raumdeuter:


When did Liverpool play 4-3-3 with gerrard there, who were the front 3 for liverpool then and what was their goal return

When did Man city play 4-3-3? Who were the 3 strikers for Man City that time?

Bros I thank you.

It's patently obvious that when Scholes moved down to central midfield, his Goal and Assist tally dried up significantly.

Abeg Compare Scholes (Above) from 2004 to Iniesta(Below) playing in the same position.

How can Scholes be 'Productive' and Iniesta 'Unproductive' based on what we can see here?

raumdeuter:


Hamsik Gerrard lampard are the dead ball takers for their clubs including FK and penalties

Of all 5 only Iniesta and Matuidi dont take PK for their clubs

Since na only Matuidi you see to compare Iniesta with, then the point is made - Iniesta has found his level.

In the past 5 seasons

Matuidi 25 goals 22 assists

Iniesta 21 goals 60 assists

Who is the productive one here

Nihilist:


Bros I thank you.

It's patently obvious that when Scholes moved down to central midfield, his Goal and Assist tally dried up significantly.

Abeg Compare Scholes (Above) from 2004 to Iniesta(Below) playing in the same position.

How can Scholes be 'Productive' and Iniesta 'Unproductive' based on what we can see here?

A little information in a child's hands is harmful. When I said you are a child in football, I wasn't joking.

If you give a clown a little information, he will abuse it. Just like when I told you Barry played left-back, you started shouting upandan.

My advice - sit back and let niggas who know more than you discuss.

So all this while we've been discussing, you did not know that Scholes output dropped from 2004 onwards? You are just realising now like a giddy kid with too much information on his hands, and doesn't know how to process it.

Now tell me how Scholes position post 2004 (deep midfielder in a 2 man midfield) is the same as Iniestas position (furthest of a 3 man midfield)?

This is abuse of information by a JJC.

Ibime:


Since na only Matuidi you see to compare Iniesta with, then the point is made - Iniesta has found his level.

When did Gerard and yaya Toure play CM in a 4-3-3

Assists in Green, Goals in Blue...

See so so 1 assist a season from a so called productive midfielder.

Iniesta 582 Total Games for Barca, 180 Goals and assists for Barca. Thats 0.31ga per game

Scholes 696 Total games for Manyoo, 194 goals and assists for Barca. Thats 0.27ga per game.

Scholes has played 114 games more than Iniesta and only has 14 more goals + assists to show for it.

Abeg who is unproductive here?

raumdeuter:


When did Gerard and yaya Toure play CM in a 4-3-3

What position were they playing? Left-back?

Liverpool midfield was Alonso-Sissoko-Gerrard or Alonso-Mascherano-Gerrard

Was Lampard playing on the wings also?

Ibime:


What position were they playing? Left-back?

Liverpool midfield was Alonso-Sissoko-Gerrard or Alonso-Mascherano-Gerrard

Was Lampard playing on the wings also?

A 4-3-3 has 3 strikers who were the 3 strikers for Chelsea when they played 4-3-3 ditto Liverpool and City

For most of Benitez stay at Liverpool they played 4-2-3-1 which Gerrard pushed forward as one of the 3 AMs. In one season I think 08 he played just off Torres and was the main dead ball taker for them

In 2013/14 alone Gerrad scored double digits penalty

Ibime:


A little information in a child's hands is harmful. When I said you are a child in football, I wasn't joking.

If you give a clown a little information, he will abuse it. Just like when I told you Barry played left-back, you started shouting upandan.

My advice - sit back and let niggas who know more than you discuss.

So all this while we've been discussing, you did not know that Scholes output dropped from 2004 onwards? You are just realising now like a giddy kid with too much information on his hands, and doesn't know how to process it.

Now tell me how Scholes position post 2004 (deep midfielder in a 2 man midfield) is the same as Iniestas position (furthest of a 3 man midfield)?

This is abuse of information by a JJC.

I specifically zoomed in on 2004 because you said this:

Ibime:


2004 to 2013, he was a permanent deep lying midfielder.

Scholes didnt even become the deep lying midfielder till circa 2008, but I'ma let that slide because at least 2004 is when you agree that he started playing in central midfield.

