LOL. I quoted 6 different posters over 6 months, funny how you saw only 1. Let me humour you a bit more with more posts and a quote by Bergomi, all collaborating the same fact. I am focusing on only that one point now, and calling your bulls**t on it. Are all these 10 odd posters wrong, or are you wrong?
One thing you will have to appreciate Brehme is that you can't change facts to suit your opinion. It should be the other way around.
Feb to May 2020:
Jun:
And what are these supposed to show?
ADRossi's post is quoting myself saying that if Conte has his way he'll sell Skriniar and Eriksen and focus on shitty signings just so that he can keep his system as he refused to integrate them.
Cafe's quote is from the covid break.
Bergomi quote is also during the covid break, care to show us the number of starts, minutes and the role Eriksen got until that date?
Your initial post was on what surripere said and some of the replies on his quotes, like Cafe's post you quoted there is basically quoting him saying that Eriksen is playing trequartista... then he says "it's not trequartista"
It's like you prepared the whole post just to show us how one member was uncertain about Eriksen's role only to conclude that he was even more uncertain after a few months
Also, all of this just to prove that what you said was wrong, yet I'm the stubborn one?
Please decide what your argument actually is.
https://www.transfermarkt.com/spielbericht/index/spielbericht/3305603
Since you like quotes:
What an attacking line up! Conte is really going for it.
But a part of me wished that he will use the coppa to give chances to youngsters like Esposito and Agoume, and some well deserved rest to key players like Lukaku and Barella.
Before Eriksen's debut, just 1-2 days after he joined us, we played vs Fiorentina in the Coppa. 3-4-1-2.
Did Conte opt for a 3-4-1-2 "to accommodate Eriksen" as the narrative suggested, from the get go? Hell to the fuck no!
Did Conte switch to 3-4-1-2 to cup games and EL just because he was experimenting or whatever? Yes, yes he did.
Did Conte switch to 3-4-1-2 after the break? Yes, he also did. Until he did not. Eriksen was not the beneficiary of that transition. Had he been an automatic starter for that role, sure, you'd have something. But he was not.
Eriksen had one start vs Udinese away, didn't make 60 minutes but it was his first ever start iirc.
He came on as a sub in the Milan game in the place of Sanchez, so playing behind a lone striker for a while in some 3-5-1-1 variation.
Did not play vs Napoli at home in the Cup game, Sensi started and we had some weird 3-4+1-2 hybrid, where he was either trequarista or mezzala. Very awkward to watch. I assume the idea was for a 3-4-1-2, too.
Lazio away, 3-5-2. Eriksen did not play.
Ludogorets away. 3-5-2. Eriksen started and it was an awkward lineup with Valero and Vecino being the other two midfielders. Cannot call it a classic Conte 3 man midfield.
Ludogorets at home. 3-4-1-2 and Eriksen got his garbage minutes as a trequartista.
Juventus loss. 3-5-2 Eriksen did not play.
Fast forward 3 months and:
Napoli away for the cup, 3-4-1-2, Eriksen got the goal with that direct corner kick.
And that was it. He got three successive starts after that in the league and then he became the last player on the list.
First league start since the break, no Brozovic, no Sensi.
Second league start since the break, no Brozovic, no Sensi and Barella had some injury concerns.
Third league start, since the break, no Brozovic, no Sensi.
And of course, no Vecino for all these games.
After Brozo returned to the lineup, he barely played again. Valero was getting a lot of minutes all of the sudden and even Barella played as trequartista. Saying that Conte changed the formation mainly to accommodate Eriksen is just blatant false.
Forum Supporter
Most Improved Member
10 years of FIF
Transfer Guru
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
Best Football Poster
Best Overall Poster
FIF Special Ones
Most Humorous Member
)
) and these are the stats:
