avfc_in_essex Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Westwood is not the sort of player who can take the game by the scruff of the neck......he simply doesn't have the attributes to be this type of player. Anyone hoping to see him take on three players or score 30 yard screamers will be left disappointed.His strengths are his quick footballing brain and a good range of passing, so when we do win back possession, he has the ability to pick a pass quickly. Unlike Sanchez who is more hesitant, those few seconds give opposing players time to readjust and get back in position. With Westwood releasing the ball quickly, the likes of Grealish, Gil etc thrive from this, as defenders will still be trying to find their shape by the time the ball is played forward, usually finding themselves out of position.Unfortunately, due to his lack of energy and physical strength, he cannot form a two man midfield and against the baggies was a prime example, two mid-table players (at best) controlled the midfield. For Westy to have any influence, he needs to play in midfield three.And I really wish someone else would take corners!! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 That's not Sanchez's job though - a lazy comparison, if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Westwood is not the sort of player who can take the game by the scruff of the neck......he simply doesn't have the attributes to be this type of player. Anyone hoping to see him take on three players or score 30 yard screamers will be left disappointed.His strengths are his quick footballing brain and a good range of passing, so when we do win back possession, he has the ability to pick a pass quickly. Unlike Sanchez who is more hesitant, those few seconds give opposing players time to readjust and get back in position. With Westwood releasing the ball quickly, the likes of Grealish, Gil etc thrive from this, as defenders will still be trying to find their shape by the time the ball is played forward, usually finding themselves out of position.Unfortunately, due to his lack of energy and physical strength, he cannot form a two man midfield and against the baggies was a prime example, two mid-table players (at best) controlled the midfield. For Westy to have any influence, he needs to play in midfield three.And I really wish someone else would take corners!! Superb analysis, this is exactly why he's so important to our team. We don't have anybody who reads the game as quick as he does and sets us off on attacks before the opposing team can regain their shape. Yes, he does have limitations, but if played in the right formation (certainly not a 2 man midfield) those limitations are irrelevant and he gets to do what he does best.That's not Sanchez's job though - a lazy comparison, if you ask me.He's not saying it's Sanchez' job, but just comparing and contrasting those 2 aspects of their game. Besides I find this comment ironic because Westwood is constantly berated in this thread for not doing things that aren't his job either like creating assists or tackling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 He's berated because he should be doing more than he is doing - Sanchez doesn't really need to be a great passer and he's not that bad as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Do you not see how biased you are, or do you not even care at this point? You just contradicted yourself in the same sentence. Like I've already posted, Sanchez doesn't need to be a good passer in the same way Westwood doesn't need to be a good tackler or assister. "Needs to do more" is just an ambiguous, lazy copout of a criticism. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post KSV Posted September 25, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) I think Veretout is the complete midfielder for us. He can do the dirty work.. and he can pass just as good if not better than Westwood. Its only a matter of time before Tim wakes up and realises he cant leave out Veretout out of the side.Sanchez and Gueye as a defensive duo with Gueye bursting forward.. and Veretout in a slightly advanced attacking position... will be our best midfield. Westwood just does 1 thing very well.. but its not enough these days. Need more to your locker than being able to make simple passes at a high percentage..He has 10 assists in 100 games plus 3 goals (6 of these in his first season.. only two in the last two years). Considering he takes set pieces for the majority of this time.. that is pathetic. He does not impact the play and does not score goals. Even the biggest fan of his.. will admit tackling is not his strong point. So what exactly is he in the side to do?? keep it ticking? we have plenty of players to do that now.What was frustrating was watching Gil come back to collect the ball in the last few games OFF Westwood rather than Westwood promoting the ball and finding him in advanced positions. He often stutters the attack.. watch him closely. He receives the ball.. takes too many touches or passes sideways/backwards.I like him as a player but not as a regular/starter. Decent squad depth and thats it imo. Edited September 25, 2015 by KSV 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Do you not see how biased you are, or do you not even care at this point? You just contradicted yourself in the same sentence. Like I've already posted, Sanchez doesn't need to be a good passer in the same way Westwood doesn't need to be a good tackler or assister. "Needs to do more" is just an ambiguous, lazy copout of a criticism.No it's not. Sanchez fulfills the role of a defensive midfielder - tackles, breaks up play. Westwood doesn't do that, he doesn't provide many assists - he offers little in terms of the attack or defense. He needs to do more, Sanchez doesn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Because a midfielder's job is as black and white as and only boils down to tackle or assist, attack or defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Sanchez is a better player than Westwood IMO but Westwood definitely offers something to the squad. You can't put a price on a smart footballing brain and If/when we become defensively stable I think he could come into his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 I didn't say that there are Champions League footballers with the same specific skill set as Westwood. But what I am saying is that if you want to buy a better player who specializes in his position then there's a good chance that there will be better teams than us in for that player He's one of our most dependable players and to replace him with someone who'd be a guaranteed improvement, would cost quite a bit of money (especially by our standards now the Benteke money has gone).I must have misunderstood, apoligses. However in terms of replacing him, why would we