Compare and Contrast his output from 2004 when he entered midfield. Is that the output of a 'Productive Midfielder'?

raumdeuter:


A 4-3-3 has 3 strikers who were the 3 strikers for Chelsea when they played 4-3-3 ditto Liverpool and City

Quit messing around with the same old nonsense.

Name the 3 strikers at PSG:

--------------Ibra

Lavezzi------------------Lucas




or Napoli:

-------------------------Higuain

Mertens/Gabbiadini-----------------Insigne


How is this different from:

-----------------Drogba

Kalou/Malouda-----------Anelka



Pedro is a striker at Barca, but Anelka is a winger at Chelsea. . . . . all because Iniesta is unproductive!

^^ You are forgetting to list the 3 strikers at City and Liverpool who Yaya and Gerrard played behind

I never asked you about PSG and Napoli. So stop spamming the page with inconsequential facts

The 3 strikers when City, CHelsea and Liverpool played 4-3-3.

all this roundabout talk just to yab iniesta,
productivity,non productivity football,like say soccer na Economics.

Nihilist:

Scholes didnt even become the deep lying midfielder till circa 2008, but I'ma let that slide because at least 2004 is when you agree that he started playing in central midfield.

In 2004 you had Ronaldo right wing, Giggs left wing, Rooney and Van Nistelrooy upfront. No space for another AM ontop.

We make the distinction because that is the year most teams started adopting 4-3-3, so the 2nd midfielder in 4-4-2 became a lot more defensive which is what Paul Scholes became from 2004 onward.

raumdeuter:
^^ You are forgetting to list the 3 strikers at City and Liverpool who Yaya and Gerrard played behind

I never asked you about PSG and Napoli. So stop spamming the page with inconsequential facts

The 3 strikers when City, CHelsea and Liverpool played 4-3-3.

Extremely inconsequential facts.

I don't understand how stating that 'Barry' played at Left Back is some sort of arcane knowledge that nobody actually knows.

Like shouldn't that even make Scholes look worse? A left Back having more assists than him?

raumdeuter:
^^ You are forgetting to list the 3 strikers at City and Liverpool who Yaya and Gerrard played behind

I never asked you about PSG and Napoli. So stop spamming the page with inconsequential facts

The 3 strikers when City, CHelsea and Liverpool played 4-3-3.

You have been yarning this nonsense for eons.

I put Napoli and PSG there because you want to count them as 4-3-3 teams, but claim Chelsea is not a 4-3-3. . . . just because you want to compare Iniesta to Matuidi, but not his mates like Lampard and Gerrard.

So please explain how Dries Mertens, Insigne and Lucas are strikers . . . . . but Anelka is not.

If you can convince me of this, then we can move on. . . . . otherwise forget it.

Ibime:


In 2004 you had Ronaldo right wing, Giggs left wing, Rooney and Van Nistelrooy upfront. No space for another AM ontop.

We make the distinction because that is the year most teams started adopting 4-3-3, so the 2nd midfielder in 4-4-2 became a lot more defensive which is what Paul Scholes became from 2004 onward.

Roy Keane and Paul Scholes played in that midfield together in 2004. Are you saying that Scholes was the more defensive of that duo?

Walahi you will twist yourself into a Gordian knot today.

Ibime:


You have been yarning this nonsense for eons.

I put Napoli and PSG there because you want to count them as 4-3-3 teams, but claim Chelsea is not a 4-3-3. . . . just because you want to compare Iniesta to Matuidi, but not his mates like Lampard and Gerrard.

So please explain how Dries Mertens, Insigne and Lucas are strikers . . . . . but Anelka is not.

If you can convince me of this, then we can move on. . . . . otherwise forget it.

I asked you specifically in case you forgot

raumdeuter:

A 4-3-3 has 3 strikers who were the 3 strikers for Chelsea when they played 4-3-3 ditto Liverpool and City
For most of Benitez stay at Liverpool they played 4-2-3-1 which Gerrard pushed forward as one of the 3 AMs. In one season I think 08 he played just off Torres and was the main dead ball taker for them
In 2013/14 alone Gerrad scored double digits penalty

When did Liverpool and City play 4-3-3 and who were the 3 strikers at Liverpool and City

The question is as clear as day.

You took the pain to list out PSG and Napoli which no one asked but couldnt use that same time to list out the 3 strikers for City and Liverpool
Could it be that you were lying and know you are about to get caught?

