A Number 10 - Do we need one?

[TMB 14,167]

I know Gerrard doesn’t normally play with one but it seems like this is the type of player we’re missing.

Ultimately, there will be games in the SPFL when we don’t need 3 holding mids.  Or games when we need a goal late on and an attacking option off the bench to switch the formation would be beneficial.  

I hated Windass but I think it’s fair to say we never replaced him with a similar player.  A central attacking midfield option who can score us 15+ a season.

[Ger_onimo 20,488]

We were playing a different system then. Windlass wouldn’t get 15 a season in this team wherever he played 

[ForeverAndEver 69,068]

13 minutes ago, Ger_onimo said:

We were playing a different system then. Windlass wouldn’t get 15 a season in this team wherever he played 

Agreed

[2nd Flute 14,036]

Hoff smugged, I was going to ask where our PM would live,wrong thread 

[STEPPS BOY 70,378]

We’ve needed a number10/playmaker for years.

Nothing has changed.

[don logan 7,706]

If a number 9 is your centre forward then what number is the the support forward like Hateley was to McCoist? Is that not a number 10? 11 is your winger.  So 8  or 7 is the type of player the OP is  championing??

[TMB 14,167]

12 minutes ago, don logan said:

If a number 9 is your centre forward then what number is the the support forward like Hateley was to McCoist? Is that not a number 10? 11 is your winger.  So 8  or 7 is the type of player the OP is  championing??

I’m talking about a CAM like David Turnbull.  Do we need this type of player.  

[McEwan's Lager 29,553]

7 hours ago, don logan said:

If a number 9 is your centre forward then what number is the the support forward like Hateley was to McCoist? Is that not a number 10? 11 is your winger.  So 8  or 7 is the type of player the OP is  championing??

A ‘10’ doesn’t exist in a flat 4-4-2 with 2 out and out strikers like Hateley and McCoist.

Durrant was the closest we had to a 10 in that team where he played behind the front two in 92/93 and 93/94 but he wasn’t really a ‘10’. 

In Italy traditionally the 10 would be a player who is not quite an attacking midfielder and not an out and out striker. It’s Baggio or a Totti or a Del Piero or Raul in Spain. A playmaker and a goal scorer.

If a team played with two up front then the 10 is the one in behind or slightly withdrawn. They call it the seconda punta- with the 9 being the prima punta.

But you can still play two up front with a 10 in behind. Traditionally the other striker would be a number 8 or 7 or 11 with the 10 still playing behind.

 

[McEwan's Lager 29,553]

3 minutes ago, TMB said:

I’m talking about a CAM like David Turnbull.  Do we need this type of player.  

We have Arfield. He’s better behind a striker centrally. Wouldn’t call him a 10 though. Not sure I’d call Turnbull a proper 10 either.

But Gerrard would have to switch to a 4-2-3-1, play wider up front, restrict Tav attacking, leave out two of Davis, Jack, Aribo, King, Kamara every week. Can’t see that happening at all.

[BlueSuedeSambas 52,700]

Think Aribo would become a far more effective player for us if he was freed up to play further forward and was removed of some of the defensive work that’s required playing as part of a midfield three.

[SuperLeeMcCulloch 2,279]

There would be no point in getting a number 10 as Gerrard doesn't set the team up to play with one, I think Aribo could more than do a job for us at the attacking mid position but again we don't play with that system, if you swapped Kamara with Aribo last night you probably end up with the same result as they would be doing identical jobs although totally different players.

IMO it should be Davis sitting with Jack acting like a box to box player while Aribo is the one who drives forward, even Arfield does a better job being that link to the striker rather than out on the wing.

[bluenoz 29,322]

Liverpool don't have a # 10 so that means we don't need one either. 

But seriously, a #10 maybe maybe the  most skillful player in the team.  Kamara plays better for Finland in an advanced role. In our team, I think Kent is better suited as a # 10, I've never saw him as a typical winger.

In my opinion, every team needs a # 10 unless you are Barcelona or Liverpool.

[McEwan's Lager 29,553]

5 minutes ago, DBBTB said:

Think Aribo would become a far more effective player for us if he was freed up to play further forward and was removed of some of the defensive work that’s required playing as part of a midfield three.

