|
Post by theonlooker on Aug 29, 2021 6:56:06 GMT
I don't think we missed Cousins. We missed a better version of him. I actually think, given the players we've brought in over the summer, that he would have looked like a fish out of water - the Danny Batth or the James Chester of midfield. We absolutely miss his engine and his ability to break up the play, but not his ability on the ball.
The type of player we need was actually on the Fulham bench today, coming back from injury - Harrison Reed. Can stick his foot in, can get about the pitch, can be disciplined and can play a bit. Maybe we can find one over the next few days, months or years...
Should have been #1 target this time around and our complete lack of seemingly wanting one is very odd. And this isn’t just about today. Allen has had 1 good game. Vrancic the same Clucas the same One of the better CM displays this season has been Thompson against Swansea. The balance so far hasn’t been there imo. I agree with you and said it after the opening game. The balance in there with Powell, Vrancic and Allen is crap. With Clucas it's only slightly better. We'll prosper against some teams and struggle badly against others. The worry for me is how one dimensional we are in there with one of the same no matter who we play out of what options we have. We don't have the players in the squad to go to a game like yesterday, shut up shop and try and keep it tight and nick a result. We can only play one way with this midfield, open and high and if it doesn't work we'll struggle....badly! What are your thoughts on the manager in all this? Last season he was preaching about power and pace, having watched Leeds physically dominate the league the year before and this season he seems to be preaching about dominating the ball, having watched Norwich and Brentford do that last season...?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2021 7:28:38 GMT
Missed Cousins today. It's no mystery though: resources are finite and we've prioritised other positions. The end of the season we'll know if that was the right call. The inclusion of a defensive midfield 'water carrier' plying his trade for Wigan Athletic, isn't what we were missing today. What we saw today was the gulf between where we are, and where we need to be, if we want to challenge. We were steamrollered. The midfield wasn't the only issue.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 29, 2021 7:44:13 GMT
Should have been #1 target this time around and our complete lack of seemingly wanting one is very odd. And this isn’t just about today. Allen has had 1 good game. Vrancic the same Clucas the same One of the better CM displays this season has been Thompson against Swansea. The balance so far hasn’t been there imo. I agree with you and said it after the opening game. The balance in there with Powell, Vrancic and Allen is crap. With Clucas it's only slightly better. We'll prosper against some teams and struggle badly against others. The worry for me is how one dimensional we are in there with one of the same no matter who we play out of what options we have. We don't have the players in the squad to go to a game like yesterday, shut up shop and try and keep it tight and nick a result. We can only play one way with this midfield, open and high and if it doesn't work we'll struggle....badly! What are your thoughts on the manager in all this? Last season he was preaching about power and pace, having watched Leeds physically dominate the league the year before and this season he seems to be preaching about dominating the ball, having watched Norwich and Brentford do that last season...? Throughout last season I was being told by someone that MON wanted to play possession football. And that was the reason he flogged Mikel to death and didn’t play Cousins. Now I don’t think it materialised at all but because of Mikel’s physical limitations and MoN’s refusal to play Collins at CB. What we were saw on the pitch just didn’t tally with what was being said privately to me. This time around I think he’s going for it again. Again I have a massive worry with Vrancic that we’ll treat him like we did Mikel. I think it’s very laudable and the way we should be playing. But as you say some games just aren’t viable for it. You could play a midfield 3 of Allen Thompson Sawyers but it’s still a bit of a nothingness if you do have the ball and if you don’t. I don’t think 4231 should be off the table either tbh.
|
|
|
Post by chayseeoatcake on Aug 29, 2021 7:49:31 GMT
Joe Allen’s still running around in circles now.
|
|
|
Post by independent on Aug 30, 2021 12:26:43 GMT
We don't have the players in the squad to go to a game like yesterday, shut up shop and try and keep it tight and nick a result. We can only play one way with this midfield, open and high and if it doesn't work we'll struggle....badly!
I can imagine what the response would have been like if MON had tried to park the bus against Fulham
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Aug 30, 2021 13:54:09 GMT
My simple mind sees a midfield three as a 6, 8 and 10:
1. a deep lying physical, athletic holder, who sweeps in front of the defence, reads the game well, wins possession and plays simple balls to those in front of him who can start attacks. He rarely gets pulled wide or too far forward. 2. a box to box ball carrier, who brings the ball forward and feeds the wide players, and links with 1, by taking the ball off him, and 3 by laying the ball off and getting forward for returns or balls into, or on the edge of, the box from the wide men. He has a great engine and chips in with his share of goals. 3. the creative hub of the team, your most skilful player, he is the fulcrum of your attack, he finds space in the hole to take passes from 1 and 2, supports the forwards, can beat a man and looks to slip balls down the channels, and get into the box for returns or crosses. He should be your supplemental goal threat after your first choice centre forward(s).
Now this works in a 352 or a 4231, to my mind.
Right now, we seem to have an 8 shoehorned into being a 6 (Allen) and two 10s being asked to play as 8s (Vrancic and Powell), with Clucas latterly, and Sawyers, when fully up to speed, 8s who are actually playing in their preferred roles, and Thommo as back up for 6/8.
We miss a proper first choice 6 and we also need to play either Nick or Mario further forward and more central.
Looking back, the set up against clearly the best team in the league was naive. A back 4, with Fox and Smith as full backs, Thommo and Allen as a middle two, with Mario ahead, and Tymon and Brown as wide attackers who could track back, may well have given us at least some foothold in the game and made them work a bit harder for the win.
Looking forward, we need a first class defensive midfielder if we are to have some steel to go along with the silk. Otherwise, I fear there are going to be a few more games like Saturday, even allowing for the returns of Powell and Campbell to massively improve our threat going forward.
|
|
|
Post by silsdenstokie on Aug 30, 2021 14:25:05 GMT
Should have got Ben Pearson from Preston when we had the chance
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Aug 30, 2021 14:44:51 GMT
Makes you wonder why we haven't solved the DM situation, seeing it is a very important role,one that could make or break a season.
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Aug 30, 2021 18:20:21 GMT
122, 188 posts. “All” …….Bollocks Not all of them...just a very large percentage
|
|
|
Post by chiswickpotter on Aug 30, 2021 18:29:52 GMT
My simple mind sees a midfield three as a 6, 8 and 10: 1. a deep lying physical, athletic holder, who sweeps in front of the defence, reads the game well, wins possession and plays simple balls to those in front of him who can start attacks. He rarely gets pulled wide or too far forward. 2. a box to box ball carrier, who brings the ball forward and feeds the wide players, and links with 1, by taking the ball off him, and 3 by laying the ball off and getting forward for returns or balls into, or on the edge of, the box from the wide men. He has a great engine and chips in with his share of goals. 3. the creative hub of the team, your most skilful player, he is the fulcrum of your attack, he finds space in the hole to take passes from 1 and 2, supports the forwards, can beat a man and looks to slip balls down the channels, and get into the box for returns or crosses. He should be your supplemental goal threat after your first choice centre forward(s). Now this works in a 352 or a 4231, to my mind. Right now, we seem to have an 8 shoehorned into being a 6 (Allen) and two 10s being asked to play as 8s (Vrancic and Powell), with Clucas latterly, and Sawyers, when fully up to speed, 8s who are actually playing in their preferred roles, and Thommo as back up for 6/8. We miss a proper first choice 6 and we also need to play either Nick or Mario further forward and more central. Looking back, the set up against clearly the best team in the league was naive. A back 4, with Fox and Smith as full backs, Thommo and Allen as a middle two, with Mario ahead, and Tymon and Brown as wide attackers who could track back, may well have given us at least some foothold in the game and made them work a bit harder for the win. Looking forward, we need a first class defensive midfielder if we are to have some steel to go along with the silk. Otherwise, I fear there are going to be a few more games like Saturday, even allowing for the returns of Powell and Campbell to massively improve our threat going forward. I agree we were surprisingly attacking and once Fulham worked us out, we were there for the taking. MON likes a 3 in midfield, a 6 and two 8s. I think it limits us as our 6 (Allen) isn’t great at passing. However against most teams it does provide a better defensive shape than with an out and out 10 but it requires the strikers and wingbacks to deliver going forward
|
|
|
Post by Jimm on Aug 30, 2021 18:31:48 GMT
Joe Allen still being here is holding us back from advancing.
