Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2009 9:02:40 GMT
Thanks to Timbo for this late example of a formation in a programme - this time 4-3-3 - from the end of the 1981/82 season:  |
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Nov 22, 2009 12:42:19 GMT
 That United line up of 81/82 featured two players who's fathers also played for the club: Mark Smith (son of Harry) and Maurice Cox (son of Geoff) one who's own son played for the club ( Tommy Wheeldon Snr and Jnr) and Bruce Rioch who's son Gregor also played as a professional in the Football League.
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Nov 22, 2009 13:00:18 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2009 14:40:54 GMT
That United line up of 81/82 featured two players who's fathers also played for the club: Mark Smith (son of Harry) and Maurice Cox (son of Geoff) one who's own son played for the club ( Tommy Wheeldon Snr and Jnr) and Bruce Rioch who's son Gregor also played as a professional in the Football League. And, just as Geoff Cox (with the infant Maurice) was a neighbour of ours in the late 1950s/early 1960s, Mark Smith (son of Harry) pitched up in the same little Torquay cul-de-sac towards the end of the 1980s... |
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Apr 5, 2020 23:24:51 GMT
Stewart's musings on tactical formations of the 50s and 60s are possibly the most fascinating insights on this entire forum. Interesting to see the Herald making a big fuss about Eric Webber belatedly turning to the new-fangled defensive 4-2-4 system - just before he was sacked. Basically just Benson and Cox dropping a little deeper, isn't it? From the Herald 6 April 1965 - 55 years ago today.    |
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Apr 5, 2020 23:33:47 GMT
More from Eric on this in the Football Herald April 10 1965:   |
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 10, 2020 2:37:19 GMT
Jon, I was wondering whether you were anticipating a response from me following your flattering remarks earlier on this page. I still regard Eric Webber as one of the club's greatest ever managers, after coming so close to the old Division 2 in 1957 and then leading his team to promotion in 1960. His longevity as manager, while quite common in that era, easily outstrips the tenures of any subsequent incumbents.
However, I'm sure that many supporters realised, towards the end of the season, that his days were numbered, as he was attempting to transform the team into one which could adapt to more up-to-date tactics, but sadly had neither the correct thinking, or the players, needed to do so. I have not previously seen the extract wherein he was interviewed about the formation against Chesterfield, but there was nothing new about it, as John Benson throughout the season had always been part of a back four, albeit in a variety of roles. As for trying to confuse the opposition by changing some of the numbers, it seems that his own players were the ones who ended up being more confused.
I have no idea who "Quinta" was, in the other cutting, but he certainly had his semi-colons in the wrong places when reporting the formation. Did he really believe that Ernie Pym was instructed to play as an inside-right, with Tony Hellin at centre half and Trevor Wolstenholme at outside-right, as a result of his old fashioned team lay out?
Frank O'Farrell arrived in 1965 with a philosophy which was not entrenched in the 1950s, and had the background to be able to sign players of the quality of John Bond, John Smith, Ken Brown and Tony Scott, which led to four seasons of unprecedented success. Eventually, he was lured away by Leicester City, closely followed by John Bond who, I believe, was refused the manager's job at Torquay and then decamped to Bournemouth along, in due course, with half the team. And so we were left with an ever changing group of journeyman players throughout the 1970s and, in my opinion, to this very day. In their time, Cyril Knowles and Kevin Hodges have produced innovative teams and tactics, but generally speaking we have been fed mediocrity and a never ending series of managerial merry-go-rounds.
Jon, I have two questions for you now:
There is a suggestion that the "current" season may be abandoned and all of the records expunged, which presumably would include individual appearances and goals scored. What is your view on that? It is certainly going to make a mess of my records!
Secondly, I know that this thread was started, all those years ago, by a member called Barton Downs, who had also posted under the name of Lummaton Cross. I believe that you knew him quite well, and I was very disappointed when he suddenly deleted his account, as I enjoyed his postings on the topic of this thread and others, and being able to respond to them. So, my question is: who was he, and why did he decide to depart the scene in what, at the time, appeared to be in great haste? Did he say something which upset someone else, or vice versa? Hopefully enough time has passed so that you can reveal the answer to a question which has long puzzled me without breaching any confidentiality.
(Just altered that last sentence which, on reflection, sounded weird, as it was written after several glasses of red wine which I frequently imbibe in the small hours in an attempt to overcome a really annoying insomnia).
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,227 
|
Post by rjdgull on Apr 10, 2020 14:14:22 GMT
Not quite sure exactly on what the outcome will be for the teams which could well be expunged but surely individual appearances, goals and other stats will stand?
|
|
Jon
Admin
Posts: 6,912
|
Post by Jon on Apr 11, 2020 23:29:26 GMT
Jon, I was wondering whether you were anticipating a response from me following your flattering remarks earlier on this page. I still regard Eric Webber as one of the club's greatest ever managers, after coming so close to the old Division 2 in 1957 and then leading his team to promotion in 1960. His longevity as manager, while quite common in that era, easily outstrips the tenures of any subsequent incumbents. However, I'm sure that many supporters realised, towards the end of the season, that his days were numbered, as he was attempting to transform the team into one which could adapt to more up-to-date tactics, but sadly had neither the correct thinking, or the players, needed to do so. I have not previously seen the extract wherein he was interviewed about the formation against Chesterfield, but there was nothing new about it, as John Benson throughout the season had always been part of a back four, albeit in a variety of roles. As for trying to confuse the opposition by changing some of the numbers, it seems that his own players were the ones who ended up being more confused. I have no idea who "Quinta" was, in the other cutting, but he certainly had his semi-colons in the wrong places when reporting the formation. Did he really believe that Ernie Pym was instructed to play as an inside-right, with Tony Hellin at centre half and Trevor Wolstenholme at outside-right, as a result of his old fashioned team lay out? Was hoping you would respond Stewart and am glad to hear from you. You echo my thoughts that the new formation was not as brand new as was claimed. We have previously discussed one wing half becoming a second centre-back,notably Griff Norman in the early years of Webber's reign, and how inside forwards divided between "midfielders" like Don Mills and second strikers like Sammy Collins. Were Benson and Cox really doing anything new or different? I wonder if Eric was feeling the heat from his new modern-thinking Chairman Tony Boyce so got his friendly local journalist to make a big fuss about how modern and forward-thinking he was - giving the lie to any thoughts he might be stuck in the 50s. I imagine it was not the writer who put the semi-colons in the first article. Quinta laid it out in 4-2-4, but whoever typed it up would have been well drilled in the habit of putting semi-colons after nos 1,3 and 6. The follow-up article has the semi-colons in the right place. Will answer your questions on another thread. |
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 12, 2020 0:42:51 GMT
Thanks, Jon. As you can see from the time, my insomnia is still in full flow!
Actually, looking back, I do believe that Eric Webber was stuck in the 50s, and that in 1964/65 he suddenly woke up to that fact, no disrespect to him intended.
Take a look at these two teams, based on the top eleven appearances in each season:
1957/58: Wakeham; Bettany, Harry Smith; Lewis, George Northcott, James; Baxter, Cox, Tom Northcott, Graham Bond, Pym.
1963/64: Adlington; Bettany, Allen; Austin, Alan Smith, Hancock; Anderson, Jenkins, Stubbs, Tom Northcott, Pym.
Both of those formations would suggest that, even after seven years, Webber's thinking had not advanced beyond having one centre half and four forwards. In fact, you could even say that, in 1963/64, in many of teams which he sent out there were, in effect, five forwards, all of whom played between 34 and 38 league matches. Peter Anderson and Ernie Pym, the wingers, scored 10 and 9 goals respectively in that season. The key to how the formation worked was inspired by Robin Stubbs, who was to all intents and purposes the manager on the pitch, and who orchestrated the tactics to such an extent that one of the three central forwards would always drop back behind the other two. This was possibly the beginning of 4-2-4, although I believe that it had little to do with anything planned by Webber. Only the arrival of John Benson, and the return of Geoff Cox in place of Reg Jenkins, finally cemented that formation.
Eric Webber, I suspect, like so many managers in those days, simply picked the team, announced the positions and left his players to sort out the style of play. Nevertheless, fifty or more years later, he still deserves the respect of all supporters over the years for dragging the club out of the stone ages. You have only to look at a team photograph taken in the mid 1950s, which was full of gnarled veterans, and compare it with one taken in the mid 1960s to appreciate the extent of his legacy.
|
|
