Was it fair criticism by Alan Shearer on the MOTD last night about Tom Huddleston? What I saw yesterday was him making some good passes, but sitting to deep at time, he does look a better player when he plays further forward.
I thought he played quite well John but did agree with Shearer about him being too deep. I said to my lad at half time we need Aluko to play in between their two banks of four, he came on and just didnt do it. Mind i would have taken Long off for Aluko and gone 4-4-1-1.
What annoys me most about Huddlestone is that although he is capable of Glenn Hoddle slide rule type passes across either flank, most of the time when he receives the ball, he is usually facing his own goal and passes the ball backwards to another player who is less capable in their passing ability. This usually results in that player hoofing it forwards and giving it back to the opposition.
I agree, SB did say they has set up to counter attack, which implies defending a bit deeper, but when the sending off happened it changed. But as you say he should have been telling him to get forward more under the new circumstances.
I agree Chazz I thought he had a good game, just he could have been more effective getting forward more.
Shearer was right about Huddlestone and I like how Boyd's running was highlighted. A lot of the passing was too safe. There's a chance for an early breakthrough but the players mess about doing easy passes while the opponent's defenders have time to get organised.
With Brady out and Aluko coming back from injury we lack people making runs like Boyd's. We need more movement coming from behind the strikers to disorganise the opposition defensive line
We should have changed things as soon as they went down to ten! Most of the first half we had a back four marking dzeko!
I came on here saying I thought he played well yesterday and got hammered for it. However having watched MOTD I do see he was remarkably deep and for a midfield player I can't recall ever seeing him in the box. Although his passing is mostly great it doesn't often lead to anything,it just looks good.
he appears to be getting worse. his passing was amazing when he first arrived. his positioning was also great too. he totally shone in the team when he first arrived.....but now? he kinda looks ordinary.
I think this had a lot to do with it. City (ours!) didn't really adapt when Kompany was sent off and it looked very much as though Thudd carried on with the original game plan. I think the criticism was unnecessarily harsh though - he did play some excellent balls but too few were into attacking positions. I suspect we'll see a very different approach next week.
People are picking on Huddlestone for dropping deep as we obviously lacked an attacking presence in the middle when it was clear that endless crosses were not working. But do the strikers have some responsibility to drop a little deeper, pick up the ball and run at the defenders or should Steve Bruce push Hudlestone further up the pitch? For me, if we play four at the back we can't play Livermore and meyler if we play 4-4-2. I think Shane long should drop deeper and run at players with his pace, same for aluko - as teams have worked out our endless crosses from Elmo. Despite that I still feel like I am nit picking in what is the greatest season and team I have ever watched
. Look its gone a little too long this America thing. No one believes you. You even admitted in your delusional state you were at home for the Brighton cup game and still didnt go.
Th Shearer comments were framed in the context of the 'Hudds to Brazil' debate and AS said no way on that display saying he exerted too little infleunce on proceedings when the one man advantage meant we might have expected to see him running the show...... Maybe Hudds is under orders from SB to play very deep, knowing he will draw opponents onto him (as he's seen as our 'threat') and thus free up players further forward? He certainly needs to score a few in the remaining games to force himself ahead of the other potential WC larkers.
