A proper defensive midfielder

[kingfox]

I think you've made your point mate..

So have I...

Leave it....

I was enjoying this debate Col, because I have strong views on this.

Im sorry but this time I might not be able to leave it

[marbelladave]

I done enjoy reading your posts. You calmly put your views over without glibness.

However, over all the years I've seen football being played, whether by City or whoever, the usual key to success IMO is control.

Control of the football, self-control with discipline, tactical control and generally control of a game.

Against Charlton on Tuesday night, it appears to me that we had little control of the football match.

Attacking football is all well and good, but if it leaves you exposed to a 'sucker punch' such that you concede before you score, the control is gone. It looks like we were playing too far forward, left space in front of the back four, which was then taken advantage of.

One nil down and then all control went until half-time. The second goal came.

The second half, as I said on the night, I knew we would come out and attack. We had too, we were two nil down. And we attacked well. But again, any control we had over the game was lost and they could have as easily gone three-one up as we could have equalised.

The best teams sort themselves out defensively. I'm not saying, of course, that Leicester are a Man City or a Barcelona. But such teams win the ball back, whether employing a DM or not, keep it and control a game. Then, when they attack, it's on their terms.

I think that we were defensively naive against Charlton, as a team. This then forced us to go all guns blazing in the second half, whether we wanted to or not.

I want us to do well, yes it's only two games, but I don't want to see us play away from home this season like we did last. Instead I want to see us defending better as a unit, winning more ball and retaining possession better. Get these fundamentals right and then our attacking prowess can make the impact it needs to, when we want it to.

Does this need a defensive midfielder in the purest sense? Ok maybe not... I'll go with the majority. But it definitely needs more defensive discipline from all the players than was on show, or so it would appear, against Charlton.

If we don't defend better collectively, we will be having these discussions about 'who is our best defence' again this season, exactly like we did last.

Col.... For once this is right on the money.......

I have been trying to describe what I saw on Tuesday that left me so underwhelmed compared to many posters on here. I have used words like 'loose' and 'sloppy' about our play when trying to describe how we operated as a team. I thought that many individuals played pretty well but the effect as a team was I thought much less than the individual parts.

Your post is as close as anything I have written or read to what I saw and thought on the night.

As you said, we never really really had control over any aspect of the game, even when we were getting after Charlton and going for the equaliser, there was always the feeling that Charlton could get hold of the ball and turn the game around in a moment.

[kingfox]

We didn't struggle to win the ball, they barely came into our half with it and when they did just gave it away. They had possession because we didn't press them high enough up the pitch and could keep possession up top when we received it. "On the run around" I'm sorry but it just wasn't like that, we sat there with two banks of four most of the first half and let them **** about in front of us. How many times did they actually get through us?

So you agree we were the dominant midfield for 65 minutes of the game... away from home?

Yes we did struggle to win the ball, even when Drinkwater and James got stuck in and managed to win it Peterborough only got it back again, I did say they didn't get anywhere in the final third, but they passed the ball around a lot, they did have us on the run around, Drinkwater and James had to do a lot of pressing in the first half, we don't want to see teams passing around against us especially at home, it was very frustrating to watch in that first half and many others will probably agree with me on that score. We didn't get hold of the ball enough times than we should of in the first half, but the second half was much better as we went onto win the game, because the midfield managed to keep the ball and win it better and create chances, something we didn't do in the first half.

I didn't go Charlton, but loads of people have said that we dominated for about 20 minutes of the first half, that is only 20 mins and James getting subbed showed that we struggled in midfield in the first half. Second half we brought on King and we looked much better, course we didn't dominate the whole of the second half but going by the last 20 mins or so we should have really levelled the game and maybe even gone onto win it with the chances we had.

