eunmac Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 Today should have at least been played like a cup final but we were run ragged (at least until Manutd sat back on purpose), and 100% agree midfield is our biggest issue. Injuries aside, King and Drinkwater - not a good pairing against stronger teams. Cambiasso should have been on at the beginning - his short passes, spread play and give and go's under pressure against a talented midfield that will run us down at least give us a chance to hold the ball a little. If he's on the bench then he's good to start and help the game get settled. 2am kickoff for me here. Not worth getting out of bed if we're going to play that midfield combo again.
SecretPro Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 Again, I don't think it's so much King that's the problem. It's how he's being played that's the problem IMO. We have no clear game plan and Christ knows what roles our midfielders have got. I didn't know we had any midfielders?! (small print: This is a joke - obviously Cambiasso, James and Hammond are midfielders)
Dan Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 The midfield has only become an issue once we've started playing a relatively poor one. No co-incidence that we're nowhere to be seen when we have a pairing of Drinkwater & King that were average at best as a partnership in the Championship.
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 Bit harsh to call the second a goalkeeping mistake.
cjslcfc Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 Once I saw Drinkwater and King were starting today I knew it was game over before we'd even started. Needed to start with the team we had when Cambiasso came on. 3 in midfield and maybe even Nugent to drop onto Blind like he did last time. Not got pissed off with Pearson too much but today's selection was pretty imponderable.
Stadt Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 Once I saw Drinkwater and King were starting today I knew it was game over before we'd even started. Needed to start with the team we had when Cambiasso came on. 3 in midfield and maybe even Nugent to drop onto Blind like he did last time. Not got pissed off with Pearson too much but today's selection was pretty imponderable. I told my dad we'd struggle against Stoke with those in the middle. They just can't play together.
Guest Col city fan Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 The midfield has only become an issue once we've started playing a relatively poor one. No co-incidence that we're nowhere to be seen when we have a pairing of Drinkwater & King that were average at best as a partnership in the Championship. That really is utter nonsense. What about the run we went on earlier in the season where we obtained three points out of 39 with a pretty constant midfield containing Cambiasso and another? Or two others? Get real for God's sake.
reynard Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 Midfield has seen the area of the team with the most changes all season, defence has been pretty much the same and not really embarrassed itself bar a few individual mistakes. Think its very clear now that drinkwater and king are not premier league midfielders and dont look as though they ever will. This is really just the tip of the iceberg. In many ways winning the Championship last year in such style and really by so many points has been an issue. It gave us all belief that our players could make the step up but the gulf between the two leagues is just massive now. Drinkwater and King aren't good enough but they're not alone. In fact far too many players have shown that they are not able to make the step up and our summer recruitment has been very questionable. The midfiled is a major issue though. I include wide players in this. Cambiasso has been a disappointment in my mind. Hammond has been effective but limited the rest really aren't anywhere near good enough and I'd include James in that though he looks better sometimes but some of his perfomances have been dreadful. Our wide midfielders are pretty much the same. Schlupp finally looking ok but for much of the season has been poor. Mahrez brilliant one moment but naive and innefective the next. Albrighton and Knockaert who knows really neither have played enough but look ok when they have done. We really need two midfielders now. One who has some physical prescence on the pitch when we need it and the other who can create chances. Neither is likely to happen. But all over the pitch we haven't been good enough, strikers who can't score, full backs basically not up to the job and whatever people say we really don't have a decent pair of central defenders. One is good enough but the others have proven not to be so. Yet we are still in with a chance and but for a stupid foul by James against Burnley we would now be sitting 18th.
funkyrobot Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 That really is utter nonsense. What about the run we went on earlier in the season where we obtained three points out of 39 with a pretty constant midfield containing Cambiasso and another? Or two others? Get real for God's sake. I don't get why you think his comment is utter nonsense? He's saying that King and Drinky are a poor pairing in midfield and performances like today back that up. For me Kingy's presence puts pressure on the other midfielder he plays with as he doesn't influence the game and passes responsibility with regards 'risky' forward passes time and time again. Drinkwater is off form but he was on his own in that 1st half. Against a top club and based on current form I'd play Hammond, Cambiasso and James but I've not given up hope that Drinky can find his form again.
the-blue-wildabeast Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 All our central midfielders are very poor, and king is at least two divisions too high, and the fact we now think Hammond, who is a very limited and slow player that was good enough in the championship is our best bet shows exactly why we will playing Millwall again next season.
Guest Col city fan Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 I don't get why you think his comment is utter nonsense? He's saying that King and Drinky are a poor pairing in midfield and performances like today back that up. For me Kingy's presence puts pressure on the other midfielder he plays with as he doesn't influence the game and passes responsibility with regards 'risky' forward passes time and time again. Drinkwater is off form but he was on his own in that 1st half. Against a top club and based on current form I'd play Hammond, Cambiasso and James but I've not given up hope that Drinky can find his form again. Dan's implication is that our midfield was fine, and has also been a problem since it was weakened with the Drinkwater/King combo. Which of course, is rubbish. The terrible run we went on, pre and post Christmas..King hardly even featured. Our midfield is not good enough at this level, period.
