Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Soccer World Cup MLS Euro Champions League etc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dexter Woo who wrote (164)	6/12/1998 7:02:00 PM
From: mc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5130

Interesting thoughts, Dexter. I hadn't really been looking for any tactical reason for the large number of own goals. I'll pay more attention this week. The new formations are interesting, but I'm not sure they'll be all that effective. It is interesting to note that Italy is talking about going the other direction and playing a 3-4-3 or 4-3-3. I think that the USA's 3-6-1 could be their undoing. They have difficulty scoring goals and I wonder if they'll be overly concerned about defending and not move into the attack. While watching the games this weekend I'll keep an eye on the spacing problem you mentioned. I wonder, is playing with three at the back a luxury created by the 4-4-2 which was so common during the last decade? With two forwards you'd only need two markers and a sweeper or libero depending on the term you prefer. Of course your midfielders have to make sure they don't get caught up during counter attacks. Also, do you think the USA strikers are skilled enough to act as as a receiver and distributor of the ball? The striker role in a 3-6-1 has to be more focused on distributing the ball to through runs and overlapping runs made by the midfielders. That's a tough task for anyone and I'm not sure the quality of the US forwards is high enough for such a task. Take care, Gary

To: Dexter Woo who wrote (164)	6/12/1998 10:52:00 PM
From: X Y Zebra	Respond to of 5130

Just an opinion, The space between the goalie and the last line of defense has increased while the space between the mid-field and top of penalty box has decreased. This may be due to the new fad of 3-7 or 3-6-1 formations. Teams want to strip/intercept in the congested space and get more attackers into offense when they get possession. Thus, defenders are getting caught by the short lob or occasional ground through pass and are running into their own goals. This own goal phenomena we're seeing may be due to bodies getting in the way of errant clearances. What are your theories? Bear in mind that I am rusty in my facts as lately I have not been up in the day to day of the sport. In my opinion, the most efficient formations in soccer are either the 4 - 2 - 4, or the 4 - 3 - 3. Its use will depend on how good your opponent is. 4-2-4 against an easier team, 4-3-3 against a more aggressive team To cram the defense becomes highly inefficient and in the end you are defeating the purpose of the game. The purpose of the game is to win, for that you need to score, and to score you need people up front with the necessary skill to finish into the net. Goal. The 3-7, and 3-6-1 formations in my eyes are just fads. The Italians, in years past, became famous for playing a horrible [but effective] game of defense, in which they would score one maybe two goals and then they would simply retreat and form a huge lock and the whole purpose was to defend the lead. It would then take players with great skill to open up such lock, in the end the game suffered and we ended up with the boring scores 0 x 0 or 1 x 0 or 1 x 1 The reason the space between the goalie and defense increases is because the defense, once in control of the ball, quickly moves forward, attempting to catch the unaware forward off-side, a highly dangerous technique but somehow effective. Control of the mid-field will certainly give you more control and domination of the game. But if you make such mid-field control the entire objective of the game, you end up not going forward effectively and scoring, and simply passing back and forth running around the mid-field [like little mice], and forgetting you need to go forward and score. Rather than concentrating on a specific formation, (albait, always important), I believe that the psychological winning attitude will be more important. This means absolute concentration in an organized attack by all members of the team with the sole purpose of scoring by the most able and best positioned player. And so in response to your question, my own particular theory of what is happening so far in this World Cup is that teams so far seem to be real hungry for victory and are playing far more open, in this way the forward are more aggressive in their attack. They are creating more opportunities to score. There seems to be a real desire and drive to win rather than merely tie a game, since the difference in points makes a greater difference. The number of own goals may be a mere coincidence, at least two of them (Scotland's and S. Africa's). In the case of Scotland's the defender was chasing the Brazilian player, rebounded and met the ball. In the case of the S. African defender, the defender almost stopped the ball, he simply did not reached far enough, but in essence the goals were the result of the aggressiveness of the forwards and not necessarily a congestion of bodies by the goal. Perhaps, as we advance in the tournament, teams will become more fearful and conservative and will close up somehow. I hope they don't as so far the games have been good. My theory.