barry'sboots Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 I thought Citeh played into our hands yesterday with a CM pairing of De Jong and Barry in the first half. Low energy pairing ideal for Sidwell to get stuck into and not too taxing for Stan. If I were Hughes I would have gone 4-5-1 and stuck Ireland in there and that would have been a different proposition but he has too many strikers to only play one up top! They were the better side though second half with Ireland added to Barry and he constantly found space in behind the, by that stage, trotting back 10 yards off play Petrov. This meant that Sidwell had to drop in and support and lost the initiative inviting the opposition on as we did so often in the last 15 games of last season, Wigan, Rapid Vienna and Blackburn. For me, he doesn't have the energy to play this role, or any role in a 4-4-2 for that matter. I would have introduced NRC (either for Stan or Carew and switched to a 4-5-1) to snuff out Ireland and think we would have gone on to win the game from there. You only have to see the difference that the energy of Wilson Palacios (IMO no better a player than NRC - not a great passer or prolific scorer) makes to the Spurs team in CM and my Spurs supporting mates rate him as Arry's best piece of business. I know that this will split the board but thought a poll would be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dom_Wren Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Sad to say, but no. Stan is a good player, but hes a very specific player, a DM in a 4-5-1/4-3-3 against a passing team, or if we played with NRC in front of him. He just doesnt have the mobility and athleticism to play in a 4-4-2, its almost like we have no balance with him in there as hes not a true DM (Cattermole) or a CM (Barry) or AMC (Cahill). Its not as if hes a luxury, hes a bloody good player, but def has trouble in a 4-4-2 and/or against very athletic players. Def mid playing against good footballing teams week in and week out and hed be grand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sled Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Some people are saying we've never replaced Barry. Some of these people are also saying Barry and Petrov were too similar. Could Petrov not then be the natural replacement for Barry (short-term)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Well we're **** if he can't. He's the captain, there isn't much chance of him not playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Oh god. Again, really? Thought he was our best player last night. So yeah, he'll do for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjc Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 He generally played well last night, but his lack of engine sometimes worries me. This can create big open spaces for teams to exploit.....one time last night Richard Dunne lost the ball fairly high up the pitch, and City had so much space to exploit. Our central midfield was nowehere to be seen! In terms of the poll, it is relistically somewhere between the two options. But if we want to really challenge the very best, I think it's a no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user66 Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Personally, I think the poll should be 'Petrov - Can he play'........ and leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sled Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted October 6, 2009 VT Supporter Share Posted October 6, 2009 Poll question is nothing like the topic title, but to answer the question in the title, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Petrov was excellent last night, our best midfielder. He can play 4-4-2 AND 4-5-1 because he's a very good midfielder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted October 6, 2009 Author Share Posted October 6, 2009 He seems to divide opinion massively. 50:50 almost with those who support him saying he was our best midfielder and those who don't thinking he is our worst. Bizarre?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted October 6, 2009 Moderator Share Posted October 6, 2009 Some people are saying we've never replaced Barry. Some of these people are also saying Barry and Petrov were too similar. Could Petrov not then be the natural replacement for Barry (short-term)? I agree. He played very well last night doing what Barry did for us and does for England. The thing is the balance of the midfield, not just one player - in this case Petrov. He uses the ball well, covers, tackles, defends and gets forward at times. He's not just a defensive player. Played alongside someone who complements his attributes he can be and has been part of some good pairings. He's beginning to link up well with Sidwell, and I thought Sidwell was very good at times last night - something I've not said often, as I feel he's mostly been very average and ineffective, to my eyes. Maybe they're now bedding down together as a midfield pair and Stan is doing the GB role, as you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokingzen Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Yes he can, but as said elsewhere, not in a 4-4-2 with 2 wingers, i think he would be more effective with 1 winger and 3 in the centre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted October 6, 2009 Author Share Posted October 6, 2009 Yes he can, but as said elsewhere, not in a 4-4-2 with 2 wingers, i think he would be more effective with 1 winger and 3 in the centre. How does that work. Where is the balance?