so that's not 3-5-2 then
that's 3-4-1-2
and the reason we don't play it is because it's only got one centre back there. As far as I've ever seen top level footie played, you either play 2 (4-4-2) or 3 with wong backs (3-5-2, 5-3-2 etc).
I've never seen anyone only play 1.
Not saying you're definitely wrong - maybe you've invented a whole new way of playing. But the reason we don't play it is because no-one apart from you has ever thought of it, I'd imagine.
Posted By: Tricky Hawes on September 30th 2007 at 22:20:48
Message Thread
- A few points from yesterday. (NCFC) - Darren Eadie, Sep 30, 22:09:49
- 3-5-2 with Hucks? (NCFC) - Tricky Hawes, Sep 30, 22:13:26
- Have it lined up like this (NCFC) - Darren Eadie, Sep 30, 22:16:17
- so that's not 3-5-2 then (NCFC) - Tricky Hawes, Sep 30, 22:20:48
- *wing* backs, obviously (NCFC) - Tricky Hawes, Sep 30, 22:22:15
- wong backs is much better, that's given me a good smile to start Monday! (n/m) (NCFC) - Old Git, Oct 1, 09:07:01
- there's a case to be made for wingbacks (NCFC) - Dave in France, Sep 30, 22:27:27
- Doesn't have to be those players, that was just an example! (n/m) (NCFC) - Darren Eadie, Sep 30, 22:25:53
- *wing* backs, obviously (NCFC) - Tricky Hawes, Sep 30, 22:22:15
- so that's not 3-5-2 then (NCFC) - Tricky Hawes, Sep 30, 22:20:48
- Have it lined up like this (NCFC) - Darren Eadie, Sep 30, 22:16:17
- 3-5-2 with Hucks? (NCFC) - Tricky Hawes, Sep 30, 22:13:26
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.