If he does then I completely agree. Doesn't do enough defensively to get away with it, everytime he loses the ball he starts limping and slowly jogging back instead of busting a gut to get back and help out. Talented lad, rubbish defensively.
Although I would like to add.. Not a patch on Bolasie for the "worst defensive positioning of the season so far" award.
I don't think the formation should change just to accommodate Albert - maybe DM needs to teach him that running back is just as important as running forward
Play him more central in a roaming player then you keep a winger that can help out defensive duties as well.
Redordead I have fancied for some time that Albert should be used in the hole, as it were. A free role to attack the opposition from midfield, using one of the big boys to play off. Only 2 problems here. Playing in the Messi position requires a player to be really good at shooting and coolly setting up chances for others. Still, it could be a way to go in future. The other problem ? Pitman and Stead look the business together, and Pitman who is our best player is already playing in the link position (or he was supposed to anyway). For this reason I would keep Adomah on the wing, but coach him to cover in a 2012 fashion. Like Ronaldo does.
A then and now comparison of 4-4-2 and how it can to some, make a team very tight at the back or how to others too open. In the good old bad old days of the AD regime in the First Division, he always played 4-4-2. I don't think anyone thought of any other formation. Yet AD's idea was that 42 0-0 draws would ensure safety with only 2pts for a win then. He actually said this once at an AGM. His Albert Adomah was Clive Whitehead on the left, with Tainton, not too tall but very hard, on the right. Sometimes he used Jimmie Mann wide left midfield and allowed him to go inside the full back and unleash a hammer drive. Is this the best way to use Albert now? Gow in the centre of midfield had a variety of partners, Jimmy Mann, Sweeney, Cormack, Fitzpatrick all of whom were pretty good defensively and so were part of a team which gave little away. But the big difference between then and now were the central defenders. Merrick, Collier, Rodgers and Hunter were very solid and had very good full backs alongside. Thus City while they struggled a lot of the time to open teams up and score which is comparable to today's team. So to the current squad. We have a lot of back four players but very few of them ever appear to be as defensively solid as the 70's lot. An example, and as this is not a dig at any of today's players, in last seasons away win at Watford, one central defender lost five 50-50 challenges with ball on floor between them, with a Watford midfielder. I cannot ever imagine that happening to Geoff Merrick, Hunter or anyone else mentioned above. So Tuesday's midfield of Foster (known more as a full back now) Cisse, so defensive he must have had a brain hemorrhage when he scored, and Joe Bryan, probably thought of as a full back more than a midfielder, leaving only Pearson as the forward minded of the four. YET, even though we conceded two, we looked a lot tighter than recent games with FIVE in midfield. I know this one will run for a while as I think DMc may well revert to 4-5-1 for some away games, especially Forest if they are still below us then.
