Freeman’s downturn

[Eric Cartman]

You think we play 5 at the back? I’d have thought even yourself couldn’t have got something so obvious so very wrong.

Of course we do. It’s a back 5 with wing backs. It’s certainly not a midfield 5.

 

[LJBlade]

Of course we do. It’s a back 5 with wing backs. It’s certainly not a midfield 5.

It’s 3-5-2, we’ve never played 5 at the back under Wilder.

 

[SwissBlade]

You can call it what you want, it was no different today to usual. Freeman struggled big time, again.

Ok, he’s not really struggled much before today. So I don’t know what the ‘again’ refers too. Looked fairly solid before he went out, presumably with an injury.

Today it seems everyone was shit

 

[Sean Thornton]

It’s a 5-3-2, 5-2-1-2 if you want to nitpick

RWB - CB CB CB - LWB
- CM - CM
- AM
- ST ST

If you’re correct - you aren’t - then it should be RB and LB.

 

[LJBlade]

Ok, he’s not really struggled much before today. So I don’t know what the ‘again’ refers too. Looked fairly solid before he went out, presumably with an injury.

Today it seems everyone was shit

Yep. He hasn’t been as bad as suggested, today was different as everyone was bad. He probably is knackered every game because he does more running than just about everyone in the team.

 

[Sean Thornton]

 

[Sean Thornton]

 

[SwissBlade]

Of course we do. It’s a back 5 with wing backs. It’s certainly not a midfield 5.

It’s not a back 5.

The wing backs don’t have as much defensive duty and certainly don’t line up that deep

 

[Eric Cartman]

If you’re correct - you aren’t - then it should be RB and LB.

Wing backs are still defenders, they’re not midfielders... so yes I am.

 

[Eric Cartman]

View attachment 47824

When we’re defending that is exactly how we line up defensively... do you not watch us?

Going forward then they become a left or right winger.

They’re wing BACKS. A wing back is a defender. Stevens, Freeman and Baldock were all right backs before they came, they are simply playing a more attacking full back role - the wing back role. They are still a back 5.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Wing backs are still defenders, they’re not midfielders... so yes I am.

They aren’t full backs either, as a 532 formation would suggest.

 

[Eric Cartman]

They aren’t full backs either, as a 532 formation would suggest.

A wing back is a defender. Defenders don’t class as part of the midfield the last time I checked? It’s a back 5 with wing backs...

As per wiki:
“There are four types of defenders: centre-back, sweeper, full-back, and wing-back. The centre-back and full-back positions are essential in most modern formations. The sweeper and wing-back roles are more specialised for certain formations.”

 

[Sean Thornton]

When we’re defending that is exactly how we line up defensively... do you not watch us?

Going forward then they become a left or right winger.

They’re wing BACKS. A wing back is a defender. Stevens, Freeman and Baldock were all right backs before they came, they are simply playing a more attacking full back role - the wing back role. They are still a back 5.

Yes I do watch us. And unlike you see us line up 352.

Wing back, like full back, is a specific role.

 

[Eric Cartman]

Yes I do watch us. And unlike you see us line up 352.

Wing back, like full back, is a specific role.

Correct. It is a specific role, an attacking defenders role.

Unless they’re wide midfielders or wingers it’s classed as a back 5.

 

[LJBlade]

Correct. It is a specific role, an attacking defenders role.

Unless they’re wide midfielders or wingers it’s classed as a back 5.

It’s a negative view to see it as 5 at the back. If we were a defensive team you might have a point but we aren’t. It’s 3 at the back, it always has been. Stevens and Baldock/Freeman spend more time closer to the oppositions box than they do our own.

 

[Eric Cartman]

It’s a negative view to see it as 5 at the back. If we were a defensive team you might have a point but we aren’t. It’s 3 at the back, it always has been. Stevens and Baldock/Freeman spend more time closer to the oppositions box than they do our own.

It’s really not. It’s just what it is.

Kieron Freeman, Enda Stevens and George Baldock were all full backs. They’re now wingbacks, not wingers. Wingbacks are classed as defenders, not midfielders. I don’t make the rules.

This is exhausting for a Sunday night.

 

[Sean Thornton]

A wing back is a defender. Defenders don’t class as part of the midfield the last time I checked? It’s a back 5 with wing backs...

As per wiki:
“There are four types of defenders: centre-back, sweeper, full-back, and wing-back. The centre-back and full-back positions are essential in most modern formations. The sweeper and wing-back roles are more specialised for certain formations.”

Any reason you missed out this bit?


The wing-back is a variation on the full-back, but with heavier emphasis on attack. This type of defender focuses more heavily on attack than defence, yet they must have the ability, when needed, to fall back and mark opposing players to lessen the threat of conceding a goal-scoring opportunity. Some formations have wing-back players that mainly focus on defending, and some that focus more on attack

Correct. It is a specific role, an attacking defenders role.

Unless they’re wide midfielders or wingers it’s classed as a back 5.

So no such thing as a 352 formation then?

 

[Bladepicker]

When we’re defending that is exactly how we line up defensively... do you not watch us?

Going forward then they become a left or right winger.

They’re wing BACKS. A wing back is a defender. Stevens, Freeman and Baldock were all right backs before they came, they are simply playing a more attacking full back role - the wing back role. They are still a back 5.

It's both obvious and widely accepted that teams that play with three centre halfs and more attacking wing backs play a 3-5-2 formation.

