Barnet

[lukcour]

There aren't any teams that don't play 4 or 5 at the back and we ain't got enough strikers on the books, never mind fit, to field your preferred option of 10. You are an authority on the game in the 60s and maybe before, but you haven't a clue about the modern game. If everything was better in the "old days" maybe we should be going back to sending small boys up chimneys, have women doing the washing in the local river. Jesus Christ it is almost impossible to access this site most of the time these days and when I do manage to get in I am confront by your incessant ramblings about how modern football managers don't have a clue. God help us!

There is no need for posts like this. Complete opposite of what we want on this site. Surprised that no other Alex supporter has not taken issue with this.

[gazan]

A better point is that Man City had no empty seats playing 'the modern game'. Saying Barnet had lots of empty seats is a reflection of the modern game is disingenuous at best.

[lukcour]

Selecting one of the best exponents of the modern game is simple. The other 2 are Klopps Liverpool and Arsenal. And quite often all 3 play with 5 forwards at times. They manage to get away with thatth through excellent fitness, constant high level of concentration, and knowing which position to take up automatically. At the same time some clubs are learning how to cope with this strategy.

To even suggest that Crewe under LB and RD is playing the modern game is beyond belief

[MikeSB]

Selecting one of the best exponents of the modern game is simple. The other 2 are Klopps Liverpool and Arsenal. And quite often all 3 play with 5 forwards at times. They manage to get away with thatth through excellent fitness, constant high level of concentration, and knowing which position to take up automatically. At the same time some clubs are learning how to cope with this strategy.

To even suggest that Crewe under LB and RD is playing the modern game is beyond belief

Its strange and crazy that some so called fans and sorry to call them that as nobody in their right mind can pay what 27 quid to watch fourth division football where they have 10 defensive players and one or no shots on goal. They have clearly lost the plot as what football is supposed to be about. These fans would rather criticise some other people's opinion than stick two fingers up at the team and the club.

The modern game is crap as babies know how to play football better. These players in the fourth division are on two to five thousand pounds a week and a heart surgeon may be lucky to get a small part of that.

Anyway, I will say for the millionth time that I have finished posting here as most of the people posting apart from a couple do not know the game or what it stands for and so that's me finished. The fans forum was great wasn't it or didit ever take place, we will never know as nobody cares, one way or the other.

Thanks Lukcour for your support and your posts!

[gazan]

Selecting one of the best exponents of the modern game is simple. The other 2 are Klopps Liverpool and Arsenal. And quite often all 3 play with 5 forwards at times. They manage to get away with thatth through excellent fitness, constant high level of concentration, and knowing which position to take up automatically. At the same time some clubs are learning how to cope with this strategy.

To even suggest that Crewe under LB and RD is playing the modern game is beyond belief

Tell that to MSB!
I also think you need to define 'forward'.

[gazan]

Its strange and crazy that some so called fans and sorry to call them that as nobody in their right mind can pay what 27 quid to watch fourth division football where they have 10 defensive players and one or no shots on goal. They have clearly lost the plot as what football is supposed to be about. These fans would rather criticise some other people's opinion than stick two fingers up at the team and the club.

The modern game is crap as babies know how to play football better. These players in the fourth division are on two to five thousand pounds a week and a heart surgeon may be lucky to get a small part of that.

Anyway, I will say for the millionth time that I have finished posting here as most of the people posting apart from a couple do not know the game or what it stands for and so that's me finished. The fans forum was great wasn't it or didit ever take place, we will never know as nobody cares, one way or the other.

Thanks Lukcour for your support and your posts!

Surely nobody in their right mind would pay money to see a team of elephants, zebras and martians? Oh that's right, nobody does that either!
Anyone else want to suggest an Aunt Sally to knock down and criticise?

[Timmy58]

Its strange and crazy that some so called fans and sorry to call them that as nobody in their right mind can pay what 27 quid to watch fourth division football where they have 10 defensive players and one or no shots on goal. They have clearly lost the plot as what football is supposed to be about. These fans would rather criticise some other people's opinion than stick two fingers up at the team and the club.

The modern game is crap as babies know how to play football better. These players in the fourth division are on two to five thousand pounds a week and a heart surgeon may be lucky to get a small part of that.

