Tactical formations in programmes

I totally agree with JM's comments about players playing well winning matches and players playing badly losing matches while fans convince themselves they are tactical geniuses devising formations that would have won if only the manager was as clever as them.

But a historical thread is a good place to indulge in a bloke's favourite pastime of talking tactics.

I knew nothing of football before 1970. I got really into football in the 1970/71 season and must say I was more a Match of the Day / Big Match / Goal Magazine fan from 1970-75, before becoming a raving Plainmoor and Herald Express type fan c1975.

By 1970, 2-3-5 had totally disappeared from the pro game, but it persisted in the terminology and was still played in schools. I can remember talking to a shoolfriend about Jeff Blockley signing for Arsenal (which dates to October 1972) and my friend looking blank when I said he was a centre-back. What's that? I've heard of full backs and centre-halves, but never a centre back he said.

By 1970, 4-3-3 was the most common line-up but the numbering system revolved around 2-3-5 and you could sense the "old positions" of players and how they had adapted.

The back four would be numbers 2,5,6 and 3. The full backs were full backs but the two centre backs were invariably two totally different animals. The number 5 was an old centre half – big and strong in the air – think Jack Charlton or Brian Labone. The number six was an old wing-half and could usually play a bit – think Bobby Moore or Colin Todd.

The midfield was usually 7-4-10 or sometimes 8-4-11. The 7 would be a pulled in winger – think Ian Callaghan or Terry Paine. The 4 would be a wing half and know how to defend – sometimes a pure hacker like Stiles or Storey, sometimes more rounded like Hollins or Bremner but always able to tackle. The 10 would be an inside forward and would often be the fulcrum of the team with passing ability – a Currie or a Hudson.

That left 8-9-11 or sometimes 7-9-10 up front. Number 9 would invariably be a big man – an old school centre forward. The 8 would be more of a goal-poaching inside forward and the 11 a winger.

That shows how these formations evolved. From 2-3-5 we went to WM with the centre half a third defender and the inside forwards withdrawn a little. To get to 4-2-4, one wing half became a fourth defender (the 6 above) with the other becoming a midfielder (the 4 above). One inside forward became a second striker (the 8 above) whilst the other became a midfielder (the 10 above). Then 4-4-2 became 4-3-3 by tucking in a winger (the 7 above).

I too would love to know more about how and when TUFC’s formations evolved. My simplistic view has always been that Eric Webber was “50s man” and would have stuck to W-m, whilst Frank O’Farrell was utra-modern “70s man” and so we had a style revolution in 1965 rather than evolution.

Looking at those two programme line-ups from 1966, I am not quite so sure. That April 1966 team could very easily have played W-m. Equally, it could have played 4-4-2. Benson would have gone to the back four and Northcott up front, leaving Spratt and Kirkman in midfield. It is certainly an attacking line-up however you set it out, with six players primarily attackers rather than defenders.

The November 1966 line-up has three outfield changes – Kitchener, Smith and Reid in for Kirkman, Northcott and Clarke. That is a defender and two midfielders replacing a midfielder, a winger and a striker. How did that eleven line-up? What role did Bond play – is the no. 10 shirt a red herring? Answers please – I know quite a few of you would have been there to see it.

It’s good to see that 66 World Cup team set out as a 4-1-3-2 formation. That’s exactly what I would call it – I did say 4-4-2 but Stiles is clearly in a holding role to give free rein to Ball, Charlton and Peters.

It has always puzzled me why people constantly refer to that team as 4-3-3. I’m too young to remember anything about the 1966 World Cup other than having a World Cup Willie with a ball-bearing in the bottom. When I first heard the formation described as 4-3-3 I thought Charlton must be counted as a forward – under the schoolboy / Roy of the Rovers theory that your best player wears no 9, plays centre-forward and scores all the goals. It slowly dawned on me that Charlton was a midfielder, and I think that the third forward may actually have been Ball. He certainly hared down the wing a lot due to his boundless energy, but it was more a case of bursting from midfield than playing upfront. By 1970 he was clearly an out and out midfielder.

4-1-3-2 hits the nail on the head, which probably puts Ramsey even more ahead of his time than he was given credit for. Of course, if Southampton had fielded their first team back in 1957, that could have been Eric Webber leading England to glory.

