Why do people on this forum have such mixed reactions to Rose Lavelle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here but in what formation is the 6 a left CB? LOL

6 is usually a holding mid. But the original point is a good one in that Ertz is very effective in a center back or holding mid role.

The 6 is an LCB in England and Argentina lol

[Anonymous]

It really depends on the player’s profile. Ertz is a good central defensive player because it fits her skill set. Moving her to the back would be a good move if the team wishes to have a more possession-oriented approach. We could even play with 3 at the back as long as Ertz is at that pivot in the center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here but in what formation is the 6 a left CB? LOL

6 is usually a holding mid. But the original point is a good one in that Ertz is very effective in a center back or holding mid role.

The 6 is an LCB in England and Argentina lol

I’m English. Played at a decent level. In England, 6 is a defensive midfielder. 4/5 are centerbacks. It’s the same in America. I know nothing about Argentina.

[Anonymous]

“In England, in a now traditional 4–4–2 formation, the standard numbering is usually: 2 (right fullback), 5, 6, 3 (left fullback); 4 (defensive midfielder), 7 (right midfielder), 8 (central/attacking midfielder), 11 (left midfielder); 10 (second/support striker), 9 (striker). This came about based on the traditional 2–3–5 system. Where the 2 fullbacks retained the numbers 2, 3. Then of the halves, 4 was kept as the central defensive midfielder, while 5 and 6 were moved backward to be in the central of defence. 7 and 11 stayed as the wide attacking players, whilst 8 dropped back a little from inside forward to a (sometimes attacking) midfield role, and 10 stayed as a second striker in support of a number 9. The 4 is generally the holding midfielder, as through the formation evolution it was often used for the sweeper or libero position. This position defended behind the central defenders, but attacked in front – feeding the midfield. It is generally not used today, and developed into the holding midfielder role.“

The 4 has been the holding mid in England for 50+ years. Either way my intention wasn’t to argue about numbers. My larger point was that Ertz could play as the 5/6 (LCB) next to Dahlkemper, which would allow for cleaner playing out the back and a midfield of Horan, Mewis and Lavelle.

[Anonymous]

Im Argentina, the 5 is the holding mid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“In England, in a now traditional 4–4–2 formation, the standard numbering is usually: 2 (right fullback), 5, 6, 3 (left fullback); 4 (defensive midfielder), 7 (right midfielder), 8 (central/attacking midfielder), 11 (left midfielder); 10 (second/support striker), 9 (striker). This came about based on the traditional 2–3–5 system. Where the 2 fullbacks retained the numbers 2, 3. Then of the halves, 4 was kept as the central defensive midfielder, while 5 and 6 were moved backward to be in the central of defence. 7 and 11 stayed as the wide attacking players, whilst 8 dropped back a little from inside forward to a (sometimes attacking) midfield role, and 10 stayed as a second striker in support of a number 9. The 4 is generally the holding midfielder, as through the formation evolution it was often used for the sweeper or libero position. This position defended behind the central defenders, but attacked in front – feeding the midfield. It is generally not used today, and developed into the holding midfielder role.“

The 4 has been the holding mid in England for 50+ years. Either way my intention wasn’t to argue about numbers. My larger point was that Ertz could play as the 5/6 (LCB) next to Dahlkemper, which would allow for cleaner playing out the back and a midfield of Horan, Mewis and Lavelle.

No, your point is clearly to come off as an arrogant know it all, and you have unquestionably hit the mark.

[Anonymous]

Not really. Either way it’s impossible to have a rational conversation because you’re caught up on the numbers rather than the players who were being discussed and the positions that they might be played in. It’s not my problem that you consider something that can easily be googled to be an “arrogant know it all”. Best to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not really. Either way it’s impossible to have a rational conversation because you’re caught up on the numbers rather than the players who were being discussed and the positions that they might be played in. It’s not my problem that you consider something that can easily be googled to be an “arrogant know it all”. Best to you.

It must be true, it said so on the Internet.

[Anonymous]

Lavelle had a great showing at World Cup. How great she truly is only time will tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stupid question from a parent who did not play soccer and does not know much about it: with this talk of Ertz moving from midfield to centerback, is it typical for the "best" players to play in the center of the field in soccer - center forward, midfielders, centerbacks and goalie?