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted October 6, 2009 Moderator Share Posted October 6, 2009 I'm losing the will to live, he was our best player last night imo, certainly the best midfielder. So todays criticism of Petrov is based around another manager picking the wrong team otherwise it would have been different. That is some straw you're grasping at there Did he play in a 4-4-2 last night? Yes Did he play well? Yes Were we playing a team that some people are tipping for the top four? Yes So lets invent a scenario that didn't exist just to say he's crap anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc89 Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Split right now the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 It's not about formation. It's simple maths. I have done an equation to illustrate the season so far: NRC + Sidwell equals win Petrov + Sidwell does not equal loss Petrov - (NRC + Sidwell) = loss You can clearly see from this that Petrov is indeed the weakest link which I knew anyway. I thought Petrov had his best game of the season last night but that's not a compliment. He was adequate. Gabby, Dunne, Collins, Warnock, Friedel had better games and Sidwell because Petrov was at fault for the goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 I'm losing the will to live, he was our best player last night imo, certainly the best midfielder. So todays criticism of Petrov is based around another manager picking the wrong team otherwise it would have been different. That is some straw you're grasping at there Did he play in a 4-4-2 last night? Yes Did he play well? Yes Were we playing a team that some people are tipping for the top four? Yes So lets invent a scenario that didn't exist just to say he's crap anyway Sorry Bickster but you can see from the poll that half the respondents do not think that Stan can play DCM in a 4-4-2. My criticism is based not around a hypothetical scenario as you state but on what actually happened in the second half following Mark Hughes bringing on Ireland. I thought he found acres of space because Stan was trotting back and not picking him up. I made that clear in my post - this is not me inventing scenarios. There are a number of responses on here that say Stan played well last night. I didn't think he did particularly - and there are again a number on here that would agree with that view. I thought Sidwell was a better performer, having an excellent game in the first half but having to drop in more second half as Stan tired/Ireland got in behind him thus nullifying his attacking/work further up the park (as often happened with Barry at the end of last season). This is not just based on my assessment of his performance in each game, but I think results over the last 9 months also substantiate this. - we were poor for the last 15 games of last season which, IMO, was down to MON not picking the right formation in certain games (Liverpool A, Chelsea H, Everton H) and not subbing Stan/supplementing him to go 4-5-1 in the last 30 mins when he could hardly walk (Stoke H, West Ham H, Hull H, Man U A etc..) - we were poor in pre-season until Stan got injured BUT much better when he went off and NRC stepped in - turning around the Atlante game, beating Porto comfortably and holding off Juventus whilst also performing very well by all accounts. - Stan walks straight back in to a the Wigan game and we are very poor and overrun in CM. - 4-5-1 produces good results against Plop. - Stan back in 4-4-2 against Rapid Vienna and we cannot close the game out, ultimately lucky not to lose on the night with all their late chances. - 4-5-1 wins against Fulham and Blues - 4-4-2 against Pompey produces an unconvincing win (IMO) against relegation fodder - 4-4-2 produces a loss to Blackburn - 4-4-2 admittedly gets a decent draw against wealthy Citeh but I believe we were in a position to have won this I am not blaming Stan and do believe he has an important part to play. I blame MON for not playing 4-5-1 when it is needed, not trying others in a 4-4-2 and/or not subbing Stan when he tires or supplementing him to go 4-5-1 at that point. But, also, I do not think he is the star player that many seem to think he is. His ball retention is good but equally he always turns back and this slows us down, particularly when much of our game is about using the pace of Gab and Ash for a fast break. I do not see a range of passing that many imply, in fact I don't think his distribution is any better than the much maligned NRC on the basis of this season's displays. He certainly doesn't have the energy to go box to box or track back when he is caught up field. I have seen very little evidence from the pro Stan lobby other than the comments that he was player of the season last year or he is our best player. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overdubber Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 I find it a little disturbing to read Barrys boots writing that Stan did not play well here in this thread, whereby in the Where art thou Fabian? thread he is writing that he did play well. maybe it is time to make your mind up before you post, not after, as this simply makes you look foolish. Sorry, but truth is truth. The game I saw on Monday he did play well, even in the second half when Ireland came on. At times he was alone in the defensive midfield, so it it obvious that he is not going to break down their play and strike the magic cutting pass.... He did , however manage to push them out to the wings on several occasions, thus hindering the line on goal, and giving time for out other midfielders to pull back...... Young should have been taken off, as he was useless after that DeJong foul, never really got back into the game at all. Crosses were haywire, and his tracking back to help out in the midfield was more of a problem than the points Barrys boots is trying to raise about Petrov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 I find it a little disturbing to read Barrys boots writing that Stan did not play well here in this thread, whereby in the Where art thou Fabian? thread he is writing that he did play well. maybe it is time to make your mind up before you post, not after, as this simply makes you look foolish. Sorry, but truth is truth. Sorry pal, but you had better go back and read my post on the "where art thou Fabian?" thread. I said that I thought Sidders had a really good first half but didn't look as good second half as he was having to drop deep more to help the tiring Petrov. And that's the "truth". I think you will struggle to find too many posts on here with me praising Stan overly for his performances over the past 9 months. As for your choice as to who played well in Monday night's game that is obviously for you to make your own assessment. I don't disagree that Ash was disappointing after the De Jong tackle, although I think he still probably carried our most potent threat along with Gabs. I do think MON was wrong to take Ash off and replace him with NRC on the RW - I personally would have pulled Gab back to RW and put NRC in CM to go 4-5-1, allowing Sidders to get up in support of Heskey (alternatively Jimmy could have stayed on the RW and Heskey back to LW) - as I think we looked unbalanced after this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts