I think Ricky Gervais is pretentious ****e but I don’t make a big song and dance if someone says they like The Office.
Correct. Either can stay back or go forward depending on the side of the field the ball/play is deveolping towards. Not both at the same time. The pivot could be on either side of the park, but not both forward at the same time. My interpretaion of the scanty info on the subject anyhow.
Ok, hence the double pivot! When is a holding midfielder not a holding midfielder? When he's part of a double pivot. I think Shankly had it right! In hindsight Cloughie always liked a double pivot, but not sure he referred it as such.
If you watched England last night, Rice and Phillips are a pretty good example of a simple but effective ‘double pivot’ or whatever you prefer to call it. When Hungary had the ball in our half, they both sat deep in front of the back four. When England had the ball on the right-hand side, Rice went forward a bit and Phillips stayed back and vice-versa when we had the ball on the left. Sometimes it’s more rigid than that, like when we play Smallwood and he sits deep regardless of what side we’re playing the ball and Docherty gets forward.
Thanks for the 'simple but effective' explanation. Agree with the Southgate eg. Also Cloughie's McGovern/ Bowyer. Smallwood is a holding midfielder, Docherty certainly isnt! And BTW, we're a 433 club (ask Ehab), coming on here with your new fangled ideas!
It sort of is. You have 2 sitting midfielders without the ball - so in our system you'd be effectively playing 4-2-3-1 in defensive pose but as soon as you win posession Docherty would immediately try and bridge the gap between Smallwoods position and try create space to receive a pass from the back and get the ball up to Honeyman or any of the the front 3.
I agree comes across well, mind you having said that I liked the sound of Tom Eaves before he kicked a ball in anger !