Is our midfield too light?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
West Kent Saint

West Kent Saint

Well-Known Member
Aug 1, 2011
6,998
3,238
113
Tunbridge Wells
I have noticed a fair few people who were at the game saying how we were bossed in the first 20 mins by West Hams midfield.

Now while I expect West Ham to come at us at home (with them clearly having a healthy respect for us as naturally we are a threat) I would like to ask the questions, though not discounting the fact that we may have rode it out anyway.

1. Do we have enough strength here (thinking possibly of prem)

2. Is Chaplow the missing piece

3. Was Hammond the missing piece

Understanding that this would also depend on formations and tactics, what are peoples thoughts?

Definitely sounded like Punch made a difference when he came on reagrds keep ball.
 
I don't want to be criticised for being negative but i have to agree with you.I'm a fan of Hammond or Chaplow in the midfield with either Cork or Spiderman,we need a bit of bite! Cork is a good player but at times he is so lightweight and for want of a better word is such a wimp in a challenge,i'm not saying he's poor (before anyone jumps down my throat) just think that CM is normally made up of a grafter and a more creative player.So yes i do agree with you.
 
Jack Cork had a bit of a mare imo, giving the ball away far too easily on several occasions. He's great when he has time on the ball, but against a side of Wham's quality, you don't get much of that. I thought this was a game that was crying out for Chaplow personally, but we had a decent spell of our own even before the sending off, and afterwards we dominated for most of the game, so there's no point being over critical.
 
Could anyone there tell me how guly got on. Im a big fan of his at home but I just think some away games Punch would be more suitable was this the case yesterday?
 
We are not nasty enough and to be honest Cork needs to be beefed up a bit he needs a bit more muscle. Perhaps he could go on the same diet and exercise regime as sharp.

I have aways said that we are far too nice. Nigel needs to get the play nasty sometimes.
 
TBD said:
Could anyone there tell me how guly got on. Im a big fan of his at home but I just think some away games Punch would be more suitable was this the case yesterday?
Click to expand...

From the radio sounded ok, was drifting in more, but then the whole team was. I wanted Punch to start, and think he may be better away from home, and I'm not a Guly hater by any means.
 
Someone on here once likened Jack Cork to Jermaine Jenas. I think its a great comparison. Great little engine, good passer but lacks that bit of strength/aggression and can get muscled off the ball in physical games. To be honest, a bit like Morgan. Certainly think we could do with a stronger midfielder to play alongside one of these. Hammond does that role well enough but I think Grant McCann at Peterborough would be the ideal choice.
 
I've thought this for most of the season, and one of the reasons we may dip out on promotion (the other being not taking enough of the chances we create). It's more obvious away from home where we come under more pressure. Sometimes you have to graft yourself a result and I don't think our midfield has that in it's armoury. We have seen teams come to St Mary's and scrap for everything but I haven't witnessed that from us too often away from home. The reason for it I think is how the team is expected to play. We are a team that looks to create chances from every area of the pitch, we don't sit back and absorb pressure. This makes us very entertaining but vunerable.
It's interesting that Cork is singled out as being lightweight because I don't think he is alone. Adam and Morgan are both easily brushed off the ball and none of them tackle with any conviction. Guly has a go, but as most people agree he can be a bit hit or miss and away from home mostly miss. I think the key to addressing this is the return of Chaplow who hopefully will find the form he was in before he was injured.
 
West Ham stacked and built the midfield very well - they're top of the league for a reason. Should we sacrifice two very good players in Schneiderlin and Cork purely to have some muscle in there? I'd rather not.
 
One thing I do remember from last night was hearing Adam Blackmore saying, Schneiderlin gives the ball away, too many times. I was surprised. Cork was not immune either. It's possible that, because Sharp is in the team, he isn't taking up the positions that the guys are used to, and so they have to look up for too long. I've said before, the new players have to gel with the team, and it takes time. However, I would have liked more bite in midfield, and swapping Cork or Schneiderlin for Hammond or perhaps Chaplow, would possibly have brought more bite. Most certainly, the attitude of the team would have changed if Hammond had been on the pitch from the start. Of course, Adkins could have changed it around from the bench at any time.
 
TheSecondStain said:
One thing I do remember from last night was hearing Adam Blackmore saying, Schneiderlin gives the ball away, too many times. I was surprised. Cork was not immune either. It's possible that, because Sharp is in the team, he isn't taking up the positions that the guys are used to, and so they have to look up for too long. I've said before, the new players have to gel with the team, and it takes time. However, I would have liked more bite in midfield, and swapping Cork or Schneiderlin for Hammond or perhaps Chaplow, would possibly have brought more bite. Most certainly, the attitude of the team would have changed if Hammond had been on the pitch from the start. Of course, Adkins could have changed it around from the bench at any time.
Click to expand...

One thing I noticed was they tried too hard to spread the ball square across midfield even though West Ham were putting us under a lot of pressure. Watching Faubert of the ball, he was always going to the same spot square of the midfielders because he knew they'd try to spread it out there - several times he was right, stole the ball and ended up charging away through midfield. I think it's half to do with poor passing, and half to do with West Ham constantly pressing to pick the ball off very well.
 
Taking the heavies to West Ham is equivalent to coming to St Mary's and trying to play open expansive football - you're going to get beat at someone else's game. Clearly their strength was going to be their main threat but there's no reason to abandon the game that has taken us to second place just yet. Anyway, teams that have tried to kick us to pieces have usually been found out so far.
 
Interesting stuff everyone. I like what you say Qwerty, I respect Adkins for playing our 'two playmakers' and basically he put out the team that I wanted to see attacking wise, minus Punch, who I feel may do a better job away from home than Guly. Indeed, play to our strengths, lets say the Southampton way!
 
i think the brief to our midfielders is get the ball and play it to the wings. cork maybe a bit light weight, spider gets bhis foot in but hammond is more direct- the main prob is they pass the ball badly at times and give it away. would prefer our midfield to the likes of nolan every day
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back