barry'sboots Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Fair point but by the same token we could have put NRC on and he could have scored an own goal right at the end and could have cost us the win. All hypothetical of course. Of course it could happen that way. I was purely setting out what I would have like to have seen with 20-25 minutes left. I have talked about games this season but there were also a number of times last season where we lost leads in the last 20 minutes or so through being too open (a 4-4-2 with Stan and Barry) IMO. Of course some people may want to stick with a 4-4-2 or, like MON arguably, start dropping strikers back into the midfield and moving midfielders around. I would probably always prefer to see a specialist "battler" coming on at that stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 So to sum up, you first thought that the manager got it wrong with his tactics but he actually didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Petrov was the best midfielder on show against Chelsea. We played 4-4-2 that day. Pretty much answers the question that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion-heart Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Petrov was the best midfielder on show against Chelsea. We played 4-4-2 that day. Pretty much answers the question that. Totally agree, Petrov was my MOTM, followed by Collins and Milner, but he has been less effective in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinnievip Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Geez, its getting so a guy cant even put his thoughts across in this place without being abused. I actually agree with barry boots in that I think if Mon had brought NRC on for the last 20-25minutes we could have potentially saved our selves from a nervey end to the game by shutting down chelseas midfield with the extra body in the middle. Yes i'm HAPPY that we won, but why shouldn't we always be looking at ways to improve. :?: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Geez, its getting so a guy cant even put his thoughts across in this place without being abused. Don't really follow what you're getting at. Someone's started a thread on a premise which has been pretty comprehensively rebuffed by real life, some people have pointed that out, poster continues to try to make the same point in a less direct way, some people continue to explain, gently rib, or start to express exasperation. I don't see abuse here. Or was it ironical? Websites are getting the point where I'm starting to expect smileys to explain things, instead of words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fran_villa Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Geez, its getting so a guy cant even put his thoughts across in this place without being abused. I actually agree with barry boots in that I think if Mon had brought NRC on for the last 20-25minutes we could have potentially saved our selves from a nervey end to the game by shutting down chelseas midfield with the extra body in the middle. Yes i'm HAPPY that we won, but why shouldn't we always be looking at ways to improve. :?:i agree with this thought,and i think if we had have brough Reo on against Man Shitty,when Ireland came on. id say we'd have been two points better off now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted October 23, 2009 Author Share Posted October 23, 2009 Geez, its getting so a guy cant even put his thoughts across in this place without being abused. Don't really follow what you're getting at. Someone's started a thread on a premise which has been pretty comprehensively rebuffed by real life, some people have pointed that out, poster continues to try to make the same point in a less direct way, some people continue to explain, gently rib, or start to express exasperation. I don't see abuse here. Or was it ironical? Websites are getting the point where I'm starting to expect smileys to explain things, instead of words. You clearly haven't read the latter pages of the thread then because I have said over the last couple of posts that I think his performances are much improved (Citeh and Chelski) and accept that he can play in a 4-4-2. Although I still think he tends to tire towards the end, maybe because he has put so much in. I think if you looked at the games we have played 4-4-2 this season and the last 15 games of last season you would see a marked increase in the oppositions possession/territory and consequencially goals in the last quarter of the game. My latest thought was that, where we are up in games - Citeh, Chelsea and Rapid Vienna plus a number from the last 15 games of last season - I would be looking to shore things up by bringing on an extra body in CM and switching to 4-5-1. And this is what the posts above are referring to, I think. We know that we can play this formation well but the question has often been asked "can we break teams down playing this at home?" If we are ahead we do not need to, we can use the 4-5-1/4-3-3 to soak up pressure and break fast/counterattack with our pace out wide and up top as we do so well with this formation away from home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 I don't think it's as easy to say bring on NRC for a striker we we won't concede. I think playing that formation would make us sit deeper and invite pressure on us, it would also restrict us going forward. Dropping a striker back into midfield puts another body in there when the opposition has the ball but also allows us to still have a forward when we attack and that's important if we don't just want a team continually attacking us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinnievip Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Good point Big John, but why does 4-5-1 mean that we automatically sit deeper and invite the opposition to attack, why cant 4-5-1 be used as a way to control the midfield while protecting the back four. let the wingers or winger do there thing and when we break players in midfield move up to support Gabby or Carew, like sidwell and NRC/Petrov. Im probably not being totally clear here but i hope u can understand what im saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulieB Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 It was surely going to be the case, after forming such a strong partnership with Gareth Barry in midfield for the past 2 seasons, that Petrov would take a few games to get used to playing with a new CM in whatever system we played this season. The same goes for the rest of the team. This appears to have been overlooked by many and MON villified for playing him as part of CM, yet against both Man City & Chelsea's quality midfields I thought he was simply outstanding as others have said. I do agree against teams that play a more physical game like Wigan, Blackburn et al MON may need to fall on the 4-5-1 but in the last 2 home games the 4-4-2 with Petrov & Sidwell has worked a treat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overdubber Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 TBH I cannot see NRC as being of too much use against a team using a physical midfield. Sure he can break them down, or divert the rout of play, but what then? He certainly has not shown us the skills required to hold the ball, let alone mentioning his passing game..... No, we are certainly better off with a player who can keep possesion, be he tried or not.... There has been many a moment when NRC gets a good early tackle in, only to give the ball directly away in the following pass. These are the moments when I question his real footballing ability, and obviously I am not the only one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC-Prideofbrum Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 But he doesn't give the ball anywhere near as much as people say. Anyway Sidwell is doing Reo-Coker's job, providing more of a threat going forward and is better on the ball. Hence why he is being picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overdubber Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Sidwell is apparently better off the ball too.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulieB Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Any midfield partnership, that can cope with the likes of Essien, Lampard, Barry, Malouda etc & come out on top ain't half bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted December 8, 2009 Author Share Posted December 8, 2009 Just wondering how we are all feeling about this after the last couple of months performances including a poor run away from home? Personally I feel that he has been poor in a 4-4-2 away from Villa Park and has done little to drive the team on (as you would expect from a skipper in CM) - and I would prefer to see us play 4-5-1 with NRC in there as well - and has been good for the first half of of home games but lacking in the second half as he tires. Hull was a prime example of this IMO when they came back into it later on and could have made it 2-1 and squeeky bum time if the shot that hit the post/bar had gone in. The Bolton game, where Stan didn't play, was the first time I have seen us dominate a side that convincingly for a long time and there was, again IMO, no let up later on in that game. I still think the stats are telling: 4-4-2 with Stan since mid Jan circa 32 points from 27 games 4-5-1 30 points from 10 games over the last 18 months or so (and mostly away games) 4-4-2 without Stan this year shows 3 points from 1 game, admittedly a small sample Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 8, 2009 VT Supporter Share Posted December 8, 2009 He's been fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanky Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Worked last two games with Milner. I see no reaon to split that unless we go 4-5-1 against Manure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 8, 2009 VT Supporter Share Posted December 8, 2009 I'd also say that using the Bolton game is a bit of a non-entity. We'd didn't win that game convincingly because NRC was replacing Petrov, we won because they were shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc89 Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Oh, we only won because they were shite? rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts