Bill TV

[Midlands Yellow 4,140]

Are we allowed to watch Bill streams this season or not?  I’m not sure what’s illegal, immoral or legit these days. 

[TIL 1010 4,830]

1 minute ago, Feedthewolf said:

So you guys can happily derail sensible threads with endless bickering, but if I try to discuss tactics on a thread called BillTV, that's O/T? Okay then...

Wolfie the moderator appears again. By the way what i posted was not bickering but merely observing that City1st appears to be talking to himself at the very outset of his own thread.

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

4 minutes ago, Bill said:

you are getting there....almost

no attack will be the same, as no defending will be the same

players react as required, much as our last minute goal against the binners... a Hanley/Klose combo- look at the binners defence, what formation were they playing ?

how many times have you seen Buendia or Pukki back 'helping out the defence, what part of a set of numbers are they following - at what stage does a player think

"aha, they have the ball so I must now move to my allotted part of the pitch....whoops, we have just won the ball back so off to my other allotted space"

a players position on the pitch will, at any given point, be determined by what has happened prior to that moment, not some farcical idea of arranging themselves to fit some absurd set up

So the base formations applied by all professional football teams for every match are 'farcical'? As I said previously, even the Rinus Michels teams of the 60s and 70s had base formations and positions around which they improvised (4-3-3 under Michels, whereas Cruyff preferred 3-4-3). They were among the most fluid and interchangeable teams to have ever existed in professional football, but they still had a basic shape which was more rigorous out of possession (with an emphasis making the pitch as narrow as possible), and more flexible out of possession (with an emphasis on making the pitch as wide as possible).

A rigorous 4-4-2 with zero positional flexibility is easy to exploit, but it still exists. It's a marriage between understanding of core role and adaptability to improvise as the game develops.

From one football fan to another, I cannot recommend Jonathan Wilson's Inverting The Pyramid highly enough. No matter what you may post on here, I challenge you to read it and come to the conclusion that 150 years of tactical evolution is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

5 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Wolfie the moderator appears again. By the way what i posted was not bickering but merely observing that City1st appears to be talking to himself at the very outset of his own thread.

Er... in response to your post telling me that my post was off-topic?! Come on Tilly, play the game!

Edited August 4, 2021 by Feedthewolf

[lake district canary 4,572]

5 minutes ago, hogesar said:

It isn't @Rich T The Biscuit that needs to 'get there'.

If, for example, Pukki is deep defending a corner, we win possession and have an opportunity to counter,  which one out of Pukki or Hanley makes the effort to join in on the counter attack, generally speaking? It's the striker, because his position is highest up the pitch and its his responsibility. 

It often depends on the situation though.  Skipp's goal last season for instance - alongside Rupp.  We've seen it with Tettey over the years too, it just depends on who is in the right place at the right time to make the break. If the striker is hanging around the edge of the area when defending, he will be there too, but there are no hard and fast rules about it.

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

16 minutes ago, Bill said:

you are getting there....almost

no attack will be the same, as no defending will be the same

players react as required, much as our last minute goal against the binners... a Hanley/Klose combo- look at the binners defence, what formation were they playing ?

how many times have you seen Buendia or Pukki back 'helping out the defence, what part of a set of numbers are they following - at what stage does a player think

"aha, they have the ball so I must now move to my allotted part of the pitch....whoops, we have just won the ball back so off to my other allotted space"

a players position on the pitch will, at any given point, be determined by what has happened prior to that moment, not some farcical idea of arranging themselves to fit some absurd set up

How condescending can one person be with your opening line, suppose it's a bit different to Oh dear.

I genuinely thought this might be the time when you finally admitted to being wrong but you failed 🤦

Think it's best you leave the educated ones to have a sensible discussion about formation and why they are necessary 👍

[hogesar 9,864]

2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It often depends on the situation though.  Skipp's goal last season for instance - alongside Rupp.  We've seen it with Tettey over the years too, it just depends on who is in the right place at the right time to make the break. If the striker is hanging around the edge of the area when defending, he will be there too, but there are no hard and fast rules about it.

