Why don't all teams have...
Discussion
and we're even s
te at throw ins But if I look at Fellani/Crouch for example, whenever there is a cross or corner he's got a big advantage if the ball is 'lofted' in which any team should be able to do.
And if I look at Gary Neville for example, he could launch a ball right into the penalty area from a throw in. Surely an advantage?
And if I look at Gary Neville for example, he could launch a ball right into the penalty area from a throw in. Surely an advantage?
Antonio (for West Ham) has recently taken a couple of long throw-in's that have landed in & around the penalty area - interesting to watch as it's not something that the team's been doing in recent times (even under BFS).
I think it's a useful option, but not something to rely on - particularly in WH's case as I'd rather that Antonio was on the receiving end of the throw where he's more effective.
I think it's a useful option, but not something to rely on - particularly in WH's case as I'd rather that Antonio was on the receiving end of the throw where he's more effective.
Frimley111R said:
But if I look at Fellani/Crouch for example, whenever there is a cross or corner he's got a big advantage if the ball is 'lofted' in which any team should be able to do.
And if I look at Gary Neville for example, he could launch a ball right into the penalty area from a throw in. Surely an advantage?
It's quite funny playing against tall players or watching them. You'll notice that they can barely jump. The only theory I've got is that they've never had to learn to leap as when they were growing up they were just 'above' everyone else. And if I look at Gary Neville for example, he could launch a ball right into the penalty area from a throw in. Surely an advantage?
They hardly dominate at set pieces in the professional game due to this.
Because big and/or tall players are usually immobile. They won't run and chase a ball, they can't turn and because they've grown up as 'the big guy' their technique isn't as good. Countless examples, Benteke now, Heskey the non scoring centre forward earlier. So while at five points in the game the may be of use, the other 85 mins is spent lumbering about, committing fouls, getting caught offside and generally being useless.
Plus as a long throw in is just a variation on a big punt upfield who wants to watch that? Fans want to see play on the ground, speed, passing and movement. Pitches these days allow that, unlike the mudbaths of the 70s and 80s where the ball was better in the air than stuck in a muddy rut.
Plus as a long throw in is just a variation on a big punt upfield who wants to watch that? Fans want to see play on the ground, speed, passing and movement. Pitches these days allow that, unlike the mudbaths of the 70s and 80s where the ball was better in the air than stuck in a muddy rut.
Frimley111R said:
But if I look at Fellani/Crouch for example, whenever there is a cross or corner he's got a big advantage if the ball is 'lofted' in which any team should be able to do.
And if I look at Gary Neville for example, he could launch a ball right into the penalty area from a throw in. Surely an advantage?
Fellaini is a hindrance, not a help as a starter to Man Utd.And if I look at Gary Neville for example, he could launch a ball right into the penalty area from a throw in. Surely an advantage?
technodup said:
Because big and/or tall players are usually immobile. They won't run and chase a ball, they can't turn and because they've grown up as 'the big guy' their technique isn't as good. Countless examples, Benteke now, Heskey the non scoring centre forward earlier. So while at five points in the game the may be of use, the other 85 mins is spent lumbering about, committing fouls, getting caught offside and generally being useless.
Benteke and Heskey are 6 foot 3 and 6 foot 2 respectively. That they are seen as big for a centre forward shows you how few particularly tall players there are in the game. Even centre backs tend to be a max of 6 foot 4, people like Mertesacker at 6 foot 7 look absolutely huge when in other sports every team will have a couple of lads that are 6 foot 5 or bigger (all of them in the case of Basketball). Being really tall is obviously generally a disadvantage for a footballer, for whatever reason, as is being particularly short, people like Messi at 5 foot 6 or 5 foot 7 always look very short for a footballer when it's not particularly small in general life or athletics. Definitely a sport that it pays to be 5 foot 10 to 6 foot 2.technodup said:
just meant they're both big useless lumps, rather than giants heightwise.
But aye, there's clearly a sweetspot for height.
Yeah I didn't think you meant they were massive or anything, it's just interesting that a lot of strikers at that height tend to be big lumps rather than pacy, skilful players. Guess centre of gravity may have a lot to do it. But aye, there's clearly a sweetspot for height.
technodup said:
Because big and/or tall players are usually immobile. They won't run and chase a ball, they can't turn and because they've grown up as 'the big guy' their technique isn't as good. Countless examples, Benteke now, Heskey the non scoring centre forward earlier. So while at five points in the game the may be of use, the other 85 mins is spent lumbering about, committing fouls, getting caught offside and generally being useless.
Usain Bolt isn't! 
And Crouchy seems nippy enough.Frimley111R said:
Usain Bolt isn't! And Crouchy seems nippy enough.
I love Bolt but we've never seen him turn. His height, weight, centre of gravity and size of feet would suggest he's not going to be a Maradona in the box. And Crouchy seems nippy enough.
Crouch is unusual in that he's lanky rather than big. There aren't many centre forwards like him around.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff