Midfield minus Esteban

[Col city fan]

I'd spunk our transfer budget on him, would enable so much more from everyone else too. No chance of us getting him though, one of the PL players of the season so far

Cambiasso however, disappointing as hell. Awful in a midfield 2, largely ineffective in a 3.

He's Undroppable though

[Guest ttfn]

I'd spunk our transfer budget on him, would enable so much more from everyone else too. No chance of us getting him though, one of the PL players of the season so far

Cambiasso however, disappointing as hell. Awful in a midfield 2, largely ineffective in a 3.

He's Undroppable though

I've only benchmarked one of your stats but Cambiasso has 66 ball recoveries (1 every 14.7 minutes) versus Cattermole (1 every 15.8 minutes), assuming that the stats don't include today's game.

Get him back in the Argentina squad on that basis.

Cattermole is not a bad player and would probably improve our team but yet again people are targeting the wrong player to compare him against.

[Col city fan]

Cambiasso is pure quality.

Having said that, where's the harm in seeing how we do without him in the team. Can't do any worse surely.

So you'd drop 'pure quality'?

Bizarre comment.

[Papasmurf]

So you'd drop 'pure quality'?

Bizarre comment.

It's not working at the moment. I don't think it's bizarre to want to see something different.

[Col city fan]

It's not working at the moment. I don't think it's bizarre to want to see something different.

So I ask again, you'd rectify this by dropping 'pure quality'?

That's the best so far.

[inckley fox]

You just go round in circles with these discussions. Cambiasso is our best midfielder, Drinkwater and James have forged a good partnership over time which hasn't yet worked out at this level.

 

King and Hammond, on the other hand, weren't really good enough in the 2nd tier. It's unlikely, and they haven't especially looked like suddenly becoming, good enough at a higher level.

 

There have been glaring problems in the side and the line-up, but that's exactly what they are - glaring. To persist with Konchesky at left back and, for so long, De Laet on the right has placed successive central defensive partnerships under immense pressure. To not have a natural left winger, and to favour Vardy over your record signing (who IS experienced, unlike Vardy, as a lone striker, and has scored six times more goals than him) is an error of judgement of Taylor-esque proportions.

 

But if we drop Cambiasso, as we may well do, then we just unsettle the side and take one of the few players who has looked good enough out of our line-up. We have a hard enough job getting the likes of Drinkwater, James, Vardy et al. to make the step up, or working our more obviously inadequate players out of the side, without complicating matters by dropping our better players.

 

Now if we had an all-action, high-energy ball winner available then there'd be a valid discussion. Our work-rate is, at times, pitiable for a side which is supposed to be 'all behind the manager'. But to wonder whether King or Hammond or dropping Cambiasso might be the answer is just skirting around the issue.

[v6rat]

Surely it's upto the other midfielders to find a way of getting in tune with Cambiasso's obvious quality rather than drop him to suit their lesser quality.

[deep blue]

You just go round in circles with these discussions. Cambiasso is our best midfielder, Drinkwater and James have forged a good partnership over time which hasn't yet worked out at this level.

 

King and Hammond, on the other hand, weren't really good enough in the 2nd tier. It's unlikely, and they haven't especially looked like suddenly becoming, good enough at a higher level.

 

There have been glaring problems in the side and the line-up, but that's exactly what they are - glaring. To persist with Konchesky at left back and, for so long, De Laet on the right has placed successive central defensive partnerships under immense pressure. To not have a natural left winger, and to favour Vardy over your record signing (who IS experienced, unlike Vardy, as a lone striker, and has scored six times more goals than him) is an error of judgement of Taylor-esque proportions.

 

But if we drop Cambiasso, as we may well do, then we just unsettle the side and take one of the few players who has looked good enough out of our line-up. We have a hard enough job getting the likes of Drinkwater, James, Vardy et al. to make the step up, or working our more obviously inadequate players out of the side, without complicating matters by dropping our better players.

 

Now if we had an all-action, high-energy ball winner available then there'd be a valid discussion. Our work-rate is, at times, pitiable for a side which is supposed to be 'all behind the manager'. But to wonder whether King or Hammond or dropping Cambiasso might be the answer is just skirting around the issue.

Great contribution, this, inckley. Para 3 identifies the prime errors made - surprisingly obvious for a man of Pearson's ability to make. Fix those, especially those relating to the defence, and I still see a route to recovery for us.

[cc_star]

You just go round in circles with these discussions. Cambiasso is our best midfielder, Drinkwater and James have forged a good partnership over time which hasn't yet worked out at this level.

King and Hammond, on the other hand, weren't really good enough in the 2nd tier. It's unlikely, and they haven't especially looked like suddenly becoming, good enough at a higher level.

There have been glaring problems in the side and the line-up, but that's exactly what they are - glaring. To persist with Konchesky at left back and, for so long, De Laet on the right has placed successive central defensive partnerships under immense pressure. To not have a natural left winger, and to favour Vardy over your record signing (who IS experienced, unlike Vardy, as a lone striker, and has scored six times more goals than him) is an error of judgement of Taylor-esque proportions.

But if we drop Cambiasso, as we may well do, then we just unsettle the side and take one of the few players who has looked good enough out of our line-up. We have a hard enough job getting the likes of Drinkwater, James, Vardy et al. to make the step up, or working our more obviously inadequate players out of the side, without complicating matters by dropping our better players.

Now if we had an all-action, high-energy ball winner available then there'd be a valid discussion. Our work-rate is, at times, pitiable for a side which is supposed to be 'all behind the manager'. But to wonder whether King or Hammond or dropping Cambiasso might be the answer is just skirting around the issue.

It's not so much about the personnel as the tactics, obviously there's a couple of faces you'd rotate out of the first team but it's still shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic if the tactics aren't right.

Contrary to your King & Hammond statement, they've been by far the most effective partnership we've had this season & not just for one game either but for our early run. The introduction of Cambiasso broke this up & we haven't been the same since,although King, & Drinkwater were excellent Vs ManCity & Cambiasso was good too

But back to tactics

Ulloa scored early on from quick counters and crosses from the wide man beating his man, we don't do that any more, Schlupp can't beat anyone & Mahrez cuts in every time. Crossing is last thing on his mind.

We've played a fast forward but have barely played a through ball for him to run onto

Etc & etc

Hammond should not be sniffed at if he was fit, breaking opposition play up & making a simple sideways pass to a Mahrez is what starts counterattacks off and it's something we're poor at with most of our balls going forward and possession being lossed

[Fox92]

Think they must be the only two central midfielders in the league to get into a decent position and go backwards. King especially.

 

Hammond should not be ignored now either. He broke up play well at the start of the season... Cambiasso remains our best midfielder, at 34 years of age, his ability to read the game is better and miles ahead than the other nine outfield players.

[lavrentis]

Agree, drop Cambiasso for a while

[Fox Ulike]

Cattermole v Cambiasso.

 

It’s not an either/or.

 

We need both. Cambiasso for his passing and link-up play, and somebody like Cattermole to sit in front of the defence and break up play.

 

We’re still playing without a defensive midfielder.

[Col city fan]

Can i take this opportunity to put all this Lee Bloody Cattermole stuff into some sort of perspective. I feel the need to do so.

Over the summer there was a thread about Cambiasso where many many posters were going wild about our signing Cambiasso. There was 'spaff' everwhere. For evidence, someone pull up the thread.

I urged caution...lets wait and see, said I. Yes, he has been World Class but it seemed to me rather strange that Inter were willing to let him go...and don't forget this isn't the Inter of old. Inter are now a pretty average Serie A side. There had been reports that Cambiasso wanted to stay at Inter, but that they had said no.

So, I urged caution..he's not played in a division as quick as the Prem, he's 34, don't build him up just yet, let's wait and see.

Then, I made the calamitous error of saying I'd actually rather City targeted a younger, fitter ball-winner, with Prem experience. THAT would have excited me more. I suggested Cattermole. I thought he was possibly a target we could get, knew about his leadership ability on the field, also knew about his 'nasty side'. So what, I thought, nasty and tough might be what City needed.

Then all Hell broke loose...I was mullered on here. So much so, in fact, that I was upset by it. I left the forum for some time, and returned due to numerous PM's suggesting that I should.. so I did.

A few months on, we are now firmly rooted to the bottom. Esteban Cambiasso has been ok for us. But, IMO, just ok and nothing more. There are still people stating he's 'pure quality' (see this thread), whilst Cattermole is doing for Sunderland exactly what I suggested he could do for City and has been one of their better players.

We, on the other hand, are leaking goals like a sieve.

I'm afraid I feel somewhat vindicated. Cambiasso INDIVIDUALLY is good. Collectively, I don't feel he's offered the team as much as a Lee Cattermole could have done.

End of explanation....

[cjslcfc]

Can i take this opportunity to put all this Lee Bloody Cattermole stuff into some sort of perspective. I feel the need to do so.

