Cull?

[gazan]

I'm not very smart sometimes or all times Timmy.

I am wedded to how football WAS played for a hundred years and it was truly based on attack with 5 forwards, two half backs and a centre half and two full backs. We won the world cup in 1966, something we have not done since. Why is that IS the question? Steve Holland was assistant manager of the National Squad but he was sacked by Crewe and a Japanese Team he had signed for for just 3 months and had one win in 11 games. Clubs won't and should not have to employ managers who have only won 3 games in 17 matches Tim. We should easily have made the play offs after the pre Christmas time and so just who is to blame for this poor performance? Every team has injuries.

Bill Nicholson was manager of my second fav team in the 60's and he was the only manager who looked after the team. the club, the fan base ie everything and they were the most successful team at the time. Timmy, there is no way my friend that having more than one manager makes sense as others will agree or disagree and a flippin GK coach? Do me a favour! Its back to whether players are good enough and no coaching in the world will make a naturally gifted player better than he is . In fact, they can and do make players worse as many coaches are just second rate players and managers. United have just paid 20 million for another manager and that was a great success wasn't it. I say again and again, managers should be apointed for no more than 6 months and then taken on for another 6 months and then sacked if they fail and no compensation involved. I'm not here to get a reaction, just to want us to play better and that involved far more strikers than we have. We were more successful when that idea was paramount. We should not be spending money on under 18's in any way.

I was a far better player in my early 20's than I was in my ****s as I was physically stronger and thought more about the game then. There is no way I would have a team with one striker up front. Not in a million years!

You regularly point out that England last won the World Cup in 1966. You also claim that for a hundred years they played with 5 forwards. England won the World Cup with only 3 forwards. Ramsey's "wingless wonders" played a 4-3-3. Prior to that Walter Winter bottom played 4-2-4. The last time England played anything like 5 forwards, they were torn apart by 'Magyar Magic', 6-3 at Wembley and 7-1 in Budapest. There have been lots of teams since, Germany, Brazil, Argentina and (particularly) Italy who have not played with 5 forwards and yet have won the World Cup. How can that be if 5 forwards is best?

[MikeSB]

You regularly point out that England last won the World Cup in 1966. You also claim that for a hundred years they played with 5 forwards. England won the World Cup with only 3 forwards. Ramsey's "wingless wonders" played a 4-3-3. Prior to that Walter Winter bottom played 4-2-4. The last time England played anything like 5 forwards, they were torn apart by 'Magyar Magic', 6-3 at Wembley and 7-1 in Budapest. There have been lots of teams since, Germany, Brazil, Argentina and (particularly) Italy who have not played with 5 forwards and yet have won the World Cup. How can that be if 5 forwards is best?

Nah, we had 5 forwards as all teams did.

Surely you cannot support having one striker up front on his own? How many goals have we scored this season. You must be embarrassed about bringing your friends to the match and getting beat once again. You should be screaming for change from Lee Bell and you are not getting it and will not next season either.

Strikers in the old days, oh forget that silly term, the forwards of yesteryear were able to dribble back then without any coaching , ever heard of George Best and Jimmy Greaves? All we do is pass the ball a thousand times in the match. Did you count how many fouls were committed last Monday? Do players ever learn to play this very easy game without committing a foul?