This. It's a specialist position. I don't rate Henry as an actual footballer but his positional play is very acceptable IMO. I think Harry has to be commended for such an attacking team but he left us very exposed at the back as Barton is not a DCM. My team Green Hughes Onouha Dunne/Hill BAE Philips Henry Barton Traore Niko Doyle
I do honestly think that the last defensive performance was largely down to the change in midfield. We had a very attacking team and went out on a limb to score more than them. In the end we didn't! Maybe a better balance of attack and defend would have worked better. Anyway, we were missing Tom Carroll and so we had 3 attacking midfielders and 1 somewhat attacking midfielder (Barton). But we didn't have a full holding midfielder like Henry, Faurlin or Tom Carroll. I liked the way we went a bit gung ho but I feel we could have done that with at least one man holding the midfield and defence together. Maybe Henry should have started? And with that said, I'd like the lineup for Burnley to be definitely used against weaker teams!
Redknapp is really hard to fathom. Along with some others, I had been crying out for a more attacking line-up, but the one game where I would have understood the need for Henry (our only natural DCM) to start was against Burnley with their dangerous front two. We don't need him against teams that are reluctant to come out of their own half.
Originally Posted by Stroller Originally Posted by awjm I do honestly think that the last defensive performance was largely down to the change in midfield. We had a very attacking team and went out on a limb to score more than them. In the end we didn't! Maybe a better balance of attack and defend would have worked better. Anyway, we were missing Tom Carroll and so we had 3 attacking midfielders and 1 somewhat attacking midfielder (Barton). But we didn't have a full holding midfielder like Henry, Faurlin or Tom Carroll. I liked the way we went a bit gung ho but I feel we could have done that with at least one man holding the midfield and defence together. Maybe Henry should have started? And with that said, I'd like the lineup for Burnley to be definitely used against weaker teams!) (Redknapp is really hard to fathom. Along with some others, I had been crying out for a more attacking line-up, but the one game where I would have understood the need for Henry (our only natural DCM) to start was against Burnley with their dangerous front two. We don't need him against teams that are reluctant to come out of their own half.) (This) Quote)) These.
Our strength over the first half of the season will be our weakness on the run in. Burnley is just the beginning.
LB C King-Pension CB Jerry Attric CB Otto Jenarian RB Buster Pass ... you'll forgive me for hoping that you get a draw at Derby
Hughes best position is at CB but would be decent at RB. This is a difficult one for me. Mistakes were made with Burnley but overall the defense have performed really well this season, so I'd be reluctant to change too much. I wonder has Harry et al been working on different defensive set-ups during this break. Hope so. Green Hughes Onuoha Dunne BAE Henry Hoilett Barton Krancjar Traore Doyle
Onohua is never a right back - he's far more comfortable at Centre back. Traore is (sadly) not good enough defensively to play at left back but has the makings of a pretty good attacking left midfielder if he can get some consistency with his crossing of the ball - he also still needs to track back and help out BAE who, for all his lazy style, is a far better option at left back -and I'm hoping his dreadful display against Burnley will give him a wake up call and remind him that he still needs to try even though he's dropped down a division. I think you're spot on with Aaron Hughes at right back - he has the experience and reads the game well according to most opinions.
I don't like the idea of only one striker again but maybe we should try with one first half and throw on AJ second half, may be use Kranky just behind the forward: Green Hughes, Dunne, Hill, BAE Henry Hoilett, Barton, Krancjar, Traore Doyle
Totally agree, dont want to be chasing the game, if we keep them quiet, we can then go on the offensive in the second half. They are a good team, and McClaren will have them up for it.
I would change the back 4 and play Hughes as well as Onoucha. Thus my defensive line up would be: HUGHES - ONUOHA - HILL (or DUNNE?) - BAE My only dilemna would be who to rest from Hill or Dunne. I probably would would rest Dunne and play HILL as he is the Captain.
excellent! .. tbf - I think we caught them on a good day for us and a poor one for them (plus McLaren had just been saddled with the Manaager Of The Month curse which Nigel Pearson has just won in turn!) - was undoubtedly our best performance of the season for me ... Derby are obviously much better than they were that night against us and Patrick Bamford appears to have found his shooting boots ... good luck.
We did not lose last Saturday, we drew against the team below us, a team who had beaten at their place already, and one of the very few teams to beat us thus far this season. I see no need for wholesale changes across the back following the last game and that original post screams of total over-reaction. BAE has had far more good games than bad this season, yes he had a bad day at the office and embarrassed himself with at least one of their goals, but that is one 4/10 games balanced against many 6/10 or 7/10 performances. Nedum is not a right back, simple, end of. Not that he can't defend, he is a good defender, but he needs to operate in the centre of the park, so that when he is coming out with the ball he has the width of the picture surrounding him on both sides to pick out a pass to the midfield. Stick him in right back and as he showed time and again when he played there for a prolonged run, he tackes/receives the ball, goes tight up the wing to midway, stops, turns, turns again, miss passes or gets tackled. He cant do the byline consistently like BAE can. Now whether Hughes suffers from the same limitations as Ned is yet to be seen, but where the f**k is Luke Young at this stage? So I would go with the same back 4 starting unless HR believes Hughes can do a better job at RB and leave the other 3 regulars as is. Then I like the look of NUTS midfield/attack option - we are away from home, but at this stage we still need to go and win games.
The only decision Harold has to make re the back 4 is the RB position, does he leave Ned there or bring in Hughes? The rest pick themselves, this is after all a side that has only conceded 22 goals all season....what is the problem? Last Saturday part of the problem was Harolds gunhoe approach in playing 442 with 4 attack minded midfielders, it was the very game that a DCM should have been deployed to nullify Burnley. Instead he allowed Burnley to play through us and supply probably the best 2 front players in the division....we were always going to be in trouble with that approach. On Monday I would prefer to see 1 up front and Henry sitting just in front of the back 4.....there is a time and a place for 442 and Monday is not it.....
I don't think attacking Burnley was a bad decision. We have been moaning all season about being too careful at home. If BAE had had a better day we would have won. 3-3 is better than 0-0, especially when the crowd has been quiet(ish) and hasn't had much to get excited about. On Monday, we need to be careful, but we should still go for the win. Which two of the three that play at CB is purely tactical depending on who they are marking, pace, or a deeper, yet slower two? Hopefully, Harry knows what is best.