I used the term generally. It doesn't apply all the time but you're talking about specific opportunities to exploit vulnerability which any intelligent player will do..it doesn't detract from the general point being made.

[Bill 1,788]

1 minute ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

How condescending can one person be with your opening line, suppose it's a bit different to Oh dear.

I genuinely thought this might be the time when you finally admitted to being wrong but you failed 🤦

Think it's best you leave the educated ones to have a sensible discussion about formation and why they are necessary 👍

I suppose that is easier than trying to put up something that resembles a coherent argument

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

3 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It often depends on the situation though.  Skipp's goal last season for instance - alongside Rupp.  We've seen it with Tettey over the years too, it just depends on who is in the right place at the right time to make the break. If the striker is hanging around the edge of the area when defending, he will be there too, but there are no hard and fast rules about it.

No one has said there are rules, with defending a corner there is a formation that the players follow, in our case it's zonal marking which guess what, is a formation.

For anyone to genuinely believe that teams don't have formations in terms of how they set up means they are either stupid or on a wind up.

No one has ever said that a player has to stay in the allocated position as flexibility is always required, they still have a designated position that is part of a formation.

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

I suppose that is easier than trying to put up something that resembles a coherent argument

Have a little look at my previous post, Bill. That had a coherent argument.

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

I suppose that is easier than trying to put up something that resembles a coherent argument

I did that earlier today and got backed up by others who agreed and who understand it properly.

Don't need to do it again as it's not something you'll seemingly ever understand.

Feather gone, sledgehammer out.....you can't reason with an idiot as they are an idiot for a reason and you sir are an idiot 👍

[hogesar 9,864]

1 minute ago, Feedthewolf said:

Have a little look at my previous post, Bill. That had a coherent argument.

He will ignore that.

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

Can't believe I actually have to post this on a football forum but all it took was to Google why formations are necessary in football:

What are football formations?

A football formation is set-up usually by the team's manager or coach so players in the team act in an organised way and know their roles and positions in the team. Football is a team game after all, so if the team functions as one cohesive unit with a shared plan and understanding of the team's tactics, they will have a significant advantage over a team that is unable to do so.

It is important to have a structured formation, to maximise efficiency and chances for success. Which football formation is used is always determined by the strengths and weaknesses of the players in a given team. Beyond that simplistic reasoning for having a formation, these formations also represent an idea, or the “style” of the team. 

Although clearly the person who wrote this is wrong 🤷🏻‍♂️

Edited August 4, 2021 by Rich T The Biscuit
Typo

[lake district canary 4,572]

2 minutes ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

How condescending can one person be with your opening line, suppose it's a bit different to Oh dear.

I genuinely thought this might be the time when you finally admitted to being wrong but you failed 🤦

Think it's best you leave the educated ones to have a sensible discussion about formation and why they are necessary 👍

The truth is somewhere in the middle of Bill's free for all and your accurate two team with the ball, without the ball approach.  Imo we will see more and more interchanging of players this season than even last season, with the likes of Gibson and Omobamidele getting forwards on occasions, as they are both comfortable on the ball - and other players dropping back to cover.  

I hope the aim is to evolve the way we play into nearer the total football that people talk about, where anyone can play virtually anywhere.  We are on that path and already interchange as part of the way we play - and to see CB's come forwards and midfielders dropping back would be an extension of that. It takes huge discipline and trust in your teammates to do that, but what will get us wins and draws this season will be that ability to be so fluid that opposition teams just can't get a handle on it. 

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

The truth is somewhere in the middle of Bill's free for all and your accurate two team with the ball, without the ball approach.  Imo we will see more and more interchanging of players this season than even last season, with the likes of Gibson and Omobamidele getting forwards on occasions, as they are both comfortable on the ball - and other players dropping back to cover.  

