Lies, damned lies and Jamie Vardy's inability to pass

[shailen]

Jeff greatest asset is his pace when he has space to run into, and in the middle of the park you need someone who has a great touch because there is no space. He'd be wasted there because his touch is diabolical at times. He is in his best position atm, occasionally coming inside and lashing a fierce shot. 

[Bettsj2]

Jeff greatest asset is his pace when he has space to run into, and in the middle of the park you need someone who has a great touch because there is no space. He'd be wasted there because his touch is diabolical at times. He is in his best position atm, occasionally coming inside and lashing a fierce shot.

By jove I think he's got it.

lol lol

[The Doctor]

Jeff greatest asset is his pace when he has space to run into, and in the middle of the park you need someone who has a great touch because there is no space. He'd be wasted there because his touch is diabolical at times. He is in his best position atm, occasionally coming inside and lashing a fierce shot.

Yeah, but he touched the ball in the centre once so he must be a cm

[jammie82uk]

So let's get this straight fox ulike as I see it so far You want Jeff to be an attacking midfielder and to play in the middle but not be a CM even tho you want him to tuck in and make a three

A couple of questions

(1) are wingers not classed as attacking midfielders?

(2) Are you trying to say Jeff should play the number 10 role?

[TOMBlcfc]

Don't worry guys i think i've found out why he wants him to play in the middle

Either

1) He wants Jeff to be the most versatile player to have ever existed

or

2) He is secretly Nigel Pearson who is desperate to revert back to his beloved 4 CM diamond formation

[The Doctor]

I reckon we should try jeff in goal next match, he's cleared shots off the line before.

[cjslcfc]

By Jove I think he's got it.

.

This thread is on loop now.

The de laet/Derby thing has already been done with Chris Wood at burnley. Please refer back to my "reasons why you're a tool" post for answers.

Am I missing something here: did we beat Stoke with a full-strenght side?

 

There's something rather ironic about someone who says we should play Schlupp centrally calling me a tool.

 

Or am I missing the point somehow?

[BoyJones]

Are we talking about our Jeff Schlupp?

He plays all over the field. That's why he is so much fun watching. If we don't know where he plays or what position he will pop up in, what chance have the opposition got!

I love watching him, he's so unpredictable, but he does makes things happen.

He's tries so hard for the team, you have to love him and accept his defects, ie decision making / first touch etc.

[Fox Ulike]

Jeff greatest asset is his pace when he has space to run into, and in the middle of the park you need someone who has a great touch because there is no space. He'd be wasted there because his touch is diabolical at times. He is in his best position atm, occasionally coming inside and lashing a fierce shot.

Stoke...injury crisis... Accommodate Albrighton... Raheem Sterling not Stevie Gerrard etc etc. Are large chunks of my posts invisible or are you just ignoring them so you can join in?

Yeah, but he touched the ball in the centre once so he must be a cm

Hilarious.

I reckon we should try jeff in goal next match, he's cleared shots off the line before.

Even funnier. Comedy gold. Got any others?

So let's get this straight fox ulike as I see it so far You want Jeff to be an attacking midfielder and to play in the middle but not be a CM even tho you want him to tuck in and make a three

A couple of questions

(1) are wingers not classed as attacking midfielders?

(2) Are you trying to say Jeff should play the number 10 role?

Dunno. What do you call Raheem Sterling when he plays that role?

There's something rather ironic about someone who says we should play Schlupp centrally calling me a tool.

Or am I missing the point somehow?

No you're spot on. You're a tool.

[Fox Ulike]

IS THERE NO ONE ELSE?

[Bettsj2]

IS THERE NO ONE ELSE?

lol lol

Jeff in the middle!

[shailen]

Stoke...injury crisis... Accommodate Albrighton... Raheem Sterling not Stevie Gerrard etc etc. Are large chunks of my posts invisible or are you just ignoring them so you can join in?

Hilarious.

Even funnier. Comedy gold. Got any others?

Dunno. What do you call Raheem Sterling when he plays that role?

No you're spot on. You're a tool.

 

Schlupp is a versatile player but only on the left side. Sterling can play anywhere in the attacking line, because he is on a whole different level as a footballer. For me, you always play the best players in their best positions. Regardless, of the injury crisis, you dont move players into unfamiliar positions. Jeff has the touch of a rapist and you're asking him to play in a position where he needs to be intricate in his play, like an Erikson, Silva, Carzola, Mata...etc. 

[Fox Ulike]

Schlupp is a versatile player but only on the left side. Sterling can play anywhere in the attacking line, because he is on a whole different level as a footballer. For me, you always play the best players in their best positions. Regardless, of the injury crisis, you dont move players into unfamiliar positions. Jeff has the touch of a rapist and you're asking him to play in a position where he needs to be intricate in his play, like an Erikson, Silva, Carzola, Mata...etc.

The point of an injury crisis is that you don't have enough fit players to play everyone in their best positions. Otherwise its not really a crisis is it??

To use one of the Doctor's hilarious gags: what would you do if Hamer got sent off and we'd used all three subs? Just play without a keeper cos its no one's "best position"?

[shailen]

The point of an injury crisis is that you don't have enough fit players to play everyone in their best positions. Otherwise its not really a crisis is it??

To use one of the Doctor's hilarious gags: what would you do if Hamer got sent off and we'd used all three subs? Just play without a keeper cos its no one's "best position"?

 

 

The keeper situation is hardly comparable because it's such a specialist position, but our problem is in CM. We can use Kramaric or Nugent as an attacking midfielder, not Jeff Schlupp.

 

We could use a CB as a defensive midfielder, for example. Think that makes more sense. Even if all of our CM were injured we can do better than playing Schlupp in the middle. I don't get how he'd be remotely effective in that position.

[Manwell Pablo]

The keeper situation is hardly comparable because it's such a specialist position, but our problem is in CM. We can use Kramaric or Nugent as an attacking midfielder, not Jeff Schlupp.

We could use a CB as a defensive midfielder, for example. Think that makes more sense. Even if all of our CM were injured we can do better than playing Schlupp in the middle. I don't get how he'd be remotely effective in that position.

Got to give kudos to ulike for sticking to his guns even if Jeff is probably just in front of mark swarzer on the who should play in midfield list (attacking or otherwise)

[Fox Ulike]

The keeper situation is hardly comparable because it's such a specialist position, but our problem is in CM. We can use Kramaric or Nugent as an attacking midfielder, not Jeff Schlupp.

We could use a CB as a defensive midfielder, for example. Think that makes more sense. Even if all of our CM were injured we can do better than playing Schlupp in the middle. I don't get how he'd be remotely effective in that position.

Yes but for Stoke Kramaric was on the bench so presumably not considered match ready by Pearson. Nugent fair enough but given his lack of goals maybe it was worth trying something different for one game? A game in which, incidentally, we failed to score. That's all really. Not sure how and why this has spiralled!.

Got to give kudos to ulike for sticking to his guns even if Jeff is probably just in front of mark swarzer on the who should play in midfield list (attacking or otherwise)

Appreciate the sentiment bro But after Nugent and Knocky, there wasn't really another available player who could have taken that role.

Plus, putting Schlupp there would also have allowed Albrighton, MoTM in the previous game against Villa, to retain his place.

[Bettsj2]

Yes but for Stoke Kramaric was on the bench so presumably not considered match ready by Pearson. Nugent fair enough but given his lack of goals maybe it was worth trying something different for one game? A game in which, incidentally, we failed to score. That's all really. Not sure how and why this has spiralled!.

Appreciate the sentiment bro But after Nugent and Knocky, there wasn't really another available player who could have taken that role.

Plus, putting Schlupp there would also have allowed Albrighton, MoTM in the previous game against Villa, to retain his place.

This.

[cjslcfc]

Stoke...injury crisis... Accommodate Albrighton... Raheem Sterling not Stevie Gerrard etc etc. Are large chunks of my posts invisible or are you just ignoring them so you can join in?

Hilarious.

Even funnier. Comedy gold. Got any others?

Dunno. What do you call Raheem Sterling when he plays that role?

No you're spot on. You're a tool.

 

   

 

Right let's just look at this again. I'm perfectly happy with the idea of putting an extra body in midfield against Stoke as we were clearly outnumbered then and struggled to get any sort of grip on that area of the field. However, isn't this what Nugent does anyway? We don't play a 4-4-2. Ask Nigel and he would tell you that we don't actually play 4-4-2 no matter what people think. So, if it's a 4-4-1-1 surely Nugent is dropping in to the attacking midfield area in which you want Schlupp to be positioned anyway? We still struggled in that respect.

