|
Post by Kjones9 on Oct 22, 2014 12:08:40 GMT
Ah ok, couldn't remember.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Oct 22, 2014 12:13:44 GMT
We mean the season before: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19310426Cameron played central midfield and I'm pretty sure was awarded Man of the Match, although Sky Sports says MOTM was Shawcross. It does say Cameron had a 'decent debut' though.
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Oct 22, 2014 12:18:31 GMT
We mean the season before: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19310426Cameron played central midfield and I'm pretty sure was awarded Man of the Match, although Sky Sports says MOTM was Shawcross. It does say Cameron had a 'decent debut' though. Yeah, I knew of that one but was trying to think of another. Anyhoo, I reckon sparky will start him on Saturday.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 12:18:39 GMT
Even if Whelan is fit I'd play Cameron. So if Huth came in for a suspended Shawcross and played well would you do the same ? Cameron was excellent on Sunday BUT....Whelan has been immense and should be one of the first names on the sheet if fit You can't compare Whelan with Shawcross.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Oct 22, 2014 12:21:11 GMT
So if Huth came in for a suspended Shawcross and played well would you do the same ? Cameron was excellent on Sunday BUT....Whelan has been immense and should be one of the first names on the sheet if fit You can't compare Whelan with Shawcross. They play in different positions so technically no but you got my jist .....I know you did Why would you drop a player who week in week out is excellent ?
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Oct 22, 2014 12:24:02 GMT
Even if Whelan is fit I'd play Cameron. So if Huth came in for a suspended Shawcross and played well would you do the same ? Cameron was excellent on Sunday BUT....Whelan has been immense and should be one of the first names on the sheet if fit
How is that logical mate? Shawcross is our best defender and should play. Whelan, in my opinion, is not our best midfielder and we have other players who could do his job just as well and even add more to the roll.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Oct 22, 2014 12:24:51 GMT
You can't compare Whelan with Shawcross. They play in different positions so technically no but you got my jist .....I know you did Why would you drop a player who week in week out is excellent ? While I agree with you, Whelan is an excellent in that position but that doesn't mean Cameron couldn't replace him. Is Whelan technically superior? In Shawcross and Huth's case, I would argue that Shawcross is quite far ahead of Huth, in almost all aspects of his game. Huth's a good centre back, but for me, Shawcross is an absolutely exceptional talent and someone vastly underrated outside of Stoke. For many on here, he's probably one of the finest defenders ever to grace the Stoke shirt and we're incredibly lucky to have him.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Oct 22, 2014 12:27:53 GMT
So if Huth came in for a suspended Shawcross and played well would you do the same ? Cameron was excellent on Sunday BUT....Whelan has been immense and should be one of the first names on the sheet if fit
How is that logical mate? Shawcross is our best defender and should play. Whelan, in my opinion, is not our best midfielder and we have other players who could do his job just as well and even add more to the roll.
I'm not knocking Cameron mate .....far from it It's just you don't drop a player who has been immense for a sustained period of time on the back of a player having a good 20 mins That's my point
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Oct 22, 2014 12:40:47 GMT
How is that logical mate? Shawcross is our best defender and should play. Whelan, in my opinion, is not our best midfielder and we have other players who could do his job just as well and even add more to the roll.
I'm not knocking Cameron mate .....far from it It's just you don't drop a player who has been immense for a sustained period of time on the back of a player having a good 20 mins That's my point Wez mate are you a Whelan fan by any chance?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 13:01:29 GMT
You can't compare Whelan with Shawcross. They play in different positions so technically no but you got my jist .....I know you did Why would you drop a player who week in week out is excellent ? I wouldn't. I've said I'd bring Whelan back when fit. Just not at the expense of Cameron.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Oct 22, 2014 15:29:12 GMT
You can't compare Whelan with Shawcross. They play in different positions so technically no but you got my jist .....I know you did Why would you drop a player who week in week out is excellent ? If Whelan is fit I'd be putting him straight back in, but unfortunately its not looking like he will be.
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Oct 22, 2014 16:09:40 GMT
Whelen was at his best for us last season, but nevertheless, he offer's us few options other than scurrying around and breaking up play. In contrast, Geoff looks like a Gazelle, breaking up play and bursting forward with attacking intent.
