Esteban Cambiasso

[Manwell Pablo]

Which is why we needed someone like Cattermole on bongos rather than Cambiasso on his bloody flute!

 

I think you're talking utter shite but the imagery of Lee Cattermole playing the bongos earns a +1

[marbelladave]

I am somewhat disapointed with Cambiasso, I expected a player who would, given his age and experience, control the space in front of our back 4, starting and prompting our attacking play from deep and helping out our defence when required.

 

Instead we seem to have acquired a sort of upmarket Richie Wellens, a player with neither the legs nor the physicality to play the all round Prem midfielder and who's overall contribution to the teams play is, at best, indeterminate and often rather fragile defensively. Right now I do not think I would start him.

 

With regard to Andy King i think he needs, as has been mentioned, to find a specific roll in the side. Personally I would like to see him revert more to the role that he started with under NFP, primarily a defensive midfielder. He is disciplined enough to play the holding roll and he is defensively very sound, good in the air too so he can drop between our centre backs to cover and we need that.

 

In possession he can pick the ball up off the defence and move it quickly, he does that naturally and if we have runners he will find them, his midfield partner (James?) can do the box to box running. King will still get forward on occasion, but his primary role is defensive.

 

I would make a slight change up front too, let Vardy lead the line and threaten deep with pace and get Ulloa to drop off short and do the link up play, give us some options.

[Guest Col city fan]

I don't get it? I don't get what is so hard to understand?

How I see it is like this:

The best teams, at the highest levels seem to prefer the 'Defensive midfielder' or the 'defensive minded midfielder' however anyone wishes to term such a player.

Chelsea, for example, do this with Matic. In the past, they did it with Makalele.

West Ham are now doing it with Song

Southampton have Wanyama.

Man City have Fernando.

There are more examples.

Effectively, they play with two different units, within the same team.

The presence of Matic enables Hazard and Willian to focus on attacking. That's what they do. You rarely see them back in their own halves, defending.

The presence (when fit) of Danny Blind enables Angel DiMaria to attack..to simply get the ball at feet and to get forward.

Barcelona's success has been underpinned by Mascherano and Busquets enabling Neymar and Messi to get forward and to do their stuff.

And so on and so forth......you have your 'attacking players' and your 'defensive players' within the same side. And rarely do the twain meet, so to speak.

Rarely actually, do the most successful sides play a 4-4-2 with 'box-to-box' central midfield players..where the midfielders are expected to play BOTH roles.

Now, where sides DO favour the box-to-box midfielder, they both need to be supremely fit, especially in the top flight, to perform both roles effectively. It must be a very demanding and tiring role, being expected to both track the runs of oncoming opposition midfielders and to get forward to link-up attacking play.

Knocks and Mahrez suffer in this type of formation, because neither are defensively minded players. Both like the ball at their feet, to dribble, to flick, to get forward and to shoot. What they don't like so much is having to get back to cover.

Why the box-to-box midfielder system worked well for us last season was mainly due to Drinkwater and James' fitness levels. Neither player, I would suggest are particularly creative lads, and don't shoot and score much. But what both were great at was getting up and down, up and down, time and time again. Linking our attacking play, complimenting our defensive play. They were so good, at that level, that they took control of that central area, enabling Knocky and Mahrez (or Dyer) to get forward without having to do a great deal of defensive work. Although actually, Lloyd Dyer was pretty good at that when he needed to be.

This is why I was concerned about our signing Cambiasso and pinning a lot of hope on him. Doubtless he's good on the ball..a natural leader, with vision, a delicious passer of the ball. BUT in a flat 4-4-2, with the box-to-box role, my concern was that he wouldn't have 'the legs' to do the defensive work effectively. This is also why I said I'd rather we sign a Lee Cattermole. I thought, and hoped, that Pearson might have gone for the DM type player which seems to be the way many sides are now setting up.

People get confused with this, I think, believing that having a DM in the team automatically means we 'go defensive'? Actually, the opposite is true. Do people not remember the crucial role Neil Lennon played in ONeill's teams? Lennon literally hardly ever ventured out of his own half, but his shielding of our back four meant that our attacking units (Izzett and Parker etc) could venture forward with freedom to hit sides where it hurt. I believe Walsh and Elliott said on more than one occassion that their defensive solidity was helped out, big time, by Lennon.

So, people may not agree that this is the best way to play. Fair enough. But conceptually, I see this as simple and don't get why people don't get it?

