April 23, 2024, 03:32:30 AM

Author Topic: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?  (Read 3809 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline UPRISING

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • "Justice is what de youths dem need overall..."
    • View Profile
Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« on: September 19, 2005, 11:52:32 AM »
People,
The defense has been a bit inconsistent so may need fine tuning...if we have 6 healthy defenders, who should start?  Who would be the most cohesive unit? 

I must say that the beat that Cox got against CR (for the 1st goal)...is the worst defending I have seen in a while (at ANY LEVEL) ...all in all he had a decent game..did what was asked of him I suppose....

Who is our best back 4?  I put that question to the forum xperts...sorry Andre..THIS is the ? of the day!

Bless..

Warriors right tru!!!!
« Last Edit: September 19, 2005, 12:26:34 PM by Tallman »
"...de way dem deal wit Mankind all mih gyal start bawl.."

Offline Mose

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2231
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2005, 12:02:48 PM »
I tink de defense pretty set with Marvin and Lawrence in de middle and Avery on de left. De problem is de right side and right now I tink I would lean towards Sancho on de right with Spann and/or Attiba as possible alternates.
Are you a match? It's too late for Emru, but maybe you can help save someone's life: http://www.healemru.com

Offline UPRISING

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • "Justice is what de youths dem need overall..."
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2005, 12:09:33 PM »
I hear you, but I think we could do a little better...Dog's performances have been tailing off over the last few games....maybe Sancho / Lawrence combo in the middle? 
"...de way dem deal wit Mankind all mih gyal start bawl.."

Offline Jayerson

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 1122
  • Gunners for life
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2005, 12:17:31 PM »
Now I have the utmost respect for Marvin Andrews however he has my heart racing on too many occasions. I remember for the 1st WCQ at home against the Dominican Rep at the Manny Ramjohn Stadium the silly penalty he gave away, luckily Hislop made an excellent save, last year before I could even settle into my seat properly he made a great pass to Borgetti who made no mistake and put it away.

Anyway back to the point, I suppose Marvin will still be there and he is a good aerial threat and scores for us every now and then. Lawrence will be there and Sancho is better than Cox going fwd, which we will have to do against Panama, Avery John could take his spot also, no need wasting the offensive abilities of Whitley and Spann in defense as we HAVE to get 3 points.

Offline maxg

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6474
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2005, 12:22:53 PM »
          Jones      Yorke  
 Birchall     Latapy  Edwards
               Sancho      
John,  Lawrence,Spann
             Charles
                 Jack


Spann, Yorke as midfield alternates...Sancho as defensive alternates

Bench: John, Scotland, Sealy, Andrews, Cox, Pierre, Whitley


Offline arrow

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3040
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2005, 12:26:13 PM »
Dog's best position right now is the same one he's playing for Rangers...on de bench
I would stick with a healthy Sancho in the middle based on what he showed against USA and Guatemala.  And based on our performance without him, Avery would reclaim his spot at left back.
I would also go back to the Spann/Edwards combo that worked well against Guatemala.

---------------------Jack------------------------
Spann------Sancho----Lawrence--Avery
Edwards----Birchall---Latas----Whitley (can switch Whitely and Birchall)
--------------Jones------Yorke-------------

Offline kicker

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 8902
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2005, 12:32:36 PM »
Sancho and Tallest in the hole

Avery on the left and Spann on the right

Live life 90 minutes at a time....Football is life.......

Offline UPRISING

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • "Justice is what de youths dem need overall..."
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2005, 12:47:41 PM »
As we need the 3 points, we need to attack..is there a way to get Latas, Jones, Yorke and Stern in a balanced lineup?  3-5-2 ? With Birchall having (strictly)  def. mid (almost stopper) responsibilities??  Latas (roaming) in behind the strikers?

                     Jack
      Sancho   Lawrence   John

Edwards    Yorke Birchall    Spann
                     Latas
          Jones              John

Spann as the utility player could hold down the left (or maybe Whitley, bring on Spann for whoever)..
             
"...de way dem deal wit Mankind all mih gyal start bawl.."

Offline JDB

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4607
  • Red, White and Black till death
    • View Profile
    • We Reach
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2005, 01:21:50 PM »
As much as it pains me to say it I woul drather see Snacho in th eteam before Dog. If Sancho in and Lawrence get bench because Dog is a stalwart and has to play I could live with that but to leave out a fit Sancho would be a bad idea.

Spann on the right and Avery on th eleft and we good to go.

Arrow that side yuh have there is alright but Yorke and Latas need to switch.

Uprising that side you describe look a lot like what we went out with against Costa Rica. If Panama have any quick wide men like Honduras (in the Gold Cup) or CR they will purge a back three, especially with a righ-footed midfielder playing left wing.

Spann doing a  good job at right back but that left attacking/defending wingback is real pressure to say yuh playing it just so.
THE WARRIORS WILL NOT BE DENIED.

Offline morvant

  • warrior nation member
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5429
  • malick till i die
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2005, 01:25:22 PM »
As we need the 3 points, we need to attack..is there a way to get Latas, Jones, Yorke and Stern in a balanced lineup?  3-5-2 ? With Birchall having (strictly)  def. mid (almost stopper) responsibilities??  Latas (roaming) in behind the strikers?

                     Jack
      Sancho   Lawrence   John

Edwards    Yorke Birchall    Spann
                     Latas
          Jones              John

Spann as the utility player could hold down the left (or maybe Whitley, bring on Spann for whoever)..
             

seriously de best team in my opinion :beermug: :beermug:
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Offline UPRISING

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • "Justice is what de youths dem need overall..."
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #10 on: September 19, 2005, 02:10:18 PM »
JDB (wha vibes) I hear yuh, so dat is why Birchall will have to stay home, in the midfield (play almost like a stopper).  To me Spann good enough to play any position out there, ONCE HE IS DISCIPLINED...

You must admit though that on paper at least, that may be our best side period..Trinidad is better than CR ..they shoud have at least gotten a point..that is why I cyar see us not getting 3pts in Panama..the thing the team lacks is the killer instinct and discipline /concentration from START to finish....still seeing men arguing and putting dey hand on dey waist complaining (Whitley is most guilty of these) ..just play football fellas ..you do not see ANY OTHER TEAM with these ANTICS ...watch the tapes ...the other teams running right through..they don't let ah bad pass or mistake distract them from the mission....

Discipline. Professionalism. Killer Instinct. LATAS from the start of the campaign... and Tnt would have finished 3rd EASY.... we deserve 4th but have to fight for it!!
"...de way dem deal wit Mankind all mih gyal start bawl.."

Offline JDB

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4607
  • Red, White and Black till death
    • View Profile
    • We Reach
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #11 on: September 19, 2005, 02:55:04 PM »
Actually before the last gamne I felt with Avery missing and Lawrence coming back a 3-5-2 might have been the best way to fit everybody in. I wasn't expecting Cox to play in place of Sancho though.

If we play 3-5-2 now it will only be to keep Dog in the side because Lawrence and Sancho playing well enough to replace him.

Carlos on the right, Whitley on the left, Birchall and Spann in the middle trying to shield the back three.

Dwight and Latas in front of them and then Stern up front (with Jones and Sealey warming up from the first minute onwards).
THE WARRIORS WILL NOT BE DENIED.

Offline football king

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 1130
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2005, 03:04:29 PM »
tha 3-5-2 squad is a good lineup although, boy something bout lawrence and dog i never been comfortable with. but wha else we go do.

the 3-5-2 to me (1 man opinion) is the best way to go-must  have that birchall holding deep as uprising said. i think birchall could handle it there.

that go free up yorke and moreso latas.  But apparently dutchmen ever since rinus michels don't go wth anything but 4-4-2. so Dog in plus beenie loyal to the senior players.

Offline Lower St. John

  • It's All About Unity, Togetherness..........
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 845
  • Don't cry as it's over, continue to enjoy it.
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2005, 03:06:26 PM »
Sancho and Tallest in the hole

Avery on the left and Spann on the right



I like this.  The only thing I would add to this is the fact that Carlos Edwards and Spann will be interchangeable.  I believe that we need to have four at the back since our midfield has not played together regularly and we will need to weather some effort from Panama.  Fellas must realize that Panama will not open de Rum Shop and leave it unattended.  they will have some fight playing at home and they can play nice offensive football.
Germany 2006 Was A Lifetime Experience Not To Be Forgotten!!!!!!!!!

Offline UPRISING

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • "Justice is what de youths dem need overall..."
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2005, 03:08:54 PM »
King, dat is true..hopefully Beenie will make adjustments as they go..he has proven to be a good tactician to this point (eg. US game)... I would just like to see our BEST XI on the field though and I think that is it... Dog failure to clear that ball against CR was real telling to me..if that was a jamaican...pure BLADE ...ball and man woulda get clear...not that soffff side foot ting that Dog try..
"...de way dem deal wit Mankind all mih gyal start bawl.."

Offline football king

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 1130
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #15 on: September 19, 2005, 03:12:37 PM »
best 11 in truth
i need 3 -4 defenders that could read the game win the ball and maintain posession. 

beenie man coach real madrid, holland etc so he 's the man
know more than me. 


Offline Mose

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2231
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #16 on: September 19, 2005, 03:14:03 PM »
I hear you, but I think we could do a little better...Dog's performances have been tailing off over the last few games....maybe Sancho / Lawrence combo in the middle? 
I could go with that, in which case I'd put Spann on de right.

Ah notice Maxg put Charles in de middle with Lawrence and dat sound like an intriguing option too seeing as how coach say dat is Charles best position.

Ah doh feel too comfortable with de 3 man backline. Considering dat we generally lacking in team speed, a 3 man back line could have real trouble with speedy forwards.
Are you a match? It's too late for Emru, but maybe you can help save someone's life: http://www.healemru.com

Offline football king

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 1130
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #17 on: September 19, 2005, 03:16:31 PM »
it could work as long as birchall handle he stories
and he must come back deep and demand tha ball, practicall take it off them defenders feet. find yorke and latas. and let we go forward from there.

Offline UPRISING

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • "Justice is what de youths dem need overall..."
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #18 on: September 19, 2005, 03:18:56 PM »
it could work as long as birchall handle he stories
and he must come back deep and demand tha ball, practicall take it off them defenders feet. find yorke and latas. and let we go forward from there.

Dat is exactly what I saying..let Birchall stay deep and help with distribution and bal winning
"...de way dem deal wit Mankind all mih gyal start bawl.."

Offline Trini

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 1631
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #19 on: September 19, 2005, 03:19:41 PM »
We know that Beenie calling 20 for the next 2 games, including 3 keepers.
We also hadda keep an eye on the yellow card situation as we have nuff me who on one yellow.

My starting 11 and remaining 9 for the next 2 games: (442 to start, 343 if we hunting the win late)
Jack
Dog
Lawrence
Spann (RB)
Avery (LB)
Carlos (RM)
Birchall (CM)
Latapy (CM)
Samuel(LM)
Stern
Sealy

Subs:
Shaka
Ince
Sancho
Cox
Seaton
Theobald
Glen
Jones
Scotland

Dunno if I am the only one who may have this opinion, but Colin Samuel play decent on the left midfield position in the limited time for the GC. He was consistently running at defenders and causing the right back to think twice about everything. Link up decent with Avery too.
On the right side, Spann and carlos have a nice vibes going too, it would not be wise to change something that work before.

Offline football king

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 1130
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #20 on: September 19, 2005, 03:20:30 PM »
uprising look we ain't no world class coach well u may be but i am not so good luck to beenie.  
 i done

Offline UPRISING

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • "Justice is what de youths dem need overall..."
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #21 on: September 19, 2005, 03:23:35 PM »
True true...dem fellas go handle theirs..dey en need two wash up old men opinion!!
"...de way dem deal wit Mankind all mih gyal start bawl.."

Offline dcs

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5032
  • T&T 4 COP
    • View Profile
    • Warrior Nation
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #22 on: September 19, 2005, 05:27:40 PM »
We know that Beenie calling 20 for the next 2 games, including 3 keepers.
We also hadda keep an eye on the yellow card situation as we have nuff me who on one yellow.