So another try: Name the 3 strikers for Liverpool(The team that wears red in Merseyside currently coached by Klopp) and City (the team in Manchester that wears blue and currently coached by pellegrini)

I am taking this pain so you wont regale me with the players from PSG in France and Napoli in Italy

raumdeuter:



I asked you specifically in case you forgot

When did Liverpool and City play 4-3-3 and who were the 3 strikers at Liverpool and City

The question is as clear as day.

You took the pain to list out PSG and Napoli which no one asked but couldnt use that same time to list out the 3 strikers for City and Liverpool
Could it be that you were lying and know you are about to get caught?

Quit being funny my gee.

Once you have two wingers/wing-forwards lining either side of a central striker, that is a 4-3-3.

I never said the 3 of them have to be STRIKERS. . . . you tried to make that distinction in your desperate and laughable attempt to distinguish Iniesta from Lampard and Gerrard.

So I will ask again, and if you cannot answer, lets end the conversation.

Please explain how Pedro, Isaac Cuenca, Cristian Tello, Munir Haddadi and Neymar are strikers. . . . but Anelka, Kalou, Dirk Kuyt and Ryan Babel are wingers.


When you are finished, tell us how you classed Dries Mertens, Insigne and Lucas as strikers. . . .just so you can find a more favourable comparison for Iniesta.

Ibime:



Quit being funny my gee.

Once you have two wingers/wing-forwards lining either side of a central striker, that is a 4-3-3.

I never said the 3 of them have to be STRIKERS. . . . you tried to make that distinction in your desperate and laughable attempt to distinguish Iniesta from Lampard and Gerrard.

So I will ask again, and if you cannot answer, lets end the conversation.

Please explain how Pedro, Isaac Cuenca, Cristian Tello, Munir Haddadi and Neymar are strikers. . . . but Anelka, Kalou, Dirk Kuyt and Ryan Babel are wingers.


When you are finished, tell us how you classed Dries Mertens, Insigne and Lucas as strikers. . . .just so you can find a more favourable comparison for Iniesta.

You mean Chelsea plays 433 now?

Ibime:
Quit being funny my gee.

[size=15pt]Once you have two wingers/wing-forwards lining either side of a central striker, that is a 4-3-3[/size].

I never said the 3 of them have to be STRIKERS. . . . you tried to make that distinction in your desperate and laughable attempt to distinguish Iniesta from Lampard and Gerrard.

So I will ask again, and if you cannot answer, lets end the conversation.

When you are finished, tell us how you classed Dries Mertens, Insigne and Lucas as strikers. . . .just so you can find a more favourable comparison for Iniesta.

That means almost every team that plays a lone striker plays 4-3-3. Because most teams would play 2 wingers on ether side of the striker

Bayern Robben Ribery Gomez (despite being common knowledge we played 4-2-3-1)
Arsenal 4-3-3 Ozil- Giroud Sanchez
Man Utd - Mata-Rooney-Martial

[size=28pt]Ibime does Chelsea play 4-3-3 yes or no?[/size]

Krasid:
No, not yet.

A Madrid fan has declined ur statement.

I feel for Ibime. I really feel for him. He must have used something really really meaningful(wife, gf, house, life savings et al)to bet against Barca in 2008 not until Iniesta scored the equaliser.

He is still in deep pains. The better he gets over it the better.

raumdeuter:


That means almost every team that plays a lone striker plays 4-3-3. Because most teams would play 2 wingers on ether side of the striker

Bayern Robben Ribery Gomez (despite being common knowledge we played 4-2-3-1)
Arsenal 4-3-3 Ozil- Giroud Sanchez
Man Utd - Mata-Rooney-Martial

Yes, they are all variants of 4-3-3.

We are leaving out 4-2-3-1 and 4-5-1 for purposes of better comparability and comparing 4-3-3 with teams that play conventional central midfielders rather than fancy no10s. . . . which is why we chose Chelsea, Liverpool, PSG, Napoli and City (at-times) for better comparability.

I still want to know how Pedro is a striker but Anelka and Dirk Kuyt are wingers.

Ibime:


Yes, they are all variants of 4-3-3.

We are leaving out 4-2-3-1 and 4-5-1 for purposes of better comparability and comparing 4-3-3 with teams that play conventional central midfielders rather than fancy no10s. . . . which is why we chose Chelsea, Liverpool, PSG, Napoli and City (at-times) for better comparability.

