|
Post by wembley4372 on Oct 24, 2014 6:09:06 GMT
He did well for ten minutes. Whether he can keep focused for longer in the middle I have yet to see, but he did enough for another try. Unless we have another couple of injuries I wouldn't want him any where near CB. To be fair it took Whelan 4 and half seasons before becoming the player we see now. He was ultra inconsistent before. And before Wezzer comes on and takes that the wrong way........I don't blame Glen for that, the previous manager never used his midfield to help their cause. Agree completely and would add that glen has been a much better player since LMH took over. The change in style has suited him. My fear is that GC would be out of position too often and leave us exposed.
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Oct 24, 2014 6:31:09 GMT
He did well for ten minutes. Whether he can keep focused for longer in the middle I have yet to see, but he did enough for another try. Unless we have another couple of injuries I wouldn't want him any where near CB. He was outstanding at the world cup playing in midfield for a couple of full games - and in tough conditions. I'm suprised it's taken this long for us to give him a run there - I suppose LMH has been loathe to split the Zonz/Glenn axis. Be interesting to see how he does.
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Oct 24, 2014 6:37:52 GMT
To be fair it took Whelan 4 and half seasons before becoming the player we see now. He was ultra inconsistent before. And before Wezzer comes on and takes that the wrong way........I don't blame Glen for that, the previous manager never used his midfield to help their cause. Agree completely and would add that glen has been a much better player since LMH took over. The change in style has suited him. My fear is that GC would be out of position too often and leave us exposed. When MH took over I was really hoping that both Glen and JW would benefit from the change in style, Glen certainly did but unfortunately Jon seemed to still struggle. I still maintain what I was discussing with Paul Spence a week or so back now that, although Players maybe be playing extremely well if there was an option that can prove even more beneficial to the team then that option must be considered. We were discussing Muniesa/Whelan at the time but if Geoff can be that improvement then so be it. My personal thought is that Geoff could be even more valuable alongside Whelan/Muniesa. The future could be very bright in that area.
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Oct 24, 2014 7:59:59 GMT
He did well for ten minutes. Whether he can keep focused for longer in the middle I have yet to see, but he did enough for another try. Unless we have another couple of injuries I wouldn't want him any where near CB. He was outstanding at the world cup playing in midfield for a couple of full games - and in tough conditions. I'm suprised it's taken this long for us to give him a run there - I suppose LMH has been loathe to split the Zonz/Glenn axis. Be interesting to see how he does. He may have looked ok in the world cup but the standard is far lower than the PL. If you pay close attention to the WC games he was caught out of position a lot. Possibly because he was surrounded by poorer players than there are in the PL and was trying to cover for them, so I will reserve judgement for now until i've seen him for a little more than his recent performance.
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Oct 24, 2014 8:02:27 GMT
Agree completely and would add that glen has been a much better player since LMH took over. The change in style has suited him. My fear is that GC would be out of position too often and leave us exposed. When MH took over I was really hoping that both Glen and JW would benefit from the change in style, Glen certainly did but unfortunately Jon seemed to still struggle. I still maintain what I was discussing with Paul Spence a week or so back now that, although Players maybe be playing extremely well if there was an option that can prove even more beneficial to the team then that option must be considered. We were discussing Muniesa/Whelan at the time but if Geoff can be that improvement then so be it. My personal thought is that Geoff could be even more valuable alongside Whelan/Muniesa. The future could be very bright in that area. You could be in grave danger of underestimating Nzonzi's contribution.
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Oct 24, 2014 9:44:57 GMT
He was outstanding at the world cup playing in midfield for a couple of full games - and in tough conditions. I'm suprised it's taken this long for us to give him a run there - I suppose LMH has been loathe to split the Zonz/Glenn axis. Be interesting to see how he does. He may have looked ok in the world cup but the standard is far lower than the PL. If you pay close attention to the WC games he was caught out of position a lot. Possibly because he was surrounded by poorer players than there are in the PL and was trying to cover for them, so I will reserve judgement for now until i've seen him for a little more than his recent performance. You're right to reserve judgment of course. The two games he excelled in midfield though, were (I think) v Belgium and Germany. Personally I doubt that the standard of those games was 'far lower' than the PL! As for being caught out of position a lot I don't think he is. What he tends to try and do is intercept the ball. When it comes off he looks great. When it doesn't he gets turned and ends up the wrong side of his man (it happened once v Swansea from memory). I hope he gets the chance v Soton because I think his athleticism will suit our counter-attacking style if he's given a box to box role. It's nice to have these options/selection headaches when we get a few injuries!