need to sign like for like? I also disagree that a better player in his role would be hard for us to get both quality wise and financially. Westwood isn't filling a role in the team that cannot be changed for the better.Either way at the moment its quite difficult to see how our midfield 3 balances out. We don't have an out-an-out defensive midfielder or a playmaker as far as I can see and the only player who looks like he has real potential so far is Gana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Because a midfielder's job is as black and white as and only boils down to tackle or assist, attack or defend.Agreed. There's this myth that players have to fit into some defined box so if your a midfielder who is okay at tackling then you can play as a "holding" midfielder and it's okay to be hopeless at passing like nigel reo-coker. Vice-Versa if you pop up with the odd goal then you don't need to tackle at all like Yaya Toure. Midfielders need to be able to pass and they need to be able to tackle. Otherwise they shouldn't be playing in midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Because a midfielder's job is as black and white as and only boils down to tackle or assist, attack or defend.Because a midfielder's job is as black and white as and only boils down to tackle or assist, attack or defend.In this day and age, yes. Especially in a two man midfield. It's a given that you can pass the ball, you've got to do something else too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted September 25, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted September 25, 2015 But everyone keeps acknowledging that Westwood doesn't work in a 2 man midfield. We've known that for years. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Because a midfielder's job is as black and white as and only boils down to tackle or assist, attack or defend. Because a midfielder's job is as black and white as and only boils down to tackle or assist, attack or defend. In this day and age, yes. Especially in a two man midfield. It's a given that you can pass the ball, you've got to do something else too.Which is why he doesn't work in a 2 man midfield, this is known. But then, neither can Sanchez. We don't have a complete midfielder that can do everything (Gana is the closest we have) at an equally high level, in fact most teams in the world don't. Most midfielders have 1 or 2 strengths along with certain weaknesses and it's up to the manager to play to those strengths and minimize those weaknesses. It's unfair to criticize a player for aspects that were never the focus of their game to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted September 25, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted September 25, 2015 Sanchez is a better player than Westwood IMO but Westwood definitely offers something to the squad. You can't put a price on a smart footballing brain and If/when we become defensively stable I think he could come into his own.Sanchez is better when he performs. But when he's bad he's awful.I'd still have Westwood in the team over Sanchez because he's more reliable, but happy that if Sanchez could add consistency to his game he'd be the better player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Sanchez is a better player than Westwood IMO but Westwood definitely offers something to the squad. You can't put a price on a smart footballing brain and If/when we become defensively stable I think he could come into his own.Sanchez is better when he performs. But when he's bad he's awful.I'd still have Westwood in the team over Sanchez because he's more reliable, but happy that if Sanchez could add consistency to his game he'd be the better player.I agree but I'm talking specifically in terms of skill set but obviously that's irrelevant when they don't mirror that consistently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 I didn't say that there are Champions League footballers with the same specific skill set as Westwood. But what I am saying is that if you want to buy a better player who specializes in his position then there's a good chance that there will be better teams than us in for that player He's one of our most dependable players and to replace him with someone who'd be a guaranteed improvement, would cost quite a bit of money (especially by our standards now the Benteke money has gone).I must have misunderstood, apoligses. However in terms of replacing him, why would we need to sign like for like? I also disagree that a better player in his role would be hard for us to get both quality wise and financially. Westwood isn't filling a role in the team that cannot be changed for the better.Either way at the moment its quite difficult to see how our midfield 3 balances out. We don't have an out-an-out defensive midfielder or a playmaker as far as I can see and the only player who looks like he has real potential so far is Gana.I liked the look of that Darder who we were linked with, who seems quite similar to Westwood, maybe even better I don't know. But I wouldn't have thought replacing Westwood is a top priority at the moment. For me I think we more need another box-to-box midielder. Pity we didn't get Diame. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Westwood isn't up to scratch defensively regardless of whether it's in a two, three, four, or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shomin Geki Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) The he said, she said, to and fro of the Westwood thread continues! But, seriously, it's nourishing. There are many good, reasonable points on either side of the barricades. I've been doing some thinking myself.Surely the argument over whether Westwood should be in the team is entirely dependent on him being surpassed? We've had arguments about the merits of Gabby, Weimann, Lowton etc, in the past. As soon as we've had no need for them the tone of the conversation pretty abruptly shifts. The moment Benteke became our Balrog was the moment arguments about the benefits of Mr Bent became a little muted. The Westood Argument will be settled as soon as we no longer have any need for him, when he is merely a name we glance over on the teamsheet bench. Unfortunately, I don't believe we're at that point. I am not a massive Westwood fan. I suppose he does a job. Until we discover ways of utilising our players so that job will no longer suffice, Westwood will remain. He will either step up his game and prove people right and wrong, or he will slip into obsolescence. How long that takes, well, it's taken **** seasons so far... Edited September 25, 2015 by Shomin Geki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 He's average. Some people will settle for that. But if we wish to improve, then he needs replacing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts