quite conceivable in this situation he will see no one there and find theres no one to pass to and be pannicked into lumping the ball up the field or into touch because theres no one to pass to. Yes its the wingers job as much as any to play deeper and provide that passing option, but this is something they haven't had to do previously in the 4-3-3, so once again, they have to learn to play their roles differently too.

Changing to a two up top formation is a fairly big change tactically regardless of how you look at it.

There's so many buts, ifs and maybes in that example I really don't know where to begin. Personally I would hope Ballack would look up before he made a pass. It's the least we should expect for £120 a week. And who, (in their right minds), would propose changing to a 4-4-2, for the very first time, in a CL final? How preposterous is that? That's a world away form wondering why Grant hasn't given it a try since the Arsenal game. That, IMO, is a perfectly reasonable question given the quality of football we have been producing.

Qaz, I honestly feel you are now arguing for the sake arguing. Re-reading this thread again, I have to say there are so many contradictions and contrived scenarios contained in your posts that it certainly seems that way to me. It is tiring. So I'm done. I'll let someone else take over if they want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up

Well, this is awkward!

Happy Tech GIF by Atlassian

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

Sure, let me in!