King and Wellens

[Scow]

One of the issues to emerge from yesterday's defeat to Millwall was the central pairing of King and Wellens. Unfortunately, while both players are talented in their own right, they simply can't function together in a 4-4-2. Both players combined lack the energy, pace and stamina needed to control games, particularly away from home. Millwall seemed to win the vast majority of second balls and they evidently displayed more bite and intensity in their play.

I think we badly miss Danns; he isn't as talented as King or Wellens but his contribution to the team is invaluable. This league is very average but tough. It doesn't matter how many talented players that we have in the side, if we can't function as a team - especially in the centre of the park - then we'll continue to fluctuate between the bad and good without making any progress.

[Happy Fox]

One of the issues to emerge from yesterday's defeat to Millwall was the central pairing of King and Wellens. Unfortunately, while both players are talented in their own right, they simply can't function together in a 4-4-2. Both players combined lack the energy, pace and stamina needed to control games, particularly away from home. Millwall seemed to win the vast majority of second balls and they evidently displayed more bite and intensity in their play.

I think we badly miss Danns; he isn't as talented as King or Wellens but his contribution to the team is invaluable. This league is very average but tough. It doesn't matter how many talented players that we have in the side, if we can't function as a team - especially in the centre of the park - then we'll continue to fluctuate between the bad and good without making any progress.

You have only began to notice now?

[Scow]

You have only began to notice now?

No, I've thought this for a while, but the game yesterday seemed to reinforce my view that we can't go into next season with these two in a 4-4-2. You can perhaps play them in a 3 man midfield with Danns, but they're too weak as a central pairing. We seemed to have some success with it under Pearson previously, but this was often in a 4-3-3 or with Oakley playing narrow on the right.

[Happy Fox]

No, I've thought this for a while, but the game yesterday seemed to reinforce my view that we can't go into next season with these two in a 4-4-2. You can perhaps play them in a 3 man midfield with Danns, but they're too weak as a central pairing. We seemed to have some success with it under Pearson previously, but this was often in a 4-3-3 or with Oakley playing narrow on the right.

Shows the manager's naivety he has done this decision making before in away games and we have unstuck too many times the problems will keep on recurring next season with Wellens, Dyer, Gallagher, Howard etc and we will be accustomed to another year of midtable mediocrity.

[Mark_w]

One of the issues to emerge from yesterday's defeat to Millwall was the central pairing of King and Wellens. Unfortunately, while both players are talented in their own right, they simply can't function together in a 4-4-2.

As proven by that season two years ago when they played CM together almost all year and we finished 5th...?

[Scow]

As proven by that season two years ago when they played CM together almost all year and we finished 5th...?

See my previous post. Wellens is two years older and his legs are going.

[Guest ttfn]

Marbella Dave will be all over this like a rash. Like a rash I tell you.

[Mark_w]

See my previous post. Wellens is two years older and his legs are going.

Or he's had one bad year because he hasn't been in great form, like almost all of our players.

[Scow]

Or he's had one bad year because he hasn't been in great form, like almost all of our players.

He's been frustratingly inconsistent from day one. If we want to progress next season then the ageing Wellens and King as a central pairing will simply not cut it.

[Mark_w]

He's been frustratingly inconsistent from day one. If we want to progress next season then the ageing Wellens and King as a central pairing will simply not cut it.

I'm not saying we should be starting with them, but you said they can't function together in a 4-4-2 and that's rubbish. As a team we've been frustratingly inconsistent, must just be Wellens' fault.

[Babylon]

He's been frustratingly inconsistent from day one. If we want to progress next season then the ageing Wellens and King as a central pairing will simply not cut it.

If Danns had been fit or if Drinkwater had been any good the previous two games, they wouldn't have been in the middle together yesterday.

[Scow]

I'm not saying we should be starting with them, but you said they can't function together in a 4-4-2 and that's rubbish. As a team we've been frustratingly inconsistent, must just be Wellens' fault.

How is that 'rubbish'? Two years ago we were a team with momentum and organisation and the former carried us a long way. Presently, and going forward, I don't think they can function together effectively and consistently as a pairing. Unlike a good number of posters on this forum, I'm not solely blaming Wellens either.

[Scow]

If Danns had been fit or if Drinkwater had been any good the previous two games, they wouldn't have been in the middle together yesterday.

