Manwell Pablo Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 For those blaming Cambiasso..... You do realise it is not his job to be covering at left full back, he was doing so as no one else was. He shouldn't even be there never mind getting the blame. As for Konchesky getting done, clear tactical nouse from Mourinho, very clever, picked out the weakness with our formation and picked out our weak link perfectly.
howlinmadmurfdoc Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 For those blaming Cambiasso..... You do realise it is not his job to be covering at left full back, he was doing so as no one else was. He shouldn't even be there never mind getting the blame. As for Konchesky getting done, clear tactical nouse from Mourinho, very clever, picked out the weakness with our formation and picked out our weak link perfectly. So who does get the blame for not covering?
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 So who does get the blame for not covering? Pearson. Possibly your left sided centre back but as has already been pointed out, your going to leave gaps if they get dragged out too much You play wing backs, much like when you play 4-3-3, your leaving yourself open to being exploited on your flanks.
AyewJoking Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Can you please name a left-back in this league that can cope with Willian and Ramires? Kieron Richardson
st albans fox Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 threads like this one are so ridiculous. we all know that PK isnt our best player. we all know that he's close to be the worst we have in their position. our tactics 3-5-2 nullified their ability to get ivanovic on the overlap. once we had to go 4-4-2, it started to unravel and once the second half came, they decided to target our left side becasue we had no cover. albrighton on the right protecting RDL (how often did azpi..... get forward?). no one on the left because DD,MJ and EC were charged with managing the middle where chelsea like to play through. with vardy stuck in the area between the left side protecting konch and supporting leo, we were in trouble. we could have changed it once we conceded the equaliser but it seemed we decided to try and keep our attacking options open rather than trying to hold the line. tbh, leo was poor. why is no one slagging him off? if we had two extra subs second half, we may have been able to 'fire fight' the last twenty mins better. konch is our best defensive LB. jeff isnt great defensively. teams have targeted our left side all season. we dont have a chelsea to play for the rest of teh season. lets get onto the front foot and make our defensive frailties irrelevant
martyn Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 He's just nowhere near good enough as a premier league fullback irrespective of whether he was afforded enough cover yesterday. Not signing a left back in the summer was a big mistake and enough people said that at the time. Chelsea made a conscious decision at half time to stick Willian right on the touchline as they knew they could exploit that area. Even more so with Konch on a yellow after that ludicrous challenge first half. Even nige was calling for kasper to hit his goal kicks towards our left hand side after a while to presumably try to condense the game.
ADK Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Think people are going overboard, thought Konch did ok, our midfield didn't help out enough.
Guest Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 For those blaming Cambiasso..... You do realise it is not his job to be covering at left full back, he was doing so as no one else was. He shouldn't even be there never mind getting the blame. As for Konchesky getting done, clear tactical nouse from Mourinho, very clever, picked out the weakness with our formation and picked out our weak link perfectly. It seems his job is to make one good pass a game and run after the ball when we score, if we listen to you.
Master Fox Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Our weakness has been shown in all it's glory. Chelsea were smart enough to pick up on how shit he is and totally exploit it yesterday. Any side playing against us from here on in only needs to attack where Konchesky is situated and they'll win. That's how bad he is. We need Schlupp back so badly.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 It seems his job is to make one good pass a game and run after the ball when we score, if we listen to you. Argue and make irrelevant points all you want, it's not his job to cover a left back.
cc_star Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Argue and make irrelevant points all you want, it's not his job to cover a left back. Lets just let 2/3 players run at the full back, and a supposed DM does nothing but shrug his shoulders saying it's not his job. Yes, there could have been a change i9n formation, but Chelsea, the Champions who've pissed on everybody all season long in the 2nd half were an irresistible force, regardless of what we did or didn't do
narboroughblue Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Matic was constantly helping out his full backs so when you play wing backs they do need help from midfield when being doubled up on. Not defending Konchesky as he isn't up to the task but they did concentrate all their second half efforts down his side and I think any full back with no midfield support would have struggled.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Lets just let 2/3 players run at the full back, and a supposed DM does nothing but shrug his shoulders saying it's not his job. Yes, there could have been a change i9n formation, but Chelsea, the Champions who've pissed on everybody all season long in the 2nd half were an irresistible force, regardless of what we did or didn't do Well he didn't do that did he, it was two players taking advantage of a hole in our formation which, despite it not being down to him, he tried to fill. Now he's getting stick for doing so as his efforts to back Konchesky up weren't great, given he is 34 he is not going to play midfield and cover both our full backs it is not going to happan. Yes agreed they were a class above I'm not debating that. Even more reason not to get on at players doing their best for the team operating out of their remit. Cambiasso isn't perfect but he has been in great form for us and is one of the main reasons we've turned ourselves around so yourself and FIF being footballing hipsters picking holes at every opportunity is pointless.
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Just worries me. But wasn't that bad although his pace is certainly getting a major concern
Guest Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Well he didn't do that did he, it was two players taking advantage of a hole in our formation which, despite it not being down to him, he tried to fill. Now he's getting stick for doing so as his efforts to back Konchesky up weren't great, given he is 34 he is not going to play midfield and cover both our full backs it is not going to happan. Yes agreed they were a class above I'm not debating that. Even more reason not to get on at players doing their best for the team operating out of their remit. Cambiasso isn't perfect but he has been in great form for us and is one of the main reasons we've turned ourselves around so yourself and FIF being footballing hipsters picking holes at every opportunity is pointless. It's amazing how little you think a midfielder should do.
ImBlue Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 It's amazing how little you think a midfielder should do. It's amazing how much you think he should do. I never saw fabregas at left back?
BigMicky Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Wow, any prem left back would have struggled last night in the 2nd half. William ran the show because he was fantastic not because Konch was rubbish. He tried his best and came up a little short get over yourselves, lack if knowledge on here is embarrassing at times.
Babylon Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 Lets just let 2/3 players run at the full back, and a supposed DM does nothing but shrug his shoulders saying it's not his job. Yes, there could have been a change i9n formation, but Chelsea, the Champions who've pissed on everybody all season long in the 2nd half were an irresistible force, regardless of what we did or didn't do But he didn't do that though did he, he quite clearly tried to help out in that area when he could. For the first goal he and FOUR others were in the corner. The problem was that Morgan got pulled out beyond all of them and was almost on the touch line. A simple ball in to the space he should have been covering exposed the defence. As the game went on he couldn't do it as much because he's 34 years old, that's not his fault. If we'd had some subs he probably wouldn't have been on the pitch. That's the managements responsibility to put him in a position then that doesn't expose his weakness then. It's would be like moaning at Drinkwater for not winning a header because Pearson asked him to mark Peter Crouch at a corner.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 It's amazing how little you think a midfielder should do. It's amazing you think covering a player playing in a 5 man defence falls into the lap of a midfielder but you stick to your agenda
Guest Col city fan Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 But he didn't do that though did he, he quite clearly tried to help out in that area when he could. For the first goal he and FOUR others were in the corner. The problem was that Morgan got pulled out beyond all of them and was almost on the touch line. A simple ball in to the space he should have been covering exposed the defence. As the game went on he couldn't do it as much because he's 34 years old, that's not his fault. If we'd had some subs he probably wouldn't have been on the pitch. That's the managements responsibility to put him in a position then that doesn't expose his weakness then. It's would be like moaning at Drinkwater for not winning a header because Pearson asked him to mark Peter Crouch at a corner. You've hit the nail on head. He's 34 and runs out of gas. Remember what I said in the summer? That's been an issue this season and a significant one. Why does Pearson keep giving him 90 mins? It's amazing you think covering a player playing in a 5 man defence falls into the lap of a midfielder but you stick to your agenda What about the third goal? Who should have been where for that one?
cc_star Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 It's amazing you think covering a player playing in a 5 man defence falls into the lap of a midfielder but you stick to your agenda Where's the 5 man defence in a 352? And anyway, it's not just Konch last night, it's almost every game see him fail to stay with opposition midfielders when the ball is in the box. It's a complete liability for us, still his positioning sense gets him out jail for so long, but once the opposition run he's screwed. Not his fault because of his age, but for that reason he should start on the bench and come on at HT/60mins, or get subbed off at HT/60mins
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 You've hit the nail on head. He's 34 and runs out of gas. Remember what I said in the summer? That's been an issue this season and a significant one. Why does Pearson keep giving him 90 mins? What about the third goal? Who should have been where for that one? That we should sign Lee Cattermole? Or you talking about something else.
ImBlue Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 But he didn't do that though did he, he quite clearly tried to help out in that area when he could. For the first goal he and FOUR others were in the corner. The problem was that Morgan got pulled out beyond all of them and was almost on the touch line. A simple ball in to the space he should have been covering exposed the defence. As the game went on he couldn't do it as much because he's 34 years old, that's not his fault. If we'd had some subs he probably wouldn't have been on the pitch. That's the managements responsibility to put him in a position then that doesn't expose his weakness then. It's would be like moaning at Drinkwater for not winning a header because Pearson asked him to mark Peter Crouch at a corner. Perfectly put. He has a lot of strengths to play to, his weaknesses are mostly down to his age, but it's obvious, we are lucky to even have a 34 year old Cambiasso at our club. Still had the legs to cover left back, I assure you he wouldn't be in a leicester shirt.
Guest Col city fan Posted 30 April 2015 Posted 30 April 2015 That we should sign Lee Cattermole? Or you talking about something else. That we needed a fitter, younger, more mobile DM in the squad. Cattermole was mentioned as an option. Yep, pretty much that.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.