Tyrone Mings

[Nigel]

On 18/03/2019 at 14:50, KenjiOgiwara said:

Why change up a defence when it's looking solid? At least wait until it's reasonable to make a change. 

It's because we would be even better with tuanzebe playing with mings; Mainly because he not only helps make the defence stronger but also helps break lines running into midfield. 

He is a top prospect for a reason!

Edited March 19, 2019 by Nigel

[KenjiOgiwara]

6 hours ago, Nigel said:

It's because we would be even better with tuanzebe playing with mings; Mainly because he not only helps make the defence stronger but also helps break lines running into midfield. 

He is a top prospect for a reason!

What's the point of winning with 1 or two more goals? There's a risk reward scenario here and the reward isn't big enough. 

[Nigel]

2 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

What's the point of winning with 1 or two more goals? There's a risk reward scenario here and the reward isn't big enough. 

Because if we do manage to get into the playoffs we will be playing some good sides and we will need all the edge we can get. This run won't last forever.

[Stevo985]

9 hours ago, Danny_Villaman84 said:

Chester and Hause, with Elphick back up in RCB. that why in transfer windows i was mentions these barbet come in free transfer take LCB roles so will good balance, if we go in and win the bid war for Mings to join will very good move.. 

so Elphick-Hause and Chester-Mings/Barbet so prefect balanced and good back up options ...

for me i think Elphick is better than chester in defend and aerial, chester better football talent and quick defend that Elphick. 

I look forward to AXEL-MINGS in Centre half it is gonna interest partner and powerfully partner .. sorry Hause :S even your play great latest .. and Axel take your place for good balance unfortunate as Hause is look awkard in RCB, i would love see him in natural LCB roles in future with Elphick or Chester in next season.

It's definitely good to have so many options all of a sudden!

 

Good to see you back by the way, Danny. Haven't seen you around on here for a while

[Paddywhack]

I don't know why Smith has given himself the selection headache of having 5 good options at CB, Bruce must be laughing his head off.

"Just have two centre-backs in the whole squad and you never have this problem", he'll be muttering.

[KenjiOgiwara]

1 hour ago, Nigel said:

Because if we do manage to get into the playoffs we will be playing some good sides and we will need all the edge we can get. This run won't last forever.

That's the whole point of never switching up a winning side. You never know what "edge" you get from dropping in-form players and replacing them with players who haven't been playing for a while. As long as you keep winning and the defence is looking solid, it's absolutely bonkers to switch it up. Unless there's a big tactical advantage of doing so, but even then you could argue it's a bad idea. 
"

[TheStagMan]

26 minutes ago, Paddywhack said:

I don't know why Smith has given himself the selection headache of having 5 good options at CB, Bruce must be laughing his head off.

"Just have two centre-backs in the whole squad and you never have this problem", he'll be muttering.

Indeed, further alleviated by playing one of the two at RB. Then you just plonk a DM in at CB and Bob's your uncle. Easy!

[Nigel]

35 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

That's the whole point of never switching up a winning side. You never know what "edge" you get from dropping in-form players and replacing them with players who haven't been playing for a while. As long as you keep winning and the defence is looking solid, it's absolutely bonkers to switch it up. Unless there's a big tactical advantage of doing so, but even then you could argue it's a bad idea. 
"

Theres an argument for this, however i think adding a better player into the fold will reap better results more often than not.

I think that Hause offers more than Taylor down the left; If you add this to Tuanzebes better ball carrying technique from the centre it is worth the gamble. It will add further dimensions to our game to make us harder to counter, hence a tactical advantage if you like.

Personally i dont think there will be much of a downside as it also helps keep players fresh  and fit.

[terrytini]

53 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

That's the whole point of never switching up a winning side. You never know what "edge" you get from dropping in-form players and replacing them with players who haven't been playing for a while. As long as you keep winning and the defence is looking solid, it's absolutely bonkers to switch it up. Unless there's a big tactical advantage of doing so, but even then you could argue it's a bad idea. 
"

Very much agree.

It’s not the case that because Player A might be “ better” than Player B the team will automatically perform better with the change. 

Id see the argument if we were talking about whether a fit again 25 year old JT was being kept out by, say, Nathan Baker, but this isn’t close to that. Hause has performed well, and uses the ball well, and has gelled well with Mings ( although Mings is good enough to make anyone look good).....no way in the world would I roll the dice on that.

Plenty of room in the run up for Subs to be used well. 

[Vive_La_Villa]

9 hours ago, terrytini said:

Very much agree.

It’s not the case that because Player A might be “ better” than Player B the team will automatically perform better with the change. 

Id see the argument if we were talking about whether a fit again 25 year old JT was being kept out by, say, Nathan Baker, but this isn’t close to that. Hause has performed well, and uses the ball well, and has gelled well with Mings ( although Mings is good enough to make anyone look good).....no way in the world would I roll the dice on that.

Plenty of room in the run up for Subs to be used well. 

Exactly this. I understand fans really rate Axel and I would also like to see Hause at left back rather than Taylor. But the fact is Hause and Mings have looked as solid as it gets together. I wouldnt want to mess about with that partnership unless I had too.

[TRO]

On 18/03/2019 at 20:58, GingerCollins29 said:

Better than terry imo

In some ways yes ....in other ways No.

