Originally Posted by
Penguin
Even if teams play with one striker they never counter with just one player. That's the whole point of counter attacks - the quick transition between defense and attack, with two or three other players anticipating it and bursting forward quicker than our midfielders.
When we attack one of our fullbacks goes up too, depending on which side we're attacking. With the way Ramsey plays he is normally high up the pitch too when the opponents win the ball from us. So during a counter attack we usually have the 2 CBs, 1 fullback and the DM back. We can easily get into 3v4 (their attackers vs our defenders) or 4v4 situations, and we did last season and every season before that.
Our defenders are good enough to defend against an equal number of attackers, but remember it is much harder to defend when you're running backwards. Taking away the DM in those situations is just suicide. Even the 'shit' teams can mess you up if you give them the chance, so why give them the chance?
Our inability to break teams down has nothing to do with playing a DM. The invincibles side was one of the best attacking sides I've ever seen and that was with Gilberto Silva, the most passive of all DMs as a regular in the side. The reason we can't break down teams is because we play a stale brand of slow-paced possession football without enough inventiveness, directness or risk-taking in the final third. Adding another attacker won't change that, it will just make us weaker defensively.
If it's 'rubbish tactics', why does every top team play with a DM?