lcfc_jme Posted 25 November 2006 Share Posted 25 November 2006 I thought Hammond's was a perfectly good goal. Not his fault it was disallowed. Two strikes one goal and in only 20 minutes on the field. Much more than that it was only when Levi and Hammond came on and when McAuley made three up front that the whole team seemed to have a few options and a bit of movement and football about it. Most sensible post I have seen on here in a while. Couldn't agree more Thrac Levi was absolutely brilliant today, Elvis was lazy in parts but managed to score (which is more than Fryatt and Hume did today) but had it disallowed for bollox all .. And McAuley was masterful at allowing the others to play off of him and create things As for MDV?? I don't think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 25 November 2006 Share Posted 25 November 2006 I thought Hammond's was a perfectly good goal. Not his fault it was disallowed. Two strikes one goal and in only 20 minutes on the field. Much more than that it was only when Levi and Hammond came on and when McAuley made three up front that the whole team seemed to have a few options and a bit of movement and football about it. Does this mean we have to put up with you ranting on about how great Elvis Hammond is for weeks on end because he scored a goal that was disallowed at Pride Park. I'm getting DeJa vous already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stez Posted 25 November 2006 Share Posted 25 November 2006 a big man up front is what we need. de vies, sadly though he was big couldn't head the ball and needed it to his chest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teblin Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 Couldn't agree more at any level you need a target!! the ball comes back to easily! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertboy Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 Simple fact de vies not good enough we found that out ....simple fact Welsh not good enough we knew this last time but brought him back. we got to stop this crisis thinking gillespie aint the answer either he had enough time here to prove his worth and didnt really deliver. just so puzzled why Derby who had so much debt and a crap team have pulled off a miracle and why stoke have got a queue of quality players in their midfield ?? we should be competing with the likes of that lot at the very least but we cant keep digging up names that have proved to be inconsistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BartonFox Posted 26 November 2006 Author Share Posted 26 November 2006 Most sensible post I have seen on here in a while. Couldn't agree more Thrac Levi was absolutely brilliant today, Elvis was lazy in parts but managed to score (which is more than Fryatt and Hume did today) but had it disallowed for bollox all .. And McAuley was masterful at allowing the others to play off of him and create things As for MDV?? I don't think so That has to be the funniest post I have read in ages. Either you are a comic genius or a gibbering galoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 That has to be the funniest post I have read in ages. Either you are a comic genius or a gibbering galoot. Bingo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonbluefox9 Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 De Vries is better (not great) when the ball's played to his chest or feet than to his head imo. When we did play the ball to his feet he used to slow the pace of the game down no end and this frustrated the supporters. Having said that, if he could hold the ball up long enough to bring some of our midfielders into play then he might help us get more men in attack than we manage to do at present. Just look at yesterday. Matty Fryatt picked the ball up 40 yards away from goal, ran with it for 15 yards and in that time he had precisely no-one up in support- no-one making a run for him etc. He subsequently stepped on the ball, fell over and possession was lost. Fryatt isn't strong enough to hold off three men on his own, he needed someone to take the attention of one of the defenders away from him but no-one was there in time. De Vries is clumsy but he could hold the ball up fairly well with his back to goal and this may enable players like Hughes to get up the other end of the pitch because at present, Hughes can be seen on the edge of his own area and then 5 yards behind play from the final third. Before he can get up alongside the strikers, possession's been lost. Not just a dig at Hughes but he is a prime example of how the midfield isn't getting involved as much as they should be in the attacking third of the pitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandannieldanok Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 We dont need De Vries back unless the takeeover doesnt get completed by January. We will then be able to do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 De Vries is better (not great) when the ball's played to his chest or feet than to his head imo. When we did play the ball to his feet he used to slow the pace of the game down no end and this frustrated the supporters. Having said that, if he could hold the ball up long enough to bring some of our midfielders into play then he might help us get more men in attack than we manage to do at present. Just look at yesterday. Matty Fryatt picked the ball up 40 yards away from goal, ran with it for 15 yards and in that time he had precisely no-one up in support- no-one making a run for him etc. He subsequently stepped on the ball, fell over and possession was lost. Fryatt isn't strong enough to hold off three men on his own, he needed someone to take the attention of one of the defenders away from him but no-one was there in time. De Vries is clumsy but he could hold the ball up fairly well with his back to goal and this may enable players like Hughes to get up the other end of the pitch because at present, Hughes can be seen on the edge of his own area and then 5 yards behind play from the final third. Before he can get up alongside the strikers, possession's been lost. Not just a dig at Hughes but he is a prime example of how the midfield isn't getting involved as much as they should be in the attacking third of the pitch. Very sensible post. What we could do with is a player capable of the above, but consistent (De Vries was not) and with the abilty to win the ball in the air. We could do with a midfield that could suppourt a striker of this nature better as well because Hughes doesn't get forward often enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonbluefox9 Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 We dont need De Vries back unless the takeeover doesnt get completed by January. We will then be able to do better. I would say we already have better than De Vries at the club but until we play to their strengths we're going to struggle