|
|
|
Post by foster on Oct 24, 2014 9:54:04 GMT
When MH took over I was really hoping that both Glen and JW would benefit from the change in style, Glen certainly did but unfortunately Jon seemed to still struggle. I still maintain what I was discussing with Paul Spence a week or so back now that, although Players maybe be playing extremely well if there was an option that can prove even more beneficial to the team then that option must be considered. We were discussing Muniesa/Whelan at the time but if Geoff can be that improvement then so be it. My personal thought is that Geoff could be even more valuable alongside Whelan/Muniesa. The future could be very bright in that area. You could be in grave danger of underestimating Nzonzi's contribution. Adding rocket fuel to a fire can make it burn brighter and longer providing there is enough oxygen.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Oct 24, 2014 10:17:01 GMT
He may have looked ok in the world cup but the standard is far lower than the PL. If you pay close attention to the WC games he was caught out of position a lot. Possibly because he was surrounded by poorer players than there are in the PL and was trying to cover for them, so I will reserve judgement for now until i've seen him for a little more than his recent performance. You're right to reserve judgment of course. The two games he excelled in midfield though, were (I think) v Belgium and Germany. Personally I doubt that the standard of those games was 'far lower' than the PL! As for being caught out of position a lot I don't think he is. What he tends to try and do is intercept the ball. When it comes off he looks great. When it doesn't he gets turned and ends up the wrong side of his man (it happened once v Swansea from memory). I hope he gets the chance v Soton because I think his athleticism will suit our counter-attacking style if he's given a box to box role. It's nice to have these options/selection headaches when we get a few injuries! My recollection is that he played the first two USA world cup games at centre back - very well in the first game and very poorly in the second game. He was then dropped for the Germany game and was reinstated (as the holding midfielder) for the Belgium game where he had a good game until he was mugged (and he wasn't the only one) near the end by Lukaku who came on as a late sub with fresh legs. I did think that Cameron and most of the USA team did enough to have won the game before Lukaku came on - but they missed too many easy chances.
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Oct 24, 2014 10:39:40 GMT
You're right to reserve judgment of course. The two games he excelled in midfield though, were (I think) v Belgium and Germany. Personally I doubt that the standard of those games was 'far lower' than the PL! As for being caught out of position a lot I don't think he is. What he tends to try and do is intercept the ball. When it comes off he looks great. When it doesn't he gets turned and ends up the wrong side of his man (it happened once v Swansea from memory). I hope he gets the chance v Soton because I think his athleticism will suit our counter-attacking style if he's given a box to box role. It's nice to have these options/selection headaches when we get a few injuries! My recollection is that he played the first two USA world cup games at centre back - very well in the first game and very poorly in the second game. He was then dropped for the Germany game and was reinstated (as the holding midfielder) for the Belgium game where he had a good game until he was mugged (and he wasn't the only one) near the end by Lukaku who came on as a late sub with fresh legs. I did think that Cameron and most of the USA team did enough to have won the game before Lukaku came on - but they missed too many easy chances. Thanks for clearing that up LP - wasn't sure. I think he's worth a go in midfield but he does take risks in order to initiate attacks and so I'm not sure CDM is the natural option for him - as I said - be interesting to see how things pan out!
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Oct 24, 2014 11:01:14 GMT
My recollection is that he played the first two USA world cup games at centre back - very well in the first game and very poorly in the second game. He was then dropped for the Germany game and was reinstated (as the holding midfielder) for the Belgium game where he had a good game until he was mugged (and he wasn't the only one) near the end by Lukaku who came on as a late sub with fresh legs. I did think that Cameron and most of the USA team did enough to have won the game before Lukaku came on - but they missed too many easy chances. Thanks for clearing that up LP - wasn't sure. I think he's worth a go in midfield but he does take risks in order to initiate attacks and so I'm not sure CDM is the natural option for him - as I said - be interesting to see how things pan out! He's always played CDM when he has played midfield for the USA. He was actually very disciplined in the Belgium World Cup game leaving most of the attacking/creative stuff to Bradley who played ahead of him. However, he did get forward when he felt the opportunity was there but also got back in the holding role as soon as he had put in a pass. He could probably play the box to box role - but, as far as I know, he has never had the opportunity. Maybe he'll get the chance once Whelan is fit again.