I still want to know how Pedro is a striker but Anelka and Dirk Kuyt are wingers.

Ibime why wont you answer my question though....

[size=28pt]
Does Chelsea play 4-3-3? [/size]

Ibime:


Yes, they are all variants of 4-3-3.

We are leaving out 4-2-3-1 and 4-5-1 for purposes of better comparability and comparing 4-3-3 with teams that play conventional central midfielders rather than fancy no10s. . . . which is why we chose Chelsea, Liverpool, PSG, Napoli and City (at-times) for better comparability.

I still want to know how Pedro is a striker but Anelka and Dirk Kuyt are wingers.

Basically Chelsea currently is playing a variant of 4-3-3 or actually 4-3-3

Nihilist:


Ibime why wont you answer my question though....

[size=28pt]
Does Chelsea play 4-3-3? [/size]

Because you are a child, and acting like one.

That moment when you want to swallow your vomit but it's too late.

Man utd Play 433, Liverpool play 433, but you wont answer when they ask if Chelsea plays 433.



You did not even at least wait till age forty to become a fool. Ibime the dim one. I hail o

Nihilist:

That moment when you want to swallow your vomit but it's too late.
Man utd Play 433, Liverpool play 433, but you wont answer when they ask if Chelsea plays 433.
You did not even at least wait till age forty to become a fool. Ibime the dim one. I hail o

I don't want to get distracted from a key debate I'm having with Raumdeuter which is to define the boundaries of the wing-forwards in a 4-3-3.

I don't want to get distracted by minor nuances between a 4-3-3 and a 4-2-3-1 (Lampard for Oscar). It is inconsequential to this debate so I don't know why you are screaming like a pig on the sideline in a childish manner.

I want Raumdeuter to tell us why he considers Pedro and Isaac Cuenca to be strikers whilst Dirk Kuyt, Albert Riera, Babel, Anelka and Kalou are pure wingers.

Ibime:


I don't want to get distracted from a key debate I'm having with Raumdeuter which is to define the boundaries of the wing-forwards in a 4-3-3.

I don't want to get distracted by minor nuances between a 4-3-3 and a 4-2-3-1 (Lampard for Oscar). It is inconsequential to this debate so I don't know why you are screaming like a pig on the sideline in a childish manner.

I want Raumdeuter to tell us why he considers Pedro and Isaac Cuenca to be strikers whilst Dirk Kuyt, Albert Riera, Babel, Anelka and Kalou are pure wingers.

Oh please....There is no 'Minor Nuance' between 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 otherwise you would not have been calling for a return to 4-3-3 for ages. You would not have been shouting about the 'Pivot' for ages. You are fool, bufoon, and a hypocrite. I've been going easy on you this afternoon because I was enjoying watching you tie yourself in knots of logic.

Just look at the crap you've come up with today -

Scholes was the defensive half of the Keane/Scholes Duo.
Scholes has always played as a deep lying playmaker.

Now Manutd, Liverpool, and even Man City play a 4-3-3.

All simply to try and paint Iniesta as an AM rather than a CM.

If you had any sense of shame, you would switch off your laptop, find a dark corner in your house, and stand in it facing the wall for the rest of the day.

What a dolt.

Nice one let me sit down and learn from the Older and more experienced ones.

There is a marked difference between a 4-3-3 and a 4-2-3-1. Which is the man in the hole. The Mesut Ozil. lets postpone the argument

Ibime na my guy, I would out of respect for that pull out of this argument for now until I catch him one on one another time

raumdeuter:
There is a marked difference between a 4-3-3 and a 4-2-3-1. Which is the man in the hole. The Mesut Ozil. lets postpone the argument

Ibime na my guy, I would out of respect for that pull out of this argument for now until I catch him one on one another time

I've just been looking at the fool since chatting utter bollocks.

I just can't be arsed to start digging up old posts, but this is a guy that is well known for his opinion that 10s are not needed, and the running in 4-3-3 is different.

All of a sudden, the difference between 433 and 4231 is a 'minor nuance'

All of this just to discount iniesta. I'mnot surprised that the ediot would make more U-Turns than Berger Under Bridge. Same person that was caught calling Iniesta the best midfielder in the world.