So you would have played an attacking midfielder? We could have got screwed if we had gone in to the game like that, ML wanted to sit back and use the counter, which is why he chose to go with 3 deeper lying midfielders, and no attacking midfielder. A tactic that got us past Chelsea at their place? Got us a result at the Emirates? why is it all of a sudden not good enough? Why, because hindsight is a wonderful thing. Laudrup wasn't to know that Spurs would have played pretty crap themselves, Laudrup wasn't to know our team wouldn't play at their best, but of course we as the armchair managers know that now, and can pick holes in the choices. Now if he had gone with your choice, of Bony and Michu, and Spurs played their A game, and won 5-0, you would most likely be on here crying about why he played an attacking midfielder, knowing that spurs are a good team.
I dont know what part of its not about the loss some don't understand, It about the way laudrup is sending his team out on the pitch with a weakened formation while we have the players sitting on the bench......lone ranger is right. why play michu as the striker when it has not worked last season as 9pts out of a possible 42pts shows, I bet there are managers in the premiership baffled by his team selection and the spurs manager could not believe his luck. It is piss poor management skills which ever way you look at it as spurs were there for the taking...
I'm all for european football but not if laudrup thinks we should play our strongest side and win comfortable and field a weakened side in the premiership i'm not.....
How was it a weakened side, Bony is not the sort of striker for counter attacking, he just doesn't have the pace, so Michu currently is our only choice to play that role. Who in that squad was part of a weakened side Rangel, Williams, Chico, Davies (nope all first teamers) Hernandez, Routledge (nope, both first teamers) JDG, Shelvey, Canas (nothing weak there, other than my personal opinion of JDG not being good enough) Michu (nope, not weak there either) Oh wait, its got to be Vorm, oh **** no, he isn't weak either. The problem was not a weakened team, it was the choice to play 3 midfielders who have'n't really played together much, and the fact that JDG is a lazy bastard so we were basically playing with 2 midfielders. I don't agree with his choice of midfielders, but to say it was a weakened team is laughable. I would personally have gone with this setup --------------Vorm---------------- Rangel----Chico---Williams---Davies ---------Canas-----Britton--------- --------------Shelvey------------- Hernandez----------------Routledge ---------------Michu-------------- That for me was the better choice, you have your 2 holding midfielders, whilst shelvey can also help out, but Shelvey is also then important when onthe break, isn't lazy like JDG, and will put in the effort. Michu would still be up front for me, not because I don't rate Bony, but Bony has not got the same pace as Michu, Michu was deadly last season on the counter attack, just because its not his favoured role, doesn't mean that we shouldn't look to him for other options when needed. It just didn't click for us yesterday, that is all, tactics were right, a bit of a change in the middle, and i think we could have got a result.
I would have preferred Bony up front. He may not be suited to counter attacking but with his strength surely he could hold the ball up a bit more and surely our midfield is stronger with Michu in there getting involved more ? The game seemed to be the same as last season - all Spurs and when we go a goal behind we knew it was game over. I don't know why anyone expected any different once the team was announced.
We got screwed anyway in case you hadn't noticed. Only Vorm stopped us taking another pasting. I cannot for the life of me fathom that mindset. We're going up against a team packed with quality players and attacking talent, so what we'll do is sit back and let them attack us? Why not play our quality attackers and at least try to keep them on the back foot for periods of the game? If we lose, we lose. At least we'd have tried to win. These tame surrenders need to stop.
I am sorry, it was a good enough tactic to get us past Chelsea last season (you know, the holding European Champions at the time) in the League cup, so the very reason we are in Europe this season, as we sat back and let Chelsea have the ball, we sat back and soaked up all the pressure and hit them on the break. Bet you were loving the tactic then. But as soon as it doesn't work, oh the manager made a booboo. Can't understand the mindset of some, that a tactic must be the wrong choice cos a team loses, ffs,we are Swansea City. This whole Barcelona comparisons has gone to some people's heads, we are going to lose games, get over it already. These same people who moan that we should go out all guns blazin, are these not the same people who criticised the lieks of Rodgers for not having a plan B? I pity the manager, cos no matter what he does, there is always some armchair manager out there moaning.
Yes, because one game where it did work more than makes up for the others where it hasn't. We've started slipping into the bad habits we picked up under Rodgers. 400+ passes in our own half on Sunday. With no outlets further up the pitch we've got nowhere to go when we do have the ball. Riskier/longer passes are tried, Spurs get the ball back and attack properly. Rinse, repeat. The difference Bony & Pozuelo made when they came on was stark in comparison to what went before. We actually looked like we wanted to score.
leaving bony on the bench was a schoolboy error and if he is not fit then what the hell are we spending £13 million on an unfit player anyway. ...laudrups talks a good game plan in the papers but he is pants at making sure its carried out and you have to expect that when he cant pick his best team...I bet bony will start in our walk over game in europe in the week..
Bony had a dodgy ankle so Laudrup didn't want to risk him more than he had to. Of course Bony is fit, maybe not at the level he wants because he wasn't able to train with us until his documentation was approved. He ticked over with Vitesse but that was it. When he is fully match fit and up to pace with the demands of this league, he will score/create a lot of goals.
If he had a dodgy ankle then what was he doing on the bench and more so why risk putting him on...I don't believe it one bit. Its bad management and nothing less and it would be even worst if he let him play knowing he has a problem, so whichever way you look at it its poor management skills...
It aint bad management it is management. Laudrup knows better than all of us , if he thought our best way to play was to put Michu up front and keep Bony on the bench then im happy with that. At the end of the day what the fook do we know ? Laudrup probably didn't want us to go all out and get another pasting, he was probably more conservative than he wanted to be but losing 1-4 to Man utd puts a different spin on how you play Spurs away. There is no way he could have risked another hammering so went for being difficult to beat, most sane people believe that was probably the best way to approach this game,a humiliating defeat by the spuds would send out the wrong signals to other teams imo .
What you choose to believe is totally, completely and utterly irrelevant. If the word from our bench is that Bony was nursing a knock on his ankle then I'm far more inclined to take their word than yours. I've asked you this before and I'll ask you again, have you ever played this game? Many players carry knocks that don't necessarily rule them out of games. They and their coaching team might well decide that they can play for a certain amount of time if it's called for. Some players carry an injury for half a season or more if it's called for.
Some of our best performances and success last season was while playing counter attacking football eg Newcastle and Chelsea away. We struggle when teams come to the liberty and defend deep. Perhaps Bony will play in counter attacking formation and be asked to hold the ball up but we can hardly say Michu is a bad option. The issue is playing too many players at the same time who have a tendency to give the ball away. We do seem to miss Briton's link play when not selected.
It would appear that you Dai have an agenda against the manger which is your prerogative but in the interests of debate please try and answer the questions when asked , I appreciate that some posts will be missed but try and give an honest response as this can lead to interesting debate