For me, I'd have signed a younger, fitter Cattermole type player and played him in the way he plays for Sunderland, over an older, more tired Cambiasso any day of the week. He's not a better player per se, of course not, but he's better at what he does and plays in a formation that I would of liked to have seen Pearson playing. If played correctly, with the right personnel, it's not all defensive. Knockeart and Mahrez, played in a way that frees them up to not defend....you'd see completely different players IMO.

[chapero82]

I don't get it? I don't get what is so hard to understand?

How I see it is like this:

The best teams, at the highest levels seem to prefer the 'Defensive midfielder' or the 'defensive minded midfielder' however anyone wishes to term such a player.

Chelsea, for example, do this with Matic. In the past, they did it with Makalele.

West Ham are now doing it with Song

Southampton have Wanyama.

Man City have Fernando.

There are more examples.

Effectively, they play with two different units, within the same team.

The presence of Matic enables Hazard and Willian to focus on attacking. That's what they do. You rarely see them back in their own halves, defending.

The presence (when fit) of Danny Blind enables Angel DiMaria to attack..to simply get the ball at feet and to get forward.

Barcelona's success has been underpinned by Mascherano and Busquets enabling Neymar and Messi to get forward and to do their stuff.

And so on and so forth......you have your 'attacking players' and your 'defensive players' within the same side. And rarely do the twain meet, so to speak.

Rarely actually, do the most successful sides play a 4-4-2 with 'box-to-box' central midfield players..where the midfielders are expected to play BOTH roles.

Now, where sides DO favour the box-to-box midfielder, they both need to be supremely fit, especially in the top flight, to perform both roles effectively. It must be a very demanding and tiring role, being expected to both track the runs of oncoming opposition midfielders and to get forward to link-up attacking play.

Knocks and Mahrez suffer in this type of formation, because neither are defensively minded players. Both like the ball at their feet, to dribble, to flick, to get forward and to shoot. What they don't like so much is having to get back to cover.

Why the box-to-box midfielder system worked well for us last season was mainly due to Drinkwater and James' fitness levels. Neither player, I would suggest are particularly creative lads, and don't shoot and score much. But what both were great at was getting up and down, up and down, time and time again. Linking our attacking play, complimenting our defensive play. They were so good, at that level, that they took control of that central area, enabling Knocky and Mahrez (or Dyer) to get forward without having to do a great deal of defensive work. Although actually, Lloyd Dyer was pretty good at that when he needed to be.

This is why I was concerned about our signing Cambiasso and pinning a lot of hope on him. Doubtless he's good on the ball..a natural leader, with vision, a delicious passer of the ball. BUT in a flat 4-4-2, with the box-to-box role, my concern was that he wouldn't have 'the legs' to do the defensive work effectively. This is also why I said I'd rather we sign a Lee Cattermole. I thought, and hoped, that Pearson might have gone for the DM type player which seems to be the way many sides are now setting up.

People get confused with this, I think, believing that having a DM in the team automatically means we 'go defensive'? Actually, the opposite is true. Do people not remember the crucial role Neil Lennon played in ONeill's teams? Lennon literally hardly ever ventured out of his own half, but his shielding of our back four meant that our attacking units (Izzett and Parker etc) could venture forward with freedom to hit sides where it hurt. I believe Walsh and Elliott said on more than one occassion that their defensive solidity was helped out, big time, by Lennon.

So, people may not agree that this is the best way to play. Fair enough. But conceptually, I see this as simple and don't get why people don't get it?

For me, I'd have signed a younger, fitter Cattermole type player and played him in the way he plays for Sunderland, over an older, more tired Cambiasso any day of the week. He's not a better player per se, of course not, but he's better at what he does and plays in a formation that I would of liked to have seen Pearson playing. If played correctly, with the right personnel, it's not all defensive. Knockeart and Mahrez, played in a way that frees them up to not defend....you'd see completely different players IMO.

those teams you speak of have decent LB and RB'S too which we do not that is the area we are conceding from

[Stadt]

Cattermole closes people down actively trying to win the ball so he's not a holding player.

Cambiasso is actually surprisingly good in the air so there's one less stick to beat him with.

I think we need a more physically dominant midfielder - we were linked with Krychowiak and Raoul Loe so I wouldn't be massively surprised if we did sign one.

[Corky]

I bet we have more discussion about Lee Cattermole than the Sunderland forums put together.

[MrAus]

People should watch. Cambiasso a lot closer. Everyone had too high expectations of him. This league is 2x faster than serie a, and let's not forget who he's been playing with over the years. Matty James is no Stankovic, Wasilewski is no Cordoba or Lucio. And Nugent is no Diego Milito.

