Watford match thread

[Sharpy]

That makes no sense.

Play 4-4-2 against teams we can beat but play a 4-5-1 against teams we have very little chance against

what is the point of being all negative and defensive if were not going to win anyway?

 

[Linz]

what is the point of being all negative and defensive if were not going to win anyway?

Because goal difference could add up to extra points at the end of the season.

We haven't really been "hammered" so far this season because of the defensive way we have been playing but at the other end we haven't been scoring goals.

Against teams where we are not likely to win and would be lucky to score, we would be better playing defensively to not leak minus goals at the other end.

On the other hand, where we have a decent chance to score, we ought to go for it and add some plus goals as the other team will hopefully not bombard our net with minus goals.

Or something

 

[Sensiblade]

That makes no sense.

Play 4-4-2 against teams we can beat but play a 4-5-1 against teams we have very little chance against

what is the point of being all negative and defensive if were not going to win anyway?

It's more play 4-4-2 against a team that we know we can match up to with our defence/midfield/attack against their d/m/a. If we play against Chelsea or Man Utd with a we have as good players as them attitude we'd be lieing and get found out big time by getting thrashed. The 4-5-1 is the better option against the better teams cos it gives us the option of pushing forward when we can but stopping the better players punishing us as much as they would if we played 4-4-2.

 

[Bladesman]

That makes no sense.

Play 4-4-2 against teams we can beat but play a 4-5-1 against teams we have very little chance against

what is the point of being all negative and defensive if were not going to win anyway?

Exactly shouldnt matter who the opposistion are i think. I mean damage limitation has hardly worked anyway with 4-5-1. We lost 3-0 to arsenal, 2-0 to chelsea and the only time it sort of worked was against Man U.

 

[Linz]

Exactly shouldnt matter who the opposistion are i think. I mean damage limitation has hardly worked anyway with 4-5-1. We lost 3-0 to arsenal, 2-0 to chelsea and the only time it sort of worked was against Man U.

But who's to know if we hadn't have played 4-5-1 defensively that we'd have lost 6-0 or 7-0?

People always go on about how many chances Watford have in relation to us, but they play 4-5-1. Chelsea won the league last season playing that formation so in some ways, it can be more attacking with a lone striker and two in support pushing forward.

I think the change in approach yesterday was due more to personnel with Jags moving back into midfield rather than playing a certain "formation", where there's only a matter of yards between playing 4-4-2 or 4-5-1... they aren't the static things that football games make them out to be.

Look at Holland... they didn't play a formation when they won the World Cup Total football!

 

[The One]

i thought everyone played well yesterday (i didn't go but did watch on sky). Quinny kept on falling over which was annoying to see.

Thought Nade played really well and was unlucky not to score. The first effort in the first half was alot harder than what the commentators make out, the ball was above hip height and the keeper and defender were very close to him.

I'd give the MOTM to lil derek, i gotta admit he's one of my favourite players purely because of his never say die attitude in a game.

 

[silverfox]

I'm getting really fed up of people talking about numbers that don't mean anything.

With the amount of time Quinny was on his arse at Watford due to crap boots (I presume) what pray was the formation in numbers anyone??

And at what exact time in a match do these numbers actually exist?

It's not a computer game for fooks sake. It's real players who run at different speeds and have different skills and capabilities and sometimes don't do what they should.

 

[markdablade]

i thought nade deserved a goal but was glad to see webber score since it was against his old club

 

[keenzy]

Heeheeeheeeeheeee
Hohohohoho
Hahahahahahahaha

 

[jim]

regarding his finishing, his goal for the reserves at Barnsley was one of the best finishes we've seen this season

and his finish at bury i think in the cup that was a good finish too so he can finish. He was a tad unlucky thats all the ball didnt drop for him and that header well he beat the keeper and just hit the post simple as nothing rong with what he was doing though.

he was too much for the watford defence to handle and has shown that against bolton aswell when he came on.

 

[7UpJordan]

Andy Gray was a complete idiot last night.
His commentary is pants in my opinion. If its not a household named player then you can forget him praising anyone.
His comments when Nade put the ball across the face of goal and Gillespie couldn't get to it were stupid (he did put too much on it but AG made it seem as if he had made the worst pass in the world).
Nade played very well last night and deserved a lot more praise than Sky gave him.

Gray probably now thinks Nade's the next Akinbiyi.

Nade has inifinite more capability than Akincrapbiyi, I bet Gray's never even seen that scorcher Nade scored against Bury.

 

[keenzy]

He HAS to score

Take A BEW Son

 

[Warnock=God]

That makes no sense.

Play 4-4-2 against teams we can beat but play a 4-5-1 against teams we have very little chance against

what is the point of being all negative and defensive if were not going to win anyway?

Well it's making sure that we don't lose a good five goals against the top teams and so far it hasn't happend yet. We aint gonna better these teams on skill and techincal ability so we have to put more numbers in midfield to stop them playing.

The 4-5-1 doesn't have to be defensive though as you can use the wide players to support the striker to make it a 4-3-3 more or less.

 

[S64 Blade]

I voted Nade for man of match, he was brill(except his misses)lol.

Great win last night, showed Watford how to play footbal.

UTB!

 

[Sensiblade]

Look at Holland... they didn't play a formation when they won the World Cup Total football!

Holland have never won the World cup.

 

[TonyAgana]

Holland have never won the World cup.

That's what I thought!!

Aren't they commonly regarded as "the best team never to win the World Cup"?

Sorry Linz

 

[Robbie]

That's what I thought!!

Aren't they commonly regarded as "the best team never to win the World Cup"?

Sorry Linz

Isn't that Spain? Or have Spain won it? My head is all confused by the lack of food this morning.

 

[silverfox]

There's a list of winners here....

http://worldsoccer.about.com/od/internationalsoccer/a/worldcupwinners.htm

 

[Robbie]

There's a list of winners here....

http://worldsoccer.about.com/od/internationalsoccer/a/worldcupwinners.htm

Either way, Our canteen has no food in.

Good job work are paying for dinner

 

[Linz]

Holland have never won the World cup.

Sorry, they got to the final