Fox Ulike Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 We still on about Nugent not being good enough? Nothing's changed, hopefully he'll leave in January then we can bring in two strikers It wouldn’t really change much. Not many strikers can score goals from 0 chances. Danny Ings had two tap-ins from inside the six-yard box on Saturday. When is the last time you can remember our strikers getting tap-ins? On Saturday we played two defensive midfielders and two out-and-out strikers. Who’s supposed to link them up? The wingers? If that’s the plan then we have a main attacking tactic which is to get the ball wide and sling it into the box. Which is fine, I guess… BUT if that’s the plan, what’s the point in playing Vardy? He’s not strong in the air and if our plan is to play through the wingers then it would of made much more sense to play Wood and Ulloa together. Team selection has been poor lately and Saturday was another example of an unbalanced side. Our line-ups seem to be mashed together with little thought of how the different components of the side will link up together. I’ve said this for a long time: Pearson just does not seem to understand midfield. He needs to listen to someone else on this.
Guest Col city fan Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 I still don't think the strikers are the MAIN issue (though they are off form). I still believe we don't create enough. Look at Schlupp on Saturday. I like Jeff, he seems an honest lad with real pace. But I can't recollect a single opportunity that came down our left hand side where Schlupp fed either striker with a chance on goal. And he was a winger! Compare that to Ings goals on Saturday. Both created by wide men, leading to tap ins. The media are suddenly labelling him as great, when actually he couldn't miss either. A STRIKER IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE CHANCES HE GETS. They all miss a few, score a few.. Costa must be laughing. He's playing in a side where he gets so many chances he can afford to fluff a few as well. We can't..thus the pressure on our forwards is immense.
Bettsj2 Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 I still don't think the strikers are the MAIN issue (though they are off form). I still believe we don't create enough. Look at Schlupp on Saturday. I like Jeff, he seems an honest lad with real pace. But I can't recollect a single opportunity that came down our left hand side where Schlupp fed either striker with a chance on goal. And he was a winger! Compare that to Ings goals on Saturday. Both created by wide men, leading to tap ins. The media are suddenly labelling him as great, when actually he couldn't miss either. A STRIKER IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE CHANCES HE GETS. They all miss a few, score a few.. Costa must be laughing. He's playing in a side where he gets so many chances he can afford to fluff a few as well. We can't..thus the pressure on our forwards is immense. Very true. Its amazing how many people are jizzing over Ings. Two virtually open goal tap ins. We need to instruct the wide men to put the fvcker in the box which is literally all that Albrighton did when he was at Villa. Fvcking play him and put the ball in!!
Guest Col city fan Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Very true. Its amazing how many people are jizzing over Ings. Two virtually open goal tap ins. We need to instruct the wide men to put the fvcker in the box which is literally all that Albrighton did when he was at Villa. Fvcking play him and put the ball in!!We do yes, but it goes a bit further than that. Lumping it into the box won't usually work at this level. We have to attack quickly (rule 1), get to near the byline and cross the ball back across the area, thus making the defender off balance and it falling to an oncoming attacker. Again, see Burnley's goals. We do this so little now. And we do miss DYER in this respect. His final ball could be poor, granted, but he was the only one who could present such a ball like the one ive described. Ulloa thrives on chances exactly like these. The ones we have made (Schlupp v Everton?), Vardy v United, where both have reached the byline, then crossed the ball BACK into the area, he's scored with. Any tall defender can soak up the cross played in from just inside our own half, but you get that lumbering centre back coming back into his own area to clear a ball, he'll have much more of a problem. I'd hate to be a striker in our team currently. They are feeding off, literally, a chance a game..yet being slaughtered if they don't take it.
Kitchandro Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 13 pages and still the spelling mistake in the title hasn't been addressed. Nugent out.
