Have we seen the end of 433 ?

[TIL 1010 4,721]

10 hours ago, chicken said:

The only people left with any "obsession" with xg are the ones claiming everyone else has an obsession with xg. Ironic. 

I was not expecting my ' waits......' to take 7 hours but i knew i would not be disappointed.

[repman 634]

3 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

That's the first half view unless they've combined McCallum in with Dimi. I thought 2nd half we had better shape with McLean and Sara more or less in line. Consequently we controlled midfield far better, kept the ball and were pretty commanding really.

I agree it will always be fluid and there'll be a bit of drift in graphics such as this from some players, eg Dowell, who play where they like.

It's not the first half as such but the 11 that started, there is an option to look at the subs positions but that removes all the starters such as Pukki and Sargent who came off. The positions of the player's who replaced them aren't really representative of the game in my view. For what it's worth, McCallum's position was as wide as Dimi but was pushed up to the halfway line. It would be good to see the difference between the halves as we certainly controlled the game better in the 2nd.

[chicken 2,604]

8 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

I was not expecting my ' waits......' to take 7 hours but i knew i would not be disappointed.

I'll be honest, I don't even know what that means.

Although if it's slightly what I think it means, then it's just odd... really odd.

[Worthy Nigelton 1,037]

Looked like a 4231 to me with Dowell and Sargent fairly fluid and interchangeable. McLean definitely dropping deep to make a 3rd centre back at times.

433 was a disaster and I'm so glad we're not using it anymore. Feels like a relief it's gone!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,510]

On 23/01/2023 at 10:21, Google Bot said:

I was thinking during the game that Wagner isn't caught up on conventions so much.  We're not even that symmetrical when you think about it.   The role Dowell plays on the right vs Onel is completely different.   And the amount of times that Max went back. and held the CB position was interesting.

Workrate and individuals knowing what they should be doing at any given moment trumps formation for me.

I was reading some comments from Russell that agreed with what you're saying here.

Quote

“Can two international players play as a two? Absolutely,” said Russell. “They’re both top-class players.

“You spoke about Josh playing on the right. If you play in a front three, these are only starting positions. A 4-4-2 can look like a 4-3-3 and vice versa in certain situations. It’s how you can have those players moving with fluidity in the top line.

“Ultimately, getting them into the situations and areas where they thrive is the most important thing, not the actual structure or formation you (the media) see as outside people, with all due respect.”

Another fun observation about Wagner is that his favoured formation at Huddersfield was... 4-3-3, although apparently at Young Boys it was 4-4-2.

Edit: I'm starting to think this formation business is much like the stated key of a classical composition. The key referred to is what you start off with, but it ignores the fact that the key often changes throughout the piece from movement to movement, and often within movements themselves.

Edited January 25, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Google Bot 3,256]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Edit: I'm starting to think this formation business is much like the stated key of a classical composition. The key referred to is what you start off with, but it ignores the fact that the key often changes throughout the piece from movement to movement, and often within movements themselves.

Very true.  For simplicity you can label a piece of music in the key of X, but then there's borrowed chords which are either accidental or deliberate.. However, they are there through choice of the artist using their own ears.

Dowell is like throwing an Eb into the C Major scale a few times during a song cause it feels right thing to do, which of course takes us into the melodic minor territory... But media would probably record it as a C Major piece.

Edited January 25, 2023 by Google Bot

[littleyellowbirdie 2,510]

22 hours ago, Google Bot said:

Very true.  For simplicity you can label a piece of music in the key of X, but then there's borrowed chords which are either accidental or deliberate.. However, they are there through choice of the artist using their own ears.

Dowell is like throwing an Eb into the C Major scale a few times during a song cause it feels right thing to do, which of course takes us into the melodic minor territory... But media would probably record it as a C Major piece.

 

[Petriix 2,834]

On 25/01/2023 at 11:55, Google Bot said:

Dowell is like throwing an Eb into the C Major scale a few times during a song cause it feels right thing to do, which of course takes us into the melodic minor territory... But media would probably record it as a C Major piece.

I think that's a poor analogy. I'd rework it as follows:

I'd say Dowell being an Eb is reasonable in that trying to throw him into a piece in the key of C major is almost certainly a mistake when he'd be much more at home in Bb major, especially with Pukki being a Bb himself. Some players can be different notes at different times. All notes fit into many different keys and the key can modulate and accommodate accidentals, but the choice of key sets the overall tone.

As any musician should know, it's the simple things in music that hold it all together: a clear pulse, metre and mode underpin most music. More importantly trying to get limited musicians to perform complex music outside their skillset typically results in a cacophonous mess.

