Gerrard and Hobbs were too similar which is why the dodgy partnership occured whereas Chester compliments them both really well in the same way that Ayala did with Gerrard which is why I can't see a Chester Ayala pairing as they are too similar.
Can see Ayala/Chester combo. Hobbs is good, don't get me wrong. But Ayala and Chester are the 2 better CB.
You're missing the point, Massimo. Just because they are the 2 better footballers doesn't make them the best partnership. In a similar way that Gerrard and Lampard seem to be useless together for England but for their clubs are world class.
I don't agree with this whole 'partnership' thing at centre back, it makes sense up front and in midfield. But defenders just need to be big, strong and tackle well. I fail to see the positive in having a smaller defender, or god forbid, a 'ball-playing' defender.
It's as crucial as anywhere to have centre halves who understand each other, don't make the same moves, know each others jobs and each others strengths and weaknesses. Agree with you on the "ball playing defender", it's best to have two
But can see Ayala/Chester being the better combo. Would be harsh on Hobbs, mind. I would of saved Coops in hindsight. Save the cash on Ayala possibly? Then still have Cooper/Hobbs/Chester. Thats if he does even come. Any 2 of Chester/Hobbs/Ayala is going to be cracking.
If you have 2 big lumps at the back you're probably guna get caught out. Not many players possess a steady array of attributes, some are fast, some tall, some read the game well so rarely have to make last ditch tackles (think Rio and Terry) Rio reads and covers whilst Terry is the man that goes after tackles and is the more aggressive ball winner. 2 different cbs can both be world class but have completely different attributes...put them together and you've got a world class partnership, each covering the others weaknesses.
Just because one is bigger, stronger and taller doesn't always mean he would have a higher sell on value. It often does though and further down the line one of the three may get sold on for good money, that's football. Having three CB's make this possible.
Well yes it's best if they understand each other, but I mean that there is only one type of centre half you need. Unlike CM and CF you don't need complimenting small/big partnerships. You just need two big guys who can tackle and head, OK it's more complex than that but you know what I mean. The idea of picking a centre back because he is smaller is stupid. Being small is a disadvantage to a CB. Chester and some others manage fine with that disadvantage, but that doesn't make being small a good thing. The thing about 'ball-playing' CBs, though sort of irrelevant, is that I can't stand when people say a CB should be technically gifted. It shouold be a bonus skill to have on top of being able to defend. But defending should be the priority for a defender, not being creative.
I agree that being able to defend is a priority for a CB (obviously) but I think being able to play the ball is also important IMO. It is no good putting in a good tackle then making an aimless hoof up field or out for a throw in etc. That just invites pressure back onto your team. Being able to pick a pass, or bring the ball out of the defence can quickly turn defence into attack
But attacks start from the back, if you have 4 defenders playing in a 4-4-2 and all they do is smash it out in blind panic then attacks break down before they begin. This is whats wrong with our country, technical ability should come before anything else then we might actually start winning things internationally (not that I care much for England anymore).
I agree wholeheartedly that technical ability is of the utmost importance in a good team, but the defence is the area where it is least important. I'm not saying defenders should give the ball away every time they get it, but they don't need to play incisive, creative passes all the time either. If they can simply lay it off to a full back or midfielder that's all they need to do. Gerrard was a crap passer but he was a blood and thunder centre half which is exactly what we needed last season.
No matter how good the two cb's we have are, any injury to either(god forbid) could be a season defining event, best to cover against this if possible. The fact that there is mixed opinion as to which two out of three are best shows he is right in there with the two we are happy with. I hope we find a way to sign Ayala and let NP worry about selection headaches.
Ok, how about a compromise? 5-3-2 Gulsaci Dudgeon LWB Chester Ayala Hobbs Roseinor RWB McKenna DM Evans/Cairney CM Brady/Koren AM (in the hole, free role) Adebola Fryatt I know it wouldnt happen but worth a thought.... For me the better pairing is Chester/Ayala, however any two of the three are good pairings
Brady? We've played well with wingers in pre-season and the Brady/Stewart combination is exciting and should not be changed.
I'm not a fan of 5 at the back, leaves you far too exposed down the wings or alternatively your wing backs sit too deep and you have no width in the team going forward.
