Kilworthfox Posted 1 November 2008 Author Posted 1 November 2008 Having had the meanest defence in recent history until Kisnorbo's return we now want a defensive midfielder. Are you lot for real?What we need is an attacking midfielder and at present the only one we use is deployed primarily as a defender. And the only other one we've got appears to have become a non person. I disagree, 3 points from 12! we have never dominated in midfield. Our creative players are in and out of the game too much. We have no one who will put their foot in on a regular basis. Our central midfielders have yet to grab any game by the scruff of the neck and drive our side on to victory with their presence. Flim flam football will not make us champions
Thracian Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 I disagree, 3 points from 12! we have never dominated in midfield. Our creative players are in and out of the game too much. We have no one who will put their foot in on a regular basis. Our central midfielders have yet to grab any game by the scruff of the neck and drive our side on to victory with their presence.Flim flam football will not make us champions Manchester United have spent decades being fast to the ball and counter attacking at speed and in numbers. Chelsea seem to want to do the same. Getting your foot in only leads to bookings and being sent off. It doesn't even work. We won nothing at Leicester with Tiatto in the side. We never even threatened. Tough guy Weso didn't equate to a run of particularly good results either. Who's talking about being "flim flam"? There is nothing "flim flam" about being first to the ball and attacking in numbers. You should try it for 90 minutes. We're faltering because our tough-guy defenders aren't actually athletic enough or skilled enough to support our midfielders high enough up the field. We've become so cumbersome and pedestrian in defence it's pathetic. I said loud and clear that Hobbs was no full-back. Why the manager thought he might be is a mystery. In fact, not one of our recent back line is a genuine support player, though Tunchev has the skill, and I certainly don't mind if we change any of our midfielders as a means of proving it. The sooner we get back to having genuine wing-backs and central defenders who can pass the better.
Koke Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Even the best passing team in the country needs a tough bastard in the middle. You see how Arsenal always come unstuck against the Bolton's of this world. They get bullied to easily. Man Utd had Keane in their prime. Now they have Anderson and Hargreaves. Chelsea had Makalele. Now they have Jon Obi Mikel. And Liverpool got Mascherano. We don't need a Tiatto. We need a tough defensive midfielder who can pass the ball, but not afraid to get stuck in when needed.
colbo68 Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Manchester United have spent decades being fast to the ball and counter attacking at speed and in numbers. Chelsea seem to want to do the same. Getting your foot in only leads to bookings and being sent off. It doesn't even work. We won nothing at Leicester with Tiatto in the side. We never even threatened. Tough guy Weso didn't equate to a run of particularly good results either. Who's talking about being "flim flam"? There is nothing "flim flam" about being first to the ball and attacking in numbers. You should try it for 90 minutes. We're faltering because our tough-guy defenders aren't actually athletic enough or skilled enough to support our midfielders high enough up the field. We've become so cumbersome and pedestrian in defence it's pathetic. I said loud and clear that Hobbs was no full-back. Why the manager thought he might be is a mystery. In fact, not one of our recent back line is a genuine support player, though Tunchev has the skill, and I certainly don't mind if we change any of our midfielders as a means of proving it. The sooner we get back to having genuine wing-backs and central defenders who can pass the better. i dont think a side automatically needs a creative defender - look at Man Utd now - Rio and Vidic arent exactly players who bring the ball out from the back in an attacking fashion - they simply win it and lay it off to Cristiano, Scholes, Giggs etc to let them weave their magic. City, like any good side in my opinion, need a central midfield ball-winner (and if he is a tough captain all the better) and a creative one who can slide the ball in for the forwards, or make a defence splitting pass for the wingers. - we don't have either of sufficient quality at present, and havn't had for some time - I saw this to some extent in Clemence, at the start of last season, but injuries seem to have done for him
Thracian Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 i dont think a side automatically needs a creative defender - look at Man Utd now - Rio and Vidic arent exactly players who bring the ball out from the back in an attacking fashion - they simply win it and lay it off to Cristiano, Scholes, Giggs etc to let them weave their magic. City, like any good side in my opinion, need a central midfield ball-winner (and if he is a tough captain all the better) and a creative one who can slide the ball in for the forwards, or make a defence splitting pass for the wingers. - we don't have either of sufficient quality at present, and havn't had for some time - I saw this to some extent in Clemence, at the start of last season, but injuries seem to have done for him It would be blessings indeed to have centre-backs like Ferdinand and Vidic who are so capable of passing the ball and of getting forward in support - both are well capable of passing the ball accurately and Vidic is an inspirationfor his commitment in the opposing penalty area. Scholes is an attacking genius and it is a great pity King or Porter don't have this role in our side but defensively Scholes is a liability. His tackling is laughable. But if he was here the fans would ignore that cos he's an established internation who can score and make goals. Unfortunately Andy King, who is probably the central midfielder in our club at scoring and making goals, is also expected to be a tough-tackling, covering defender and well as atending to his box-to-box duties. And to do so with precious little help now Oakley is injured.
Thracian Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Even the best passing team in the country needs a tough bastard in the middle. You see how Arsenal always come unstuck against the Bolton's of this world. They get bullied to easily. Man Utd had Keane in their prime. Now they have Anderson and Hargreaves. Chelsea had Makalele. Now they have Jon Obi Mikel. And Liverpool got Mascherano. We don't need a Tiatto. We need a tough defensive midfielder who can pass the ball, but not afraid to get stuck in when needed. Manchester United have been successful without Keane for years. And Keane could play. He's remembered for being the vicious bastard he was but Keane was a footballer too. Besides we're not going to get the Keanes, Mascheranos and Makeleles. We get the Tiattos and Jarretts. So we mikghjt as well do what we are equipped to do which is pass the ball quickly and accurately instead of what we're not equipped to do. Besides, when you take ing out of our midfield that'll lee Oakley who doesn't score/shoot or create much and your rotweiler We've tried that sort of approach time and again and it's never worked.