Over the summer there was a thread about Cambiasso where many many posters were going wild about our signing Cambiasso. There was 'spaff' everwhere. For evidence, someone pull up the thread.

I urged caution...lets wait and see, said I. Yes, he has been World Class but it seemed to me rather strange that Inter were willing to let him go...and don't forget this isn't the Inter of old. Inter are now a pretty average Serie A side. There had been reports that Cambiasso wanted to stay at Inter, but that they had said no.

So, I urged caution..he's not played in a division as quick as the Prem, he's 34, don't build him up just yet, let's wait and see.

Then, I made the calamitous error of saying I'd actually rather City targeted a younger, fitter ball-winner, with Prem experience. THAT would have excited me more. I suggested Cattermole. I thought he was possibly a target we could get, knew about his leadership ability on the field, also knew about his 'nasty side'. So what, I thought, nasty and tough might be what City needed.

Then all Hell broke loose...I was mullered on here. So much so, in fact, that I was upset by it. I left the forum for some time, and returned due to numerous PM's suggesting that I should.. so I did.

A few months on, we are now firmly rooted to the bottom. Esteban Cambiasso has been ok for us. But, IMO, just ok and nothing more. There are still people stating he's 'pure quality' (see this thread), whilst Cattermole is doing for Sunderland exactly what I suggested he could do for City and has been one of their better players.

We, on the other hand, are leaking goals like a sieve.

I'm afraid I feel somewhat vindicated. Cambiasso INDIVIDUALLY is good. Collectively, I don't feel he's offered the team as much as a Lee Cattermole could have done.

End of explanation....

 

In all seriousness Col do you think we could have got Cattermole with any sort of bid? I think Gus sees him as an integral part of his team. As I've said before I think we could do with both, not one or the other.

 

I think how many of us see it is that your argument, maybe partially, appears to be that Sunderland are doing well because of Cattermole and we are doing badly because of Cambiasso. This may not be the case but that's how it seems. Our problems lie much much deeper than Cambiasso, who has actually been one of our better players. They lie in our incapability of defending set pieces, the constant stream of almost inexplicable individual errors (e.g. Konch on Saturday) and an absolute battering of our confidence due to setback after setback. There are other problems as well. One player I would like us to get is a DM but that alone would not come near to solving our problems. We also need a LB who can pass the ball without giving it away, a CB who is dominant in the air and takes command of set pieces and a striker who puts away the sort of gilt-edged chances we have missed from game to game.

 

A DM could provide good cover for our weak defence but what he won't do is provide a solution on his own. We need 4 or 5 better players than we already have to inject some confidence and quality into our team. I doubt we will get that but it's not as clearcut as Cambiasso vs. Cattermole, if you know what I mean.

[inckley fox]

It's not so much about the personnel as the tactics, obviously there's a couple of faces you'd rotate out of the first team but it's still shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic if the tactics aren't right.

Contrary to your King & Hammond statement, they've been by far the most effective partnership we've had this season & not just for one game either but for our early run. The introduction of Cambiasso broke this up & we haven't been the same since,although King, & Drinkwater were excellent Vs ManCity & Cambiasso was good too

But back to tactics

Ulloa scored early on from quick counters and crosses from the wide man beating his man, we don't do that any more, Schlupp can't beat anyone & Mahrez cuts in every time. Crossing is last thing on his mind.

We've played a fast forward but have barely played a through ball for him to run onto

Etc & etc

Hammond should not be sniffed at if he was fit, breaking opposition play up & making a simple sideways pass to a Mahrez is what starts counterattacks off and it's something we're poor at with most of our balls going forward and possession being lossed

 

Surely Cambiasso played an absolutely key role in our only two wins this season? So how can he have 'broken up' our most effective midfield partnership?

 

And Hammond played an effective stop-gap role. But sides studied those first few games and identified obvious weaknesses - be they the tendency of De Laet to charge up the flank, the fact that Konchesky tends to buckle under sustained pressure rather than use his experience (he's a 33 year old who plays with the brain of a 17 year old), our zonal marking, the immobility of Hammond and King in the middle, the fact that we push very high up the field...

 

I like Hammond and am happy with his contribution. But we're kidding ourselves if we think he is anything like top flight material. Not that this is actually what you're saying...!

[inckley fox]

Can i take this opportunity to put all this Lee Bloody Cattermole stuff into some sort of perspective. I feel the need to do so.

Over the summer there was a thread about Cambiasso where many many posters were going wild about our signing Cambiasso. There was 'spaff' everwhere. For evidence, someone pull up the thread.