I grew up with baseball, and understood that you typically wanted to build a team that was strong up the middle. I was just curious if the same principle applied to soccer. If so, this would seem to confirm something I have observed over the years, where it seems like any time a team "upgrades" with kids from outside the club, they usually come in as players in the center of the field, and push boys/girls who used to play those positions to the wings, whether offensive or defensive.

Yes. Same hold true in soccer.

Not really.

Lower level teams with uneven talent will often "hide" their weak links on the wings, where they can do the least damage.

At the elite level though, the answer is no. Many of the world's best players have played on the wings (C. Ronaldo, Messi, Marta, Ronaldinho, Mbappe, Neymar, Salah, Hazard), and there have also been many greats who played in central positions (Zidane, Iniesta, (Brazilian) Ronaldo, Zlatan, Pele). It really just depends on the profile of the player.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stupid question from a parent who did not play soccer and does not know much about it: with this talk of Ertz moving from midfield to centerback, is it typical for the "best" players to play in the center of the field in soccer - center forward, midfielders, centerbacks and goalie?

I grew up with baseball, and understood that you typically wanted to build a team that was strong up the middle. I was just curious if the same principle applied to soccer. If so, this would seem to confirm something I have observed over the years, where it seems like any time a team "upgrades" with kids from outside the club, they usually come in as players in the center of the field, and push boys/girls who used to play those positions to the wings, whether offensive or defensive.

Yes. Same hold true in soccer.

Not really.

Lower level teams with uneven talent will often "hide" their weak links on the wings, where they can do the least damage.

At the elite level though, the answer is no. Many of the world's best players have played on the wings (C. Ronaldo, Messi, Marta, Ronaldinho, Mbappe, Neymar, Salah, Hazard), and there have also been many greats who played in central positions (Zidane, Iniesta, (Brazilian) Ronaldo, Zlatan, Pele). It really just depends on the profile of the player.

Yeah, I gotta agree with this. It depends on the player, what their strengths are, taking advantage of matchups, etc. But, yes with lower level and/or younger teams weaker players can be "hidden" up top or on the outside (kind of, but not really).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not really. Either way it’s impossible to have a rational conversation because you’re caught up on the numbers rather than the players who were being discussed and the positions that they might be played in. It’s not my problem that you consider something that can easily be googled to be an “arrogant know it all”. Best to you.

It must be true, it said so on the Internet.

As opposed to what an anonymous poster said on the internet? Lol okay

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stupid question from a parent who did not play soccer and does not know much about it: with this talk of Ertz moving from midfield to centerback, is it typical for the "best" players to play in the center of the field in soccer - center forward, midfielders, centerbacks and goalie?

I grew up with baseball, and understood that you typically wanted to build a team that was strong up the middle. I was just curious if the same principle applied to soccer. If so, this would seem to confirm something I have observed over the years, where it seems like any time a team "upgrades" with kids from outside the club, they usually come in as players in the center of the field, and push boys/girls who used to play those positions to the wings, whether offensive or defensive.

Yes. Same hold true in soccer.

Not really.

Lower level teams with uneven talent will often "hide" their weak links on the wings, where they can do the least damage.

At the elite level though, the answer is no. Many of the world's best players have played on the wings (C. Ronaldo, Messi, Marta, Ronaldinho, Mbappe, Neymar, Salah, Hazard), and there have also been many greats who played in central positions (Zidane, Iniesta, (Brazilian) Ronaldo, Zlatan, Pele). It really just depends on the profile of the player.

Yeah, I gotta agree with this. It depends on the player, what their strengths are, taking advantage of matchups, etc. But, yes with lower level and/or younger teams weaker players can be "hidden" up top or on the outside (kind of, but not really).

I suppose they can be hidden until you come up against a team with a really strong winger/fullback or get folded in half by a beast of a centerback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not really. Either way it’s impossible to have a rational conversation because you’re caught up on the numbers rather than the players who were being discussed and the positions that they might be played in. It’s not my problem that you consider something that can easily be googled to be an “arrogant know it all”. Best to you.

It must be true, it said so on the Internet.

As opposed to what an anonymous poster said on the internet? Lol okay

The irony in this statement is thick.