NeilLCFC Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 Why do people think our defenders or midfielders are the problem. After yesterday I'm staring to think Pearson is the problem. In the past when he's made stupid decisions I've been able to see what he was trying to do, after yesterday I am sure he hasn't got a fvcking clue. Super shit team selection and could someone please tell me why you would take £17m worth of strikers off and play Nugent as the lone striker when 3-0 down at utd?! His tactics have been questionable far too many times this season but yesterday confirmed he's gone mental.
MPH Posted 1 February 2015 Author Posted 1 February 2015 Bit harsh to call the second a goalkeeping mistake. Former goalkeeper myself.
AyewJoking Posted 1 February 2015 Posted 1 February 2015 hang on, I thought we were making enough chances and just needed a quality forward like Kramaric to put them away?
Guest Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 hang on, I thought we were making enough chances and just needed a quality forward like Kramaric to put them away? That was last week. This week it's midfield, next week it'll be defence and rotate that pattern until the end of the season
narboroughblue Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 Real dilemma this and not convinced today will solve it. As a 4 we struggle to keep the ball and create for our strikers. As a 5 we just struggle full stop and create even less with the ball just coming back at us constantly as we don't get up to support the lone striker. I have changed my opinion numerous times between the two formations but at the end of the day I've concluded that we just don't have the quality in midfield to play consistently with the ball at this level. Hence we give up possession and try to bypass the midfield with quick attacks. Dangerous game as we are relying on us taking our few chances and not making mistakes the other end. If we don't do business today then I would stick with 4 4 1 1 with James and Hammond against the better sides or defending a lead and James and Cambi against the lower sides or when chasing goals.
filbertway Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 Why do people think our defenders or midfielders are the problem. After yesterday I'm staring to think Pearson is the problem. In the past when he's made stupid decisions I've been able to see what he was trying to do, after yesterday I am sure he hasn't got a fvcking clue. Super shit team selection and could someone please tell me why you would take £17m worth of strikers off and play Nugent as the lone striker when 3-0 down at utd?! His tactics have been questionable far too many times this season but yesterday confirmed he's gone mental. Did seem odd, but we did win the second half...so whatever it was, was an improvement.
Babylon Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 That was last week. This week it's midfield, next week it'll be defence and rotate that pattern until the end of the season Eventually we might get to the point that we're not brilliant in any position, due to us being a newly promoted team. Sometimes we're good in midfield, sometimes bad, sometimes good at the back, sometimes bad, sometimes good upfront, sometimes bad. A bit like the 4/5 teams above us in the table.
conLAD logan Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 Certainly not a coincidence that when Hammond plays we generally get results, he's got the energy in midfield we need compared to our other midfielders
Danno Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 Drinkwater and king were too lightweight in the championship.....Why did we think they could perform at this level?Probably due to the fact that Drinkwater was voted as our player of the season and one of best three players in the league by his fellow professionals.
Fox Ulike Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 Individually all of our midfielders are OK: James, Cambiasso, Hammond, King, Drinkwater. They are "GOOD ENOUGH". This seems really obvious to me, but if there's two of you but the opposition have 3, then you're going to look shit. Pearson will soon start playing a midfield of one, just to be fvcking awkward. 4-1-5. Vardy as captain.
Manwell Pablo Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 Dan's implication is that our midfield was fine, and has also been a problem since it was weakened with the Drinkwater/King combo. Which of course, is rubbish. The terrible run we went on, pre and post Christmas..King hardly even featured. Our midfield is not good enough at this level, period. the run ended just post Christmas when we started to play 4-4-2 with James cammbiasso Hammond all fit and playing big parts.Before that, we played that horrific diamond that often featured king and had a stint playing 4-5-1, during which as I pointed out to you nearly every goal we conceded was an individual defensive error or a set piece. No matter what the formation. The only difference is playing 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 we actually looked like scoring ourselves (I'd be willing to wager we score less than a goal every 180 minutes with more than two in there when nugent isn't playing and that will get you relegated) You cannot sit there and say us being bottom proves our midfield isn't good enough, or sinle them out for the problems pre x mas. it proves the team isn't good enough not that certain areas or individuals included in the team are not. The simple crux of this whole thing is quite simple. People are too stupid to realise that we are going to get out played frequently by better sides, Saturday is a prime example. I find it hilarious people are using a game away at old Trafford to try and illustrate their points as their desperate to look knowledgable or prove point. things are getting better and Saturday was to be expected and Stoke was unfortunate but those two aside, we've picked up some great results for a side like us since Xmas. Playing the players and formation you don't want to play, I understand that's hard for you to swallow but trying exaggerate our flaws with nothing but an away defeat to Man U as evidence is
Captain... Posted 2 February 2015 Posted 2 February 2015 The problem is the midfield in my opinion. It is ok off the ball but when we have the ball they are often panicky and rushed and against United looked like they didn't want the ball. It was more evident on Saturday as United pressed us constantly, but we don't work hard enough to create the simple ball, too often players are isolated and don't have any option other than a hit and hope. The midfield should be doing that, when the defence has the ball they should be looking for it, when the attack has the ball they should be looking for it. When the midfield has the ball then the attack and defence have to be making themselves available for a simple ball and not charging forwards hoping they pick out an improbable pass. Watch our next game how often are players isolated with no options?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.