 

On the other hand, maybe it's not about the numbers in there but the players who are playing?? King and Drinkwater were always likely to struggle against N'Zonzi and Whelan. If we had Hammond and James/Cambiasso playing I imagine we would have fared a lot better. I can only hypothesise but their better physical presence may have given us a much better chance in that area. Unfortunately, Nigel's hand was forced and we only had 2 fully fit CMs. You can't just stick one more player in there, no matter who it is, and then say it would work because we have 3. The actual players playing there are pretty much as important as the number of players. This is why it's so ridiculous to claim you wanted Schlupp to join a midfield 3.  

 

It's honourable to stick to your argument in the face of a lot of criticism but come on, think about it for a second. As many have said Schlupp does not nearly possess enough of the attributes needed to play in the centre of the pitch. His positioning is pretty awful (although, he is learning) and he doesn't have the vision, technique or general footballing intelligence to play in that area of the pitch!

 

Then again it's probably hard to get someone to see the error of his own ways when he claims to have done a better job than Pearson throughout the season. You insist that we play 4-4-2 a lot, yet if you ever go to games I think you'd notice something. Look how we set up when the opposition have the ball and you'll see the 2 CMs sit, Nugent (when he plays, or Kramaric now he plays that role) will sit behind the main striker and the wingers will tuck in slightly. That gives us a 4-2-3-1/4-5-1 compact shape. Isn't this what you're asking for?

 

 

 

 

If we had no defensive midfielder available then surely it would make sense to shore up that area with an extra body against 3 Stoke midfielders? I’d have played Schlupp in the middle as an attacking midfielder  and asked King and Drinky to sit deeper (Schlupp does tend to drop in there anyway a lot when we don’t have possession) and put Albrighton on the wing. Ulloa on his own up front.

 

 

[Dan LCFC]

What about Tom Lawrence? Who played most of the cup game against Newcastle as part of a midfield three. Not ideal but still.

[BigMicky]

What about Tom Lawrence? Who played most of the cup game against Newcastle as part of a midfield three. Not ideal but still.

With the exception of Wood and Ulloa, I would prefer any other outfield player to that of Schlupp.

[MrSpaM]

What about Tom Lawrence? Who played most of the cup game against Newcastle as part of a midfield three. Not ideal but still.

Looked completely out of his depth against Stoke when he came on

[Dan LCFC]

Should never have come on instead of Albrighton but I mean to give us an extra body in midfield from the off. Playing against a team at 0-0 is very different from playing against them at 0-1.

[Fox Ulike]

   

 

Right let's just look at this again. I'm perfectly happy with the idea of putting an extra body in midfield against Stoke as we were clearly outnumbered then and struggled to get any sort of grip on that area of the field. However, isn't this what Nugent does anyway? We don't play a 4-4-2. Ask Nigel and he would tell you that we don't actually play 4-4-2 no matter what people think. So, if it's a 4-4-1-1 surely Nugent is dropping in to the attacking midfield area in which you want Schlupp to be positioned anyway? We still struggled in that respect.

 

On the other hand, maybe it's not about the numbers in there but the players who are playing?? King and Drinkwater were always likely to struggle against N'Zonzi and Whelan. If we had Hammond and James/Cambiasso playing I imagine we would have fared a lot better. I can only hypothesise but their better physical presence may have given us a much better chance in that area. Unfortunately, Nigel's hand was forced and we only had 2 fully fit CMs. You can't just stick one more player in there, no matter who it is, and then say it would work because we have 3. The actual players playing there are pretty much as important as the number of players. This is why it's so ridiculous to claim you wanted Schlupp to join a midfield 3.  

 

It's honourable to stick to your argument in the face of a lot of criticism but come on, think about it for a second. As many have said Schlupp does not nearly possess enough of the attributes needed to play in the centre of the pitch. His positioning is pretty awful (although, he is learning) and he doesn't have the vision, technique or general footballing intelligence to play in that area of the pitch!

 

Then again it's probably hard to get someone to see the error of his own ways when he claims to have done a better job than Pearson throughout the season. You insist that we play 4-4-2 a lot, yet if you ever go to games I think you'd notice something. Look how we set up when the opposition have the ball and you'll see the 2 CMs sit, Nugent (when he plays, or Kramaric now he plays that role) will sit behind the main striker and the wingers will tuck in slightly. That gives us a 4-2-3-1/4-5-1 compact shape. Isn't this what you're asking for?

