[Archived] Sam Allardyce

[BPF]

He's on Talks***e now...

[gumboots]

  On 15/07/2010 at 12:36, Broken_Picture_Frame said:

He's on Talks***e now...

At least Hawksbee and Jacobs is a decent programme. If you're listening tell us if he says anything remotely interesting.

[Majiball]

  On 15/07/2010 at 12:45, gumboots said:

At least Hawksbee and Jacobs is a decent programme. If you're listening tell us if he says anything remotely interesting.

Its the funniest radio station in the UK.

Gough has me in stitches as does porky parry, they have the most bizarre idea's about football and always have me ROFLMAO.

[BPF]

  On 15/07/2010 at 12:45, gumboots said:

At least Hawksbee and Jacobs is a decent programme. If you're listening tell us if he says anything remotely interesting.

Hi Gumboots,

I've posted what he said on the takeover thread.

[roversmum]

Dr Sam

[tonygreenbank]

  On 16/07/2010 at 10:44, roversmum said:

Dr Sam

Thanks Roversmum for that as I saw a brief clip without the sound in a shop window and thought I was seeing things yesterday!

Good quiz question in years to come, "Which premier league manager had a PhD?"

Wonder why Nicko hasnt mentioned it!

[ihtd]

I was at the ceremony yesterday, rather fun day-It was my girlfriend's graduation and he was the guest speaker/received his honorary doctorate from the vice-chancellor. Was more than happy to pose for pictures after the ceremony and went down to the university for the reception.

[Majiball]

  On 16/07/2010 at 14:59, tonygreenbank said:

Thanks Roversmum for that as I saw a brief clip without the sound in a shop window and thought I was seeing things yesterday!

Good quiz question in years to come, "Which premier league manager had a honorary PhD?"

Wonder why Nicko hasnt mentioned it!

Corrected it for you.

[LeChuck]

  On 16/07/2010 at 17:45, Majiball said:

Corrected it for you.

Sort of... 'an honorary PhD'.

[Majiball]

  On 16/07/2010 at 18:29, LeChuck said:

Sort of... 'an honorary PhD'.

:lol:

Fair play.

[thenodrog]

  On 15/07/2010 at 12:29, Majiball said:

I think playing 352 in the premiership would be suicicde. Most teams play with two sets of wingers IE modern full backs and we would get over run.

I could see it as a plan B, but no more.

We played 3-5-2 in the promotion season with great success...... then we tried it at Arsenal in the FA Cup and got paggered big time. Won't work in the Prem, the opposition are too good.

  On 16/07/2010 at 18:29, LeChuck said:

Sort of... 'an honorary PhD'.

The old RFW was awarded one of those a couple of years ago at Manchester Met I think.

[Amo]

  On 16/07/2010 at 22:07, thenodrog said:

We played 3-5-2 in the promotion season with great success...... then we tried it at Arsenal in the FA Cup and got paggered big time. Won't work in the Prem, the opposition are too good.

Salgado will get raped eight ways from Sunday.

[67splitscreen]

Two more games played and three at the back in both, now I'm getting worried.

Surely Sam does not think we have the personnel for this formation.

[grizfoot]

  On 17/07/2010 at 19:02, 67splitscreen said:

Two more games played and three at the back in both, now I'm getting worried.

Surely Sam does not think we have the personnel for this formation.

I am a fan of 3-5-2 and a few teams at the World Cup showed the formation can work well if used correctly, (Algeria v England and New Zealand v Italy spring to mind as good examples). I''d say our strongest position in terms of players is centreback with Givet, Nelsen, Samba added to the up-and-coming youngsters of Jones & Hanley. So in someways it would suit to play a back three I'd say. Nelsen was terrific for New Zealand in the centre of a back three. The central centreback is almost like a spare defender or a sweeper used mainly for putting in clearances and blocks when the other two central defenders haven't dealt with the danger. Always the hardest position in the 3-5-2 formations is the wing-backs, we do have two natural candidates in Olsson for the left and Emerton for the right but I fear if thoose two aren't available then the likes of Pedersen or Salgado in a wing-back roles would be highly disastrous.

I'd propose something like the following:

When defending:

--------------------- Robinson --------------------

---------------------- Nelsen ----------------------

-Emerton - Samba ---- Givet ---- Olsson -

--------------- Nzonzi --- Pedersen -------------

----------------------- Dunn ----------------------

------------- Kalinic ------- Roberts --------------

When attacking:

--------------------- Robinson ---------------------

------- Samba ---- Nelsen --- Givet -----------

---------------------- Nzonzi ------------------------

---- Emerton ---- Pedersen ---- Olsson -----

---------------------- Dunn --------------------------

-------- Kalinic ------------ Roberts --------------

To me with the current personnal that doesn't look to far off our strongest team. Obviously we'd all like a good partner for Nzonzi in midfield and a new striker upfront but I'm just going off the players we have at present.

The added advatange of 3-5-2 is that we'd have three centrebacks on the pitch and therefore there's more dangers from set-pieces, which is obviously a big part of our game. The system is unusual and a lot of the players probably won't have played it before, for this formation I think Nelsen is a must in there because he knows how to play in a back three.

