In the late '60s, George Graham was an inside forward for us. How does that position

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

and formation work?

"He was Arsenal's top scorer in both 1966–67 and 1967–68, having started out as a centre forward for the club, but later moved to inside forward with John Radford moving from the wing to up front."

I also didn't realise he joined ManU after he left us and got them relegated.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

Inside forwards played behind the striker, there were normally two at the time unlike now when you tend to have one playing behind the striker.

Well you're going back to 2-3-5 there! Although in Graham's time I imagine it looked morelike 4-3-3

[Ash]

and formation work?

"He was Arsenal's top scorer in both 1966–67 and 1967–68, having started out as a centre forward for the club, but later moved to inside forward with John Radford moving from the wing to up front."

I also didn't realise he joined ManU after he left us and got them relegated.

Oops, wrong place. See reply to Mo.

[Ash]

Inside forwards played behind the striker, there were normally two at the time unlike now when you tend to have one playing behind the striker.

Well you're going back to 2-3-5 there! Although in Graham's time I imagine it looked morelike 4-3-3

2-3-5 :cloud9:

I used to play that with my U10s side.

We lost some games rather heavily.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

2-3-5 :cloud9:

I used to play that with my U10s side.

We lost some games rather heavily.

I played that on Subbuteo and was quite successful.

I think the offisde rule killed off 2-3-5

[Ash]

I played that on Subbuteo and was quite successful.


:nod: If you fancied scoring a goal from the off you needed to stack it up top.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Inside forwards played behind the striker, there were normally two at the time unlike now when you tend to have one playing behind the striker.

Well you're going back to 2-3-5 there! Although in Graham's time I imagine it looked morelike 4-3-3

So I striker, 2 wingers, 2 IFs, one defensive midfielder (called what?) and a flat back 4?

So a bit like that 4-1-4-1 we played in the CL when we got to the final, then? With Cesc and Hleb as the IFs, and Bobby and Freddie as the wingers.

Is that right?

[Mo Britain less Europe]

So I striker, 2 wingers, 2 IFs, one defensive midfielder (called what?) and a flat back 4?

So a bit like that 4-1-4-1 we played in the CL when we got to the final, then? With Cesc and Hleb as the IFs, and Bobby and Freddie as the wingers.

Is that right?

Not sure if you're talking abour 2-3-5 or 4-3-3. If the former you've left out one of the central midfielders.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Not sure if you're talking abour 2-3-5 or 4-3-3. If the former you've left out one of the central midfielders.

I'm a bit confused. So:

1. Did they play a flat back 4 in those days (the late '60s)? 2 CBs and 2 FBs?
2. Did they play just one centre forward?
3. If both the above are true, and there are 2 IFs, then it's a sort of 4-3-3, but the inside forwards are like attacking MFs (the Cesc and Hleb of 2006, with Freddie and Booby as 'wingers'.) So there is the 3rd MF, sitting in front of the back 4, but behind the 2 IFs (the Gilberto.) Is this true? And what position did they call the Gilberto roll?

But I also thought that we ended up with 2 CHs cos we were playing 2 strikers (thus becoming 4-4-2.) Yet we can't have 2 strikers and 2 wingers and 2 IFs. There's no midfield cover.

[redgunamo]

and formation work?

"He was Arsenal's top scorer in both 1966–67 and 1967–68, having started out as a centre forward for the club, but later moved to inside forward with John Radford moving from the wing to up front."

I also didn't realise he joined ManU after he left us and got them relegated.

I'm told he was Bergkamp-like, but much better in the air and a worse goalscorer.

[Mo Britain less Europe]

I'm a bit confused. So:

1. Did they play a flat back 4 in those days (the late '60s)? 2 CBs and 2 FBs?
2. Did they play just one centre forward?
3. If both the above are true, and there are 2 IFs, then it's a sort of 4-3-3, but the inside forwards are like attacking MFs (the Cesc and Hleb of 2006, with Freddie and Booby as 'wingers'.) So there is the 3rd MF, sitting in front of the back 4, but behind the 2 IFs (the Gilberto.) Is this true? And what position did they call the Gilberto roll?

But I also thought that we ended up with 2 CHs cos we were playing 2 strikers (thus becoming 4-4-2.) Yet we can't have 2 strikers and 2 wingers and 2 IFs. There's no midfield cover.

1. Yes.
2. Often would play with two strikers - hence "strike partnership" - certainly when doing 4-4-2. In practice I suppose one was the leading guy and the other his sidekick.
3. Yes, I guess in a 4-3-3 your third midfielder is the holding one but remember they called Ramsay's team the "wingless wonders" when they started on 4-3-3 so I imagine they actually tucked in a fair bit.

[Viva Prat Vegas]

but remember they called Ramsay's team the "wingless wonders" when they started on 4-4-3 so I imagine they actually tucked in a fair bit.

The "keeperless wonders"