I hope the aim is to evolve the way we play into nearer the total football that people talk about, where anyone can play virtually anywhere.  We are on that path and already interchange as part of the way we play - and to see CB's come forwards and midfielders dropping back would be an extension of that. It takes huge discipline and trust in your teammates to do that, but what will get us wins and draws this season will be that ability to be so fluid that opposition teams just can't get a handle on it. 

It's a lovely idea, but there will always be a bit of play between the two ends of the dichotomy. Much as it'd be amazing if everyone tried to play that Cruyffian style of football, you'll still get teams like Burnley who realise that their best chance of levelling the playing field against the Klopp and Guardiola teams is to be rigorous, physical, disciplined and direct.

It may seem paradoxical, but playing with that Ajax level of creative freedom requires a colossal amount of collective discipline to analyse the game on the fly and work out what your team-mates are doing and respond accordingly. Michels was a strict disciplinarian, despite his improvisational attacking philosophy.

When Stefan Kovacs took over from Michels, the system was so well drilled that in Kovacs' first season Ajax were even better due to the freedom Kovacs gave them, but subsequently the team fell apart due to the lack of discipline and leadership. In summary, like you say, the truth is in the middle ground 🙂

 

[TheGunnShow 6,159]

2 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

It's a lovely idea, but there will always be a bit of play between the two ends of the dichotomy. Much as it'd be amazing if everyone tried to play that Cruyffian style of football, you'll still get teams like Burnley who realise that their best chance of levelling the playing field against the Klopp and Guardiola teams is to be rigorous, physical, disciplined and direct.

It may seem paradoxical, but playing with that Ajax level of creative freedom requires a colossal amount of collective discipline to analyse the game on the fly and work out what your team-mates are doing and respond accordingly. Michels was a strict disciplinarian, despite his improvisational attacking philosophy.

When Stefan Kovacs took over from Michels, the system was so well drilled that in Kovacs' first season Ajax were even better due to the freedom Kovacs gave them, but subsequently the team fell apart due to the lack of discipline and leadership. In summary, like you say, the truth is in the middle ground 🙂

 

There was a really interesting observation - I think it was in Jonathan Wilson's Behind The Curtain - saying that apparently Cruyff said Total Football could not have been invented in a country that didn't play hockey, simply as off-the-ball movement is apparently so important to playing good hockey. Also, it went through Cruyff - that Dutch team were somewhat discombobulated in the WC final against West Germany as the Germans had excellent man-markers who eventually got Cruyff out of the game (especially Vogts, and Schwarzenbeck was a criminally underrated old-school centre-half). With the leader gone, the hive was left a bit rudderless.

And, to throw in a personal story, there's a reason why my vets team throw me, an expert five-a-side goalie (who's a bit short for elevens) on as a full-back or wing-back. That simple reason is my gas tank. Even if I have a first touch that's somewhere between virgin and serial killer, and the second one's usually a slide tackle, I get chucked on against tiring teams simply as my brand of running all over the place gives defences a horrible job, and with a bit of luck, any of our better ball-players can find a pass to a better attacking player who's got more space simply as I've decided to go bombing up and cause an overload. And if we do lose it, I'm fit enough to get up and down and buy time for them to get back.

But you do need a basic structure for them to follow.

[Bill 1,788]

6 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

It often depends on the situation though.  Skipp's goal last season for instance - alongside Rupp.  We've seen it with Tettey over the years too, it just depends on who is in the right place at the right time to make the break. If the striker is hanging around the edge of the area when defending, he will be there too, but there are no hard and fast rules about it.

that merely blows out of the water the 'formation fannies' 'guff,

as the whole basis of their nonsense is that players have a certain place on the pitch depending on whether we are defending or attacking - watch the play leading up to Aarons shot and see if you can pause the action at any point that demonstrates their being some adhered to formation

in fact at NO point in the entire 4 min clip is there to be found said 'formation* - the players moved around as play dictated rather than any need to be in a place directly relating to the other 9 outfield players,

as supposedly, when we attack the impetus is to adopt some formation rather than move themselves  and the ball to where thought best, given where the opposition are.....................who also seem to have an unerring ability not to be in formation either

meanwhile watch the build up tour second (1.40sec) and explain what part of a numbered formation Aarons was in prior to receiving the ball and why did no City players rush to adjust their position when Cantwell moved into the box, surely the numbered formation must have been changed by Cantwell going from being behind four City players to being the most forward

