Match Report and MOM v Chelsea...

Brian Hutchings said:
Until we learn how to keep the ball, it doesnt matter about whether its 433 or 442.
Maybe 532 in away games might be wise...long ball orientated.
You can't just set up the formation and that's it.....it depends on what the opposition does in the early part of a game...you have to adapt to that and events as they happen.I.e. goals.
Formations in football are a fluid thing .
You can play a different one in each half to confuse if you are limited with skills ....if you are at 2-1 with 10 minutes left you can bring defenders and midfielders on and take forwards off.
A rigid adherence to 433 or 442 is the daftest thing I've ever heard... Its just asking for trouble. The leaders have to read the game as it unfolds.
I find it quite amusing to see fans bickering over it season after season....and in reality during the greater part of most games there is no discernable ' formation' that makes any sense....just a continual winning and losing of the ball, sideways and back passing....with bouts of head tennis in between.
Obviously the top sides have a greater number of skilled ballwinners/ballholders, effective blockers and very pacy wingers....so formations are less subjective.

I was transfixed during the Chelsea game by the way Stacey applied himself...this boy seems to be streets ahead of the others in ideas and reading of the game...I could imagine him in Man City's team.
Click to expand...
I still don't think your Bill.
 
RobTrent said:
Not in Europe without Liverpool though, so you're stretching it a bit. Perhaps if JT started bringing in the beer you might cut him some slack:

"The Boot Room was a small room near the changing rooms that stored the squad's football boots. Bill Shankly converted it into an informal coaches' meeting room, with a relaxing atmosphere that paid dividends for a Liverpool side who were rebuilding at the time. The original members of the Boot Room were Shankly, Bob Paisley, Reuben Bennett, Tom Saunders, Joe Fagan and Ronnie Moran. Neither Bennett nor Saunders ever went on to manage the club, however it was Bennett who remained at Anfield the longest.[2]

Out of the five, Saunders was the only one to hold a full coaching certificate, but among them they provided the common thread that held Liverpool together for almost 40 years. Each man filled a specific role; Paisley was a tactician who had an eye for spotting a transfer target. Bennett, who was closest to Shankly, was the link to the manager. Fagan, in Roy Evans' words, was "the glue that held everything together". Fagan, however inadvertently, could claim to have founded the Boot Room in the sense that he was the first to store the crates of Guinness, given as a thank-you from the brewery's team, in the Room.[3] They were joined in 1967 when Shankly asked ex Liverpool player Geoff Twentyman to join the boot room staff as chief scout".
Click to expand...
What a football dynasty that was - superb .
 
bog_standard said:
I didn't call you a thick idiot because of your trade, I called you it because you didn't respect my view or the clubs and tried to force them on me. We both know the club said they would prefer to spend the money on players and wages, wrongly in my view, rather than on infrastructure that would have set us up for the next 40 or 50 years. You prefer to interpret it as not financially viable, it's called difference of opinion, which is fine. I'm not going to get into another argument with you on the need for this.
Click to expand...
I didn't see this thread, but totally agree. How many of us would swap Solanke for starting work on a new stadium ?
 
Les78 said:
I didn't see this thread, but totally agree. How many of us would swap Solanke for starting work on a new stadium ?
Click to expand...

Investment in players yields a return - TV rights money for staying in the PL. Investment in a stadium yields a return - ticket money for the next 20-30 years. One of these returns is worth a lot more than the other.
 
Les78 said:
I didn't see this thread, but totally agree. How many of us would swap Solanke for starting work on a new stadium ?
Click to expand...
Totally agree with you mate, what's Solankie worth now 5m, if that and we may well go down this season anyway, so I wouldn't say that was money wisely spent at all.
 
bog_standard said:
Totally agree with you mate, what's Solankie worth now 5m, if that and we may well go down this season anyway, so I wouldn't say that was money wisely spent at all.
Click to expand...
But wouldn’t it cost circa a couple of hundred million to build a new stadium? It’s not like it was a choice between Solanke and a new ground?
 
Waz afcb said:
But wouldn’t it cost circa a couple of hundred million to build a new stadium? It’s not like it was a choice between Solanke and a new ground?
Click to expand...

Just a diffence of opinion mate. You deal in actual numbers and use logic. He deals in opinions that have no basis in reality. Can't you just agree to disagree?
 
Waz afcb said:
But wouldn’t it cost circa a couple of hundred million to build a new stadium? It’s not like it was a choice between Solanke and a new ground?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't cost anywhere near that, Aberdeen's is around 50m for a 20,000 seats. Less than 10% of our Premier League money so far.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Just a diffence of opinion mate. You deal in actual numbers and use logic. He deals in opinions that have no basis in reality. Can't you just agree to disagree?
Click to expand...
Bloody idiot you are, please get over it!
 
bog_standard said:
It wouldn't cost anywhere near that, Aberdeen's is around 50m for a 20,000 seats. Less than 10% of our Premier League money so far.
Click to expand...

They bought dirt cheap green belt land miles out of town and rail-roaded the council into granting permission. They also own Pittodrie and will sell it for housing as part of the deal. Even so the fall in Aberdeen House prices has put the project at risk.

What cheap site do you think we should use? Maybe we could build it in Aberdeen? What land are we going to sell to fund it? Obviously you know best but us clueless idiots think that these factors might just push the construction costs up towards £100m down here.

The new ground will yield £3m - £5m a year on top of what we make now on match days... that's if we don't get relegated in the 20 years it would take to pay off, in which case we'd be making less matchday money than we do now.

All just an opinion though.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
They bought dirt cheap green belt land miles out of town and rail-roaded the council into granting permission. They also own Pittodrie and will sell it for housing as part of the deal. Even so the fall in Aberdeen House prices has put the project at risk.

What cheap site do you think we should use? Maybe we could build it in Aberdeen? What land are we going to sell to fund it? Obviously you know best but us clueless idiots think that these factors might just push the construction costs up towards £100m down here.

The new ground will yield £3m - £5m a year on top of what we make now on match days... that's if we don't get relegated in the 20 years it would take to pay off, in which case we'd be making less matchday money than we do now.

All just an opinion though.
Click to expand...
Yes, you've finally got it, your a clueless idiot. If you don't want to be called that again, don't respond to my postings, simple even for you!!
 
SlowDownDerek said:
They bought dirt cheap green belt land miles out of town and rail-roaded the council into granting permission. They also own Pittodrie and will sell it for housing as part of the deal. Even so the fall in Aberdeen House prices has put the project at risk.

What cheap site do you think we should use? Maybe we could build it in Aberdeen? What land are we going to sell to fund it? Obviously you know best but us clueless idiots think that these factors might just push the construction costs up towards £100m down here.

The new ground will yield £3m - £5m a year on top of what we make now on match days... that's if we don't get relegated in the 20 years it would take to pay off, in which case we'd be making less matchday money than we do now.

All just an opinion though.
Click to expand...
You'll find that constructions costs are about the same all over the country its the land prices that vary.
 
I realize it would be more than the 50m the Aberdeen stadium cost but nowhere near the couple of hundred million that Waz AFCB was suggesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;