1
Keeper
2 5 3
Right back Sweeper Left back
4 6
Right half Left half
7 8 9 10 11
Right wing Inside right Striker Inside left Left wing



Thats what we were taught in under 10`s, by under 12`s whether we meant it or not would line up like that and nearly instantly drift to a natural WM with the two half players spreading wide and the two inside players droping in behind the striker, it worked really well for along time especially when we were up against massive Greak or Italian hairy tree trunk legged giants! 1978 that was, the game seemed to evolve into some wierd and wonderful formations after that!

Stupid computer, I lay out all the positions with the numbers on top and it decides to lay them out different and shove them all over to the left margin, why don`t these bloody machines do what you tell them? I blame it on the geeky software gits that think they know whats best for us!

I did mention this :



The story behind the emergence of the defensive centre half goes back to changes in the offside law. The old law was THREE players between the last attacker and goal. In theory this could be any three, but in practice it meant the two full backs and the goalkeeper. Full backs always stayed where full backs were supposed to stay, so you would only ever be offside if you “sneaked” behind the full backs. “Sneaking” was deemed as dashed unsporting anyway – like its “jumpers for goalposts” equivalent crime of goalhanging. There was no element of defenders trying to trick attackers or catch them out – if you “sneaked” where you shouldn’t sneak you were offside, if you didn’t you weren’t.

In the 1920s a full back called Billy McCracken spotted a loophole. If one full back moved up a couple of steps, he could “catch” the opposition forwards technically offside even if they weren’t “sneaking”. This kind of working-class gamesmanship was exactly the reason that the toffs had had reservations about letting the great unwashed play the beautiful game – tricking forwards just isn’t cricket, is it old bean?

As others cottoned on to McCracken’s trick, the game was spoilt. Forwards could no longer stand where they had always stood and the game just could not flow. To counter this, the law was changed in 1925 to not three but TWO players between the last attacker and the goal. From making life too difficult for forwards, this made things too easy for forwards and in 1925-26 goals were flying in by the hatful.

To counter this goal glut, Arsenal came up with the tactic of withdrawing the centre half into defence to stem the tide. Indeed the very first defensive centre half was Jack Butler – who of course went on both to play for and to manage TUFC. More about Butler can be found here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Butler_(footballer)

I've only just come across this thread and the lengthy posts by Barton and Jon have got me thinking and remembering and have completely distracted me while trying to watch Numbers and then the X Factor this evening.

Having first attended Plainmoor in October 1954 (a 4-1 win against Southend United), I hope I can throw a small ray of light on your hopes of finding out how the tactics of the team evolved in the 1950s and 60s under Eric Webber.

The simple truth, from all my memories of long ago, is that they did not so much evolve as stumble through a period when all the manager did was pick the team and let the players sort out the tactics and formations for themselves.

Certainly in 1954 we had dual 'stoppers' at the back in Webber himself and Griff Norman, which in retrospect was surprising as everywhere else was probably entrenched in the old 3-2-5. In midfield, Dennis Lewis was the ball-winner and Don Mills the playmaker in what younger supporters would recognise as the Alex Russell role, although Mills was superior in every aspect you can think of. So at the time I first set foot in the ground the formation was definitely 4-2-4.

We had two traditional wingers in Ron Shaw and Jack Smith, with Harold Dobbie the old-fashioned, knock-taking centre-forward and Sam Collins the archetypal, goal poaching inside-forward, who relied so much on Dobbie and later Ted Calland to give him the space he needed to score so many goals. These partnerships were the equivalent of the Bobby Smith/Jimmy Greaves duo at Tottenham a few years later.

Collins was an ace penalty taker and I would be very surprised, although I don't know, if he ever missed one. He was enormously popular with the crowd, as indeed were all the players, as they were all local heroes and often caught the same trains as the fans. And if ever a true cult hero existed at the club, it would have been the left-back, Harry Smith, whose only desire in any game appeared to be belting the ball over the stand. But he was a hard, no-nonsense player and the fans loved him.