Fox Ulike Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 We do yes, but it goes a bit further than that. Lumping it into the box won't usually work at this level. We have to attack quickly (rule 1), get to near the byline and cross the ball back across the area, thus making the defender off balance and it falling to an oncoming attacker. Again, see Burnley's goals. We do this so little now. And we do miss DYER in this respect. His final ball could be poor, granted, but he was the only one who could present such a ball like the one ive described. Ulloa thrives on chances exactly like these. The ones we have made (Schlupp v Everton?), Vardy v United, where both have reached the byline, then crossed the ball BACK into the area, he's scored with. Any tall defender can soak up the cross played in from just inside our own half, but you get that lumbering centre back coming back into his own area to clear a ball, he'll have much more of a problem. I'd hate to be a striker in our team currently. They are feeding off, literally, a chance a game..yet being slaughtered if they don't take it. True... But you need to take this back a step though: Our wingers aren’t going to get much decent service from two defensive midfielders. Against Arsenal, Nugent peels off and plays a ball down to Schlupp by the by-line. Schlupp crosses, Ulloa scores. Without Nugent or an equivalent attacking midfielder, no-one is really going to give decent service to the wingers.
Manwell Pablo Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 20 minutes on the pitch in two games and he's still getting the blame on here. priceless, and people deny that this is a witch hunt.
Arriba Los Zorros Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 I'm not so sure that both Nugent and Vardy don't have the quality to succeed in this league. For me personally I believe Pearson needs to start them together. I think that they compliment each other's game well and give opposition defenders very little time on the ball, which in turn allows us to play a higher line and close the gap between the midfield and the attack thus allowing us to create more chances as we are able to get our creative players in and around the box. More importantly they have a great understanding which any striker will tell you can make an average striker a decent striker. How many times have we seen consistent goalscoring strikers separated from their partner only to become absolute donkeys or seemingly average players playing with the right partner and being propelled to stardom? Given the fact that neither have started a game together this season playing in a 4-4-2 I think it's a little unfair that people are being so critical when the pairing that scored us a great number of goals last season haven't been given the opportunity to play together in the system that suits them best once. Ulloa is part of the issue for me. Despite a great start he has contributed very little to the team. He doesn't seem to hold the ball up as well as someone like Pelle or Wickham, and isn't mobile enough to play the pressing game that we played last season. Yesterday was a prime example, Vardy looked unlike his usual self as he'd press the centre back simply to see the ball passed to the other centre back with no one closing down this man as Ulloa was just meandering out wide or in deep positions. Don't get me wrong this isn't an attack on Ulloa as I think he has something to offer by giving us options for when we need to change, but I don't believe that he suits our primary style of play. I also think Pearson made the mistake of just putting him straight into the first team. In my opinion Nugent and Vardy should have started the season and Ulloa should have waited for his opportunity. I know people will say that without his goals we wouldn't be where we are but conversely aside from the price tag what had he actually done to warrant a start in the side and for Pearson to change our style of play given that statistically he was no better than our other strikers last season. the above post is gospel
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 True... But you need to take this back a step though: Our wingers aren’t going to get much decent service from two defensive midfielders. Against Arsenal, Nugent peels off and plays a ball down to Schlupp by the by-line. Schlupp crosses, Ulloa scores. Without Nugent or an equivalent attacking midfielder, no-one is really going to give decent service to the wingers. They aren't defensive midfielders though. James played like King did in the Sven season, advancing and supporting the strikers...
Guest Col city fan Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 They aren't defensive midfielders though. James played like King did in the Sven season, advancing and supporting the strikers... I'm not sure you watch the games Doc. Didn't you claim that we made lots of good chances on Saturday or summat? Words to that effect? If you see James as a midfield playmaker, an advanced midfielder who links play between attack and defence then I'm not sure you watch the games. James is your out and out central midfielder, with a primarily defensive mind who sometimes makes good forward runs. Not vice-verca.
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 I'm not sure you watch the games Doc. Didn't you claim that we made lots of good chances on Saturday or summat? Words to that effect? If you see James as a midfield playmaker, an advanced midfielder who links play between attack and defence then I'm not sure you watch the games. James is your out and out central midfielder, with a primarily defensive mind who sometimes makes good forward runs. Not vice-verca. We had 4 good chances - james had 2 and schlupp and mahrez put it into the side-netting. If you don't believe that, then it's quite clear who doesn't actually watch the games. Did he, or did he not press forward on Saturday? Is that not how he linked up with Ulloa to produce both his chances?
