full backs.

In the modern game, full backs have taken on a more offensive role than is the case traditionally. [4]Wingerless formations such as the diamond 4-4-2 formation demand the full back to cover considerable ground up and down the flank. Some of the responsibilities of modern full backs include:

I also thought this was about the 4-3-1-2 what barnsley lay because there is no wingers either.

Making off-the-ball runs into spaces down the channels and supplying crosses into the opposing penalty box.

Providing a passing option down the flank, for instance, by creating opportunities for sequences like one-two passing moves.

In wingerless formations, full backs need to cover the roles of both wingers and full backs, although defensive work may be shared with one of the central midfielders. Hugo and anderson do this regular for kouzluk/van homoet when they go forward.

Additionally, attacking full backs help to pin both opposition full backs and wingers deeper in their own half with aggressive attacking intent. Their presence in attack also forces the opposition to withdraw players from central midfield, which the team can seize to its advantage. This would have been helpful for barnsley yesterday as Charlton had 3 cm's

The below is what the full back a to do.
Good off-the-ball ability to create attacking opportunities for his team by running into empty channels.
Dribbling ability. Many of the game's eminent attacking full backs are excellent dribblers in their own right and occasionally deputise as attacking wingers.


This is not the problem for all of barnsley's full backs but mainly just one. When foster is at full back he gets up and down fine and this is not is natural position. Now this is a big problem for barnsley because foster is a very good cb as well and is needed in there.

This is not me moaning it is the truth and something i watch for 90 mins and 45 at close from the east stand lower tier. I dont get on on to players but i noticed about macken before it was raised on here. I noticed the problem and told him at preston last year what people would be saying this year and it turned out right.

 

Has Hassell shagged your bird?

 

.

 

Well?

 

thought hassel didnt get forward enough yesterday

 

As i have said in another post that i have no problem with Robert hassell and another member of the forum as said he should have attacked more yesterday journo. Keep up

 

Thats what im saying D/T or are you stateing a fact ?

 

stating an opinion.

 

Keep up?

You keep up the hounding of one of our best players.

(clap) (doh)

 

Funny someone mentioned fullbacks because I've watched the Newcastle v Everton game........and......

..............to say that Simon Davey holds Moyes in such high esteem......he dosent follow what Moyes does with full backs
It were quite noticeable that alway through the match the Evetrton full backs were bombing forward.

Fullbacks are an important part of the offensive force these days............and ours on Setdi just stood and stared when we were attacking

 

RE: Funny someone mentioned fullbacks because I've watched the Newcastle v Everton game........and..

Moyes doesnt have Daveys obsession with not allowing teams to come through the middle.

 

Young Nudger do you think that is a good thing or a bad thing ?

 

Whats so new about attacking overlapping fullbacks? </p>

It's been a part of the game since the 1960s when Alf Ramsey switched the England team from 4-2-4 to 4-3-3. </p>

Liverpools fullbacks such as Chris Lawler scored as many goals as modern Day strikers. </p>

Don Revie at Leeds converted Terry Cooper from a left winger into a fullback. A lot of fullbacks were converted wingers in those days.
</p>

 

Question

Do you remember Hassell beating 2-3 men and getting to the byeline in the second half? Unfortunate in the end to run out of space but made the run forward.

One of the few times we actually got in their penalty area.

Just wondered.

I think you do him a severe dis-service.

 

I like the idea

of overlapping full backs. But I think Bobby Hassell generally does get forward quite a bit, I think yesterday was just a game when nobody was that attacking minded.
Plus, it's all well and good Van Homoet getting forward a lot, but he does **** all with the ball if he receives it, can't cross a ball 9 times out of 10 and his passing is atrocious! And he rarely even seems to make the right runs to draw defenders out of position.
If a full back is going to bomb forward he might as well be of some use, if not I'd rather him stay in defence.

 

We've got 2 decent full backs, only Davey won't play one of em. Prefers a bloke who can't pass a ball and can't even kick a ball with his left foot.

 

I have had time to consider this carefully, amd without needing to refer to over fruity language I can conclude that since I started supporting Barnsley, at the age of about 11 (Now 36 yrs young), I really am struggling to remember a full back quite as W**K as Van Homoet. Now, Kosluck is not the best full back I have seen in all those years, I concede. But, if whatever Davies problem is with Kosluk means he would rather play someone who would not look out of place at Thornes Park on a Sunday morning rather than a solid, and dependable full back, then HE DESERVES THE SACK. We do not have the luxury of playing numpties.

You can intellectualise the concepts of formations, and full backs all you like, the simple point is that our friend from Wales appears to be refusing to play the best full back (on either flank) that this club has. SACK HIM NOW!!!!

 

You needed time to arrive at that conclusion re: Van Homoet?
Part-timer!

 

Try writing your posts in English so that the rest of us on here can understand. nt

Because I think you may have something useful to say.

 

Brush, English and grammar is not my strength and i will say sorry now. Whats good in what i have said brush or any one else who wants to say some think on what i have said. I do like people to say what they think of what i say but i also like them to say whats good/ bad in it too.