Burnley vs Newcastle

[aimaad22 3418]

Yup. A takeover of this size can easily take 6 months plus. And thats assuming there are no major hiccups and nobody gets cold feet.

[ohhh_yeah 2763]

9 hours ago, ewerk said:

Were we even linked with a half decent striker in the summer? Bas Dost is the only one who springs to mind.

 

Michy Batshauyi, Divock Origi, Cenk Tosun, Lucas Perez, Angel Correa, Loic Remy.   

 

[Meenzer 13983]

4 minutes ago, ohhh_yeah said:

 

Michy Batshauyi, Divock Origi, Cenk Tosun, Lucas Perez, Angel Correa, Loic Remy.   

 

 

We didn't start the fire.

[The Fish 8950]

On 31/10/2017 at 2:10 PM, Anorthernsoul said:

I'd have started 4-4-2 with Hayden in for Diame and Gayle in for Perez. Hayden holding with Shelvey playmaker. That would have mean't we had attacking threat and intent, the two wingers given the freedom to actually get at the fullback and two strikers to hit in the box. As it was we had Joselu wondering around up top on his todd, Perez not really playing anywhere, Diame looking lost as per and Shelvey couldn't stamp his authority on the game as he had no-one next to him to cover when he wanted to go forward.

 

I know Diame was a passenger in the game, but I don't think playing 2 in midfield with Hayden would have seen us wrest more control of the centre. Perez puts pressure on their CBs and CMs and were we to play with 2 up front, the gap between the forwards and the midfield would increase the amount of long balls we'd rely upon. I don't think the wingers were restricted in attack, and even were we to play 4-4-2 they'd need to have shouldered the same defensive responsibility they do in a 4-2-3-1, perhaps even more. We put in 16 crosses, but most of them were shite.

 

I think the tactics were right, but we were undone by a combination of a momentary lapse in concentration at the back, the opposition's specific qualities, a poor selection choice (Diame) and wasteful play by the wide men.

 

4-4-2 repeatedly gets unravelled by 4-2-3-1 as the midfield gets swamped, the wide men rarely get 1-on-1 and the two strikers get starved of possession. Meanwhile the team playing 4-2-3-1 can overload the midfield, the #10 finds holes and channels or pulls CMs and CBs out of position. With the squad we've available I get why we play it.

[Rayvin 4949]

Decent post tbf.

[David Kelly 1115]

1 hour ago, The Fish said:

 

I know Diame was a passenger in the game, but I don't think playing 2 in midfield with Hayden would have seen us wrest more control of the centre. Perez puts pressure on their CBs and CMs and were we to play with 2 up front, the gap between the forwards and the midfield would increase the amount of long balls we'd rely upon. I don't think the wingers were restricted in attack, and even were we to play 4-4-2 they'd need to have shouldered the same defensive responsibility they do in a 4-2-3-1, perhaps even more. We put in 16 crosses, but most of them were shite.

 

I think the tactics were right, but we were undone by a combination of a momentary lapse in concentration at the back, the opposition's specific qualities, a poor selection choice (Diame) and wasteful play by the wide men.

 

4-4-2 repeatedly gets unravelled by 4-2-3-1 as the midfield gets swamped, the wide men rarely get 1-on-1 and the two strikers get starved of possession. Meanwhile the team playing 4-2-3-1 can overload the midfield, the #10 finds holes and channels or pulls CMs and CBs out of position. With the squad we've available I get why we play it.

I hear this bit in bold being said as a defence of Perez but I just don't see it happening in practice.  Instead what I do see is him constantly surrendering possession and very rarely doing anything that results in a chance for us or even allow us to keep possession further up the field. I'm not saying this means 4-4-2 is the answer and I recognise the problems with playing 4-4-2 against teams playing 3 in the middle.  But what I do say is that since I don't believe Perez does this pressuring of the opposition we are in effect just playing with 2 in the middle anyway.  

[David Kelly 1115]

18 hours ago, Meenzer said:

 

We didn't start the fire.

[Dr Gloom 19737]

On 02/11/2017 at 1:30 PM, David Kelly said:

I hear this bit in bold being said as a defence of Perez but I just don't see it happening in practice.  Instead what I do see is him constantly surrendering possession and very rarely doing anything that results in a chance for us or even allow us to keep possession further up the field. I'm not saying this means 4-4-2 is the answer and I recognise the problems with playing 4-4-2 against teams playing 3 in the middle.  But what I do say is that since I don't believe Perez does this pressuring of the opposition we are in effect just playing with 2 in the middle anyway.  

 

agree on perez. i don't what he's contributing to warrant starting in that position every game. you can't argue that he runs about a lot, but his work on and off the ball is mostly poor. he spends a lot of time chasing shadows, rarely wins a 50/50 ball, is easily knocked off the ball when he was possession and doesn't have the pace or creativity to really trouble defenders. he does show occasional glimpses of tekkers but i think he's just too slow and lightweight to be starting every game. 

Edited November 3, 2017 by Dr Gloom

[The Fish 8950]

29 minutes ago, David Kelly said:

I hear this bit in bold being said as a defence of Perez but I just don't see it happening in practice.  Instead what I do see is him constantly surrendering possession and very rarely doing anything that results in a chance for us or even allow us to keep possession further up the field. I'm not saying this means 4-4-2 is the answer and I recognise the problems with playing 4-4-2 against teams playing 3 in the middle.  But what I do say is that since I don't believe Perez does this pressuring of the opposition we are in effect just playing with 2 in the middle anyway.  