 

[Bill 1,788]

58 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Are we allowed to watch Bill streams this season or not?  I’m not sure what’s illegal, immoral or legit these days. 

not if the usual suspects complain - motivated by their constant sniping at me, than any moral stance

or consideration for others

 

this can be seen here as in so many other threads, highjacked by the same cretins

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

24 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Imo we will see more and more interchanging of players this season than even last season, with the likes of Gibson and Omobamidele getting forwards on occasions, as they are both comfortable on the ball - and other players dropping back to cover.  

All of which needs a formation. Interchanging means that players swap positions (of a formation) other players dropping back to cover Gibbo or Omobamidele is to ensure we retain a formation.

No one has ever said that players can't interchange or swap from one side to another as that is tactics but if Cantwell just decided to play on the same wing as Buendia we would be lacking in formation balance and leave gaps for other teams to exploit.

The reason that we have been successful is because we have a formation that allows players to swap and interchange.

Which is actual one of the things I'm keen to see how Villa use Buendia, if they try and restrict that he won't be the same Buendia.

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

7 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

There was a really interesting observation - I think it was in Jonathan Wilson's Behind The Curtain - saying that apparently Cruyff said Total Football could not have been invented in a country that didn't play hockey, simply as off-the-ball movement is apparently so important to playing good hockey. Also, it went through Cruyff - that Dutch team were somewhat discombobulated in the WC final against West Germany as the Germans had excellent man-markers who eventually got Cruyff out of the game (especially Vogts, and Schwarzenbeck was a criminally underrated old-school centre-half). With the leader gone, the hive was left a bit rudderless.

And, to throw in a personal story, there's a reason why my vets team throw me, an expert five-a-side goalie (who's a bit short for elevens) on as a full-back or wing-back. That simple reason is my gas tank. Even if I have a first touch that's somewhere between virgin and serial killer, and the second one's usually a slide tackle, I get chucked on against tiring teams simply as my brand of running all over the place gives defences a horrible job, and with a bit of luck, any of our better ball-players can find a pass to a better attacking player who's got more space simply as I've decided to go bombing up and cause an overload. And if we do lose it, I'm fit enough to get up and down and buy time for them to get back.

But you do need a basic structure for them to follow.

Ah, that's his book about Eastern European football, right? It's on my list, I'm working through his back catalogue. Currently reading his history of Manchester United. I ran a vets' team until recently... are you in Norwich/Norfolk?

[TheGunnShow 6,159]

11 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Ah, that's his book about Eastern European football, right? It's on my list, I'm working through his back catalogue. Currently reading his history of Manchester United. I ran a vets' team until recently... are you in Norwich/Norfolk?

Yep, Behind The Curtain is about Eastern European football. Very enjoyable read. I live and play in Bolton though.

Although the best football book I ever read was either the two by Garry Nelson (Left Foot Forward and Left Foot In The Grave) or The Keeper of Dreams, by Ronald Reng.

Edited August 4, 2021 by TheGunnShow

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

11 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Ah, that's his book about Eastern European football, right? It's on my list, I'm working through his back catalogue. Currently reading his history of Manchester United. I ran a vets' team until recently... are you in Norwich/Norfolk?

I did Vets locally for a couple of years but not played for 8 or so years.

[Bill 1,788]

29 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

The truth is somewhere in the middle of Bill's free for all and your accurate two team with the ball, without the ball approach.  Imo we will see more and more interchanging of players this season than even last season, with the likes of Gibson and Omobamidele getting forwards on occasions, as they are both comfortable on the ball - and other players dropping back to cover.  