to score goals. Fryatt and Hume are good enough players to score goals at this level. Fryatt showed it last season, Hume has probably scored more consistently this season already. Can't rely on one man though as the last few games have shown. The midfield is poor at present and are offering very little support to the front two. It wasn't until Porter came on that we actually had someone in midfield running at their defence and taking the attention away from the front two. He's not the finished article and his final ball isn't always there but he's got pace and two quick, skillful feet which you can't say about many if any of our other midfielders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonbluefox9 Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 Very sensible post. What we could do with is a player capable of the above, but consistent (De Vries was not) and with the abilty to win the ball in the air. We could do with a midfield that could suppourt a striker of this nature better as well because Hughes doesn't get forward often enough. Just 5 players needed then I know what you're saying though. We really haven't got a targetman at the club. It shows when we have to put McAuley up their to play the role. The midfield is looking very weak most weeks. Welsh has had 3 or 4 ordinary games now. With Johansson behind him the attacking play is never going to come down our left-handside. Although I say this uncomfortably, Tiatto looked about our best midfielder that started yesterday and that's saying something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 Just 5 players needed then I know what you're saying though. We really haven't got a targetman at the club. It shows when we have to put McAuley up their to play the role. The midfield is looking very weak most weeks. Welsh has had 3 or 4 ordinary games now. With Johansson behind him the attacking play is never going to come down our left-handside. Although I say this uncomfortably, Tiatto looked about our best midfielder that started yesterday and that's saying something. Indeed, we've got serious problems at this club and they need sorting. Tiatto's had a good season in parts. I think alot of people are judging him a bit harshley this season because of his last season. Welsh should be sent back I've seen nearly all the games he's played in and I've not seen him play well once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 This isn't a new thing. We've had the same problem all season. If you look back at the teams I've suggested we put out in the few weeks following the Luton and Burnley debacles, they contain Chris O'Grady. Now you're all aware of my views on O'Grady I'm sure, but the fact I was willing to resort to playing him shows that it was fairly obvious from the first couple of games that we needed someone to hold the ball up and wait for the midfield to push on and support the attack as there is no-one there with the pace to break quickly from midfield. You can attempt to remedy this by playing quicker players through the centre (Welsh or Porter) as I posted in my Midfield thread a few weeks ago or you can play a targetman. The third option, which worked fairly well for us recently, was playing Hume and Hammond up front and basically giving them scraps to feed off in the hope that they will create their own chances. Fryatt doesn't seem to have the basic burst of pace in the long term, or more worryingly, the motivation to even attempt it at the moment. Most fans will post teams, systems and different approaches they think would work, the vast majority of which have never been attempted so there's no evidence that they will. McAuley up front, de Vries back from loan, Hammond back in the team etc etc. At the moment I'd have to say the latter is the best option. (Personally, by the way, if we were to have any of our centre-backs up front I would prefer it to be McCarthy but that would again still be a last resort.) In the past three years the only evidence we have of a system that worked consistently for a good few weeks was Gudjonsson and Williams supplying chances through the middle for Fryatt and Hume. We have barely scored any goals at all from crosses into the box. Despite all the crazy propositions from all corners of our fanbase, I think we are pretty united in agreement that our best bet is to get Wesolowski and Williams back and donate Johnson to the glue factory. I still wouldn't be 100% happy with this from the perspective that it doesn't give us the pacy attacking central midfielder I think we need but it'll have to do. I still don't think we have enough pace and strength in whatever midfield Kelly selects in a 4-4-2. At least in a 3-5-2 there's an extra body to compensate for individual deficiencies. I can't say it would definitely work but as I've maintained for a long time, I think it suits our players a lot better than the current 4-4-2 at all costs, defenders in midfield and a gigantic gap between the midfield and attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 Dear Fez, Have you ever considered that you might post too much sense? With concern, A fan of yours, Maidstone (22). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonbluefox9 Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 Indeed, we've got serious problems at this club and they need sorting. Tiatto's had a good season in parts. I think alot of people are judging him a bit harshley this season because of his last season. Welsh should be sent back I've seen nearly all the games he's played in and I've not seen him play well once. Yes, some people are still judging Tiatto on last season at times. The only thing that makes me cringe is that our best midfielder starting yesterday, imo, was an ageing man who will be moving back to Australia come the end of the season. For a team which is meant to be based around young, hungry players looking to improve and push us forward, that is slightly worrying. Yes we have injuries but we have a small squad so you've got to expect players like Hughes and Welsh to come in and play their part at some part in the season. These players should be doing the running for Tiatto not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 Dear Fez, Have you ever considered that you might post too much sense? With concern, A fan of yours, Maidstone (22). Yeah, you keep saying you're 22 while you still can! Seriously though, not a single vote for most knowledgeable about football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 You can't match the Pablomeister I'm afraid mate. You don't know enough about Spanish right backs... or whoever Manwell Pablo actually is! In actual fact, I'm the most knowledgeable about football. I just long ago got fed up with posting about this bunch of wan kers. You can go back months and months and a number of posters had already identified problems. The concerning thing is that RK doesn't seem to realise