My starting 11 and remaining 9 for the next 2 games: (442 to start, 343 if we hunting the win late)
Jack
Dog
Lawrence
Spann (RB)
Avery (LB)
Carlos (RM)
Birchall (CM)
Latapy (CM)
Samuel(LM)
Stern
Sealy

Subs:
Shaka
Ince
Sancho
Cox
Seaton
Theobald
Glen
Jones
Scotland

Dunno if I am the only one who may have this opinion, but Colin Samuel play decent on the left midfield position in the limited time for the GC. He was consistently running at defenders and causing the right back to think twice about everything. Link up decent with Avery too.
On the right side, Spann and carlos have a nice vibes going too, it would not be wise to change something that work before.


You protecting Yorke for the last game or u just forget to list him?
I rubbing meh eye cuz I eh seeing his name.

Offline triniwings

  • Full Warrior
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #23 on: September 19, 2005, 06:31:32 PM »
                                          Jack                                                                       
 
                      Lawrence                    Sancho           
 
     
Spann                                                                       Avery

                                       
                    Birchall                  Theobold( or Whitley)
                                               

        Edwards                      Yorke                        Latapy

                                          Stern                           


Bench:Jones*
         Sealy*
         Dog
         Whitley
         Wolfe
         Rahim
         Shaka

         Scotland/Glen(optional)
       

We need goals....we conceded less goals of late, but we not scorin.  We need to win two out of two. That has to be the mentality.  One against a deflated Panama team that never defeated us and the other against a second string Mexican outfit.  We need goals...Sancho and Tallest will keep us clean at dee back.....Dog is dee replacement for either one in case of injury.  We will need Dog to come in a 3-5-2 when we play Bahrain/Uzbekistan.  Theo and Birchall would keep the ball moving, as well as provide dee hustle in dee midfield we require in order to force opponents to lose possession.  Only goals will take us forward.  That formation would serve us well.  Wa alya tink?

Offline samo

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2333
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #24 on: September 19, 2005, 07:05:07 PM »
I doh like de idea of Yorke playing behind Stern, they are too similar in style. Panama not coming to defend, they coming to win they last home game, and give they people something to smile about..
Panama has not scored many goals, I would go with a 4-4-2..

                                                                 
                                                                 
  Stern, Scotland
                                                           Latas, Birchall, Yorke, Edwards,                   
                                                          John,  Lawrence, Andrews ,Sancho
                                                                            Jack

1 question.. If a man get a second yellow against Mex.. and we win both games, does he miss the game against Uzbek/ Bahrain???

Offline football king

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 1130
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #25 on: September 20, 2005, 01:43:43 PM »
i would say yes the man have to sit out cause that playoff is part of the qualification process.


Offline NUFF

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 970
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #26 on: September 20, 2005, 02:43:41 PM »
Last year when Bertille was using de 3-5-2 system man was calling fuh he head.  Now man callin fuh Beenie to use de same system.  Allyuh cyah make up allyuh mind atall eh.

We need to use play with four defenders because our midfielders are not disciplined enuff to defend consistently in a 3-5-2 system.

My back four would be:

      Spann          lawrence       sancho    avery


            Edwards        Birchall       Yorke 

                             latapy

                             Stern

Offline arrow

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3040
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Who should the back 4 be?
« Reply #27 on: September 20, 2005, 03:14:10 PM »
Last year when Bertille was using de 3-5-2 system man was calling fuh he head.  Now man callin fuh Beenie to use de same system.  Allyuh cyah make up allyuh mind atall eh.

We need to use play with four defenders because our midfielders are not disciplined enuff to defend consistently in a 3-5-2 system.

My back four would be:

      Spann          lawrence       sancho    avery


            Edwards        Birchall       Yorke 

                             latapy

                             Stern

I think a 3-5-2 would be better than your 4-4-1 anyday...at least we would have 11 men on the field. 
Or you playing with Jack AND Shaka in goal or what?

 

1]; } ?>