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Aug 31, 2021 9:49:04 GMT
Joe Allen still being here is holding us back from advancing. Allen has been good so far this season, and was one of our better players on Saturday. Time to find another agenda.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Aug 31, 2021 10:12:00 GMT
My simple mind sees a midfield three as a 6, 8 and 10: 1. a deep lying physical, athletic holder, who sweeps in front of the defence, reads the game well, wins possession and plays simple balls to those in front of him who can start attacks. He rarely gets pulled wide or too far forward. 2. a box to box ball carrier, who brings the ball forward and feeds the wide players, and links with 1, by taking the ball off him, and 3 by laying the ball off and getting forward for returns or balls into, or on the edge of, the box from the wide men. He has a great engine and chips in with his share of goals. 3. the creative hub of the team, your most skilful player, he is the fulcrum of your attack, he finds space in the hole to take passes from 1 and 2, supports the forwards, can beat a man and looks to slip balls down the channels, and get into the box for returns or crosses. He should be your supplemental goal threat after your first choice centre forward(s). Now this works in a 352 or a 4231, to my mind. Right now, we seem to have an 8 shoehorned into being a 6 (Allen) and two 10s being asked to play as 8s (Vrancic and Powell), with Clucas latterly, and Sawyers, when fully up to speed, 8s who are actually playing in their preferred roles, and Thommo as back up for 6/8. We miss a proper first choice 6 and we also need to play either Nick or Mario further forward and more central. Looking back, the set up against clearly the best team in the league was naive. A back 4, with Fox and Smith as full backs, Thommo and Allen as a middle two, with Mario ahead, and Tymon and Brown as wide attackers who could track back, may well have given us at least some foothold in the game and made them work a bit harder for the win. Looking forward, we need a first class defensive midfielder if we are to have some steel to go along with the silk. Otherwise, I fear there are going to be a few more games like Saturday, even allowing for the returns of Powell and Campbell to massively improve our threat going forward. I agree we were surprisingly attacking and once Fulham worked us out, we were there for the taking. MON likes a 3 in midfield, a 6 and two 8s. I think it limits us as our 6 (Allen) isn’t great at passing. However against most teams it does provide a better defensive shape than with an out and out 10 but it requires the strikers and wingbacks to deliver going forward It took them 4 minutes to “work us out”?
|
|
|
Post by Jimm on Aug 31, 2021 11:26:26 GMT
Joe Allen still being here is holding us back from advancing. Allen has been good so far this season, and was one of our better players on Saturday. Time to find another agenda. We've been on a downward spiral ever since he joined. He's not a defensive midfielder at all. He's over rated as fuck, hence why he's still here! He is holding us back massively. Imagine a proper DM who sits, breaks up play, can tackle and can pass, this would improve our midfield massively! It's no agenda at all, he simply doesn't and never has suited Stoke.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 31, 2021 11:35:19 GMT
Last season O'Neill was criticised for being too defensive and as soon as he plays an attacking formation he gets battered for not being defensive enough...
I get a DM with a back 4 but I don't think you need one necessarily in a back 5 - in fact a tradition DM could end up getting in the way of the central CB. The key to defending with a back 5 is the ability of the wing backs to get back and cover.
All formations have a weakness - with a back 5 it's getting in behind the wingbacks and with a back 4 it's attacking the space between the CBs and the CBs and the fullbacks. Also if you play one or two DMS to cover a back four your weaken your attacking options.
We are playing with a relatively attack minded middle 3 - which means we should create more chances and score more goals but we'll probably concede more as well and against a team who are a class above, like Fulham, we will get turned over. But how many teams in this league that much better than us?