I hope the aim is to evolve the way we play into nearer the total football that people talk about, where anyone can play virtually anywhere.  We are on that path and already interchange as part of the way we play - and to see CB's come forwards and midfielders dropping back would be an extension of that. It takes huge discipline and trust in your teammates to do that, but what will get us wins and draws this season will be that ability to be so fluid that opposition teams just can't get a handle on it. 

I have never talked of any 'free for all' that is just you making up stuff

what I have stated is that the passage of play will determine where players are- rather than this absurd notion that players arrange themselves in some pre-determined set up

of course there is some degree of structure. but again that is the dog wagging the tail, not the other way round

watch a goal kick where the players will often drift to one side, anticipating where the ball will land, and it is a case of defenders marking attackingers - not some numerical set up

as with corners, who stays back on the halfway line is determined by who the attackers 'leave up front'

last night both Aarons and Giannoulis were well forward, not because of some formation, which in its absurdity would have had us playing a 2-3- 5 formation, but that it was perceived that given it was Gillingham they would be better placed playing further forward when possible

at the moment Farke is playing a 'possession' game which means players are constantly moving so as to offer a passing option, that means players are where they are determined by that need rather than any requirement to 'know their place'

that has the advantage of making it harder for defenders as they adjust to who they are marking, watch as no one tracked Cantwell as he moved into the box to set up our second, as did Aarons with his shot

there is no 'free for all' as that is to misunderstand how the type of football (possession) is determining the requirement of a more fluid approach to play - and watch how commentators will more and more pick up on this

 

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

11 minutes ago, Bill said:

I have never talked of any 'free for all' that is just you making up stuff

what I have stated is that the passage of play will determine where players are- rather than this absurd notion that players arrange themselves in some pre-determined set up

of course there is some degree of structure. but again that is the dog wagging the tail, not the other way round

watch a goal kick where the players will often drift to one side, anticipating where the ball will land, and it is a case of defenders marking attackingers - not some numerical set up

as with corners, who stays back on the halfway line is determined by who the attackers 'leave up front'

last night both Aarons and Giannoulis were well forward, not because of some formation, which in its absurdity would have had us playing a 2-3- 5 formation, but that it was perceived that given it was Gillingham they would be better placed playing further forward when possible

at the moment Farke is playing a 'possession' game which means players are constantly moving so as to offer a passing option, that means players are where they are determined by that need rather than any requirement to 'know their place'

that has the advantage of making it harder for defenders as they adjust to who they are marking, watch as no one tracked Cantwell as he moved into the box to set up our second, as did Aarons with his shot

there is no 'free for all' as that is to misunderstand how the type of football (possession) is determining the requirement of a more fluid approach to play - and watch how commentators will more and more pick up on this

 

So why, then, was Aarons exclusively on the right and Giannoulis exclusively on the left? Because the formation dictates that the fullbacks bomb forward to act as auxiliary attackers in the absence of traditional wingers in a 4-2-3-1 formation (which, whether you like it or not, is what Farke has been playing for most of the past four seasons).

I'm a huge advocate of improvisation and flexibility in players, but that flexibility is in itself predicated by the concept of deviation from a standard structure. The sliding scale is simply in how rigorous the manager/coach is about the application of the standard tactical structure.

Our greatest flexibility is in the unpredictable movement of the three narrow attackers in the 4-2-3-1. You yourself mentioned a 2-3-5 formation in your previous post... why is that more absurd than any other formation if you don't believe in formations? It's extremely common for 'big' teams to have their two centre backs as the most defensive players but still inside the opposition half. That's just how things look when you're on the front foot: the fullbacks bomb forward, the wider forwards come a little deeper and flit around to drag defenders out of position, and at least one of the two defensively minded midfielders are ready to drop and fill the gap on the counter.

As you've said; tons of improvisation, and tons of flexibility. But the concepts of flexibility and improvisation only gain meaning by comparison to a framework from which to deviate/improvise.

