|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Mar 8, 2008 12:20:10 GMT
How we have managed that with him in the team God only knows.Imagine if we had a 'proper' forward playing.
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Mar 8, 2008 12:21:15 GMT
You mean like Cresswell? Traditionally, the ball just bounces straight back at us.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 12:22:40 GMT
We've managed it partly because of the space Sidibe creates and the physiscal nuisance he is to defenders, which brings Lawrence and Cresswell into the game in dangerous positions.
He also helps the defence out because the ball sticks to him more and stays upfield, rather than constantly pinging back at us.
|
|
|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Mar 8, 2008 12:22:51 GMT
And with Sidibe it goes where?How many goals has he set up this season?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 12:24:37 GMT
Do you mean directly or indirectly through the space and nuisance factor?
|
|
|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Mar 8, 2008 12:27:59 GMT
If your picking a player just because of his space and nuicance factor,your wasting a place on your teamsheet for a real footballer who has this factor and more.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 12:28:43 GMT
Didn't seem to do Sam Allardyce's Bolton any harm.
|
|
|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Mar 8, 2008 12:33:15 GMT
I didnt think we were on about Bolton and If youre comparing Sidibe to Kevin Davies that is just silly as one is a footballer and the other one isnt.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 12:35:44 GMT
Bolton are a relevant example. It didn't do them any harm and it's not doing us any harm.
Davies is used by them in a very similar way. Not prolific, not the most talented, but very physical and crucial to their set up.
Carew, Heskey and Kenwyne Jones are further examples.
|
|
|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Mar 8, 2008 12:40:19 GMT
You cant compare Sidibe with any of those players in a footballing sense.The others have scored goals in their careers.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 12:42:52 GMT
None are massively prolific, all are important to how they play.
|
|
|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Mar 8, 2008 12:44:14 GMT
No,the teams those players play for actually use their midfield.
|
|
|
Post by BraveSirRobin on Mar 8, 2008 12:44:46 GMT
Off now.....Goooo onnnn Sidebe you useless lump!
|
|
|
Post by anarchicalan on Mar 8, 2008 12:45:48 GMT
BSR - you can see that, I can see that, anyone with half an eye can see that, but the manager doesn't understand the alphabet.
rob - this is true, but it won't keep us in the Premier league if we go up.
MD - agree.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 12:48:16 GMT
It kept Bolton up. Plenty of teams in the Prem have a fairly direct style of play. Yes, we;d need to modify it and bring the midfield in more, but to varying degrees Liverpool, Villa, Bolton, Pompey, and Everton all employ a fairly direct style.
|
|
|
Post by MrMagic on Mar 8, 2008 12:48:30 GMT
Bolton are a relevant example. It didn't do them any harm and it's not doing us any harm. Davies is used by them in a very similar way. Not prolific, not the most talented, but very physical and crucial to their set up. Carew, Heskey and Kenwyne Jones are further examples. Sorry Rob - but that is pushing the envelope a little too far. Mama does do well for us, but often I scratch my head to work out why. The assertion made earlier, that the ball sticks to him is one that I have to disagree with. He traps a ball further than I could kick it. He has no close control, and the reason he is "unplayable" is because even he doesn't know what he is going to do next. Any manager worth his salt would have someone markign him 6 yards away to pick up all of the loose balls coming off him. Yes - we do better with him than without him, but that is more to do with Pulis' inability to change things based on the squad than anything else. Mama is not good enough for a side serious about promotion. He has been a very good servant to the club though and I like and respect him lots.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 12:53:17 GMT
I disagree that he has no close control. It's not always the best, but it's better than he gets credit for - he often brings it down and shields it - watch today (assuming he plays).
The Sunderland game last season is an example of how the ball sticks to him. From the moment he came off, we were under the cosh and they eventaully equalized, because we were incapable of keeping the ball high up the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 8, 2008 13:15:27 GMT
At first I thought the title of this thread read Mama-Leagues 2's best player-he probably wouldn't be if he played in league 2 though.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 8, 2008 13:17:38 GMT
I disagree that he has no close control. It's not always the best, but it's better than he gets credit for - he often brings it down and shields it - watch today (assuming he plays). The Sunderland game last season is an example of how the ball sticks to him. From the moment he came off, we were under the cosh and they eventaully equalized, because we were incapable of keeping the ball high up the pitch. Dust watch a different Mama from me? His touch is poor. he's got skillfuller, his passing is crap, his flick ons are ok, he holds it up ok and he doesn't get into goal scoring areas.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2008 13:19:49 GMT
Skillfuller ;D
His touch is sometimes rubbish, sometimes good. His passing is sometimes rubbish, sometimes good (like his cross for Delap's opener at Wolves and his slide-rule pass for Parkin in the first home game of this season).
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 8, 2008 13:20:48 GMT
;D ok-he posses more skill! ;D I still prefer skillfuller!
|
|