Rather than flip flop formation and personnel on the back of what will probably be our hardest game of the season I'd rather we stuck to our guns and continue with an attack orientated midfield. If nothing else we'll be a good watch as a result.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 31, 2021 11:37:59 GMT
Last season O'Neill was criticised for being too defensive and as soon as he plays an attacking formation he gets battered for not being defensive enough... I get a DM with a back 4 but I don't think you need one necessarily in a back 5 - in fact a tradition DM could end up getting in the way of the central CB. The key to defending with a back 5 is the ability of the wing backs to get back and cover. All formations have a weakness - with a back 5 it's getting in behind the wingbacks and with a back 4 it's attacking the space between the CBs and the CBs and the fullbacks. Also if you play one or two DMS to cover a back four your weaken your attacking options. We are playing with a relatively attack minded middle 3 - which means we should create more chances and score more goals but we'll probably concede more as well and against a team who are a class above, like Fulham, we will get turned over. But how many teams in this league that much better than us? Rather than flip flop formation and personnel on the back of what will probably be our hardest game of the season I'd rather we stuck to our guns and continue with an attack orientated midfield. If nothing else we'll be a good watch as a result. Playing with a defensive midfielder doesn't automatically make you defensive-minded though. Man City play with one, peak era Barca played with one.
|
|
|
Post by Jimm on Aug 31, 2021 11:47:25 GMT
Last season O'Neill was criticised for being too defensive and as soon as he plays an attacking formation he gets battered for not being defensive enough... I get a DM with a back 4 but I don't think you need one necessarily in a back 5 - in fact a tradition DM could end up getting in the way of the central CB. The key to defending with a back 5 is the ability of the wing backs to get back and cover. All formations have a weakness - with a back 5 it's getting in behind the wingbacks and with a back 4 it's attacking the space between the CBs and the CBs and the fullbacks. Also if you play one or two DMS to cover a back four your weaken your attacking options. We are playing with a relatively attack minded middle 3 - which means we should create more chances and score more goals but we'll probably concede more as well and against a team who are a class above, like Fulham, we will get turned over. But how many teams in this league that much better than us? Rather than flip flop formation and personnel on the back of what will probably be our hardest game of the season I'd rather we stuck to our guns and continue with an attack orientated midfield. If nothing else we'll be a good watch as a result. Playing with a defensive midfielder doesn't automatically make you defensive-minded though. Man City play with one, peak era Barca played with one. It gives you suture and a spine to the team and allows more freedom to the attacking minded midfielders. Rather than walking straight through a team and having an invisible midfield, like what happened on Saturday
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Aug 31, 2021 12:05:04 GMT
Playing with a defensive midfielder doesn't automatically make you defensive-minded though. Man City play with one, peak era Barca played with one. It gives you suture and a spine to the team and allows more freedom to the attacking minded midfielders. Rather than walking straight through a team and having an invisible midfield, like what happened on Saturday They didn't though did they. Fulham spread it wide and hurt us down the side of Ostigard and Wilmot. They didn't get in behind by going straight through.
|
|
|
Post by Jimm on Aug 31, 2021 12:14:16 GMT
It gives you suture and a spine to the team and allows more freedom to the attacking minded midfielders. Rather than walking straight through a team and having an invisible midfield, like what happened on Saturday They didn't though did they. Fulham spread it wide and hurt us down the side of Ostigard and Wilmot. They didn't get in behind by going straight through. Come on, they went straight through us. Our midfield was none existent. The first goal for example was down to Clucas not staying with Wilson
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 31, 2021 12:19:51 GMT
Last season O'Neill was criticised for being too defensive and as soon as he plays an attacking formation he gets battered for not being defensive enough... I get a DM with a back 4 but I don't think you need one necessarily in a back 5 - in fact a tradition DM could end up getting in the way of the central CB. The key to defending with a back 5 is the ability of the wing backs to get back and cover. All formations have a weakness - with a back 5 it's getting in behind the wingbacks and with a back 4 it's attacking the space between the CBs and the CBs and the fullbacks. Also if you play one or two DMS to cover a back four your weaken your attacking options. We are playing with a relatively attack minded middle 3 - which means we should create more chances and score more goals but we'll probably concede more as well and against a team who are a class above, like Fulham, we will get turned over. But how many teams in this league that much better than us? Rather than flip flop formation and personnel on the back of what will probably be our hardest game of the season I'd rather we stuck to our guns and continue with an attack orientated midfield. If nothing else we'll be a good watch as a result. Playing with a defensive midfielder doesn't automatically make you defensive-minded though. Man City play with one, peak era Barca played with one. I think it does make you more defensively minded if you're playing a DM in front of a back five. In effect a DM in front of a back four is just a more advanced central CB and the attacking element comes from the fullbacks getting forward - which is the same as a back 5 but even more attack minded. However you need top class fullbacks to pull it off. The 532 O'Neill is trying to play puts the responsibility for defending on the 3 CBs and the wing backs giving the 3 in midfield more freedom. If we go for a DM in order to remain as offensive we'd probably need to go to a back 4 - which is a different argument altogether and raises the question as to whether our fullback options are good enough to make it work.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 31, 2021 12:49:07 GMT