United go even further than that and allow the outside centre half to roam forward to. Only when we go ultra defensive to protect a lead late on would we ever get near to 5 at the back - but our starting formation is 3-5-2 - that is as clear as day - I find it bizarre that you would argue otherwise?

 

[Eric Cartman]

Any reason you missed out this bit?


The wing-back is a variation on the full-back, but with heavier emphasis on attack. This type of defender focuses more heavily on attack than defence, yet they must have the ability, when needed, to fall back and mark opposing players to lessen the threat of conceding a goal-scoring opportunity. Some formations have wing-back players that mainly focus on defending, and some that focus more on attack



So no such thing as a 352 formation then?

Am I missing something? Have wing backs become midfielder players in the last hour or so?

So one is suggesting it’s a negative formation for crying out loud. But it’s a back fucking 5.

 

[LJBlade]

It’s really not. It’s just what it is.

Kieron Freeman, Enda Stevens and George Baldock were all full backs. They’re now wingbacks, not wingers. Wingbacks are classed as defenders, not midfielders. I don’t make the rules.

This is exhausting for a Sunday night.

It isn’t a ‘rule’. It’s not black and white. The way we play is 3-5-2, it’s that simple.

Most of the time when we’re attacking we’re 2 at the back. Egan and whichever centre back is on the opposite side to the one we’re attacking on i.e. if we’re attacking down the right it’s usually just Egan and O’Connell at the back. That’s clearly not 5 at the back.

 

[Eric Cartman]

It's both obvious and widely accepted that teams that play with three centre halfs and more attacking wing backs play a 3-5-2 formation.

United go even further than that and allow the outside centre half to roam forward to. Only when we go ultra defensive to protect a lead late on would we ever get near to 5 at the back - but our starting formation is 3-5-2 - that is as clear as day - I find it bizarre that you would argue otherwise?

No it’s not. That’s why we sign defenders (barring Johnson) for the role, and not wingers. Because wing backs are midfield players.

 

[Eric Cartman]

It isn’t a ‘rule’. It’s not black and white. The way we play is 3-5-2, it’s that simple.

Most of the time when we’re attacking we’re 2 at the back. Egan and whichever centre back is on the opposite side to the one we’re attacking on i.e. if we’re attacking down the right it’s usually just Egan and O’Connell at the back. That’s clearly not 5 at the back.

In that case it’s completely fluid and no one has any set positions.

 

[LJBlade]

Any reason you missed out this bit?


The wing-back is a variation on the full-back, but with heavier emphasis on attack. This type of defender focuses more heavily on attack than defence, yet they must have the ability, when needed, to fall back and mark opposing players to lessen the threat of conceding a goal-scoring opportunity. Some formations have wing-back players that mainly focus on defending, and some that focus more on attack



So no such thing as a 352 formation then?

Yeah but that’s only taken from Wikipedia...

 

[Sean Thornton]

Our own Danny04 seems to think it’s 352.

“That togetherness and team spirit transcends onto the field, too and although each of United’s Championship rivals know exactly how they will set up in games tactically, very few – on the evidence so far, seem to have an answer when it comes to stopping their pioneering 3-5-2 formation.

United’s wing-backs operate like traditional wingers, with the two “outside” centre-halves also tasked with getting forward and creating attacks as often as they stop them.“


3
5
2

 

[LJBlade]

In that case it’s completely fluid and no one has any set positions.

‘No one’ is an overstatement but we are very fluid in how we play. It’s a very good feature of ours. Generally though we play 3-5-2, as most experts and pundits describe us.

 

[LJBlade]

Our own Danny04 seems to think it’s 352.

“That togetherness and team spirit transcends onto the field, too and although each of United’s Championship rivals know exactly how they will set up in games tactically, very few – on the evidence so far, seem to have an answer when it comes to stopping their pioneering 3-5-2 formation.

United’s wing-backs operate like traditional wingers, with the two “outside” centre-halves also tasked with getting forward and creating attacks as often as they stop them.“


3
5
2

I think Eric Cartman is just taking the piss nd winding us both up, it’s hard to tell though.

I thought it was obvious we played 3-5-2 but maybe not?

 

[Sean Thornton]

Am I missing something? Have wing backs become midfielder players in the last hour or so?

So one is suggesting it’s a negative formation for crying out loud. But it’s a back fucking 5.

Why does everyone but you call it 352 then?

 

[essexblade73]

Its a strange one cos when you play with wingbacks and 3x cd's it is classed as 352 however wingbacks are indeed classed as defenders. However it is classed as 532 when the wingbacks play as fullbacks, hence not the same emphasis on attack. I played in a few teams where we used wingbacks, as I got older i moved from playing winger to wingback and it is such a demaninding role. Get it wrong and your back 3 are exposed or your attack do not get the service from out wide. Enda and Baldock must be so in shape given how they play the role.

 

[Dellas Cowboys]

He’s bang out of form but I think it’s highly unlikely that he’s playing if he’s unfit, let alone overweight. These guys will have their diets monitored and we have a highly regarded sports scientist on our bench. Professional athletes are not allowed to get fat, and unfit guys do not accidentally make their way onto the pitch.

You seen Lukaku?

 

[Sean Thornton]

I think Eric Cartman is just taking the piss nd winding us both up, it’s hard to tell though.

I thought it was obvious we played 3-5-2 but maybe not?

I think we’ve fallen for it as well LJ but I can never fathom why part of winding people up would involve making yourself look daft. As Eric certainly is doing.

He’s started swearing now though......