I urged caution...lets wait and see, said I. Yes, he has been World Class but it seemed to me rather strange that Inter were willing to let him go...and don't forget this isn't the Inter of old. Inter are now a pretty average Serie A side. There had been reports that Cambiasso wanted to stay at Inter, but that they had said no.

So, I urged caution..he's not played in a division as quick as the Prem, he's 34, don't build him up just yet, let's wait and see.

Then, I made the calamitous error of saying I'd actually rather City targeted a younger, fitter ball-winner, with Prem experience. THAT would have excited me more. I suggested Cattermole. I thought he was possibly a target we could get, knew about his leadership ability on the field, also knew about his 'nasty side'. So what, I thought, nasty and tough might be what City needed.

Then all Hell broke loose...I was mullered on here. So much so, in fact, that I was upset by it. I left the forum for some time, and returned due to numerous PM's suggesting that I should.. so I did.

A few months on, we are now firmly rooted to the bottom. Esteban Cambiasso has been ok for us. But, IMO, just ok and nothing more. There are still people stating he's 'pure quality' (see this thread), whilst Cattermole is doing for Sunderland exactly what I suggested he could do for City and has been one of their better players.

We, on the other hand, are leaking goals like a sieve.

I'm afraid I feel somewhat vindicated. Cambiasso INDIVIDUALLY is good. Collectively, I don't feel he's offered the team as much as a Lee Cattermole could have done.

End of explanation....

 

I understand your point, Col. But perhaps because you've made this perfectly valid point we notice it more when you say things like 'we should drop Cambiasso', when he's actually been our best CM!

 

I'd probably have to rephrase it a bit if I was to fully agree: when you go up you are going to have to buy players, and you can only really expect two or three to instantly come into and improve on the first eleven in the first half of the season.

 

Without wanting to bang on about O'Neill (which is hard considering he's the last manager we had who successfully presided over promotion), this was the case back then when Keller, Prior and Marshall were the only real improvements in the first half of the campaign. We've not done too badly in this regard, in that two players have come in and represented an improvement - Ulloa and Cambiasso.

 

I just can't help but feel that (and this isn't to their discredit at all) we might have done better had, say, it been a couple of full backs, or a left winger, who had represented that improvement, as opposed to a CM and a CF. Especially as our midfield pairing had such an excellent understanding last year, you might even argue our two CFs did too. On the other hand there were already question marks at LB, RB, LW.

 

But the real problem is that you need 5 or 6 of your existing players to really competently make the step up. Back then it was Walsh, Grayson, Izzet, Lennon, Parker, Heskey, Claridge. Seven players at least. But this year I'm not convinced that a single one of our existing players has managed to make that step up when you'd have expected at least a handful.

 

Some of them will go on to do it in the second half of the season, when it's too late, and will benefit us by either being much better second time around, or fetching a decent transfer fee in the summer.

[cc_star]

Pearson obviously mindful of Cambiasso's ability to play games this close together and probably saving him for Hull

 

We've showed a lot of energy & purpose about our midfield today

 

King exceptional, Drinkwater bloody good, Mahrez is such a threat every time he gets the ball, even Schlupp look useful today (and that's high praise from me)

 

Nugent weighing-in when needed

 

Even though we're outnumbered I've been more impressed today than any game since the Utd one, and looks like our early season buzz again

 

Anyway, King off injured now

[Ozwin]

Cambiasso would be better off in the advanced midfield position, without having to worry about tracking back too much.

[Col city fan]

Looks better...much more mobile and energetic

[blueharmie]

Without him..... We lost... Good one.

[Arriba Los Zorros]

much better display without Cambiasso, I have to say, I'd just field last season's side for the remainder of the season (i.e. no Cambiasso or Ulloa)

[DennisNedry]

Drinkwater and James looked great back in the midfield together.

 

Sorry Cambiasso - you need to stay out of the team.

[Col city fan]

Drinkwater and James looked great back in the midfield together.

Sorry Cambiasso - you need to stay out of the team.

What? World class Cambiasso that is clearly superior to everyone else?

He'll be back in for Hull if King is out I suspect. Unless James and Drinky start. Probably be all three.

[DennisNedry]

What? World class Cambiasso that is clearly superior to everyone else?

He'll be back in for Hull if King is out I suspect. Unless James and Drinky start. Probably be all three.

 

I think you'll find...

 

http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/96413-esteban-cambiasso/?p=3099367

[Col city fan]

I think you'll find...

http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/96413-esteban-cambiasso/?p=3099367

Think I'll find what?