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Oct 24, 2014 11:29:23 GMT
Thanks for clearing that up LP - wasn't sure. I think he's worth a go in midfield but he does take risks in order to initiate attacks and so I'm not sure CDM is the natural option for him - as I said - be interesting to see how things pan out! He's always played CDM when he has played midfield for the USA. He was actually very disciplined in the Belgium World Cup game leaving most of the attacking/creative stuff to Bradley who played ahead of him. However, he did get forward when he felt the opportunity was there but also got back in the holding role as soon as he had put in a pass. He could probably play the box to box role - but, as far as I know, he has never had the opportunity. Maybe he'll get the chance once Whelan is fit again. Agreed. If he KNOWS that defensive duties are his priority then maybe he can adapt his game to suit CDM for us. When he's played RB though the urge to 'pinch' the ball seems to overcome him a couple of times a game and he gets turned - which is why people tend to think he gets caught out of position. Having said that I was always happy with him there as I thought his good points outweighed the bad, and he brings energy and a great attitude to the team. Bardsley though has proved worth his place. We've got good players all over the place at the minute...... ..........................Happy Days
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Oct 24, 2014 13:57:15 GMT
He's always played CDM when he has played midfield for the USA. He was actually very disciplined in the Belgium World Cup game leaving most of the attacking/creative stuff to Bradley who played ahead of him. However, he did get forward when he felt the opportunity was there but also got back in the holding role as soon as he had put in a pass. He could probably play the box to box role - but, as far as I know, he has never had the opportunity. Maybe he'll get the chance once Whelan is fit again. Agreed. If he KNOWS that defensive duties are his priority then maybe he can adapt his game to suit CDM for us. When he's played RB though the urge to 'pinch' the ball seems to overcome him a couple of times a game and he gets turned - which is why people tend to think he gets caught out of position. Having said that I was always happy with him there as I thought his good points outweighed the bad, and he brings energy and a great attitude to the team. Bardsley though has proved worth his place. We've got good players all over the place at the minute...... ..........................Happy Days When he is trying to nick the ball he isn't out of position, if he gets mugged it then puts us into trouble, when it works it's great. But the risk reward probably isn't in our favour. You may need to pay more attention to where he is when he's not by the ball. When he's out of position as he was in the world cup it can cause a problem but he can be good enough to clear up his own mess. I think it makes him look better than he is. Maybe I just prefer the solid dependable approach. If you watched the world cup games closely you will have seen that the commentators were giving him credit for things he hadn't done. Maybe that's why they thought he was man of the match in one game.
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Oct 24, 2014 14:55:26 GMT
It's a blow if Bardsley misses the game tomorrow. Personally, I'd play Wilson at right back, Huth alongside Ryan, and Cameron in midfield.
I'd also play Walters on the right, Moses on the left and Diouf through the middle. Can't see Crouch being particularly effective in games like these.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Oct 24, 2014 15:25:19 GMT
It's a blow if Bardsley misses the game tomorrow. Personally, I'd play Wilson at right back, Huth alongside Ryan, and Cameron in midfield. I'd also play Walters on the right, Moses on the left and Diouf through the middle. Can't see Crouch being particularly effective in games like these. Diouf hasn't shown much to suggest that he is a leader of the line as opposed to a second striker.
|
|
|
Post by stokemanusa on Oct 24, 2014 18:12:00 GMT
It's a blow if Bardsley misses the game tomorrow. Personally, I'd play Wilson at right back, Huth alongside Ryan, and Cameron in midfield. I'd also play Walters on the right, Moses on the left and Diouf through the middle. Can't see Crouch being particularly effective in games like these. Diouf hasn't shown much to suggest that he is a leader of the line as opposed to a second striker. I agree, he best left to chase imo.
|
|
|
Post by robstokie on Oct 24, 2014 18:15:01 GMT
He did well in the Swansea game when he came on, as he did in the first half vs Pompy. He certainly deserves a shot at playing the holding role, he likes a challenge and he is defensively minded so, hopefully, he will slot in seamlessly.
|
|
|
Post by stokemanusa on Oct 24, 2014 18:18:40 GMT
I hope Geoff puts this 'Tadic' and Pelle orgasm in the media to bed with a Whelan style sideline charge like he tussled last match with Mr. Bony.
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Oct 24, 2014 20:55:16 GMT
Agreed. If he KNOWS that defensive duties are his priority then maybe he can adapt his game to suit CDM for us. When he's played RB though the urge to 'pinch' the ball seems to overcome him a couple of times a game and he gets turned - which is why people tend to think he gets caught out of position. Having said that I was always happy with him there as I thought his good points outweighed the bad, and he brings energy and a great attitude to the team. Bardsley though has proved worth his place. We've got good players all over the place at the minute...... ..........................Happy Days When he is trying to nick the ball he isn't out of position, if he gets mugged it then puts us into trouble, when it works it's great. But the risk reward probably isn't in our favour. You may need to pay more attention to where he is when he's not by the ball. When he's out of position as he was in the world cup it can cause a problem but he can be good enough to clear up his own mess. I think it makes him look better than he is. Maybe I just prefer the solid dependable approach. If you watched the world cup games closely you will have seen that the commentators were giving him credit for things he hadn't done. Maybe that's why they thought he was man of the match in one game. Obviously I rate him a bit more than you do mate! We'll probaby get a better idea over the next few weeks of his capabilities.
|
|