It also runs the possibility of Dorrington putting in a MOTM performance and preventing Torres from winning that header or Watkins basically walking through on goal. The fact we don’t know how it would work is part of the reason we should give it a go, because Stevie Wonder could’ve told us all that a pairing of Davies and Emerson definitely wouldn’t work.
It's pretty clear that Ange's absolute top priority is the System and sticking to it come what may. This means he is searching for the players who can deliver the System as he sees it. By process of elimination, he is working through his most senior and experienced options first. Dier and Hojbjerg got the nod against Wolves and we immediately regressed into a Conte side. So both got dropped for Villa. 'Is Dorrington a good player' is a different question to 'is he a good fit for the system', and I feel Ange is more concerned about the latter, which is why we started yesterday without anything resembling a holding midfielder. There is no question to my mind that Hojbjerg is overall a significantly better player than Gil, but the latter got the nod as the System demanded it. I think Ange is handling this crisis pragmatically and tbh I'd do exactly the same. It doesn't matter what CB partnership we put out at the moment, none of them are good enough to withstand most PL attacks over 90mins. So mind over matter and we rely on the system to do the job instead of individual quality - and that's something we've all been calling for for years after watching Kane and Son carry us for months on end. Villa's two goals were soft but take away Matty Cash's usual contribution and better finishing on our part and I can't see anything less than a 5-2 win to Spurs yesterday.
The thing with youth CBs is you can't just chuck them on with 5-10 minutes to go when we're coasting to a win like you can with a youth striker or winger, because defence is a very different beast The fact that Dorrington was still more likely to come off the bench instead of Dier does say a lot - although most of that can be said by the Italian phrasebook that Dier reportedly might be wise to invest in prior to January Similar can also be said for SECOND CB while I'm on the subject, as we needed Mickey van to bed in first and foremost given he was a starting CB - and with the lack of fixtures outside of that, having a second CB to bed in would have been difficult. On the other hand signing SECOND CB in January would make sense as there's a glut of fixtures in January to rotate and give them some starts, and with Mickey Van coming back from an injury it gives us extra incentive to have somebody on the bench if he's not match fit for a few games (and hopefully a few, not a repeat of last season's flogging injured players to death instead of rotating them)
He’s a ball playing CB that isn’t a slouch. Which is more or less how you’d sum up both Romero and van de Ven. There’s no pragmatism in playing two squad players - one who is technically awful too - out of position in which neither can even come close to remotely replicating what Romero or van de Ven do. I’d also say there’s no pragmatism in bringing on a DM for a forward when you’re 2-1 down.
With respect, none of what you’ve said here is really relevant to what we were just talking about. You’ve somehow changed my point of “Dorrington should’ve started over our backup RB and LB at CB” to talking of how we can’t bring on a CB when coasting to a win and then what we can do if we get a second CB signing in January.
Except that's what I started with, hence the part about you can't give a five minute runout to a youth CB like you can a winger or striker when coasting to a win - in much the same way that it's easier to take a punt on starting a youth winger or striker instead of a CB, because CBs have a lot more responsibility put on them both in terms of defending and (in Ange's system) playing out from the back while a youth winger or striker have far less responsibilities when subbed on I do think that both FIFA and Football Manager have given people a wonky view of how the reality of football works, because in FIFA or FM you can start with a youth player and half the job is taken care of either by being good at FIFA or FM's algorithm lessening the risk of them starting (outside of playing them against Bayern or Barca or something), when in reality starting a youth CB in a makeshift backline is actually a far worse idea than playing a FB or DM there unless that youth CB is the second coming of Baresi or something
I agree the Skipp substitution was a bad call and the player did nothing to justify the decision. The game seemed to pass him by. I fear he is going to be left behind by the increase in tempo and technical ability Ange's system calls for.
I wasn’t wanting Dorrington have a 5 minute run out. I wanted Dorrington to start over one of Emerson or Davies, preferably Emerson despite the fact Davies was the poorer of the two on Sunday.
I think similar, Skipp isn’t a bad player by any means but he’s bad for the system and especially either of the CM roles. Likewise I don’t think Emerson or Davies are good for the system, especially as a pairing at CB as they lack ball playing ability as well as height, with neither measuring over 6ft. Meanwhile we had a 6’4 technically sound young CB who’d seemingly suit Ange-ball as well as the current jewel of the academy who oozes technical ability like a young Kane both sitting on the bench watching players unsuited to positions they can play in start or come on ahead of them. This also on a weekend where Miley assisted and played well in Toon’s rout of Chelsea and Mainoo put in arguably a MOTM performance for Utd. Other clubs seem to have little issues playing their youth, we seem allergic to it.
It is a bad idea to start a youth CB against a FB in the middle of a makeshift back four Not joking, starting Dier would be a better idea
Actually it isn't, not least due to pretending that Davies hasn't played CB for us for the past two seasons nor for Wales for the past five or six As I said hours ago, if Dorrington was starting next to Romero it wouldn't be a problem, as Cuti would be able to keep Dorrington more or less in line with what is needed in regards to positioning and when to push up - but that wouldn't have been the case on Sunday with either partner, as neither of the starting CBs would be able to mentor Dorrington or Phillips about what they need to do and where they need to be due to both of them being scratch options
He’s played LCB in a back three with two proper CBs standing 6ft+, not CB in a back four alongside another natural FB that’s below 6ft. As I said hours ago, Dorrington should’ve played as he’s a natural CB and earned a chance to play for the first team.
I think that the one obvious issue with the selection was a lack of height and aerial ability. That allowed Villa to nick an entirely undeserved equaliser just before the break. I'm annoyed at the result, but I can't say that I was too disappointed with the performance. I wasn't expecting much given our absences, yet we started very brightly and took the lead. Should've been about 4 or 5-0 up after about 20 minutes, bar some poor finishing and dodgy final balls. Being denied our four best midfielders for a three-man midfield ended up being a bit much. Some of the criticisms of individual players has been a bit much, in my opinion. Postecoglou made some mistakes, for me, but the players did pretty well. Gil and Lo Celso haven't had any involvement so far, yet they both looked comfortable. Not perfect, but each had a lot of promising signs and moments.
I let the WHL crowd at FT be the judge of the 90 mins. As I heard nothing dissenting, then they (like me) understood the performance put in even though the result did not go our way.
Does anybody else think that the new timekeeping rules have backfired a little? Timewasting is no longer punished, so some players now completely take the piss. We all know that it was never consistently punished anyway, but now they're just not bothered.
A more general topic than the game specifically (so perhaps better moved elsewhere) , but cards should still be dished out as "ungentlemanly conduct" .
