bawsburst 1,381 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 And what about when he ran round the back of the goalie?What do u think he was trying to achieve exactly?Unless the goalie has eyes in the back of his heid he wasn't interfering with his line of vision. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack1690 793 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Why does the op need to bring up what the management team gets in a subject about tactics.. Pathetic it really is.. If U were a player and someone offered you 40k would U say no I'll take. 20k. I don't think soAnyway back to the topic it never cost us a goal.. If its no broke don't fix itEh? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Unless the goalie has eyes in the back of his heid he wasn't interfering with his line of vision. Its not just about line of vision though. The goalie knew he was there. He would be watching him out of the side of his eyes mindful of the position he has taken and therefore its offside.Not withstanding that though, if he is not trying to gain an advantage or put off the keeper in some manner, what justifiable reason is there for what he done ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawsburst 1,381 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Its not just about line of vision though. The goalie knew he was there. He would be watching him out of the side of his eyes mindful of the position he has taken and therefore its offside.Not withstanding that though, if he is not trying to gain an advantage or put off the keeper in some manner, what justifiable reason is there for what he done ?As previously stated it is not an offence to be offside, the explanation as to a direct save in the amended law is self explanatory,.. as to the advantages of sucha tactic Alistair would be the one to explain that, personally I don't see any. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehost 11,061 Posted December 31, 2013 Author Share Posted December 31, 2013 Is the host actually the goat with all these multiple anti Ally threads - goat has stopped going them and the host has started????????????Oh and just to be argumentative - 11 back at a corner is a tactic - not a lack of tactics - it's just one a few posters disagree with - but it's a long time since we lost a goal from an opposition corner and it's a tactic I see many EPL managers employ - but any excuse fore an anti Ally thread from this opening posterCan you read.I was not discussing the 11 men back.I was pointing out that our opponents simply played a ball that allowed a runner a free shot from 20 yards, they then allowed them to do the self same thing a few minutes later indicating that no one was looking to change tactical outlook despite obvious danger.Still you bang on about ally hating etc.I dread to think about your attention to detail, in everyday life! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25 Minutes To Go 28 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 What happens if there is a quick break and it's three against one?Exactly my point. No matter what system a manager employs, if it is not carried out properly by the players on the pitch, there is scope for criticism, whether justified or not. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyalfollower 1,543 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Well as much as I hate that tactic the stats dont lie. 8 conceded. Wether or not better teams can still do us at corners remains to be seen. Walter used it through the last 3 in a row and every year we had the best defensive record if memory serves me right. God awful tactic on the eye but its proven that its successful Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al 55 9,276 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Exactly my point. No matter what system a manager employs, if it is not carried out properly by the players on the pitch, there is scope for criticism, whether justified or not.Of course there is scope for criticism, every fan thinks they know better.But no manager would ever leave 1 defender to mark 3 attackers.As I said most teams will still leave 2 at the back even when there are no attackers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 As previously stated it is not an offence to be offside, the explanation as to a direct save in the amended law is self explanatory,.. as to the advantages of sucha tactic Alistair would be the one to explain that, personally I don't see any.Im not sure if we are agreeing or disagreeing here but for the benefit of any doubt, if he does it again and whilst running round behind the keeper, we score a goal, i would be willing to bet the referee will give offside. If he gets away with it once though, then there will be a complaint from the opposing side, quite rightly, then it will be made clear that any future goals will not be given. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25 Minutes To Go 28 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 But no manager would ever leave 1 defender to mark 3 attackers.Flip it. No manager would have three up front allowing the attacking side such a numerical advantage at a corner. A 'Who blinks first?' situation. All hypothetical, of course. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Flip it. No manager would have three up front allowing the attacking side such a numerical advantage at a corner. A 'Who blinks first?' situation.All hypothetical, of course. But they wouldnt have a numerical advantage. It would be 8 v 8. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCDBigBear 10,829 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Yes winning away from home 4-0 against the second best team in the league is terrible. Just not good enough for those with their agendas. We won a game of football which is what The Rangers do.You are missing a very valid point though. The OP is correct to point out tactical weakness on our part and it is habitual. At Dunfermline corners we had nobody further out than our penalty spot. Nobody up the park for a breakaway and nobody on the edge of D to prevent the opposition getting a free shot at goal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bothwellbear 1,392 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 You are missing a very valid point though. The OP is correct to point out tactical weakness on our part and it is habitual. At Dunfermline corners we had nobody further out than our penalty spot. Nobody up the park for a breakaway and nobody on the edge of D to prevent the opposition getting a free shot at goal.No I am not. We won four nil. No goals against. Tactics are therefore valid. The op is just desperate to attack McCoist and using an unattractive tactic as his rage point. We won handsomely away from home and played well. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCDBigBear 10,829 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 No I am not. We won four nil. No goals against. Tactics are therefore valid. The op is just desperate to attack McCoist and using an unattractive tactic as his rage point. We won handsomely away from home and played well.You surely don't think that such tactics are acceptable? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bothwellbear 1,392 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 You surely don't think that such tactics are acceptable?When it works yes. We did not concede. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehost 11,061 Posted December 31, 2013 Author Share Posted December 31, 2013 No I am not. We won four nil. No goals against. Tactics are therefore valid. The op is just desperate to attack McCoist and using an unattractive tactic as his rage point. We won handsomely away from home and played well.Why don't you read the op, digest the point being made and comment. It was not directly addressing the 11 men back at a corner.Then again addressing the point would be difficult. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCDBigBear 10,829 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 When it works yes. We did not concede.It only "works" (or should that be "doesn't fail") because our current level of opposition is so poor. We should be using our time in the lower divisions to target improvement and to perfect our tactics. That is not what I am witnessing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawsburst 1,381 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Im not sure if we are agreeing or disagreeing here but for the benefit of any doubt, if he does it again and whilst running round behind the keeper, we score a goal, i would be willing to bet the referee will give offside. If he gets away with it once though, then there will be a complaint from the opposing side, quite rightly, then it will be made clear that any future goals will not be given. If the ref interprets it correctly he wouldn't be offside as long as he doesn't touch a ball from his own player or a save from the keeper, which would be deemed gaining an advantage, however not every ref adheres to the letter of the law, Howard Webb has made some of the most baffling decisions ever seen when straight reds should have been produced and would have been produced by even amateur refs, the laws are at the mercy of refs unless they are called to account for blatant incompetence. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Copland bear 7,966 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Not a fan of the manager,( down to the money and shares he has got since admin), but he had them up for it yesterday, so credit were it is due. One of the best performances so far this season. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cd true bluenose 86 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 But they wouldnt have a numerical advantage. It would be 8 v 8. i would spread four across the six yard box,3 between the penalty spot/18 yard line leaving three to float outside the box .or make it four x four leaving two outside the box any way it should stop the ball coming straight back at you ???? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nachothelegend 1,932 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Noticed Jig peeling off. Bergkamp used to do that!!!And everyone back at corners is awfulJigs an intelligent Player up front and makes a lot of good runs.Forwards do what forward do.But jig adds an extra dimension. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nachothelegend 1,932 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Noticed Jig peeling off. Bergkamp used to do that!!!And everyone back at corners is awfulJigs an intelligent Player up front and makes a lot of good runs.Forwards do what forward do.But jig adds an extra dimension. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nachothelegend 1,932 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 When it works yes. We did not concede.It won't work against better opposition.Trust me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25 Minutes To Go 28 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 But they wouldnt have a numerical advantage. It would be 8 v 8. You're certainly not TheArithmeticMan. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirAlistairofMcCoist 91 Posted December 31, 2013 Share Posted December 31, 2013 Get at tactic tae fuck. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.