Jump to content

Can someone please explain this old formation to me?


Recommended Posts

Guest mkowl

Was much easier when players played in a numbered position and would wear a different shirt number if they played a different role that game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The numbers denoted your position to a certain extent, but by the time I started watching Wednesday in 1967 /68 they were lining up with four at the back:                                             1

                                                                             Springett

         2   Smith.                            5   Mobley.                                    6 Young.                3   Megson

    

                                        4 Eustace.                      8 Mccalliog                  11 Pugh

          

                                                  7    Fantham        9 Ritchie             10  Ford

or summat like that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Animis said:

who marked the wingers?

God I feel old. The job of the 2 fullbacks was to stop the wingers attacking, the job of the centre half was to hold the defence together, the midfielders broke up play , the two inside forwards were attacking midfielders, the job of the wingers was to get down the touchline and cross the ball to the centre forward. They varied it, ofcourse, but at the level I played at,that's how it worked. Numbers meant something, if you got a particular shirt you got a particular job.

Basically, two fast men on the wings to cross to a goal scorer in the middle

Defending a corner, a man on each post (left footer on right post, right footer on left post, leave a fast man on the halfway line.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was standard formation for teams and think only changed about 66 when Ramsey set teamup differently to win world cup.

I understand full backs took care of wingers . Centre half marked centre forward and right half looked after inside left and left half loooked after inside right. It was a man v man set up with 5 attacking and 5 defending. The inside and half positions did get involved in both attacking and defending. Full backs andcentre halves were known as hard men in the teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

29468548_10156348675103627_2111503826493112320_n.jpg

This formation is before my time

Is it basically just displayed all skewed in the programme?

was it like wingers?

I recall it a little different to some of the other oldies ........young was a defensive wing half and tommy mac more the play maker further forward ....Wilkinson who wernt much good and Dobson played as wingers , pearson would play deeper alongside tommy mac with the number 9   and fantham as the spearhead .......Quinn didn't last long in the number 9 shirt coz he was  only a tich and lost out to hickton. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ash60s said:

mid 60s particularly to 4-4-2 ie Ramsey's England

in the 66 brown did play a loose 4-4-2  with 2 wingers usher & Dobson but switched to 4-3-3 for the semi against Chelsea with pugh and Quinn coming in and joining Eustace in a narrow 3 in the middle with smith and megson as the overlapping full backs  and stuck with it for the final . .......it was a fluid way as mccalliog who wasn't a typical number 9 sorted floated between attack and midfield .....i'm sure some will have a different view but that's my take on it . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flexibility was that Jimmy Mac could be up front with JF & DF as a 3 when attacking

or drop in hole in front of GP PE JQ when we without ball

Oh they were happy daze weren't they? and then we changed the strip in 67 and we all know the rest...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

29468548_10156348675103627_2111503826493112320_n.jpg

This formation is before my time

Is it basically just displayed all skewed in the programme?

was it like wingers?

It's very simple, it's the "attack, attack, attack" formation!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Quist said:

This was standard formation for teams and think only changed about 66 when Ramsey set teamup differently to win world cup.

I understand full backs took care of wingers . Centre half marked centre forward and right half looked after inside left and left half loooked after inside right. It was a man v man set up with 5 attacking and 5 defending. The inside and half positions did get involved in both attacking and defending. Full backs andcentre halves were known as hard men in the teams.

 

Yep. It was Alf Ramsey's "wingerless wonders" who changed the "rules" of how football teams lined up in England after the '66 World Cup. However, I seem to recall that the Hungarians, with Puskas and his mates, changed the formation a few years before then when they tore England a new one scoring loads of goals st Wembley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ash60s said:

Flexibility was that Jimmy Mac could be up front with JF & DF as a 3 when attacking

or drop in hole in front of GP PE JQ when we without ball

Oh they were happy daze weren't they? and then we changed the strip in 67 and we all know the rest...........

brown never quite settled on how to play ...he went out and got the best header of a football ive ever seen in Ritchie but then took him a while to realise we had  no fecker on the wing to  put the crosses in .he'd sold Dobson by then so kept bringing usher back but he was borderline useless.when brown left we  then got archie Irvine who  was even worse and we never did get the best out of Ritchie .  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Musn't Grumble said:

 

Yep. It was Alf Ramsey's "wingerless wonders" who changed the "rules" of how football teams lined up in England after the '66 World Cup. However, I seem to recall that the Hungarians, with Puskas and his mates, changed the formation a few years before then when they tore England a new one scoring loads of goals st Wembley.

spot on with that .....I think though he more or less stumbled on to the wingless wonders as in the early games in 66 he played 3 different recognised wingers and all of them failed so must have thought t feck it i'll go without and everyone hailed him a master tactician 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...