If King is back to form we need to start him instead of James, because like I have said before to get top 6 you need goals from midfield, and King has been doing that so far scoring two in two. It's the defensive side though, I still have my doubts on Drinkwater, I think he is far too inconsistent and isn't strong enough, I would be happy to see him play in a three man midfield with a defensive midfielder sitting behind Drinkwater with Danns or King alongside. Drinkwater isn't good enough to do the defensive side of things the kid is only 22 and only 5ft8, he lacks experience and height and strength presence.

[Babylon]

Col.... For once this is right on the money.......

I have been trying to describe what I saw on Tuesday that left me so underwhelmed compared to many posters on here. I have used words like 'loose' and 'sloppy' about our play when trying to describe how we operated as a team. I thought that many individuals played pretty well but the effect as a team was I thought much less than the individual parts.

Your post is as close as anything I have written or read to what I saw and thought on the night.

As you said, we never really really had control over any aspect of the game, even when we were getting after Charlton and going for the equaliser, there was always the feeling that Charlton could get hold of the ball and turn the game around in a moment.

Nice to see you agree with someone who listened on the radio compared to what seems like the huge majority who went that have commented.

[Col city fan]

Nice to see you agree with someone who listened on the radio compared to what seems like the huge majority who went that have commented.

You just can't help yourself can ya!

[onecapwonder]

If King is back to form we need to start him instead of James, because like I have said before to get top 6 you need goals from midfield, and King has been doing that so far scoring two in two. It's the defensive side though, I still have my doubts on Drinkwater, I think he is far too inconsistent and isn't strong enough, I would be happy to see him play in a three man midfield with a defensive midfielder sitting behind Drinkwater with Danns or King alongside. Drinkwater isn't good enough to do the defensive side of things the kid is only 22 and only 5ft8, he lacks experience and height and strength presence.

This is pretty much my opinion. I can't see any combination of two of our current midfielders that would provide both the defensive presence, energy, passing range and creativity/goals that we need, you can think of combinations that would provide some of those but not all (though I don't think any of the players are defensively/physically strong enough). I think Danns would have to be playing to make a pair work, he has the energy, agression and the most strength to form the deeper of two midfielders, the problem is he didn't seem technically good enough last season. A three of Danns, Drinkwater/James and King should offer control and allow King to play as the furthest forward, which could be useful system away with some pace on the wings. At home Danns, King and Marshall could offer a lot of imagination and goal threat from midfield but would be weaker defensively. The problem is we just have too many strikers for Pearson to play 3 in midfield without upsetting one of our miss firing star strikers and killing off opportunities for the lesser lights, Fuctas and Schlupp, to ever get games.

[Babylon]

Well KF I'll have to disagree with how you saw the boro first half. And by what most have said we were dominant for most of the second half.

[fleckneymike]

Nice to see you agree with someone who listened on the radio compared to what seems like the huge majority who went that have commented.

All we need now is someone who watched the match on teletext to pass comment and this thread will have had it all.

[Babylon]

All we need now is someone who watched the match on teletext to pass comment and this thread will have had it all.

Well it depends on what the comments are, no prob with Col commenting. Just found it funny he was the only one MD agreed with.

[wolfgang amadeus]

You don't necessarily need an out and out defensive midfielder of the Makelele/Lennon/Mascherano ilk to be successful. Someone who can cover a fair amount of ground and is willing to put their foot in and look for a simple pass out wide is fine. Man Utd have played without a holding midfielder since Fletcher went and Arteta played deepest for Arsenal last year on many occasions. Not seen much of James but Drinkwater seems to have grown into the league a little bit and doesn't mind putting his foot in, someone called him a poor man's Michael Carrick who I honestly believe is one of the most underrated players United have had for years. Would happily have the cheap knock-off version of him rather than a poor man's Lee Cattermole which is what people seem to want.

Think we'll be fine with the midfield we've got, James and Drinkwater seem to be earning their keep, King on form is easily good enough for this division as with Danns and Wellens isn't a bad 5th choice midfielder.

[marbelladave]

Nice to see you agree with someone who listened on the radio compared to what seems like the huge majority who went that have commented.

Doesn't alter the fact that it was as good a summary of what I saw that I have seen.

And I did go......

[kingfox]

Well KF I'll have to disagree with how you saw the boro first half. And by what most have said we were dominant for most of the second half.

I just thought they passed it around more, they didn't get anywhere Babylon but they had more of it than we did in the first half, it was frustrating to watch, we had to press many of times. Like I said as the score shows proof, we did much better in the second half, because we got the ball and kept it better and managed to create chances because James, King and Drinkwater managed to keep the ball, win it and pass it.

[Col city fan]

Doesn't alter the fact that it was as good a summary of what I saw that I have seen.

And I did go......

Don't forget Dave that Babs, IMO, appears to jump on most people that suggest something which, in his mind anyway, can be construed as 'criticising' the club or the current manager.

Heaven forbid that anyone may want to post something which they believe might be a bit of a problem with how we are playing or indeed, how we may continue playing. Judas!! We hear... Judas!!

[fleckneymike]

Don't forget Dave that Babs, IMO, appears to jump on most people that suggest something which, in his mind anyway, can be construed as 'criticising' the club or the current manager.

Heaven forbid that anyone may want to post something which they believe might be a bit of a problem with how we are playing or indeed, how we may continue playing. Judas!! We hear... Judas!!

I don't wish to appear too antagonistic but this from the man who accused others of calling Pearson clueless because they expressed the opinion that King should start.

For the umpteenth time. It was an enjoyable match, we played some nice stuff, two lapses cost us, no need to panic, carry on as we are and we'll have a jolly good time watching us (and this from a man who has never really enjoyed watching a Pearson side).

[kingfox]

This is pretty much my opinion. I can't see any combination of two of our current midfielders that would provide both the defensive presence, energy, passing range and creativity/goals that we need, you can think of combinations that would provide some of those but not all (though I don't think any of the players are defensively/physically strong enough). I think Danns would have to be playing to make a pair work, he has the energy, agression and the most strength to form the deeper of two midfielders, the problem is he didn't seem technically good enough last season. A three of Danns, Drinkwater/James and King should offer control and allow King to play as the furthest forward, which could be useful system away with some pace on the wings. At home Danns, King and Marshall could offer a lot of imagination and goal threat from midfield but would be weaker defensively. The problem is we just have too many strikers for Pearson to play 3 in midfield without upsetting one of our miss firing star strikers and killing off opportunities for the lesser lights, Fuctas and Schlupp, to ever get games.

Nice to see someone agrees

The second sentance I entirely agree on no partnership will provide us with defensive, energy, passing and creativity.

We had the defensive side in Wellens in our play-off season, who had the defensive and passing skills, while King had the energy and had the goals.

Neil Danns has energy and is an all round midfielder in all fairness, but he isn't the best of players and fails to get the ball and control things, he usually gives it away too often. A three of Danns, Drinkwater and King may work, but still on the defensive side of things as last season proved, they are far too weak and struggle to keep hold of the ball for great periods of time. But you make a good put of strikers getting frustrated, we will have to leave a winger out aswell maybe probably Dyer/Knockaert and play Marshall-Beckford/Nugent-Vardy in a three. Futacs is our plan B option I think if we face physical defences, while Schlupp will be in and out this season or be loaned out completely, while Waghorn should be sold because he is shit.

Seven subs now though and not five, so we could have Dyer/Knockaert, Futacs and Beckford/Nugent on the bench with a midfielder and defender.

[Col city fan]

I don't wish to appear too antagonistic but this from the man who accused others of calling Pearson clueless because they expressed the opinion that King should start.

For the umpteenth time. It was an enjoyable match, we played some nice stuff, two lapses cost us, no need to panic, carry on as we are and we'll have a jolly good time watching us (and this from a man who has never really enjoyed watching a Pearson side).

Absolutely not!

Read the posts back...

I never called Pearson clueless at all or those who wanted King to start. I was asking those people who wanted King to start whether they were implying that Pearson was clueless because if King was that good, why wasn't he starting him? If you wish to be antagonistic Mike please don't suggest I said something I didn't.

