OriginalRobboFOX Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 Did a job at right back. Hope Kely leaves him there if he insists on playing Paddy Mac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 It's a classic case of shuffling the team to retain someone who doesn't deserve to be left out and including someone you want back in. As it happened it didn't obviously backfire although we conceded two more goals and might easily have shed five. The truth was we never looked solid in central defence and it wouldn't be long before opposing teams start to attack McAuley for pace, something that contributed to one of the Fulham goals anyway. In many ways he's similar to Nils. He reads the game quite well, doesn't panic and is better than Nils with his his distribution. But both have the Achilles heel of being slow, especially on the turn, and limited in the amount of support they can give to a winger. McAuley's a centre-back and Kelly has to decide which two of his three choices he's going to select. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynny Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 I thought it looked pretty decent. Our three best defenders were all out there playing. I was too far away in the second half but in the first half McAuley looked superb. Thrac, do you reckon Maybury was selected over Nils because RK didn't want the same weakness on both flanks, or some other reason? I dunno if he's injured or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 I'd like to see Maybury given a proper run at right back which is easily his best position. McAuley/Kisnorbo in the middle. McCarthy on the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaststandtom Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 I thought it looked pretty decent. Our three best defenders were all out there playing. I was too far away in the second half but in the first half McAuley looked superb. Thrac, do you reckon Maybury was selected over Nils because RK didn't want the same weakness on both flanks, or some other reason? I dunno if he's injured or something. exactly all 3 should play but in a 5-3-2 formation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 Did a job at right back. Hope Kely leaves him there if he insists on playing Paddy Mac Rigdewell and Radsinki made him look very limited at times, won his headers, put in a few good tackels, good forward reasnoable well and covered Kisnorbo when he broke forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 I thought it looked pretty decent. Our three best defenders were all out there playing. I was too far away in the second half but in the first half McAuley looked superb. Thrac, do you reckon Maybury was selected over Nils because RK didn't want the same weakness on both flanks, or some other reason? I dunno if he's injured or something. My feeling is that Kelly was inclined towards a 3-4-3 system as being best able to accommodate his three centre-backs, to offer us more forward support and yet retain, with Hughes and Maybury out wide, his inevitable defensive insurance. This enabled Porter to stay forward more and therefore improved our attacking options. Attack-wise it worked. There was more support, we created more chances than in recent games, scored two goals and should have had more. Defensively we were demonstrably vulnerable. Re Nils: He may be injured but I've heard nothing to that effect and am more inclined to think Kelly's been shocked at how vulnerable Nils has been to pace from the Derby game onwards. Kenton looked anything but the answer and as he doesn't seem to consider Sheehan at all. Apart from Tiatto, That only left Maybury who has played there before with varying degrees of success over his career. Maybury did good and bad things, as did most of our players, but I don't ever see him as a genuine left-back, any more than he's a midfielder. Maybury to me is simply a right-back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 Sign Capaldi before he pens a new contract thats what I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louise Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 To be honest I thought McAuley looked uncomfortable and offered less going forward than say Stearman. Some poor passes as well and he didn't seem to understand the concept of stopping the cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OriginalRobboFOX Posted 8 January 2007 Author Share Posted 8 January 2007 I'd like to see Maybury given a proper run at right back which is easily his best position. McAuley/Kisnorbo in the middle. McCarthy on the bench. Agreed. However, Kelly is so in love with Paddy Mac that he'll never drop him. Macauley looked good at right back and he was better than Stears at goin forward, it offered us a bit of height down the flanks too. He won more headers on that left flank than Low, Hughes and Stears have won all season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 To be honest I thought McAuley looked uncomfortable and offered less going forward than say Stearman. Some poor passes as well and he didn't seem to understand the concept of stopping the cross. Agreed. However, Kelly is so in love with Paddy Mac that he'll never drop him. Macauley looked good at right back and he was better than Stears at goin forward, it offered us a bit of height down the flanks too. He won more headers on that left flank than Low, Hughes and Stears have won all season. You gotta love it when two fans watch the same match and have polar opposite opinions about a single player's performance - one reckoning he was below standard for that position, one reckoning him better than average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveyJ Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 You gotta love it when two fans watch the same match and have polar opposite opinions about a single player's performance - one reckoning he was below standard for that position, one reckoning him better than average. Well I'll go for less good than Stearman. I didn't think his distribution was greta and thought he looked uncomfortable going forward. Still played well, but other teams would rip him apart on his pace. I wish RK wouldn't put McCarthy back in as Macauley is a better CB and definitely a better header, which against a tema so useful in the air, like Fulham, is a stupid decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wils Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 I'd like to see Maybury given a proper run at right back which is easily his best position. McAuley/Kisnorbo in the middle. McCarthy on the bench. Seconded. Maybury isnt a bad player when he has a run of games under his belt and ive always said McAuley should start ahead of Paddy M in the centre,that would be our strongest pairing there IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonthefox Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 McAuley was the best right back we've had all season. Period. Stearman's not playing as well as he did last season, Maybury's good but was used well on the left (if i'm guessing that Johansson's injured, Maybs was playing cos Kenton was shite against Sunderland), and Kenton, although looking good at times, was b******s v Sunderland. As Henderson ALWAYS kicks to that side of the pitch, we needed someone that could win headers and therefore start attacks, as Josh Low couldn't win a header if his life depended on it. McAuley did. Good defensively, although not quick he read the game well. Cool, calm, collected on the ball, willing and able to go forward with the ball, helping Hughes (who's being surprisingly good on the right wing!) with overlaps. Even put in a coupla different crosses. Should definately play there from now on. We can't leave out Kisnorbo or McCarthy, and when (if?) Johansson comes back we'lll have a quality defence. Boom boom, shake the room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynny Posted 8 January 2007 Share Posted 8 January 2007 McAuley was the best right back we've had all season. Period. Stearman's not playing as well as he did last season, Maybury's good but was used well on the left (if i'm guessing that Johansson's injured, Maybs was playing cos Kenton was shite against Sunderland), and Kenton, although looking good at times, was b******s v Sunderland. As Henderson ALWAYS kicks to that side of the pitch, we needed someone that could win headers and therefore start attacks, as Josh Low couldn't win a header if his life depended on it. McAuley did. Good defensively, although not quick he read the game well. Cool, calm, collected on the ball, willing and able to go forward with the ball, helping Hughes (who's being surprisingly good on the right wing!) with overlaps. Even put in a coupla different crosses. Should definately play there from now on. We can't leave out Kisnorbo or McCarthy, and when (if?) Johansson comes back we'lll have a quality defence. Boom boom, shake the room. Exactly my thoughts. No-one else seems to have as much time on the clearance as McAuley. Classy guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.