Vo Rogue Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Manchester United have spent decades being fast to the ball and counter attacking at speed and in numbers. Chelsea seem to want to do the same. Getting your foot in only leads to bookings and being sent off. It doesn't even work. We won nothing at Leicester with Tiatto in the side. We never even threatened. Tough guy Weso didn't equate to a run of particularly good results either. Who's talking about being "flim flam"? There is nothing "flim flam" about being first to the ball and attacking in numbers. You should try it for 90 minutes. We're faltering because our tough-guy defenders aren't actually athletic enough or skilled enough to support our midfielders high enough up the field. We've become so cumbersome and pedestrian in defence it's pathetic. I said loud and clear that Hobbs was no full-back. Why the manager thought he might be is a mystery. In fact, not one of our recent back line is a genuine support player, though Tunchev has the skill, and I certainly don't mind if we change any of our midfielders as a means of proving it. The sooner we get back to having genuine wing-backs and central defenders who can pass the better. Your use of figures leaves much to be desired to support your claims. Weso in our Championship games had near enough the highest wins when starting %. When we were relegation fodder early 2007 and he was back for a short while before refracturing his leg due to being returned too soon I believe they then won 3 out of the 4 he played putting us in a muuch sounder position. Didnt he not help Cheltenham win more points than they lost while there as well as playing a more attacking role and scoring more goals than we seem to nowadays?
Flynny Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Oakley does more of this work than he gets credit when I've seen him, but not consistantly enough to free up King entirely and give us space.
MPH Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 who was that absolute bull dog of a danish Midfielder? Think he got jailed for picking a fight with a group of hells angels or somthing like that.... right ugly git he was too... absolute nutcase.. EDIT: Got my fights mixed up he was in... jailed for headbutting a cafe owner in copenhagen in 2003... think he might of retired now actually..
Jack Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 who was that absolute bull dog of a danish Midfielder? Think he got jailed for picking a fight with a group of hells angels or somthing like that.... right ugly git he was too... absolute nutcase.. Stig Tofting ? If you ment him anyway he is an assistant manager at some danish club now.
MPH Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Stig Tofting ?If you ment him anyway he is an assistant manager at some danish club now. yup. right nasty little git he was too...
Jonezy Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Stig Tofting ?If you ment him anyway he is an assistant manager at some danish club now. Im impressed.... Another Dane Thomas Gravesen is still without a job, but he would most likely ruin more than he would improve.
Dan Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Who is out there? We need some one to do a job for us as a defensive midfielder!I don't expect Gattuso will come rolling down Filbert Way any time soon but surely there is a mobile horrible geezer who likes to get stuck in and give the ball available for a loan deal? Any Ideas???? Ive been saying this all season Thats why we're struggling to win all these games, purely down to being outmuscled I dont think Patrick Vieiras good enough though so who u all thinking>
RowlattsFox Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 I'm not sure whether we need a defensive midfielder or a creative one, we could do with both to be honest. Oakley and King are similar, both inbetween roles.
Finnegan Posted 1 November 2008 Posted 1 November 2008 Agree with both Thracian and Kilworth, really. I think what Thracian's overlooking is that a strong, ball-winning defensive midfielder does create chances, just in a different way. How many attacks did Lennon's ball winning start under O'Neill? Thing is, Izzet was his foil - and right now we have neither, and nor have we had either for several seasons. Arguably, we haven't had a decent midfield since Izzet actually left. In Adams, Gradel and Dyer there's finally potential for widemen but we really lack a bit of quality creativity and grit in the middle of the park.
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 2 November 2008 Posted 2 November 2008 Not really a bulldog midfielder but I'd love Adam Rundle from Rochdale here.
Ric Flair Posted 3 November 2008 Posted 3 November 2008 Adam Bolder would be a decent loan signing to give us extra bute in midfield. Not a player i'd have ever wanted had we stayed in the Championship with aspirations of getting promoted to the Premeirship, but in League One he'd be solid and he's not getting a sniff at QPR, unless he's injured of course?
carterfox90 Posted 3 November 2008 Posted 3 November 2008 there must be some quality players in the prem that are not getting a game who would just like to be playing i know coming down to our level is asking a lot but some players just want play football they might come just for 1 or 2 months on loan
marbelladave Posted 3 November 2008 Posted 3 November 2008 Interesting series of posts. Last season we played a lot of games with defensive 'ball winning' midfielders in the side, Clemence, Weso and assorted defenders plus Oakley and what happened, we got relegated! So far this season King and Oakley have been the best pairing we have had for years, but clearly something is not right in this area, leading to the clamour for a 'ball' winner to sort things out and break up the opposition attacks. I think this is misguided, the problems that King and Oakley are having would not be solved by a change of personnel, any player would struggle with the workload we have placed on our center midfield at times this season. We have a back 4 that is reluctant to press forward and compress the game, even worse, they have a tendency (in recent games) to sit deep, thus expanding the space in midfield. Add to that playing with 2 men up and 2 men wide leaves literally acres of space in central areas that any midfield pairing would struggle to control. We do not need to change our players, just our way of playing!
Uncle Albert Posted 3 November 2008 Posted 3 November 2008 I'm sure there is some horrible Bulgarian bastard more than willing to come and play for us and be willing to break his own leg's for us. I think someone said Nick Montgomery? Class player and is someone who would fill this role well. But is such a midfield vital to us this season?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.