 

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

10 minutes ago, Bill said:

1. Of course there is some degree of structure. but again that is the dog wagging the tail, not the other way round

2. Watch a goal kick where the players will often drift to one side, anticipating where the ball will land, and it is a case of defenders marking attackingers - not some numerical set up

Point 3: as with corners, who stays back on the halfway line is determined by who the attackers 'leave up front'

4. last night both Aarons and Giannoulis were well forward, not because of some formation, which in its absurdity would have had us playing a 2-3- 5 formation, but that it was perceived that given it was Gillingham they would be better placed playing further forward when possible

5.at the moment Farke is playing a 'possession' game which means players are constantly moving so as to offer a passing option, that means players are where they are determined by that need rather than any requirement to 'know their place'

6. That has the advantage of making it harder for defenders as they adjust to who they are marking, watch as no one tracked Cantwell as he moved into the box to set up our second, as did Aarons with his shot

I'm going to have one last go at trying to help you stop embarrassing yourself....

 

Point 1: that is the formation so well done for finally catching up

Point 2:  when Krul takes a goal kick does Aarons go to the left wing or in the right back position of a formation, guess what he stands to the right of the centre half and is the first player in front of Krul on the right because that's his position in the formation, even if the players shift across they still line up as Aarons, Gibson, Hanley and Giannoulis, they don't randomly swap Bill style 🤷🏻‍♂️

Point 3: We play a zonal marking formation (one which I hate) to cover the space in the box, not just randomly stand wherever a player fancies

Point 4: I refer again to my point about formation with the ball and without, had the TV screen panned out you would have seen the central mid player at the time drop in to cover and make it a 3, guess why, because that's the formation for when we have the ball

Point 5: no one has ever said players don't or can't move in a formation, but when one does move, guess what, another player reacts and ensures we are covered, see my point above as an example

Point 6: is a tactic and how we play but none of that can happen if the players on the pitch don't have a formation, otherwise what would stop the entire team all bombing forward when they felt like it

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

Just now, Rich T The Biscuit said:

I'm going to have one last go at trying to help you stop embarrassing yourself....

 

Point 1: that is the formation so well done for finally catching up

Point 2:  when Krul takes a goal kick does Aarons go to the left wing or in the right back position of a formation, guess what he stands to the right of the centre half and is the first player in front of Krul on the right because that's his position in the formation, even if the players shift across they still line up as Aarons, Gibson, Hanley and Giannoulis, they don't randomly swap Bill style 🤷🏻‍♂️

Point 3: We play a zonal marking formation (one which I hate) to cover the space in the box, not just randomly stand wherever a player fancies

Point 4: I refer again to my point about formation with the ball and without, had the TV screen panned out you would have seen the central mid player at the time drop in to cover and make it a 3, guess why, because that's the formation for when we have the ball

Point 5: no one has ever said players don't or can't move in a formation, but when one does move, guess what, another player reacts and ensures we are covered, see my point above as an example

Point 6: is a tactic and how we play but none of that can happen if the players on the pitch don't have a formation, otherwise what would stop the entire team all bombing forward when they felt like it

Haha! Can I be your assistant? 🙂

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

14 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Haha! Can I be your assistant? 🙂

Of course 👍

[Vazzza 62]

I love these formation threads. I can only imagine Bill gets it and is just on the wind up but makes good reading nonetheless 👍

[Feedthewolf 4,957]

12 minutes ago, Vazzza said:

I love these formation threads. I can only imagine Bill gets it and is just on the wind up but makes good reading nonetheless 👍

Nah, Bill's right. Everyone else is just talking out their árse.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Feedthewolf

[Rich T The Biscuit 572]

15 minutes ago, Vazzza said:

I love these formation threads. I can only imagine Bill gets it and is just on the wind up but makes good reading nonetheless 👍

I hope he is on a wind up otherwise he must be the old boy that sits in front of me who shouts "chase the ball" randomly 😆