I think you're probably right.

[davieG]

As proven by that season two years ago when they played CM together almost all year and we finished 5th...?

They had Oakley in there with them for most of that season playing as a very narrow RW. The skills they possess do not compliment each other, ones a pass and move player the other's a put your foot on the ball slow the game down player two contrasting approaches to the game.

[Mark_w]

They had Oakley in there with them for most of that season playing as a very narrow RW.

It was a 4-4-2, they where the two central midfielders, we finished 5th, they can function together in a 4-4-2.

[Scow]

They had Oakley in there with them for most of that season playing as a very narrow RW.

Yep, the point that was conveniently ignored in my second post.

[davieG]

It was a 4-4-2, they where the two central midfielders, we finished 5th, they can function together in a 4-4-2.

It may have been presented as that but Oakley isn't, never was and never played in a wide role he always supplemented King and Wellens in the middle of the pitch that's why it worked..

[Iwan is a Welshman]

Largely agree with what you say - aside from this 4-3-3 myth (we have only played 4-3-3 under Sven.)

King and Wellens were a fantastic midfield pairing for 2 seasons under Nige's first tenure but failing to recreate that this year has cost us. I do think it's because Wellens has lost his legs and is a different player now. With Danns and Drinkwater we have four good centre mids we just need to find a way to get them to work. Or, failing that, get a ball winner in.

Our lack of bite in the middle of the park has cost us greatly.

[accessory]

It was a 4-4-2, they where the two central midfielders, we finished 5th, they can function together in a 4-4-2.

That was then, this is now. Wellens is older and slower. King has regressed and is no longer reliable.

[Mark_w]

It may have been presented as that but Oakley isn't, never was and never played in a wide role he always supplemented King and Wellens in the middle of the pitch that's why it worked..

But it was a 4-4-2, just because Oakley didn't do the role of a normal right midfielder doesn't mean it wasn't, so it's unfair to say they can't function together in a 4-4-2.

[RyanB89]

It was a 4-4-2, they where the two central midfielders, we finished 5th, they can function together in a 4-4-2.

No, it wasnt, as had been sed it was a 433

Imo, though wellens isnt good enough, he should be on the bench at best next season.

[davieG]

But it was a 4-4-2, just because Oakley didn't do the role of a normal right midfielder doesn't mean it wasn't, so it's unfair to say they can't function together in a 4-4-2.

Well if Oakley wasn't playing wide it wasn't a 442, just because the print it as a 442 doesn't make it a 442.

[Mark_w]

No, it wasnt, as had been sed it was a 433

We some times played a 4-3-3 that season, but largely it was 4-4-2. Lloyd Dyer, Matt Oakley, Richie Wellens and Andy King all played in midfield, Howard and Fryatt both played up front, 4-4-2.

[Scow]

Largely agree with what you say - aside from this 4-3-3 myth (we have only played 4-3-3 under Sven.)

King and Wellens were a fantastic midfield pairing for 2 seasons under Nige's first tenure but failing to recreate that this year has cost us. I do think it's because Wellens has lost his legs and is a different player now. With Danns and Drinkwater we have four good centre mids we just need to find a way to get them to work. Or, failing that, get a ball winner in.

Our lack of bite in the middle of the park has cost us greatly.

We did actually employ the 4-3-3/4-5-1 (whatever you want to call it) in the second half of the 2009/10 season. Dyer/Gallagher/Waghorn were often the front three. Fryatt played as a lone striker away at Blackpool and at home to Donny (until his jaw was broken) then played Waghorn up there (think Forest home, Cov home etc).

[reynard]

I'm afraid to say that neither of them is good enough. If we are serious about wanting promotion then both have to go or at best be used as squad players.

Wellens has been a good pro but his best days are behind him. He's a bit of a flat track bully these days. By which I mean playing against a side which sits off him and gives him time and space he can cause a lot of problems. But when sides close him down he no longer has the pace in his legs to get away from them. Quite often he slows play down too much and some of his attempted quick passes just give back possession to the opposition.

King simply isn't quite good enough for me. He's too slow and 9 ties out of ten his first move is either backwards or sideways. He also seems to be consistently out muscled in a 50:50 situation. I know people quote the quiet work he does but for me he disappears in games for too long. Even his goals scoring threat seems less than it once was.