We saw glimpses of this formation developing during the later parts of last season, although it usually only appeared at the end of the games when we where winning as a short of blockout tactic. That was more of a 5-3-1-1 formation, which is basically the same as my "when defending" example above apart from the fact one striker has been sacrificed for an extra central midfield. The logic behind this is pretty clear, don't let anyone down the centre of the pitch push the opposition out wide and force them to cross it in. With the amount of height in our team you'd back us to clear the high majority of crossess put into the box. Last season we saw on a number of ocassions long strikes from the centre of the pitch, with extra players in defense it should encourage the midfield to push out a lot more knowing there's basically a back five behind them.

True this formation can become very narrow and the wing-backs have to get a lot of work for it to work really effectively. But we very rarely play it down the flanks anymore, and it's not like we have an array of brilliant wingers or anything. I'd be more happy with 3-5-2 rather than 3-5-1-1 because having two upfront enables the strikers to run the channels and create width that way. Although most of our play seems to be direct and down the centre, packing the central areas with more players doesn't sound a bad idea to me.

Big Sam was one of the big reasons 4-5-1 became so popular with his success using this formation at Bolton. So successful in fact that the majority of teams now adopts this formation, football tactics and formations are always changing. To stand still can be dangerous, like I stated at the beginning I'm a fan of the 3-5-2 over the 4-5-1 we currentley play and it would make for interesting viewing if we adopt it next season.

[old darwen blue]

  On 17/07/2010 at 22:05, grizfoot said:

I am a fan of 3-5-2 and a few teams at the World Cup showed the formation can work well if used correctly, (Algeria v England and New Zealand v Italy spring to mind as good examples). I''d say our strongest position in terms of players is centreback with Givet, Nelsen, Samba added to the up-and-coming youngsters of Jones & Hanley. So in someways it would suit to play a back three I'd say. Nelsen was terrific for New Zealand in the centre of a back three. The central centreback is almost like a spare defender or a sweeper used mainly for putting in clearances and blocks when the other two central defenders haven't dealt with the danger. Always the hardest position in the 3-5-2 formations is the wing-backs, we do have two natural candidates in Olsson for the left and Emerton for the right but I fear if thoose two aren't available then the likes of Pedersen or Salgado in a wing-back roles would be highly disastrous.

I'd propose something like the following:

When defending:

--------------------- Robinson --------------------

---------------------- Nelsen ----------------------

-Emerton - Samba ---- Givet ---- Olsson -

--------------- Nzonzi --- Pedersen -------------

----------------------- Dunn ----------------------

------------- Kalinic ------- Roberts --------------

When attacking:

--------------------- Robinson ---------------------

------- Samba ---- Nelsen --- Givet -----------

---------------------- Nzonzi ------------------------

---- Emerton ---- Pedersen ---- Olsson -----

---------------------- Dunn --------------------------

-------- Kalinic ------------ Roberts --------------

To me with the current personnal that doesn't look to far off our strongest team. Obviously we'd all like a good partner for Nzonzi in midfield and a new striker upfront but I'm just going off the players we have at present.

The added advatange of 3-5-2 is that we'd have three centrebacks on the pitch and therefore there's more dangers from set-pieces, which is obviously a big part of our game. The system is unusual and a lot of the players probably won't have played it before, for this formation I think Nelsen is a must in there because he knows how to play in a back three.

We saw glimpses of this formation developing during the later parts of last season, although it usually only appeared at the end of the games when we where winning as a short of blockout tactic. That was more of a 5-3-1-1 formation, which is basically the same as my "when defending" example above apart from the fact one striker has been sacrificed for an extra central midfield. The logic behind this is pretty clear, don't let anyone down the centre of the pitch push the opposition out wide and force them to cross it in. With the amount of height in our team you'd back us to clear the high majority of crossess put into the box. Last season we saw on a number of ocassions long strikes from the centre of the pitch, with extra players in defense it should encourage the midfield to push out a lot more knowing there's basically a back five behind them.

True this formation can become very narrow and the wing-backs have to get a lot of work for it to work really effectively. But we very rarely play it down the flanks anymore, and it's not like we have an array of brilliant wingers or anything. I'd be more happy with 3-5-2 rather than 3-5-1-1 because having two upfront enables the strikers to run the channels and create width that way. Although most of our play seems to be direct and down the centre, packing the central areas with more players doesn't sound a bad idea to me.

Big Sam was one of the big reasons 4-5-1 became so popular with his success using this formation at Bolton. So successful in fact that the majority of teams now adopts this formation, football tactics and formations are always changing. To stand still can be dangerous, like I stated at the beginning I'm a fan of the 3-5-2 over the 4-5-1 we currentley play and it would make for interesting viewing if we adopt it next season.

I am liking the look of that Griz

[Helmshore blue]

I have to agree that I also have faith in the 3-5-2 formation. Having played this formation for the past 2 years, I think it is pivotal on 3 positions.

The first of these is the centre back who will sweep in behind the other two, who would attack the ball. I think Nelsen can do this perfectly.