At the highest level JT would be my call....He is a like a well oiled machine that reads the game so well and organises well, but he has to have the talent around him....John was a Rolls Royce Centre Back, but I don't think as imposing as I was expecting at this level.

Mings at this level has everything....He is more dominant in the air than John and physically more imposing....He attacks the ball with more gusto and aggression.....but I would suspect not as polished as John at the top level...not YET anyway.

I think Mings has transformed us and it doesn't surprise me at all, that a player of his stature has.....I love his play.

Bear in mind JT was 37 playing with us (amazing)

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by TRO

[TRO]

10 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

That's the whole point of never switching up a winning side. You never know what "edge" you get from dropping in-form players and replacing them with players who haven't been playing for a while. As long as you keep winning and the defence is looking solid, it's absolutely bonkers to switch it up. Unless there's a big tactical advantage of doing so, but even then you could argue it's a bad idea. 
"

Its so hard to get a winning formula so why change it?

also players accept being left out when the team is winning much more readily than a tactical change.....team spirit is also crucial in a winning run.

so many factors to avoid rocking the boat.

You could leave an unfancied player( by the fans) out and he might be best mates with your star player.....that's how sensitive it can be, to disrupt.

[OutByEaster?]

Growing up he had a Rottweiler called Heskey. 

 

 

[VILLAMARV]

14 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Growing up he had a Rottweiler called Heskey.

Might have seen him play

[Carlos_the_third]

I was speaking to a couple of Bournemouth fans on the way back from the England game last night, who reckoned that they would be more than up for selling TM for £10m as he had been poor for them, and they thought he wasn’t good enough for the Prem. Apparently, they couldn’t trust him in a 2 man central defence, so he only played in a 3, but had poor distribution and ‘bambi on ice’ qualities when trying to bring the ball out from the back. I thought this was very interesting, as I’d say he’s seemed the exact opposite for Villa. Personally, I’d love us to sign him permanently based on what I’ve seen at Villa, and would be more than happy with him as one of a two if we go up!

[TRO]

On 23/03/2019 at 11:43, Carlos_the_third said:

I was speaking to a couple of Bournemouth fans on the way back from the England game last night, who reckoned that they would be more than up for selling TM for £10m as he had been poor for them, and they thought he wasn’t good enough for the Prem. Apparently, they couldn’t trust him in a 2 man central defence, so he only played in a 3, but had poor distribution and ‘bambi on ice’ qualities when trying to bring the ball out from the back. I thought this was very interesting, as I’d say he’s seemed the exact opposite for Villa. Personally, I’d love us to sign him permanently based on what I’ve seen at Villa, and would be more than happy with him as one of a two if we go up!

Perhaps, he was just coming back from injury.....Its difficult for us fans to reconcile that part of things.

Dean has already said he was happy he was over them, when he came to us....hence his performances.

Personally, I have always found it difficult to balance the injury thing when appraising players, after a game ....because lets face it, if they are carrying a knock they can't be at their best....that's why we all comment on things, when we maybe don't know, the full picture.

[sne]

On 23/03/2019 at 12:43, Carlos_the_third said:

I was speaking to a couple of Bournemouth fans on the way back from the England game last night, who reckoned that they would be more than up for selling TM for £10m as he had been poor for them, and they thought he wasn’t good enough for the Prem. Apparently, they couldn’t trust him in a 2 man central defence, so he only played in a 3, but had poor distribution and ‘bambi on ice’ qualities when trying to bring the ball out from the back. I thought this was very interesting, as I’d say he’s seemed the exact opposite for Villa. Personally, I’d love us to sign him permanently based on what I’ve seen at Villa, and would be more than happy with him as one of a two if we go up!

I can see what they mean tbf.

If he tried to play the way he does with the ball here against PL strikers he'd be punished time and time again.

It's all well and good being a bit cheeky with the ball against this level players but the PL strikers are for the most part both faster stronger and especially smarter and much better at pressing the defenders.

They will just swarm him and take the ball off him when he tried to do a dummy as last man in defense. 

I think he's brilliant in the Championship and if fit could potentially be good in the PL as well. But he'd have to stop with his Zlatan dribbles or we'd all get very frustrated with him very fast.

[mikeyp102]

On 23/03/2019 at 11:43, Carlos_the_third said:

I was speaking to a couple of Bournemouth fans on the way back from the England game last night, who reckoned that they would be more than up for selling TM for £10m as he had been poor for them, and they thought he wasn’t good enough for the Prem. Apparently, they couldn’t trust him in a 2 man central defence, so he only played in a 3, but had poor distribution and ‘bambi on ice’ qualities when trying to bring the ball out from the back. I thought this was very interesting, as I’d say he’s seemed the exact opposite for Villa. Personally, I’d love us to sign him permanently based on what I’ve seen at Villa, and would be more than happy with him as one of a two if we go up!

How would Bournemouth fans know how much the club would sell him for? It’s the same as us saying Jack is worth £40m etc

[rodders0223]

Only way we sign him down here is if we sell Jack and fund a few sizeable transfers.

[sir_gary_cahill]

1 hour ago, rodders0223 said:

Only way we sign him down here is if we sell Jack and fund a few sizeable transfers.

Who says we need to sell Jack?