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Oct 22, 2014 16:15:15 GMT
Glen doesn't deserve to be replaced at the moment (if he is able to play?), but I really liked what I saw from Cameron on Sunday. I also like that he has got much more pace than Glen and because of that will be harder to get past and to pick up when going forward.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 16:15:35 GMT
If Whelan is injured, yes. If Whelan isn't injured then maybe. It's tempting to try him over N'Zonzi. Yes, a good point. When Whelan is fit again we could end up with Whelan and Cameron for some games and Whelan or Cameron plus NZonzi for other games. I think when all three are fit it might be the threat posed by the opposing midfield which will determine which permutation is best. Certainly, Cameron's cameo on Sunday means he MUST be given a chance to stake his claim for a regular midfield place. It is no secret that Adam in midfield has worried me in the past - because of his defensive rushes of blood to the head - but the possibility of Whelan and Cameron in tandem would make me a lot happier for Adam to be the third midfielder. Cameron's athleticism and Whelan's steadiness could be the key to getting the best out of Adam on a regular basis. Really agree with this. It reminds me of the balance we had away at Villa last year with Whelan and Palacios as a base, only hopefully with a player who could be more consistent than Palacios.
|
|
|
Post by slpmarc on Oct 22, 2014 16:23:24 GMT
He played there, and very well too, in his first game for us. Against Arsenal too. Strange how we didn't continue with that. Before he signed I mentioned on here that I thought he was being brought in for RB. I was told that in would be madness to buy a CB/DM to play at RB, why not just buy a RB? But that was the genius of Tony I guess! I am sure if that was true, his management team would of taken him Everton as they were favourites to sign him at the time.
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Oct 22, 2014 16:25:35 GMT
Yes, a good point. When Whelan is fit again we could end up with Whelan and Cameron for some games and Whelan or Cameron plus NZonzi for other games. I think when all three are fit it might be the threat posed by the opposing midfield which will determine which permutation is best. Certainly, Cameron's cameo on Sunday means he MUST be given a chance to stake his claim for a regular midfield place. It is no secret that Adam in midfield has worried me in the past - because of his defensive rushes of blood to the head - but the possibility of Whelan and Cameron in tandem would make me a lot happier for Adam to be the third midfielder. Cameron's athleticism and Whelan's steadiness could be the key to getting the best out of Adam on a regular basis. Really agree with this. It reminds me of the balance we had away at Villa last year with Whelan and Palacios as a base, only hopefully with a player who could be more consistent than Palacios. I think Palacios is VERY consistent mate.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 22, 2014 16:33:47 GMT
If Whelan isn't fit then yes. If Whelan's 75% fit then yes. If Whelan's fully fit and raring to go then no. However, Southampton away could be a good game to play Whelan, Cameron and the Fonz for more solidity. Cue ire from the Adam lovers but it's just a thought. I'd play Adam for you lovers out there!
|
|
|
Post by that's our Ric on Oct 22, 2014 16:42:17 GMT
If Whelan isn't fit then yes. If Whelan's 75% fit then yes. If Whelan's fully fit and raring to go then no. However, Southampton away could be a good game to play Whelan, Cameron and the Fonz for more solidity. Cue ire from the Adam lovers but it's just a thought. I'd play Adam for you lovers out there! Not a problem playing all 4 - we just drop that waste of space at the moment, Ireland, and for Southampton, one of Moses or Diouf depending who's the fittest!
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Oct 22, 2014 16:51:11 GMT
Competition for places is only a good thing. Hughes believe in rewarding a good display and nobody is irreplaceable. (that should include Shawcross & Begovic)
Every player needs to know they always have to give 100%. Some players like Nzonzi for instance (and even Glenn) it can be good to drop once in a while and see them come back fighting for their place.
It worked last season when Zonz was dropped, and it worked before when Whelan has been dropped.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 17:01:43 GMT
Really agree with this. It reminds me of the balance we had away at Villa last year with Whelan and Palacios as a base, only hopefully with a player who could be more consistent than Palacios. I think Palacios is VERY consistent mate. How could i forget his recent run of form?
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Oct 22, 2014 17:02:05 GMT
Let's hope Glenn is fit.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Oct 22, 2014 17:02:47 GMT
If Whelan isn't fit then yes. If Whelan's 75% fit then yes. If Whelan's fully fit and raring to go then no. However, Southampton away could be a good game to play Whelan, Cameron and the Fonz for more solidity. Cue ire from the Adam lovers but it's just a thought. I'd play Adam for you lovers out there! Not a problem playing all 4 - we just drop that waste of space at the moment, Ireland, and for Southampton, one of Moses or Diouf depending who's the fittest! There is a problem when you're missing someone to play out wide, or do you want a cm there?
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Oct 22, 2014 17:08:51 GMT
Tbh these thread headings do my head in.
Is this a statement from the club, has someone from the club or media told you this is happening or is this just your opinion?
If the latter please make it clear in the heading and I won't waste my time opening the thread.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Oct 22, 2014 17:11:43 GMT
Tbh these thread headings do my head in. Is this a statement from the club, has someone from the club or media told you this is happening or is this just your opinion? If the latter please make it clear in the heading and I won't waste my time opening the thread. Just hover you mouse over the title, saves you opening the thread.
|
|
|
Post by ayem on Oct 22, 2014 17:50:34 GMT
Cameron to start over Whelan, if fit, at least for this week for for three reasons: 1. If Whelan is coming off an injury and we have a suitable sub, there is no reason to throw him in an risk reinjury. We'll need him in the months to come. 2. Cameron has earned it. Not just the sub in time, but all of his past play for Stoke. He played a position he has commonly said is not where he should be and did so admirably. And he wasn't a premadonna about it. Always showed up, always gave his best. 3. Sitting Nzonzi is a mistake. He has good forward play, strong presence on the ball, and may throw a fit if benched. That last point is important: his past of looking for a bigger team are still fresh in my mind, and if it's going to be in January then let him play to Stokes monetary benefit. I hate the idea of playing someone who doesn't want to be here but that may be the money that secures Moses, brings in yarmolenko.
|
|
|
Post by that's our Ric on Oct 23, 2014 8:49:13 GMT
Not a problem playing all 4 - we just drop that waste of space at the moment, Ireland, and for Southampton, one of Moses or Diouf depending who's the fittest! There is a problem when you're missing someone to play out wide, or do you want a cm there? I see your point, but obviously Moses is the wide man if fit, with Adam supporting Crouch. I think especially for this game it will be pace on the break (through Moses or Diouf) as we won't dominate possession
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Oct 23, 2014 8:51:34 GMT
Not a problem playing all 4 - we just drop that waste of space at the moment, Ireland, and for Southampton, one of Moses or Diouf depending who's the fittest! There is a problem when you're missing someone to play out wide, or do you want a cm there? Charlie left wing?
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Oct 23, 2014 13:57:34 GMT
MH: Probably the only doubt is Phil Bardsley, who's had trouble with his back at the end of the game on Sunday. He didn't train today. Hopefully he'll train tomorrow. Apart from him it's as we were.
Geoff possibly reluctantly back to RB?
|
|
|
Post by superstokiejon on Oct 23, 2014 14:00:33 GMT
If Bardsley is out, I'd go Muniesa at RB and Geoff in the middle.
Southampton will have a field day if we go with the same midfield we started the Swansea game with I feel.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Oct 23, 2014 14:05:33 GMT
Sentinel MH: The week we allow Wilko out on loan we have an issue with right-back! Geoff's an option but he did really well in midfield and I'd like to see more of him in that position. It's a balance of where we need him most. It's an option we have and that's why we let Wilko out. There are other options I can use too.
I had a conversation with GC when he came back from the World Cup. He was very strong in terms of what position he wanted to play, either midfield or centre-back. I'd played him at right-back and he'd done really well. Perhaps I didn't have the knowledge of his capabilities and needs must.
I said if he was prepared to battle for places with the midfielders we were happy to get him up to speed and that's how it's panned out, although he's had a set-back with a hernia problem.
|
|