where the problems lie... or put in a more supportable way.. RK has done extremely little in my eyes to address any of our problems. That does not come down to having no money, I'm talking about approach, style, gameplan, tactics, motivation, substitutions etc. We're sloppy, gutless and often too little, too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonbluefox9 Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 This isn't a new thing. We've had the same problem all season. If you look back at the teams I've suggested we put out in the few weeks following the Luton and Burnley debacles, they contain Chris O'Grady. Now you're all aware of my views on O'Grady I'm sure, but the fact I was willing to resort to playing him shows that it was fairly obvious from the first couple of games that we needed someone to hold the ball up and wait for the midfield to push on and support the attack as there is no-one there with the pace to break quickly from midfield. You can attempt to remedy this by playing quicker players through the centre (Welsh or Porter) as I posted in my Midfield thread a few weeks ago or you can play a targetman. The third option, which worked fairly well for us recently, was playing Hume and Hammond up front and basically giving them scraps to feed off in the hope that they will create their own chances. Fryatt doesn't seem to have the basic burst of pace in the long term, or more worryingly, the motivation to even attempt it at the moment. Most fans will post teams, systems and different approaches they think would work, the vast majority of which have never been attempted so there's no evidence that they will. McAuley up front, de Vries back from loan, Hammond back in the team etc etc. At the moment I'd have to say the latter is the best option. (Personally, by the way, if we were to have any of our centre-backs up front I would prefer it to be McCarthy but that would again still be a last resort.) In the past three years the only evidence we have of a system that worked consistently for a good few weeks was Gudjonsson and Williams supplying chances through the middle for Fryatt and Hume. We have barely scored any goals at all from crosses into the box. Despite all the crazy propositions from all corners of our fanbase, I think we are pretty united in agreement that our best bet is to get Wesolowski and Williams back and donate Johnson to the glue factory. I still wouldn't be 100% happy with this from the perspective that it doesn't give us the pacy attacking central midfielder I think we need but it'll have to do. I still don't think we have enough pace and strength in whatever midfield Kelly selects in a 4-4-2. At least in a 3-5-2 there's an extra body to compensate for individual deficiencies. I can't say it would definitely work but as I've maintained for a long time, I think it suits our players a lot better than the current 4-4-2 at all costs, defenders in midfield and a gigantic gap between the midfield and attack. I agree with a lot of that but I don't think Welsh in the middle would improve us at all. Porter (like you said) would imo but Welsh has showed since returning on loan that he has very little strength when in possession or without the ball, struggles to spot the right ball at the right time and hasn't got enough pace to beat his man regularly. In fact he reminds me of a slightly better Joe Hamill. Other than that, I'd agree on almost everything else. You did say you made this point a few weeks ago though so maybe at the time the Welsh option seemed like an improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 I agree with a lot of that but I don't think Welsh in the middle would improve us at all. Porter (like you said) would imo but Welsh has showed since returning on loan that he has very little strength when in possession or without the ball, struggles to spot the right ball at the right time and hasn't got enough pace to beat his man regularly. In fact he reminds me of a slightly better Joe Hamill. Other than that, I'd agree on almost everything else. You did say you made this point a few weeks ago though so maybe at the time the Welsh option seemed like an improvement. That is pretty much the case, yeah. We are so devoid of pace in midfield (even supposedly natural wingers like Low and Sylla who are incapable of doing anything other than running at defenders... slowly) that I had to mention him else we'd be relying on Levi Porter and I don't want to sound like you know who. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonbluefox9 Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 That is pretty much the case, yeah. We are so devoid of pace in midfield (even supposedly natural wingers like Low and Sylla who are incapable of doing anything other than running at defenders... slowly) that I had to mention him else we'd be relying on Levi Porter and I don't want to sound like you know who. I know what you mean, I think he's been pretty spot on about Porter to be fair. He's not a complete player but he's shown on more than one occasion that he deserves his place in the first team squad if not the first 11. Maybe Thrac goes on about him a bit too much at times but he's worth talking about for some of the things he does when he has the ball. Yesterday was just a cameo performance but it was worth seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 I know what you mean, I think he's been pretty spot on about Porter to be fair. He's not a complete player but he's shown on more than one occasion that he deserves his place in the first team squad if not the first 11. Maybe Thrac goes on about him a bit too much at times but he's worth talking about for some of the things he does when he has the ball. Yesterday was just a cameo performance but it was worth seeing. I just don't think it's helpful making him out to be some sort of midfield general when really he's a nippy, elusive little player who is probably our most exciting attacking player other than Hume. Well, whatever, he should be playing ahead of Welsh. Again, pretty much everyone will agree on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 I just decided I want to be Fabrizio Moretti, the drummer in The Strokes and I've decided that this is the best thread in which to let you all know. Ta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 I just decided I want to be Fabrizio Moretti, the drummer in The Strokes and I've decided that this is the best thread in which to let you all know. Ta. More pointless crap from TPH. When is someone going to come along and do something about this nonsense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBK Posted 26 November 2006 Share Posted 26 November 2006 I just decided I want to be Fabrizio Moretti, the drummer in The Strokes and I've decided that this is the best thread in which to let you all know. Ta. Funny man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.