Second is the wing backs, need a lot of energy, and obviously have to be able to get forward as well as defend. I think Olsson could do this, but not sure about Emo.

Finally, maybe the most important position is the sitting midfielder, who needs to be diciplined enough to just play infront of the back 3, and fill in for either wing back. I really hope N'Zonzi could fill this role.

How I see it, the formation can work as a pivot defensively. For example, imagine a back 3 of Givet, Samba and Nelsen, with Olsson and Emo as wing backs. If Olsson goes forward, Emo would stay back, and the back three would push across to make a back four, with givet at left back. The same would happen if Emo went forward, Olsson would stay as a left back, with Nelsen covering at right back.

[Steve Moss]

  On 18/07/2010 at 01:34, lr526 said:

I have to agree that I also have faith in the 3-5-2 formation. Having played this formation for the past 2 years, I think it is pivotal on 3 positions.

The first of these is the centre back who will sweep in behind the other two, who would attack the ball. I think Nelsen can do this perfectly.

Second is the wing backs, need a lot of energy, and obviously have to be able to get forward as well as defend. I think Olsson could do this, but not sure about Emo.

What about Hoillett? He has the pace on the right, if not the brain.

[Helmshore blue]

That is true, he does have pace and the young legs which will help his workrate, but apart from that I havn't seen anything from Hoilett that I've been over impressed with. He still seems a little raw, hopefully after a few games this will wear off!

[1864roverite]

I think 3-5-2 combats a 4-4-1-1 formation quite well. The 4-4-1-1 seems to be the set up being preferred by a lot of teams so it might just work.

I would like to see the first team employ this formation on Tuesday at nobend. Only then will we be able to see if the team can make it work against a half decent championship side.

It will be interesting to see who Sam uses in the back 3 as well as seeing who gets the central slot in midfield.

[Kelbo]

  On 17/07/2010 at 19:02, 67splitscreen said:

Two more games played and three at the back in both, now I'm getting worried.

Surely Sam does not think we have the personnel for this formation.

[/quot

He may be thinking along those lines, it really depends on who he gets in the transfer window but it would be a little odd to play pre season with a system he is not going to adopt in the coming campaign!

[Bobby G]

Its a forward thinking concept to alter something, as it may give us a little extra something too. Not a single club in the top flight plays with it. People said it was obsolete but I think the WC should that it wasnt.

Uruguay played with it, and so did Chile and it seems to be somewhat popular with the South Americans.

[Kelbo]

  On 18/07/2010 at 09:36, Bobby G said:

Its a forward thinking concept to alter something, as it may give us a little extra something too. Not a single club in the top flight plays with it. People said it was obsolete but I think the WC should that it wasnt.

Uruguay played with it, and so did Chile and it seems to be somewhat popular with the South Americans.

Another pointer here could be the fitness thing, Sam got them back earlier and wanted them to improve on their fitness, to play such a formation needs lots of stamina and vibrancy, maybe he is going along those lines.

[den]

  On 18/07/2010 at 01:34, lr526 said:

I have to agree that I also have faith in the 3-5-2 formation. Having played this formation for the past 2 years, I think it is pivotal on 3 positions.

The first of these is the centre back who will sweep in behind the other two, who would attack the ball. I think Nelsen can do this perfectly.

Playing three at the back means there is more space for the opposition to exploit. It is essential that the back three have real pace. Nelsen would really struggle in a back three.

While we are talking tactics, it's pretty obvious to me that the world cup has reaffirmed my belief that 4-4-2 is far too rigid. The better teams, at international level at least, have, at times, as many as 6 players in the central midfield. Even the lone striker doesn't just stand up front waiting for the long ball - he drops back and gets involved in the areas where it really matters - and when this happens the oppositions back four are contributing nothing to the game. That's almost half your side not involved in play.

This showed up when England had Lennon standing out wide [being replaced by SWP at times, who did exactly the same], while the rest of the England midfield became overwhelmed by sheer numbers. The Aaron Lennon/SWP type of player would never get near to the German or Spanish sides. On top of that, players as slow as Gareth Barry was shown to be, would never get in a top international midfield. Players like Gerard and Lampard who can't play the quick, pass and move game also wouldn't get into a team who play the more progressive, short passing game.

So, Sam's way of playing the lone striker is a far more liquid way of playing, but you have to have the right type of player to play those tactics. At present we don't have them. There's no future, at the top level, with 4-4-2.

[RevidgeBlue]

Well, I hope Sam is enjoying his golfing break in Portugal.

I must say if the previous manager had done the same at this stage of preseason the messageboard would be in meltdown and we'd be carting Gordon off to intensive care..................

[John]

  On 18/07/2010 at 10:42, RevidgeBlue said:

Well, I hope Sam is enjoying his golfing break in Portugal.

I must say if the previous manager had done the same at this stage of preseason the messageboard would be in meltdown and we'd be carting Gordon off to intensive care..................

The previous manager was shyte at his job though.

Whether you like him or not, Sam is one of the best Premier League managers around - he knows what is effective and how to get results.

I think its good for the manager not to always to be with the players - too much time of anyone and people become sick of each other.