2?

I’ve always seen the number 10 role as the deep creative central forward role. A sort of Cantona or Bergkamp player. I’ve always seen the number 8 as the creative central midfielder role. A sort of Cazorla or Fabregas type of player, even if they don’t have the 8 shirt.

In sum, I’ve always seen the numbers as closest to these roles. 1 goalkeeper, 2 right back, 3 left back, 4 defensive midfielder, 5 strong in the air central defender, 6 ball playing central defender, 7 right midfield, 8 creative central midfield, 9 centre forward, 10 creative central forward, 11 left midfield.

I played no 4 for my primary school team.

That was right half in a 2-3-5 formation. And we played in heavy mens’ rugby shirts. And used dubbin on our boots.

Presumably you used jumpers for goalposts.

I played no 4 for my primary school team.

That was right half in a 2-3-5 formation. And we played in heavy mens’ rugby shirts. And used dubbin on our boots.

At school we had school issue rugby shirts that were reversible. plain on one side and hoops on the other. We'd spend half the lesson doing various rugby drills then half the lesson playing a match where half the class had to reverse their tops which were now nice and muddy. The feeling of putting the muddy side against your skin was not a nice one

I agree, it’s probably nonsense journalism and I wouldn’t want to lose Smith Rowe for Ødegaard either. But can’t you find ways to say that without slagging Ødegaard off? Ødegaard is an elite talent and potentially a truly elite player. I suspect that’s why Real Madrid, in my view the world’s biggest club, not only bought him but probably want to keep him. I bet he ends up achieving more in the game than Cazorla, sadly as I don’t see it being with Arsenal.

Slightly daft and maybe naïve question, but I'll ask it anyway.

In modern football, what's the essential difference between the number 10 role and the number 8 role?

Spurs hunt for a new manager goes on
Nagelsmann, Rodgers, Flick, Ten Hag, Pochettino, Conte, Fonseca, Gattuso.....on to the next one. Scott Parker?

I agree, it’s probably nonsense journalism and I wouldn’t want to lose Smith Rowe for Ødegaard either. But can’t you find ways to say that without slagging Ødegaard off? Ødegaard is an elite talent and potentially a truly elite player. I suspect that’s why Real Madrid, in my view the world’s biggest club, not only bought him but probably want to keep him. I bet he ends up achieving more in the game than Cazorla, sadly as I don’t see it being with Arsenal.

Yuk. I can imagine that feeling still living with you.

At school we had school issue rugby shirts that were reversible. plain on one side and hoops on the other. We'd spend half the lesson doing various rugby drills then half the lesson playing a match where half the class had to reverse their tops which were now nice and muddy. The feeling of putting the muddy side against your skin was not a nice one

Not certain if anyone knows the Brentford match is now scheduled for Friday, Aug 13 at 8 pm. Moved for live TV coverage.

Not certain if anyone knows the Brentford match is now scheduled for Friday, Aug 13 at 8 pm. Moved for live TV coverage.

That didn’t take long did it? In fact all of our first three league fixtures have changed.

And there is the second round of the Carabao Cup to look forward to.

Friday 13th

What could possibly go wrong?

At least we’re still getting shown on telly.

What a surprisingly dull low quality game so far.

Watched a fair bit of the second half (very little of the first) but from what I did see, I thought Scotland deserved their point. Delighted for them, as at least they still have a chance of qualifying.

Watched a fair bit of the second half (very little of the first) but from what I did see, I thought Scotland deserved their point. Delighted for them, as at least they still have a chance of qualifying.

One should take one's pleasure where one can, Gaz

Scotland deserve a lot of credit for that performance and it wouldn't have flattered them if they'd nicked a winner. England will have to up their game significantly to have any chance of going deep into the tournament. I agree with Graham Souness when he said that you need to replace either Rice or Phillips in the England midfield with someone more creative.

Lots of happy Scots because they didn't lose, but in truth that was a constipated game of football. Where have all the flank players who take on their backs gone to? Where was the creative forward pass? Just a few moments of excitement, and for me the Tierney cross for a good volley well saved was the only classy moment in a turgid match. Kane looks knackered and without him firing England's prospects look limited.

I only watched about 20 minutes but it was in the second half when Kane was put thru but a long way out and he was run down with ease and while a foul was given against the Scots he really looked more like Lacca than a 100million pound player. I wonder if he is on the slide.

Sorry, can't help it. It wasn't over-the-top slagging. Just don't like the way he plays. I prefer him to be tougher, like Cesc. Agree, he could potentially be a magician in the middle of the park. But I've not seen enough to be convinced he is able to bring up his game to match the opposition when needed. Well, I've been wrong before (don't we all?), and if he stays with us, hope he proves me wrong.

Sorry but in my view it was grossly over the top slagging. You implied Ødegaard isn’t driven and pulls away from tackles. That’s a criticism of his attitude that I see as way over the top. Creative players can show inconsistency (look at the England players last night) and if you had restricted your criticisms to that issue rather than implying he has a poor non-driven and tackle avoiding attitude I would have accepted it. Albeit I would have commented that you were probably being unfair because of his age and newness to the country and Premier League.

Ødegaard as a talent is arguably on another level. He did enough to convince me of that, while he was here. As I say, I wouldn’t want to lose Smith Rowe to acquire him, which is the rumour that started this debate. But I think many fans are too willing to use over the top criticism by slagging players off. I think you could have found a more reasonable way of saying we shouldn’t lose Smith Rowe to get him. That’s my point here. You went over the top. Your post was made even worse by saying Ødegaard is “Not anywhere close to Özil,” who would be very near the top if I was listing the Arsenal players I’ve seen with the worst attitudes.

However, I do agree with Zed’s point. Ødegaard will probably be better off (career wise) going back to Real than joining Arsenal.