Anyway, I will say for the millionth time that I have finished posting here as most of the people posting apart from a couple do not know the game or what it stands for and so that's me finished. The fans forum was great wasn't it or didit ever take place, we will never know as nobody cares, one way or the other.

Thanks Lukcour for your support and your posts!

Referring to fans as "so called fans" is a bit disrespectful to those paying money to watch the team. I have been watching Crewe for around 50 years and over that period have spent a lot of money watching them. I consider myself a fan and want the team to do well. Football, as many things have, has changed over the years both in the style of football played and the way the game is run. It is disingenuous to criticise the wages the players are paid at League 2 level, £2k/week equates to £100k/year. When you consider the length of a footballers career it is not an excessive salary, unlike those playing in the Premier League and the Championship. Unfortunately money is king in everything and none more so than football. It is that which will ruin the game, not teams failing to select 10 forwards in their teams!

[MikeSB]

Last post, honest as I do not have the energy to fight a battle here on every post. I was an very good Chartered Engineer that was brought about not going to University but to Technical Colleges. Degrees are hard to come by that way but I achieved the almost impossible anyway. My Job was to do things that would improve things and try and do that the whole time and got many promotions in work by doing just that. Now that's the BS as you may say out of the way. I loved playing football and watching it from the highest in the Land, ie Spurs of the 60's who I watched many times when they played near to like Burnley and Wolves and saw how football shouldbe played and Jimmy Greaves scored 46 goals in one season and loads at other times. He was small in height but a magician with the ball. He did not believe in coaching and thought that was detrimental to the ability of naturally gifted players. I thought the same, not because I am supid or biased as all of us are sometimes but in those days players were signed as footballers who had different skills that made them PL standard or the fourth division and lower. If they were good enough they became a professonal on very low wages and fixed wages at the time. I read that some players are on a million pounds a month now etc etc.

I played local football for ten years between aged 15 and 25 and loved playing the game and according to my managers played to a good standard and could have played higher. I never received one coaching lesson in those ten years as the managers at the top and bottom level never got involved with that sort of BS.

I saw some great games and some poor games. If anyone told me that football should be played as a defensive game with over 400 or 500 passes in a game without one shot or a couple of shots on goal, I would have said that was pathetic and stupid thinking. You all hear the crowd when teams score and so why isn't that the standard where the teams should have far more strikers than defenders and managers put 9 or 10 defensive players on the pitch? Football surely is there to attack and score goals otherwise its not worth playing as what is the point, a goaless draw? What can any crowd get out of a game like that?

Almost at an end now but all or most of the quality of players has gone as you very rarely see players with dribbling skils like we had all those years ago. All we see is pass the ball, pass the ball and score from 3 yards, ie the perfect goal for some.

Why do some fans criticise other fans for having a different opinion, when all they need to say, is yes, that was the norm or as Dario said to me, 'They all do it' and everyone crowds other players on corners etc as 'they all do it'. What we need is managers of vision that will take on the change and put 5 forwards on the pitch IF you can get them. You never evet put one player as the main striker, never as you will get 99% defensive play and few attacks and that is the standard of football we have today. Take it or leave it! I will leave it to the wonderous memories that I have had both watching and playing this once great game!

[gazan]

The difficulty is separating opinion from fact. Sometimes people quote their opinion and claim it as fact. This is where criticism is due. Also using an Aunt Sally as part of an argument is also due cause for criticism. In the context of this last sentence: noone plays 10 defenders. It is true that during the course of the game everyone may be pulled back to defend a particular moment but then there may be 7 or 8 players rushing towards the goal on a counter attack but this doesn't mean the team is playing with 7 or 8 forwards.
Only having 1 (or even 0) shot on target is poor regardless of the system being played and isn't necessarily about 'modern football' (for Lukcour's benefit I'll remind everyone that it was MSB who referred to this term). You may remember that the Alex had more than 22 shots away at Salford on the opening day. Same management same team (+ a lot of people who are now injured). So you can't just pick worse case scenarios and pretend they are representative. Not can/should invent cases (Aunt Sally) to knock down to bolster your argument that are simply not true.
I am not going to engage in this argument any more as last year I said I wouldn't and I have broken my own rule. It's one thing to claim that opinions presented as facts shouldn't be criticised and it's yet another to blithely ignore all counter arguments as if they haven't been made and then repeat the same old tropes again and again.