When Eric Webber retired from playing, Griff Norman moved from No.6 to No.5 and was mostly partnered by Jimmy James who was more of a defensive wing-half. So for the next two seasons it was back to 3-3-4.

Following the divisional restructure in 1958, Webber clearly decided that some of the old guard had had their day, and new faces included Bettany, G Northcott, Bond, Cox, Baxter, T Northcott and Pym. George Northcott played alone in the centre of defence, and at No.6 were successively Nobby Clarke, Eric Johnson and most notably Colin Rawson, none of whom could justify the modern description of central defender, but were more like 'holding players'. So once again it was virtually 3-3-4.

During the following 3 seasons or so, Don Mills was frequently absent through injury and was usually replaced by Graham Bond, and in this scenario the versatility of Geoff Cox was most evident.

When Mills played, Cox would be seen as a partner to Tom Northcott, in the 'in the hole' role of modern times. When Bond played, Cox would drop deeper to partner first Colin Bettany and then David Hancock as attacking wing-halves. The influence that Geoff Cox had on the teams of the early 60s should never be underestimated.

Ray Spencer and David Hancock were also paired in 'midfield' during this period, but Colin Bettany and then Alan Smith still patrolled the centre of the defence unaided until the arrival of John Benson as sweeper and organiser in 1964, and his presence at the back was priceless for both Eric Webber and later Frank O'Farrell.

And yet, remarkably, looking back from these days when workrate is at a premium, there were still only two, Cox and Trevor Wolstenholme, in midfield, because Alan Smith and George Allen were by no stretch of the imagination overlapping full-backs, and Ernie Pym and Micky Somers certainly were not noted for 'tracking back' as wingers. This was 4-2-4 in its heyday and it was great to watch.

My last season of living in Devon was 1967/68, by which time Frank O'Farrell had brought in John Bond, Jimmy Dunne and John Smith, among others. The formation was still 4-2-4, with Doug Clarke, Ron Barnes, Robin Stubbs and Tony Scott making up the front four and Ken Brown joining Benson at the back.

My theory on the John Bond in a no.10 shirt, by the way, is that he was moved into central midfield to make way for the arrival of Bill Kitchener at left-back. When Eric Burgess fell out of favour later that season, Bond moved back to right-back. I certainly don't remember him ever playing as a forward.

The first signs of 4-4-2 appeared around this time, however, as the wingers were clearly being required to drop back to help out the full-backs, and I have always believed that it was his growing isolation at the point of attack, compared to the days when he was so well supported by Tom Northcott and Reg Jenkins, that finally persuaded Robin Stubbs that it was time to move on.

The last time I saw him play was at Orient one evening in 1969, and he looked a pale and disillusioned shadow of his former self.

Incidentally, Barton, get on and read that book by Jonathan Wilson as soon as you can. It answered so many queries and doubts I had had over the years and is easily the best of its kind I have ever read.

....I didn't know you worked here merse! - mind you, i think half of Torquay has at one time

Lovely memories of Harry......he was hard as nails but a kind bloke all the same, so straight down the line, every thing was always black and white with him.......totally loyal and honest, he was your archetypal company man....they don't make 'em like him anymore.
I remember my first day when i joined the family business.......my old man called him into the office and said "Harry......your job is to make my lad into a man" in other words.....make his life a bloody misery. My first job was to unload a whole container of Egyptian New potatoes by hand (the key to the forklift mysteriously went missing, later found in Harry's pocket!) .......in 112lbs sacks i could barely lift one.....let alone the 1840 sacks that i had to that day.....what was worse was that, in those days Egyptian spuds were packed in Camel excrement....and it seeped through the bag.
I had 2 years under him, doing all the sh*t jobs that he could he think of....i soon learnt that if i talked about TUFC or his pro career, then he would gas on for ages and i could enjoy a quiet f*g and a rest.
I still see him about walking about......he must be one of the few, if any that are left from that team, unfortunately and really very sadly, Harry has suffered badly from alzheimers.......the last time i talked to him, a year or so ago.....he was completely in his own world......didn't remember me, working here for 35 years or so or TUFC.

Such a dreadful illness......."highest today" Harry deserved better.

....Dave

You should have mentioned you were a TUFC fan....or liked cricket, that really is all you would have needed to get the job