I’m wary of playing him further up the park. I really rate him but I have a hunch he’s probably better deeper and arriving later on the fringes of the box. Nothing I can really back that up with though.

Some players just have better vision from different starting positions. It’s like Tav I think would struggle enormously if we played him at RW. He’s better receiving the ball and driving forward and attacking space from deeper positions.

[AlbertzLoyalRSC 17,855]

53 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

A ‘10’ doesn’t exist in a flat 4-4-2 with 2 out and out strikers like Hateley and McCoist.

Durrant was the closest we had to a 10 in that team where he played behind the front two in 93/94 but he wasn’t really a ‘10’. 

In Italy traditionally the 10 would be a player who is not quite an attacking midfielder and not an out and out striker. It’s Baggio or a Totti or a Del Piero or Raul in Spain. A playmaker and a goal scorer.

If a team played with two up front then the 10 is the one in behind or slightly withdrawn. They call it the seconda punta- with the 9 being the prima punta.

But you can still play two up front with a 10 in behind. Traditionally the other striker would be a number 8 or 7 with the 10 still playing behind.

 

Hateley was an actual no 10 tho with McCoist 9 for years?

 

 

[BookWorm 3,608]

Yes.

[Bruno's Manbun 2,631]

3 hours ago, DBBTB said:

Think Aribo would become a far more effective player for us if he was freed up to play further forward and was removed of some of the defensive work that’s required playing as part of a midfield three.

I think Jack and Davis could pick up the more defensive roles, dictating the play from midfield and Aribo could move forward with that creative spark 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,058]

Arfield does that job brilliantly, pity gerrard fucks him out wide and ruins him

[McEwan's Lager 29,553]

5 hours ago, AlbertzLoyalRSC said:

Hateley was an actual no 10 tho with McCoist 9 for years?

 

 

Yeah but we are talking about a specific role / position rather than what number a player wore.

Hateley and McCoist both essentially played as ‘9’s in the same team. 

[eejay the dj 31,964]

9 hours ago, TMB said:

I know Gerrard doesn’t normally play with one but it seems like this is the type of player we’re missing.

Ultimately, there will be games in the SPFL when we don’t need 3 holding mids.  Or games when we need a goal late on and an attacking option off the bench to switch the formation would be beneficial.  

I hated Windass but I think it’s fair to say we never replaced him with a similar player.  A central attacking midfield option who can score us 15+ a season.

I'm glad you are not our manager TMB

[pcbear 10,913]

What is the definition of a 10? 

[STEPPS BOY 70,378]

10 hours ago, DBBTB said:

Think Aribo would become a far more effective player for us if he was freed up to play further forward and was removed of some of the defensive work that’s required playing as part of a midfield three.

Seen that at St Johnstone when we changed to a 4-2-3-1.

[Smile 26,535]

4 hours ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Arfield does that job brilliantly, pity gerrard fucks him out wide and ruins him

Kills his game out wide.

[Laudrupsleftfoot 9,930]

3 hours ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Yeah but we are talking about a specific role / position rather than what number a player wore.

Hateley and McCoist both essentially played as ‘9’s in the same team. 

And one that's surely now a dying breed in modern football.

Can't think of many teams that play with a true number 10 in the way you've correctly described it. The players who are natural 10s have either had to adapt, or if they can't they've found themselves in and out of the team like Ozil.

[McEwan's Lager 29,553]

6 minutes ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

And one that's surely now a dying breed in modern football.

Can't think of many teams that play with a true number 10 in the way you've correctly described it. The players who are natural 10s have either had to adapt, or if they can't they've found themselves in and out of the team like Ozil.

Agree.

I mean on paper Messi would be a perfect number 10 but he’s never really played there properly in club football.

He has for Argentina but with extremely limited success. 

You have to be incredibly talented to make it work properly and I think that’s why it’s so rare these days.

 

[McEwan's Lager 29,553]

I’d argue that in a 4-2-3-1 the 10 is not a true 10 anyway. Too much defensive responsibility.

Only real number 10s I’ve seen at the top level in the past few years are Dybala in Allegri’s 3-5-2 where he was withdrawn behind Mandzukic, Morata, or Higuaín and Hazard in Conte’s 4-3-3. 

Hazard is probably the best example as he was a true goal scorer and playmaker in the left central channel behind Costa with Willian or Pedro playing wide on the right of the front 3.