Using numbers instead of positions

[Brisan123]

1

2 5 3

4 6

7 8 9 10 11

 

[Shibbywiggles]

9 is an out and out striker whereas 10 is link up and usually more flair but still central.

A 433 would not have a usual 10 playing in it.

7/11 are normally for right/left wingers

8 is box to box mid, 6 is defensive mid

4/5 cbs

2/3 right/left back

I’m 31 and have been using these all my life, what the cool kids talk about nowadays are false 9s, quarter backs and treqartistas

 

[aazak]

Raumdeuter

 

[messymascot]

Even in the days of 1-11 there was no exact formula. Our team of the 80s had Reid and Bracewell in centre midfield and they wore 6 and 10 but some teams used 4 and 8 for these positions.

 

[WA Toffee]

9 is an out and out striker whereas 10 is link up and usually more flair but still central.

A 433 would not have a usual 10 playing in it.

7/11 are normally for right/left wingers

8 is box to box mid, 6 is defensive mid

4/5 cbs

2/3 right/left back

I’m 31 and have been using these all my life, what the cool kids talk about nowadays are false 9s, quarter backs and treqartistas

I think that is kind of my point. If every team played the same formation, it would make a bit of sense to use numbers, but when people start shoehorning numbers into positions which dont exist in certain formations, it just makes them sound stupid to me. Such as the example you just used, there is no "number 10" in a 433.

 

[Papa Shango]

I always thought a "number 10" was an "attacking midfielder", between your true CMs and your strikers. Usually central.

Number 8 would be a standard CM, neither attacking nor defensive.

Number 6 - DM.

Number 9 - traditional striker.

Using any other number is taking it too far.

I wouldn't even go that far. 9 and 10. That's it, but even then the number 9 has a few different versions, the 10 is basically an attacking mid.

 

[chrismpw]

Can someone help me here. It seems people think they are cool by referring to positions by a shirt numbers. Fine in concept, but given that there are so many tactical formations now, I really can't get my head around how it works now.

For example, is a "number 10" the same role in a 442 as it is in a 433 or a 4231 or a 343? What about a "traditional number 7". Is that different based on the formation or are we going to shoehorn an obselete position into a modern line up?

Or are people just trying to be hipsters and proving that they don't really understand football at all?

Hipster and cool is something young people try and do to compensate for having absolutely nothing else about them while they grow into more interesting humans. Its hardly a youngster thing to refer to shirt numbers and positions as this is something that stopped decades ago when football history was killed off as part of the sky football revolution.
I submit therefore that dismissing these terms as hipster or cool is in error .

For those that know the traditions, those who remember the past whom Sky have yet to eradicate, yes numbering players is a quick simple way to refer to positions in a team. With some flexibility. It saves words - and using fewer words where many can be shoehorned in, is definitely unhipster.

 

[degsy]

Can someone help me here. It seems people think they are cool by referring to positions by a shirt numbers. Fine in concept, but given that there are so many tactical formations now, I really can't get my head around how it works now.

For example, is a "number 10" the same role in a 442 as it is in a 433 or a 4231 or a 343? What about a "traditional number 7". Is that different based on the formation or are we going to shoehorn an obselete position into a modern line up?

Or are people just trying to be hipsters and proving that they don't really understand football at all?

Players?

 

[bcblue1878]

Can someone help me here. It seems people think they are cool by referring to positions by a shirt numbers. Fine in concept, but given that there are so many tactical formations now, I really can't get my head around how it works now.

For example, is a "number 10" the same role in a 442 as it is in a 433 or a 4231 or a 343? What about a "traditional number 7". Is that different based on the formation or are we going to shoehorn an obselete position into a modern line up?

Or are people just trying to be hipsters and proving that they don't really understand football at all?

John Hurst would have confused a few - wore no’ 10 and played in the centre of defence, and that was back in the day of shirt numbers 1-11.

 

[Bluetintedspecs]

John Hurst would have confused a few - wore no’ 10 and played in the centre of defence, and that was back in the day of shirt numbers 1-11.

Was just gonna post that.

 

[WA Toffee]

Hipster and cool is something young people try and do to compensate for having absolutely nothing else about them while they grow into more interesting humans. Its hardly a youngster thing to refer to shirt numbers and positions as this is something that stopped decades ago when football history was killed off as part of the sky football revolution.
I submit therefore that dismissing these terms as hipster or cool is in error .

For those that know the traditions, those who remember the past whom Sky have yet to eradicate, yes numbering players is a quick simple way to refer to positions in a team. With some flexibility. It saves words - and using fewer words where many can be shoehorned in, is definitely unhipster.

That may be true, but is a number 10 the same in a 442 as it is in a 433 or a 4321? That was my point, that people who just use the term "number 10" or whatever number it is without thinking about whether that role exists in a specific formation or not, are basically chatting wham, and are in indeed hipsters.

 

[messymascot]

I think Ray Atteveld wore every shirt number from 2-11 in his inspiring career. I would imagine Alan Harper wore quite a few as well.

 

[chrismpw]

That may be true, but is a number 10 the same in a 442 as it is in a 433 or a 4321? That was my point, that people who just use the term "number 10" or whatever number it is without thinking about whether that role exists in a specific formation or not, are basically chatting wham, and are in indeed hipsters.

As far as I know, the numbers seem to gave been tied with the traditions of a club. To me 10 means your creative midfielder, or secondary striker. To other clubs it might be a box to box midfielder- not too different really.

10 is not a goalkeeper, fullback or central defender ffs.

 

[WA Toffee]

As far as I know, the numbers seem to gave been tied with the traditions of a club. To me 10 means your creative midfielder, or secondary striker. To other clubs it might be a box to box midfielder- not too different really.

10 is not a goalkeeper, fullback or central defender ffs.

Oh god, that makes it even harder. So when one of the hipsters talks about a number 8, I have to research the history of the club they are talking about to find out which position they mean

 

[chrismpw]

Oh god, that makes it even harder. So when one of the hipsters talks about a number 8, I have to research the history of the club they are talking about to find out which position they mean

Yes - but not hipsters - hipsters are too young to know what any of this stuff means. Its football history and as we all know, history doesn't exist anymore.