Guest Col city fan Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 We had 4 good chances - james had 2 and schlupp and mahrez put it into the side-netting. If you don't believe that, then it's quite clear who doesn't actually watch the games. Did he, or did he not press forward on Saturday? Is that not how he linked up with Ulloa to produce both his chances? Yes he did..but thats not the type of player myself and FoxUlike are referring to. At least, that I think he's referring to. And Sven played King at the tip of a diamond. Thats not how Pearson has played James. James is a primarily defensive minded midfielder who gets forward every so often. See the difference?
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Yes he did..but thats not the type of player myself and FoxUlike are referring to. At least, that I think he's referring to. And Sven played King at the tip of a diamond. Thats not how Pearson has played James. James is a primarily defensive minded midfielder who gets forward every so often. See the difference? So then you admit that he wasn't playing as a defensive midfielder? No, second season he did, first season he played centre mid and broke forward to support the strikers. Even still, not playing at the tip of a diamond doesn't mean that James wasn't playing like King did in 2010/11. He was sitting in midfield and breaking forward to support the strikers, not playing as a defensive midfielder.
Guest Col city fan Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 So then you admit that he wasn't playing as a defensive midfielder? No, second season he did, first season he played centre mid and broke forward to support the strikers. Even still, not playing at the tip of a diamond doesn't mean that James wasn't playing like King did in 2010/11. He was sitting in midfield and breaking forward to support the strikers, not playing as a defensive midfielder. You aint reading mate. I haven't said he is a defensive midfielder. I said he is your archetypal central midfield player, but primarily defensive minded. Don't worry, we'll move on...
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 You aint reading mate. I haven't said he is a defensive midfielder. I said he is your archetypal central midfield player, but primarily defensive minded. Don't worry, we'll move on... And yet foxulike said that he was a defensive midfielder, which is what I was arguing against. Try to keep up and perhaps read the comments before you dive in.
dayday Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Don't know if it's been mentioned,Ulloa speaking in the sun,says we need to focus again.it is important to remember that when we started the season we played well with the ball and pressed with intensity We've played different in some games since. Now we need to focus on the next game and recover this intensity and mentality. Would you say that's indirect swipe at Pearson,for changing things?
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Don't know if it's been mentioned,Ulloa speaking in the sun,says we need to focus again.it is important to remember that when we started the season we played well with the ball and pressed with intensity We've played different in some games since. Now we need to focus on the next game and recover this intensity and mentality. Would you say that's indirect swipe at Pearson,for changing things? Given he's talking about the lack of pressing, I'd say it's probably more of a swipe at the team for decreasing their effort if there is any sort of jibe to that. Big if though, the players seem fine playing for him still - there's no moaning coming out of the dressing room, they don't look disharmonious on the pitch.
Fox Ulike Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 We had 4 good chances - james had 2 and schlupp and mahrez put it into the side-netting. If you don't believe that, then it's quite clear who doesn't actually watch the games. Did he, or did he not press forward on Saturday? Is that not how he linked up with Ulloa to produce both his chances? Yes but the point you're missing is that he's NOT an attack-minded player. He may well have "pressed forward" on Saturday but it doesn't mean he's good at it. The fact that he missed two good chances would seem to bear this out.
Guest Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 I'm not so sure that both Nugent and Vardy don't have the quality to succeed in this league. For me personally I believe Pearson needs to start them together. I think that they compliment each other's game well and give opposition defenders very little time on the ball, which in turn allows us to play a higher line and close the gap between the midfield and the attack thus allowing us to create more chances as we are able to get our creative players in and around the box. More importantly they have a great understanding which any striker will tell you can make an average striker a decent striker. How many times have we seen consistent goalscoring strikers separated from their partner only to become absolute donkeys or seemingly average players playing with the right partner and being propelled to stardom? Given the fact that neither have started a game together this season playing in a 4-4-2 I think it's a little unfair that people are being so critical when the pairing that scored us a great number of goals last season haven't been given the opportunity to play together in the system that suits them best once. Ulloa is part of the issue for me. Despite a great start he has contributed very little to the team. He doesn't seem to hold the ball up as well as someone like Pelle or Wickham, and isn't mobile enough to play the pressing game that we played last season. Yesterday was a prime example, Vardy looked unlike his usual self as he'd press the centre back simply to see the ball passed to the other centre back with no one closing down this man as Ulloa was just meandering out wide or in deep positions. Don't get me wrong this isn't an attack on Ulloa as I think he has something to offer by giving us options for when we need to change, but I don't believe that he suits our primary style of play. I also think Pearson made the mistake of just putting him straight into the first team. In my opinion Nugent and Vardy should have started the season and Ulloa should have waited for his opportunity. I know people will say that without his goals we wouldn't be where we are but conversely aside from the price tag what had he actually done to warrant a start in the side and for Pearson to change our style of play given that statistically he was no better than our other strikers last season. This.