Playing with a defensive midfielder doesn't automatically make you defensive-minded though. Man City play with one, peak era Barca played with one. I think it does make you more defensively minded if you're playing a DM in front of a back five. In effect a DM in front of a back four is just a more advanced central CB and the attacking element comes from the fullbacks getting forward - which is the same as a back 5 but even more attack minded. However you need top class fullbacks to pull it off. The 532 O'Neill is trying to play puts the responsibility for defending on the 3 CBs and the wing backs giving the 3 in midfield more freedom. If we go for a DM in order to remain as offensive we'd probably need to go to a back 4 - which is a different argument altogether and raises the question as to whether our fullback options are good enough to make it work. I don’t really agree - plenty of teams who play with a back three still play a DM, even the more attack-minded ones. The issue with the central CB stepping forward is that while they’re adept with the ball and in building from the back, you still don’t have that physical presence and energy in midfield to provide protection and a platform for your attacking players. It’s not just your full backs providing that, it’s your other midfielders and perhaps your second striker too. You still need that flinty presence to plug the gaps and make sure you keep your shape.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Aug 31, 2021 15:28:01 GMT
They didn't though did they. Fulham spread it wide and hurt us down the side of Ostigard and Wilmot. They didn't get in behind by going straight through. Come on, they went straight through us. Our midfield was none existent. The first goal for example was down to Clucas not staying with Wilson The ball went wide, Smith was exposed
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 31, 2021 15:56:11 GMT
I think it does make you more defensively minded if you're playing a DM in front of a back five. In effect a DM in front of a back four is just a more advanced central CB and the attacking element comes from the fullbacks getting forward - which is the same as a back 5 but even more attack minded. However you need top class fullbacks to pull it off. The 532 O'Neill is trying to play puts the responsibility for defending on the 3 CBs and the wing backs giving the 3 in midfield more freedom. If we go for a DM in order to remain as offensive we'd probably need to go to a back 4 - which is a different argument altogether and raises the question as to whether our fullback options are good enough to make it work. I don’t really agree - plenty of teams who play with a back three still play a DM, even the more attack-minded ones. The issue with the central CB stepping forward is that while they’re adept with the ball and in building from the back, you still don’t have that physical presence and energy in midfield to provide protection and a platform for your attacking players. It’s not just your full backs providing that, it’s your other midfielders and perhaps your second striker too. You still need that flinty presence to plug the gaps and make sure you keep your shape. DM is a position, physical presence and energy are player attributes - you can have physical presence and energy in a midfield that doesn't include a DM. I actually agree we could do with more physical presence in the midfield (we are lightweight) but that doesn't necessarily mean we need a DM - in fact I think if the back five are doing their job it's negative and unnecessary, A Barry Bannon type who wins the ball higher up the pitch would be ideal but I wouldn't describe that sort of player as a classic DM in the same way that Fernandinho is -i.e. sits covers for the defence. We'll have to agree to differ.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 31, 2021 16:09:37 GMT
I don’t really agree - plenty of teams who play with a back three still play a DM, even the more attack-minded ones. The issue with the central CB stepping forward is that while they’re adept with the ball and in building from the back, you still don’t have that physical presence and energy in midfield to provide protection and a platform for your attacking players. It’s not just your full backs providing that, it’s your other midfielders and perhaps your second striker too. You still need that flinty presence to plug the gaps and make sure you keep your shape. DM is a position, physical presence and energy are player attributes - you can have physical presence and energy in a midfield that doesn't include a DM. I actually agree we could do with more physical presence in the midfield (we are lightweight) but that doesn't necessarily mean we need a DM - in fact I think if the back five are doing their job it's negative and unnecessary, A Barry Bannon type who wins the ball higher up the pitch would be ideal but I wouldn't describe that sort of player as a classic DM in the same way that Fernandinho is -i.e. sits covers for the defence. We'll have to agree to differ. You still need that disciplined player at the back of the midfield though, especially if your wing backs are getting forward regularly and you've got a central defender stepping up. Often the centre back who steps up is effectively almost a playmaker, the one who starts the attacks. You still need someone to plug the gaps and do the simple stuff. Either way the point's fairly moot as the manager isn't interested in signing that kind of player and we don't have much in the way of midfield physicality, in that role or higher up.
