A proper defensive midfielder

[marty78]

But they didn't see more of the ball.

When our players didn't see much of the ball against posh it was down to not having a DM you said . Now we did have the ball, did well and stopped their two cm's from playing its down to their players not having the ball and not us.

All week people have banged on about how our 4 in midfield would get bossed by them. Today we bossed them and cut through them time after time.

Agreed, people have talked of a need to control the game, which for large spells we did. A DM wouldn't have stopped Konchesky an De Laet making errors and, although we should work on things that need to be better, we generally looked a team with some purpose and cohesion, which is a step forward from the past two seasons.

[Col city fan]

The first goal was more down to an error from Konch. The second resulted after a ricochet from a midfielder getting a block in which Pederson then beat our RB and slotted the ball home. Surely a defensive midfielder would have done the same as Danns or are you suggesting the ball would have fallen for us after the block and not Blackburn? Confused...

The first goal was from 20 yards out I believe?

The second goal was down to Danns putting in a miss tackle when he had been on the pitch for what 3/4 mins?

What I'm suggesting is a defensive minded midfielder that plays just off the back four, to support them such that they aren't effectively the only line of defence. A player that has been trained in this position, that sticks to this position and gives the defence the reassurance that they have another body mooching around in front of them to stop attacks building up. We have a pretty solid back four IMO. It's of no coincidence to me that defensive mistakes are all too common, exactly like they were last season, when they are not sufficiently supported by a midfield which is too advanced. Yes, King and Drinky may well have controlled the midfield from the centre of the park. But we still conceded two goals. I'd like to see more control from a deeper position, just outside our own area, when playing away from home.

[Col city fan]

If you try I'm sure you can try and blame every goal on not having a DM.

I'm sure he'd have been stood right next to Konchesky to clear up just in case he fooked up... Or stood next to RDL in the box to save him getting turned.

If Blackburns wonderful midfield with a DM (the ones you lot said would dominate us) can't handle our weak shambles I fear for them more than us.

They still won the game. Missed chances on our part AND defensive frailty was the reason.

[marty78]

Every goal that is scored/conceded could be dealt with better if you analyse it enough and as has been said Blackburn had a DM and yet conceded more goal scoring chances than we did.

[kingfox]

If you try I'm sure you can try and blame every goal on not having a DM.

I'm sure he'd have been stood right next to Konchesky to clear up just in case he fooked up... Or stood next to RDL in the box to save him getting turned.

If Blackburns wonderful midfield with a DM (the ones you lot said would dominate us) can't handle our weak shambles I fear for them more than us.

Look I admit I thought Blackburn would dominate us today, I was wrong. I know they didn't, but if they had more of the ball they would of simply of exploited us more.

We are obviously missing something to get us over the winning line, where the goals came from, a defensive midfielder covers that area of the field, if we had one they might of been in that area or they might of not, but a defensive midfielder covers that area and that's where we were weak today. More up the field we were excellent, King and Drinkwater were bossing in and around the centre circle and further up the pitch, but you need that defensive midfielder in and around the 18 yard box to mop up balls and mop up opposition attacks, we simply didn't have that today.

If Blackburn headed the ball out of the area on a defensive sense we had nobody coming forward to get the ball because Drinkwater and co were too deep, if we had a defensive midfielder Drinkwater could stand forward more while the defensive midfielder along with probably Konchesky could of sat back. While on an attacking sense, when we cleared the ball, Blackburn would get on the end of it again and pass it out wide, and get that extra cross in, which didn't lead to goals because Morgan headed clear, but they could of well lead to a goal. While if you had a defensive midfielder the defence could pass it out or head it out then the defensive midfielder would be able to pick it up, but we didn't have that today because Drinkwater and King were far too up the field, then Blackburn get the ball again and had the opportunity to create another chance or get in another cross.

In my opinion we are missing something, and that is a defensive midfielder, if we had a three man midfield I believed we would of won today and would be able to cut out both the goals they scored.

[Col city fan]

Agreed, people have talked of a need to control the game, which for large spells we did. A DM wouldn't have stopped Konchesky an De Laet making errors and, although we should work on things that need to be better, we generally looked a team with some purpose and cohesion, which is a step forward from the past two seasons.

The general consensus is that Konch and DeLaet are good, solid defenders. DeLaet was made MOTM by some in the last game I believe. Why then, should they suddenly look shaky today?

I propose that it COULD be due to lack of support from the rest of the team as a defensive unit. The 'last defender' will be more liable to making errors if they don't feel supported by those in front of them.

