shen Posted 23 February 2015 Posted 23 February 2015 He had a really good game. Especially considering he was hung out to dry upfront on his own! Did well Yeah, he did alright linking up, but again, he was nothing spectacular. Didn't create many openings and only had one threatening effort. I'm not laying the blame on Krammy for this, but to say he was more effective against Everton than Schlupp is stretching it.
Swiss_tony Posted 23 February 2015 Posted 23 February 2015 He had a really good game. Especially considering he was hung out to dry upfront on his own! Did well his preffered position is actually as a lone striker. which i'm sure is why pearson is palying this formation.
Swiss_tony Posted 23 February 2015 Posted 23 February 2015 Yeah, he did alright linking up, but again, he was nothing spectacular. Didn't create many openings and only had one threatening effort. I'm not laying the blame on Krammy for this, but to say he was more effective against Everton than Schlupp is stretching it. he does lots of things and does them well. schlupp doesn't. you're probably one of those people who thought heskey wasn't very good because he didn't score enough goals. krams all round play is excellent, and he's miles better than schlupp.
Dickov22 Posted 24 February 2015 Posted 24 February 2015 his preffered position is actually as a lone striker. which i'm sure is why pearson is palying this formation. I find that very hard to believe. When has he said that?
Dickov22 Posted 24 February 2015 Posted 24 February 2015 his preffered position is actually as a lone striker. which i'm sure is why pearson is palying this formation. Pearson explained to Guy Mowbray that the new formation is about two things: Experience and an extra man at the back which therefore allows him to still play two wide men.
shen Posted 24 February 2015 Posted 24 February 2015 he does lots of things and does them well. schlupp doesn't. you're probably one of those people who thought heskey wasn't very good because he didn't score enough goals. krams all round play is excellent, and he's miles better than schlupp. Stop assuming things about me. Can you just accept that I'm not buying into this Schlupp dislike that you seem to have? I can perfectly well recognise Kramaric's ability as a footballer, and the same goes for Schlupp. Just because our youth product is not as technically or tactically gifted as our £9m (! NINE MILLION !) man, doesn't mean he's not a useful or effective player. He was the one getting on the end of our chances on Sunday, one of which people completely ignore was actually superbly controlled in the first place. Oh no, instead let's hammer him on the head because of the shot he dragged wide and ignore Kramaric's woeful shot out of the park at the end. He had just as much, if not more, impact as Kramaric, and no amount of belittling will change my opinion.
Silverdaz Posted 24 February 2015 Posted 24 February 2015 What I said was, if Pearson insists on playing a back 5 (eg 3 centre halves) I'd much rather he played his full backs/wingers as proper wing backs- Schlupp and De Laet. Cant you see though with playing Konchesky and Simpson there if gives the licence to the wingers to just do there business and not defend as much
Swiss_tony Posted 24 February 2015 Posted 24 February 2015 I find that very hard to believe. When has he said that? it's on his wiki page for a start (so it must be true)
Dickov22 Posted 25 February 2015 Posted 25 February 2015 Cant you see though with playing Konchesky and Simpson there if gives the licence to the wingers to just do there business and not defend as much Yes certainly but I don't agree with if. Paul Konchesky wouldn't have been in my team last season, let alone this season.
Hirsty The Blue 94 Posted 25 February 2015 Posted 25 February 2015 i expect competence in the position. Or a full back to not be running towards his own goal playing catchup with an opposition player over and over again. the classic yesterday was the ball over the top that caught him out completely. he looked around to see if anybody was there andwhen he realized lennon was in he stuck his hand up for offside. he's useless as a defender. But he wasn't playing as a full back, but as a wing back so would be higher up the pitch than usual. With 3 centre halves the responsibility falls to them to get round and cover, and in this case that was Upson who had a torrid time. I do think we should have bought a new left (and we tried Creswell) but if we get relegated it will not be because of Paul Konchesky.
Rasmic123 Posted 25 February 2015 Posted 25 February 2015 Schwarzer 6 - solid Huth 5 - see below Konchesky 2 - caught out of position so many times, gave the ball away. lennon/coleman had a field day down their right. garbage. what a wazzock
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.