Massive difference there. His passing ability and vision is exceptional. Maybe doesn't have the legs yet, as he's still getting up to pace of our premier league. Not done bad at all IMO.

[The Doctor]

I find it incredible when the goals are coming from crosses and long balls, and not cutting through our midfield, that people are blaming cambiasso for it. He's been solid from a defensive point of view, he's been one of our most creative players (if we could finish he'd have 3-4 assists from Saturday alone) and is I believe joint second top scorer behind only Ulloa. He's doing pretty much everything right - the problems lie in finishing and defending crosses

[MrAus]

I find it incredible when the goals are coming from crosses and long balls, and not cutting through our midfield, that people are blaming cambiasso for it. He's been solid from a defensive point of view, he's been one of our most creative players (if we could finish he'd have 3-4 assists from Saturday alone) and is I believe joint second top scorer behind only Ulloa. He's doing pretty much everything right - the problems lie in finishing and defending crosses

Agreed.

[Guest ttfn]

I find it incredible when the goals are coming from crosses and long balls, and not cutting through our midfield, that people are blaming cambiasso for it. He's been solid from a defensive point of view, he's been one of our most creative players (if we could finish he'd have 3-4 assists from Saturday alone) and is I believe joint second top scorer behind only Ulloa. He's doing pretty much everything right - the problems lie in finishing and defending crosses

It's almost like there's one person with an agenda shouting louder than everyone else.

[The Doctor]

It's almost like there's one person with an agenda shouting louder than everyone else.

I'm wondering more if people have forgotten konchesky has hair now and are confusing him for Paul.

[Guest Col city fan]

It's almost like there's one person with an agenda shouting louder than everyone else.

Well its not one person is it?

And if you want to read it like that, thats your perogative. I couldn't have been any more fair or explanatory.

Anyway, onto tonight's game.

[Guest ttfn]

Well its not one person is it?

And if you want to read it like that, thats your perogative. I couldn't have been any more fair or explanatory.

Anyway, onto tonight's game.

Cambiasso is definitely going to fail to track a runner for a goal tonight now

[Fez of Mahrez]

I love reading the same f***ing thing a million times.

[MC Prussian]

I love reading the same f***ing thing a million times.

Welcome to Col's World.

[DB11]

I thought he was impressive tonight

 

Maybe someone could have tracked Gerrard for his second but Morgan really shouldn't have teed it up to him

[Brooksy]

Expecting a certain someone to post in this thread any minute.

[Magictv]

Thought he played alright tonight tbh

[Fox Ulike]

Yeah i take back what i said about him, he was very good tonight, as was James

[Guest Col city fan]

Yeah i take back what i said about him, he was very good tonight, as was James

Bowing to pressure.... I don't know...

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

He was good over all, probably our best player, but that miss...

[tickler28]

No not at all he's about the only player with a bit of Premiership class but think he works a lot better in a three. Seems as though Drinkwater, King and Hammond have gone off the radar after not doing much wrong.....thing is all 5 central mid fielders are much of a muchness and you may as well draw names out of a hat but Cambiasso can and does offer a little more intelligence and reads game better than King/Hammond/Drinkwater

No not at all he's about the only player with a bit of Premiership class but think he works a lot better in a three. Seems as though Drinkwater, King and Hammond have gone off the radar after not doing much wrong.....thing is all 5 central mid fielders are much of a muchness and you may as well draw names out of a hat but Cambiasso can and does offer a little more intelligence and reads game better than King/Hammond/Drinkwater

[Bamba's Babes]

Cambiasso was the best player on the pitch first half and nothing he did was any worse than James. Looked like the only player who was going to unlock the defence.

 

Past two games he has improved a lot, for me.

[Fox Ulike]

Bowing to pressure.... I don't know...

Sorry mate yer on yer own now!

We still need that third midfielder though. Vardy improved as the game went on but first half he was just a waste of a shirt.

[Manwell Pablo]

I thought he was impressive tonight

 

Maybe someone could have tracked Gerrard for his second but Morgan really shouldn't have teed it up to him

 

Absolutely not. I fully expect to read down a few posts and see the professor blame him for that goal but unless your suggesting every player in our midfield should be man tight and goal side in the expectation that Wes Morgan is going to clear directly to their feet you've got no case at all.

 

His biggest failure tonight was not putting that chance away, aside from that he was, yet again, among our best players.