This is a theory I have. I simply can't believe that Bamba, Morgan, SSL, Konch, Peltier, DeLaet are all 'bad defenders'.. But those that remain continue to make errors this season like they did last.

It could be we don't defend sufficiently well enough as a team when away from home. The stats completely back this up and suggest that something is wrong DEFENSIVELY with our formation when playing away from home

[Babylon]

Blackburn had a DM and we got through them all the time didn't we?

[fleckneymike]

This is a thread conducted by clairvoyance.

[Babylon]

So not having a DM makes Konch panic and **** up. Good lord.

[indierich06]

As stated, Etuhu was their DM and our midfield went past him like he wasn't there.

[Col city fan]

Then answer me this...

Pearson has continued to mostly play a flat 4-4-2 both at home and away since he has been back at the club.

Why then, despite frequent changes to defensive personnel (Mills, SSL, Bamba, Morgan, Moore, Peltier, Konch, DeLaet) did we last season, and continue to this season, ship far too many goals away from home?

Our performances at home last season (and I believe this season) will be promotion form. However, away, it is a completely different matter. Rather than just knocking what I think may the problem when playing away, don't you suggest another theory as to what the problem is.

Are you going to continue to lay the blame for all the defensive errors at the feet of so many different defenders, or perhaps accept that Pearson has something fundamentally wrong in this respect?

If anyone can suggest a better reason for conceding the number of goals we do when away from home then fine. I'm always happy to listen.

If you can't then get your fingers out of Pearsons arris and consider that a different tactical formation may be needed when not at home. The stats, both for last season and, thus far for this, indicate a problem.

To be honest, a DM is only one way we could go. There are other options. What is clear is that we concede too readily when away from home. I'm all ears...

[kingfox]

As stated, Etuhu was their DM and our midfield went past him like he wasn't there.

But that is on an attacking sense, on a more defensive sense we were weaker especially around that 18 yard box, where a defensive midfielder would sit.

[indierich06]

But that is on an attacking sense, on a more defensive sense we were weaker especially around that 18 yard box, where a defensive midfielder would sit.

They had 2 shots on target all game. Granted, they scored both of them, but how were we weaker defensively? Again, they didn't get a sniff for 90 minutes. Two individual errors let us down and they were clinical - which is what we need to be. But to say that we were poor defensively is simply wrong - we stopped them from creating anything.

[kingfox]

They had 2 shots on target all game. Granted, they scored both of them, but how were we weaker defensively? Again, they didn't get a sniff for 90 minutes. Two individual errors let us down and they were clinical - which is what we need to be. But to say that we were poor defensively is simply wrong - we stopped them from creating anything.

I just seen the goals, as they have come up on the Watford game on Sky Sports, and I have to agree with Col.

First goal especially a defensive midfielder would be in that area where the goal was conceded, exactly in the area where Gomes shooted from.

Second goal, a defensive midfielder would be in and around where Danns attempted the tackle, yet again a defensive midfielder in that moment could of done a lot better than Danns. While De Laet who I thought played well, was costly for the goal he cost us Kermorgant's goal against Charlton for mistiming his jump, and today he missed his kick then for some reason backed about 5 yards off, to me that is very poor defending.

[Col city fan]

I'm still all ears...

[tylesta]

I just seen the goals, as they have come up on the Watford game on Sky Sports, and I have to agree with Col.

First goal especially a defensive midfielder would be in that area where the goal was conceded, exactly in the area where Gomes shooted from.

Second goal, a defensive midfielder would be in and around where Danns attempted the tackle, yet again a defensive midfielder in that moment could of done a lot better than Danns. While De Laet who I thought played well, was costly for the goal he cost us Kermorgant's goal against Charlton for mistiming his jump, and today he missed his kick then for some reason backed about 5 yards off, to me that is very poor defending.

how can you say EXACTLY were gomes shot from?

[tylesta]

what formation do we play with he defensive midfielder then col, if i remember rightly sven used to use a defencsive midfielder and that didn't work if yo tgou have some one sitting in the hole in front of the back 4 you either have to take a winger out of the game or a striker to play the formation, defo cannot take a striker out as we struggle up front with 2 strikers let alone 1.

[Col city fan]

what formation do we play with he defensive midfielder then col, if i remember rightly sven used to use a defencsive midfielder and that didn't work if yo tgou have some one sitting in the hole in front of the back 4 you either have to take a winger out of the game or a striker to play the formation, defo cannot take a striker out as we struggle up front with 2 strikers let alone 1.

Look up...

I'm not specifically advocating a DM.

What I am advocating is a better defensively organised team.

A DM may help this and for this I'd sacrifice one of the strikers.

But no one has answered my question set above..