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Yes but the point you're missing is that he's NOT an attack-minded player. He may well have "pressed forward" on Saturday but it doesn't mean he's good at it. The fact that he missed two good chances would seem to bear this out. Well he's not a defensive midfielder either - he's a box to box midfielder, perfectly capable of recycling possession, feeding the creative players and pitching in around the opposing box, even if his finishing wasn't great on Saturday. Wanting to bill him as a defensive midfielder because he lacked a clinical finish seems like taking a table and fashioning it into a cricket bat to swat something on the table. It makes no sense, much like that analogy,
Manwell Pablo Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 I hope you're feeling lucky! 'Cus he hasn't scored one yet in the past 2 months. That post wasn't even aimed at you, swear I even quoted Inickley fox in it! EDIT: Ha seems I somehow inadvertently quoted you in it as well I doubt he'll get 5 full stop never mind from open play given he's not even playing upfront. I'll stick with it though on the off chance we get a good FA cup draw (cup goals not counting wasn't specified by your good self)
Fox Ulike Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Well he's not a defensive midfielder either - he's a box to box midfielder, perfectly capable of recycling possession, feeding the creative players and pitching in around the opposing box, even if his finishing wasn't great on Saturday. Wanting to bill him as a defensive midfielder because he lacked a clinical finish seems like taking a table and fashioning it into a cricket bat to swat something on the table. It makes no sense, much like that analogy, Is Matty James the table or the cricket bat? Might help if you used analogies that actually did make sense.. Just sayin. Also, what the hell does "pitching in around the opposing box" mean? You sound like Ron Manager. I digress. So, you accept that James isn't an attacking midfielder? You're kind of stealing my thunder as that is My Point.
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Is Matty James the table or the cricket bat? Might help if you used analogies that actually did make sense.. Just sayin. Also, what the hell does "pitching in around the opposing box" mean? You sound like Ron Manager. I digress. So, you accept that James isn't an attacking midfielder? You're kind of stealing my thunder as that is My Point. As I said, the analogy makes as much sense as your point. James is not a defensive midfielder, and just a couple of missed chances doesn't make him so. He's a box to box midfielder, and perfectly capable of supporting the forwards and wingers. That wasn't your point - midfielders aren't divided into attacking and defensive. Your point was that he was a defensive midfielder. He certainly didn't and doesn't play such a role.
Fox Ulike Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 As I said, the analogy makes as much sense as your point. James is not a defensive midfielder, and just a couple of missed chances doesn't make him so. He's a box to box midfielder, and perfectly capable of supporting the forwards and wingers. That wasn't your point - midfielders aren't divided into attacking and defensive. Your point was that he was a defensive midfielder. He certainly didn't and doesn't play such a role. Not really sure you quite understand what a defensive midfielder is. It just means a midfielder whose main strength is to in preventing the opposition from attacking. It doesn't mean he's not allowed to shoot or get forward. Not sure how many more ways this can be explained to you Mister. Can you understand the differences between David Silva and Gareth Barry, for example? Or do you just see them as interchangeable midfielders?
The Doctor Posted 24 November 2014 Posted 24 November 2014 Not really sure you quite understand what a defensive midfielder is. It just means a midfielder whose main strength is to in preventing the opposition from attacking. It doesn't mean he's not allowed to shoot or get forward. Not sure how many more ways this can be explained to you Mister. Can you understand the differences between David Silva and Gareth Barry, for example? Or do you just see them as interchangeable midfielders? A defensive midfielder is someone like Dean Hammond, who sits back and supports the defenders - not a box to box midfielder. Of course, Silva is a playmaker, Barry is a centre mid. That's like trying to compare Knockaert and King to show that King is a defender.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.