For the final time on my part too. I want us to strengthen our defensive game and wonder whether a stronger defensive midfielder may help.

Some agree some don't.

Tis a football forum and a democracy.

[marbelladave]

Well it depends on what the comments are, no prob with Col commenting. Just found it funny he was the only one MD agreed with.

Glad to see your mind reading skills are so far off the mark, otherwise you would be really scary!

I made my views clear from the start, well the morning after I suppose, but had largely given up posting on this thread as pointless.

I felt Col's description of our performance as 'lacking in any control' was actually very perceptive and improved on the explanations I gave when trying to explain my views which clearly went against the mainstream and were therefore, naturally, wrong.....

Whether his views were formed from listening to the radio or examining the entrails of a goat is irrelevant, they simply explained some of the things I was trying to say rather better tham I managed myself......

[fleckneymike]

Absolutely not!

Read the posts back...

I never called Pearson clueless at all or those who wanted King to start. I was asking those people who wanted King to start whether they were implying that Pearson was clueless because if King was that good, why wasn't he starting him? If you wish to be antagonistic Mike please don't suggest I said something I didn't.

For the final time on my part too. I want us to strengthen our defensive game and wonder whether a stronger defensive midfielder may help.

Some agree some don't.

Tis a football forum and a democracy.

I can only apologise for misinterpreting your post but I do wish that you could eschew obfuscation in future.

[marbelladave]

I can only apologise for misinterpreting your post but I do wish that you could eschew obfuscation in future.

Wouldn't it be better if he just says what he means?.......

[kingfox]

eschew obfuscation

Quality use of words

[Col city fan]

I can only apologise for misinterpreting your post but I do wish that you could eschew obfuscation in future.

Whatever!!

[Babylon]

Doesn't alter the fact that it was as good a summary of what I saw that I have seen.

And I did go......

I know but we all know what you're like

[onecapwonder]

We had the defensive side in Wellens in our play-off season, who had the defensive and passing skills, while King had the energy and had the goals.

Neil Danns has energy and is an all round midfielder in all fairness, but he isn't the best of players and fails to get the ball and control things, he usually gives it away too often. A three of Danns, Drinkwater and King may work, but still on the defensive side of things as last season proved, they are far too weak and struggle to keep hold of the ball for great periods of time. But you make a good put of strikers getting frustrated, we will have to leave a winger out aswell maybe probably Dyer/Knockaert and play Marshall-Beckford/Nugent-Vardy in a three. Futacs is our plan B option I think if we face physical defences, while Schlupp will be in and out this season or be loaned out completely, while Waghorn should be sold because he is shit.

Seven subs now though and not five, so we could have Dyer/Knockaert, Futacs and Beckford/Nugent on the bench with a midfielder and defender.

I don't really know about our play off season, the quality of that side is well below what we can put out now or last year. I think it may have just been a "star align" season with success coming mainly from something we can't recreate again by swapping systems, buying players or playing more "x" instead of "y". I could be wrong but I can't really work out how we managed to only concede 45 goals with Hobbs and Brown at CB. The majority of the league is getting stronger, that year Newcastle and WBA bossed it and won with ease, last year Southampton and Reading were very dominat as well but ended up much closer to the play off chasers.

As for a front three, I'd be tempted to play Nugent centrally, then have Marshall on the left and Knockeat on the right. Knockeat playing as much as possible as a winger, and have Marshall looking to cut inside onto his right and shoot. The other option would be Vardy on the left and Marshall right, in which case if Vardy could make the excellent runs Dyer does but actually score he'd be a 15+ goals a season wide forward with ease.

[Babylon]

Don't forget Dave that Babs, IMO, appears to jump on most people that suggest something which, in his mind anyway, can be construed as 'criticising' the club or the current manager.

Heaven forbid that anyone may want to post something which they believe might be a bit of a problem with how we are playing or indeed, how we may continue playing. Judas!! We hear... Judas!!