|
|
|
Post by thehoof on Aug 31, 2021 16:22:43 GMT
Well, whatever we think about the midfield and its lack of balance or otherwise, the Manager clearly doesn’t see it as an issue- absolutely no interest in signing a midfielder. I don’t know anything about the lad we are trying to get on loan from Brighton ( if they do indeed buy him), but Fletcher does need to be a bench player not a regular starter-this may give us another option.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Aug 31, 2021 16:23:44 GMT
DM is a position, physical presence and energy are player attributes - you can have physical presence and energy in a midfield that doesn't include a DM. I actually agree we could do with more physical presence in the midfield (we are lightweight) but that doesn't necessarily mean we need a DM - in fact I think if the back five are doing their job it's negative and unnecessary, A Barry Bannon type who wins the ball higher up the pitch would be ideal but I wouldn't describe that sort of player as a classic DM in the same way that Fernandinho is -i.e. sits covers for the defence. We'll have to agree to differ. You still need that disciplined player at the back of the midfield though, especially if your wing backs are getting forward regularly and you've got a central defender stepping up. Often the centre back who steps up is effectively almost a playmaker, the one who starts the attacks. You still need someone to plug the gaps and do the simple stuff. Either way the point's fairly moot as the manager isn't interested in signing that kind of player and we don't have much in the way of midfield physicality, in that role or higher up. There will be plenty of games, as the season progresses, where we will need to fight for our right to play our football (almost went full Beastie Boys there!). I struggle to see too many fighters in that midfield department right now, who can impose themselves on proceedings and drag the team through a tough game by the force of their will. In his own special way, Powell can turn a game on his own, when he is in the mood, but I would love to see a midfield lynchpin, a fulcrum for the team, stationed in the middle of the park. It is all a bit too Poundland late Wenger Arsenal in their right now - as Barney Ronay famously said, a team full of "skill gnomes" - when the best Arse teams had Vieira and Petit, after that Gilberto Silva. We need, as the Aussie cricketers call it, "a bit of mongrel" in there.
|
|
|
Post by Jimm on Aug 31, 2021 18:31:55 GMT
Come on, they went straight through us. Our midfield was none existent. The first goal for example was down to Clucas not staying with Wilson The ball went wide, Smith was exposed Watch it back and look how much space our midfield let Harry Wilson have!
|
|
|
Post by TinkerT on Aug 31, 2021 18:35:01 GMT
The ball went wide, Smith was exposed Watch it back and look how much space our midfield let Harry Wilson have! The first goal was pretty much the perfect way to play against our formation and draw players out of position doubling up wide. The next 10 15 mins we had some very good period which showed the positives of the formation.
|
|
|
Post by Jimm on Aug 31, 2021 18:38:42 GMT
Watch it back and look how much space our midfield let Harry Wilson have! The first goal was pretty much the perfect way to play against our formation and draw players out of position doubling up wide. The next 10 15 mins we had some very good period which showed the positives of the formation. I've got nothing against the formation just stating we need a disciplined specialist acting as the spine to hold our shape. Allen isn't that player
|
|
|
Post by TinkerT on Aug 31, 2021 19:12:17 GMT
The first goal was pretty much the perfect way to play against our formation and draw players out of position doubling up wide. The next 10 15 mins we had some very good period which showed the positives of the formation. I've got nothing against the formation just stating we need a disciplined specialist acting as the spine to hold our shape. Allen isn't that player I know he isn't but at this time of deadline day we're not going get a decent enough replacement and sell him on. At least our midfield is better than mikel and Allen last season eh..
|
|