When I talk about formations I'm largely talking about the underlying defensive structure and the starting point from which patterns of play can be built. I don't expect players to stay in a specific shape most of the time, I just expect certain phases of play to be met with a coherent underpinning where players know what their (and each other's) roles should be and can identify and respond to deviations  (e.g. when your fullback has gone marauding forwards and you lose the ball, knowing who should fill in and where etc.).

So, you can talk about formations being irrelevant, but that misses the underlying structural flaws we've all been witnessing: pukki struggling without a number 10 or central strike partner, fullbacks being overloaded when there is too much space between them and their corresponding wingers, central midfield battles being lost through poor positional discipline and ill-defined roles etc. Some formations have specific features which others lack and this bears out in the patterns of play which unfold on the pitch.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,510]

31 minutes ago, Petriix said:

I think that's a poor analogy. I'd rework it as follows:

I'd say Dowell being an Eb is reasonable in that trying to throw him into a piece in the key of C major is almost certainly a mistake when he'd be much more at home in Bb major, especially with Pukki being a Bb himself. Some players can be different notes at different times. All notes fit into many different keys and the key can modulate and accommodate accidentals, but the choice of key sets the overall tone.

As any musician should know, it's the simple things in music that hold it all together: a clear pulse, metre and mode underpin most music. More importantly trying to get limited musicians to perform complex music outside their skillset typically results in a cacophonous mess.

When I talk about formations I'm largely talking about the underlying defensive structure and the starting point from which patterns of play can be built. I don't expect players to stay in a specific shape most of the time, I just expect certain phases of play to be met with a coherent underpinning where players know what their (and each other's) roles should be and can identify and respond to deviations  (e.g. when your fullback has gone marauding forwards and you lose the ball, knowing who should fill in and where etc.).

So, you can talk about formations being irrelevant, but that misses the underlying structural flaws we've all been witnessing: pukki struggling without a number 10 or central strike partner, fullbacks being overloaded when there is too much space between them and their corresponding wingers, central midfield battles being lost through poor positional discipline and ill-defined roles etc. Some formations have specific features which others lack and this bears out in the patterns of play which unfold on the pitch.

My initial reaction to this is that it sounds like you wouldn't be a fan of Shostakovich!

I loved where Google Bot took the comparison there, and actually I think he improved on what I offered in drawing a parallel more evocative of jazz than classical music, because jazz does give the individual players more autonomy to depart off in different directions and it becomes more about the musicians following where it's going and how they need to adapt to build on that and take it somewhere else.

I'd also add that the allusion to modes in there brilliantly underlined how sometimes the difference can be the emphasis of the notes and its rest state than which notes are in the scale.

[Petriix 2,834]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

My initial reaction to this is that it sounds like you wouldn't be a fan of Shostakovich!

I loved where Google Bot took the comparison there, and actually I think he improved on what I offered in drawing a parallel more evocative of jazz than classical music, because jazz does give the individual players more autonomy to depart off in different directions and it becomes more about the musicians following where it's going and how they need to adapt to build on that and take it somewhere else.

I'd also add that the allusion to modes in there brilliantly underlined how sometimes the difference can be the emphasis of the notes and its rest state than which notes are in the scale.

It's more that I think you need top class players to play whatever the footballing equivalent of Shostakovich might be. As I've previously stated, Jazz is actually highly dependant on some very complex underlying knowledge and training which might be a little beyond our current squad and could well be inappropriate for our position in the football ladder.

My point, however was more about how I wouldn't see Dowell as so out of key with the underlying mode of our play and that we seem to have switched to playing very much in concordance with his ability - hence his sudden return to goalscoring form. Round pegs in round holes - to add yet another metaphor!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,510]

33 minutes ago, Petriix said:

It's more that I think you need top class players to play whatever the footballing equivalent of Shostakovich might be. As I've previously stated, Jazz is actually highly dependant on some very complex underlying knowledge and training which might be a little beyond our current squad and could well be inappropriate for our position in the football ladder.

My point, however was more about how I wouldn't see Dowell as so out of key with the underlying mode of our play and that we seem to have switched to playing very much in concordance with his ability - hence his sudden return to goalscoring form. Round pegs in round holes - to add yet another metaphor!

And then there's the matter of the other jazz band turning up on stage trying to jam out their own riffs while ****ing yours up at the same time...

Edited January 26, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[shefcanary 2,385]

I prefer Punk Rock myself ...

In your face, simple to understand, play and entertaining (as long as you're not on the receiving end, say less than 100 minutes)? 😉