Bullshit!!!! Let's look back at what I've said about your DM. I've said I don't think a specialist is needed if you have the right players in other parts of the team and two Cm's who can put a tackle in if needed.

Secondly I have said that it's a bit too early to be banging on as though it's our one and only problem. So far in my mind we were very comfortable against Boro and according to those who went (except MD) we dominated a newly promoted club (always tricky) for 65 minutes away from home.

I have never denied it was a problem last year, in fact only agreed it was. But this year we have changed all areas of the team, and it's quite possible that those changes may alter what went before with us losing a battle.

My main gripe is that yourself and kingfox said it was a problem before the season and have seemingly given it two games to decide that it's still a problem. Focusing on an average first half against posh (which I don't believe had anything to do with not having a DM) and a bad 25 minutes in an away game.

To me it looks as though you are both looking for things to prove your point. Micro Analysing a goal and bad patches here and there whilst not making as much comment on the good like 65 minutes of being on top or a good 45 against posh.

Our real bad games last year like Millwall, Bristol, reading etc we were bossed for the majority of the game. So far we haven't been. The last result might not have been what we wanted, but the chances were there for it to be very different.

Maybe the problem will still be there, maybe it won't. I just find you banging on about it after seeing only one game exceptionally frustrating.

I will moan about what I think needs moaning about and will give people a proper chance before doing so.

If arguing that two games isn't enough to know how good Vardy, or our new team is, or sticking up for someone against rumours of them falling out with players left right and centre has me down as a Pearson bummer them that's fine. But I actually believe that's the right stance.

[Col city fan]

Bullshit!!!! Let's look back at what I've said about your DM. I've said I don't think a specialist is needed if you have the right players in other parts of the team and two Cm's who can put a tackle in if needed.

Secondly I have said that it's a bit too early to be banging on as though it's our one and only problem. So far in my mind we were very comfortable against Boro and according to those who went (except MD) we dominated a newly promoted club (always tricky) for 65 minutes away from home.

I have never denied it was a problem last year, in fact only agreed it was. But this year we have changed all areas of the team, and it's quite possible that those changes may alter what went before with us losing a battle.

My main gripe is that yourself and kingfox said it was a problem before the season and have seemingly given it two games to decide that it's still a problem. Focusing on an average first half against posh (which I don't believe had anything to do with not having a DM) and a bad 25 minutes in an away game.

To me it looks as though you are both looking for things to prove your point. Micro Analysing a goal and bad patches here and there whilst not making as much comment on the good like 65 minutes of being on top or a good 45 against posh.

Our real bad games last year like Millwall, Bristol, reading etc we were bossed for the majority of the game. So far we haven't been. The last result might not have been what we wanted, but the chances were there for it to be very different.

Maybe the problem will still be there, maybe it won't. I just find you banging on about it after seeing only one game exceptionally frustrating.

I will moan about what I think needs moaning about and will give people a proper chance before doing so.

If arguing that two games isn't enough to know how good Vardy, or our new team is, or sticking up for someone against rumours of them falling out with players left right and centre has me down as a Pearson bummer them that's fine. But I actually believe that's the right stance.

You've been like this for ages mate IMO. Not just after two games this season. You were pretty much the same with Sven too. I commend you for it to be fair. You simply appear reticent to discuss a manager, tactics etc whilst they are incumbent, if such a discussion is verging on the perceived 'negative'. I may be wrong Babs, it's simply my perception.

However, I'd just rather you didn't try to thrust such loyalty in the face of myself. I'm loyal to Pearson too and first and foremost a City fan. But that doesn't mean I won't discuss my concerns over a problem which was very apparent last season becoming one too again this season if we aren't careful. I want us to succeed.

Note this down..... I hope we go on to stuff Blackburn via a beautiful attacking display and then continue to control many games against our opponents. That way it may well be I've been talking out my arse. I won't care at all... I'm happy to be proven wrong.