I agree with much of what you say.

The 441 with Nugent is a lot better than the 442. True. And Nugent does a lot of the work I'm talking about to give us a bit extra in midfield. BUT... Nugent has not offered enough of a goal threat this season.

Against Villa he missed a couple of sitters, and so i was a bit surprised to see him in the starting 11 against Villa, with Albrighton dropped.

Schlupp has played as an attacker and a winger, AND has found the net this season. You can talk about vision and intelligence all you want. I'm Talking about our only player (bar Ulloa) who has showed he can put the ball in the back of the net this season.

He's got pace and could of given Stoke's big central defenders a few headaches breaking forward from midfield, and his energy could have helped us stop Stoke dominate the midfield. Who knows. It would also have meant Albrighton stayed in the team.

That is of course all speculation. If you don't agree with it that's fine. It's just an opinion, and the only reason this thread has crawled to five tedious pages is cos of all the muppets desperately trying to score points by proving it's "wrong", and the bigger attention-seeking muppets pretending to find it "hilarious"! (CJS i excuse you from both these categories as you have just offered a fleshed-out analysis of why you think it wouldn't work. Respect.)

I know some people will laugh at anything, but suggesting that a goal-scoring winger play more centrally for ONE game to cover a shortage of proper CMs really isn't so funny that Big Micky should fall about laughing. Thats just a bit embarrasing.

[BigMicky]

I agree with much of what you say.

The 441 with Nugent is a lot better than the 442. True. And Nugent does a lot of the work I'm talking about to give us a bit extra in midfield. BUT... Nugent has not offered enough of a goal threat this season.

Against Villa he missed a couple of sitters, and so i was a bit surprised to see him in the starting 11 against Villa, with Albrighton dropped.

Schlupp has played as an attacker and a winger, AND has found the net this season. You can talk about vision and intelligence all you want. I'm Talking about our only player (bar Ulloa) who has showed he can put the ball in the back of the net this season.

He's got pace and could of given Stoke's big central defenders a few headaches breaking forward from midfield, and his energy could have helped us stop Stoke dominate the midfield. Who knows. It would also have meant Albrighton stayed in the team.

That is of course all speculation. If you don't agree with it that's fine. It's just an opinion, and the only reason this thread has crawled to five tedious pages is cos of all the muppets desperately trying to score points by proving it's "wrong", and the bigger attention-seeking muppets pretending to find it "hilarious"! (CJS i excuse you from both these categories as you have just offered a fleshed-out analysis of why you think it wouldn't work. Respect.)

I know some people will laugh at anything, but suggesting that a goal-scoring winger play more centrally for ONE game to cover a shortage of proper CMs really isn't so funny that Big Micky should fall about laughing. Thats just a bit embarrasing.

Wow wrong again. Keep moving those goalposts.

[shailen]

I agree with much of what you say.

The 441 with Nugent is a lot better than the 442. True. And Nugent does a lot of the work I'm talking about to give us a bit extra in midfield. BUT... Nugent has not offered enough of a goal threat this season.

Against Villa he missed a couple of sitters, and so i was a bit surprised to see him in the starting 11 against Villa, with Albrighton dropped.

Schlupp has played as an attacker and a winger, AND has found the net this season. You can talk about vision and intelligence all you want. I'm Talking about our only player (bar Ulloa) who has showed he can put the ball in the back of the net this season.

He's got pace and could of given Stoke's big central defenders a few headaches breaking forward from midfield, and his energy could have helped us stop Stoke dominate the midfield. Who knows. It would also have meant Albrighton stayed in the team.

That is of course all speculation. If you don't agree with it that's fine. It's just an opinion, and the only reason this thread has crawled to five tedious pages is cos of all the muppets desperately trying to score points by proving it's "wrong", and the bigger attention-seeking muppets pretending to find it "hilarious"! (CJS i excuse you from both these categories as you have just offered a fleshed-out analysis of why you think it wouldn't work. Respect.)

I know some people will laugh at anything, but suggesting that a goal-scoring winger play more centrally for ONE game to cover a shortage of proper CMs really isn't so funny that Big Micky should fall about laughing. Thats just a bit embarrasing.

 

Haven't you just done the same thing?