[marty78]

Then answer me this...

Pearson has continued to mostly play a flat 4-4-2 both at home and away since he has been back at the club.

Why then, despite frequent changes to defensive personnel (Mills, SSL, Bamba, Morgan, Moore, Peltier, Konch, DeLaet) did we last season, and continue to this season, ship far too many goals away from home?

Our performances at home last season (and I believe this season) will be promotion form. However, away, it is a completely different matter. Rather than just knocking what I think may the problem when playing away, don't you suggest another theory as to what the problem is.

Are you going to continue to lay the blame for all the defensive errors at the feet of so many different defenders, or perhaps accept that Pearson has something fundamentally wrong in this respect?

If anyone can suggest a better reason for conceding the number of goals we do when away from home then fine. I'm always happy to listen.

If you can't then get your fingers out of Pearsons arris and consider that a different tactical formation may be needed when not at home. The stats, both for last season and, thus far for this, indicate a problem.

To be honest, a DM is only one way we could go. There are other options. What is clear is that we concede too readily when away from home. I'm all ears...

Last season I am not interested in discussing as we have signed a number of new players and our general performances, with a few exceptions, were poor last year and not comparable with what I have seen so far this season. It is early days though, as hard as that is to believe by reading the emotionally unstable posters on here.

So far this season we have played 3 matches, winning one and losing two, despite being arguably the better side in the two defeats. We have a youngster who has been thrust into the side, a new right back and even Captain Morgan has only been here since January. I think a bit of patience before we say there is a major flaw is not unreasonable and I am prepared to wait, at least for now, to see where this takes us.

The reason I, and perhaps others, didn't want to answer your question is because it is being asked too early and is too reactionary considering our performances. I think you are over analysing things to try and fit your argument, even if not intentionally. Continuing to try and explain what you are saying in ever more detail will get you nowhere, at least with me, as I understand what you are saying and it has some merit but I have no interest in having in depth discussions about tactics after two defeats, away from home, that I have not even attended and in which we apparently played quite well.

We actually looked like a team today (stream) and I hope Pearson has the courage and conviction to keep trying to be positive and to be the team that looks to take the initiative in matches, both at home and away.

Finally, the discussion becomes pointless once most have given their view as not one of us can change what the team will be and how it plays regardless of how strongly we believe something. At a certain point it comes across like a drum with a monotonous beat rather than a subject of interesting discussion.

[Col city fan]

Last season I am not interested in discussing as we have signed a number of new players and our general performances, with a few exceptions, were poor last year and not comparable with what I have seen so far this season. It is early days though, as hard as that is to believe by reading the emotionally unstable posters on here.

So far this season we have played 3 matches, winning one and losing two, despite being arguably the better side in the two defeats. We have a youngster who has been thrust into the side, a new right back and even Captain Morgan has only been here since January. I think a bit of patience before we say there is a major flaw is not unreasonable and I am prepared to wait, at least for now, to see where this takes us.

The reason I, and perhaps others, didn't want to answer your question is because it is being asked too early and is too reactionary considering our performances. I think you are over analysing things to try and fit your argument, even if not intentionally. Continuing to try and explain what you are saying in ever more detail will get you nowhere, at least with me, as I understand what you are saying and it has some merit but I have no interest in having in depth discussions about tactics after two defeats, away from home, that I have not even attended and in which we apparently played quite well.

We actually looked like a team today (stream) and I hope Pearson has the courage and conviction to keep trying to be positive and to be the team that looks to take the initiative in matches, both at home and away.

Finally, the discussion becomes pointless once most have given their view as not one of us can change what the team will be and how it plays regardless of how strongly we believe something. At a certain point it comes across like a drum beating a monotonous beat rather than a subject of interesting discussion.

Thank you for the reply and actually what you said I think is fair enough.

I too am happy to wait and to see whether such a trend continues. I believe it will if we continue to play a flat 4-4-2 away from home, but that is just my belief, not fact.

The reason why I kept 'banging my drum' is because I fear the problems of last season have spilled over into this, at least, defensively.

Anyway, as I said, good post and let's wait and see.

[marty78]

Thank you for the reply and actually what you said I think is fair enough.

I too am happy to wait and to see whether such a trend continues. I believe it will if we continue to play a flat 4-4-2 away from home, but that is just my belief, not fact.

The reason why I kept 'banging my drum' is because people kept commenting on the thread.

Anyway, as I said, good post and let's wait and see.

There is nothing wrong with your opinion or some of the points you raise but I didn't really want to get into the discussion again, which is why I declined responding initially. You may turn out to be right although I bloody well hope not.