 

Hard to get a decent metric on "applying pressure", but Perez consistently is among the players with the highest number of tackles for us. 

 

He he gets a decent number of touches and passes for us and while this is less a defence of Perez and more a defence of the system, he's the best we've got to fulfill that role; that of a harassing pest who can also be a bit of a threat going forward. Certainly better than Diame. 

 

Also, his passes and overall contribution were, stymied by Diame's poor performance. Diame just doesn't seem to win, keep or use the ball half as well as the other 3 CMs. His touch is heavy, his decisions are often wrong, and always slow to come to him. 

 

Tbh if we had a better #10, the role of the #10 would likely change. We'd be better on the ball, better at controlling the tempo of the game and get more out of our wide men. 

 

 

[Noelie 103]

18 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

 

Tbh if we had a better #10, the role of the #10 would likely change. We'd be better on the ball, better at controlling the tempo of the game and get more out of our wide men. 

 

 

 

We had a better #10 but Rafa let him go, DeJong.

[ewerk 26189]

4 minutes ago, Noelie said:

 

We had a better #10 but Rafa let him go, DeJong.

 

He has played 51 minutes of league football since his return to Ajax. I'm not convinced that he was our saviour.

[Alex 30246]

I was about to say, he's barely played for them this season he barely played for us and didn't play that much on loan at PSV (who decided not to take up the option to sign him). He played a good pass in a pre-season friendly though

[The Fish 8950]

8 minutes ago, Noelie said:

 

We had a better #10 but Rafa let him go, DeJong.

 

Familiarity breeds contempt. 

[Alex 30246]

1 minute ago, The Fish said:

 

Familiarity breeds contempt. 

Well, I'm better alone than in company

[David Kelly 1115]

19 hours ago, The Fish said:

 

Hard to get a decent metric on "applying pressure", but Perez consistently is among the players with the highest number of tackles for us. 

 

He he gets a decent number of touches and passes for us and while this is less a defence of Perez and more a defence of the system, he's the best we've got to fulfill that role; that of a harassing pest who can also be a bit of a threat going forward. Certainly better than Diame. 

 

Also, his passes and overall contribution were, stymied by Diame's poor performance. Diame just doesn't seem to win, keep or use the ball half as well as the other 3 CMs. His touch is heavy, his decisions are often wrong, and always slow to come to him. 

 

Tbh if we had a better #10, the role of the #10 would likely change. We'd be better on the ball, better at controlling the tempo of the game and get more out of our wide men. 

 

 

I'm using the metric of my eyes seeing him doing fuck all except turnover possession.

 

I know this is the Burnley match thread but I was speaking generally about Perez so I'm not concerned with his link up with Diame as they will barely ever play at the same time.  I really don't see him as a pest to anyone but us.  We don't have a lot of possession up the field so him losing it so often is a problem.  I'm not saying this because I think possession generally is that important, certainly not at our level, but being able to build a platform up the field is and he stops us from doing that.  When Diame came on against Palace (combined with Merino's introduction a bit earlier) we were able to retain possession in the final third and build attacks which lead to our first efforts on target of the game, and ultimately the winning goal.  I'm not saying Diame is better than Perez in that position as usually he's just as bad (and more lumbering) but on that occasion he did what was needed.

 

I think everyone agrees that we don't really have anyone who is particularly suited to position, what I'm saying is that we should be looking to adjust that position within the system (by playing Shelvey further forward would be my idea) or dispense with it in favour of another striker.  IMO we wouldn't actually lose a man in midfield because Perez causes us more problems in there by losing possession than he solves by any harassing he may do of the oppositions defence.

 

If you want to play someone in there just to close down the opposition, I'd suggest that Ritchie would be a better bet.  He actually works hard to close down his man and retains possession for us.  I know he's never been tried there but I can't see him doing worse than Perez or Diame.  The reservation would come from losing him down the right where he is our biggest threat and links up well with Yedlin. 

 

Of course given that we're 9th in the table you could say that we don't really need to change much at all.  And as long as we can keep in and around this position I'd probably agree.  But if things start going south I think it would be a pressing concern.

 

[Dr Gloom 19737]

1 hour ago, David Kelly said:

I'm using the metric of my eyes seeing him doing fuck all except turnover possession.

 

 

aye, me too. he runs around a lot but gives away possesion more often than retaining it or creating something, so it's wasted energy more often than not. agree about giving ritchie a go there as we have aarons or murphy who could have a go out wide. 

[ewerk 26189]

Stick your stats up your arse, Fish.

[Dr Gloom 19737]

speaking of which, where is HF these days? gone and dropped us just like champagne enema boy. 

 

at least gemmill is slowly being lured back in. 

 

and CT 

 

 

[Tdansmith 2068]

Nee chance Jack playing tomorrow

 

[ewerk 26189]

Good.

[Dr Gloom 19737]

Farewell the ginger pirlo. More crab-like passing range than Butch Wilkins tbh

[Alex 30246]

14 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

Farewell the ginger pirlo. More crab-like passing range than Butch Wilkins tbh

That's a bit harsh, Wilkins was a good player.

[Dr Gloom 19737]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

That's a bit harsh, Wilkins was a good player.

 

Colback was Wilkins lite. Butch without the good bits 

[Alex 30246]

Was more of a tongue-in-cheek dig at Ginger Jack but Wilkins was decent. He got about 80 ENgland caps back when that was actually a pretty impressive achievement, less games, less subs, more English players to choose from and so on.

[Dr Gloom 19737]

one my earliest football memories is him getting sent off in mexico 86