Formation / Tactics

Fev said:
I think playing Elmo & Robertson at the back in a 4 leaves us far too exposed.
Click to expand...

I think they would both be fine in a standard full-back role, but they are expected to be wingers too. If Robertson had Brady in front of him, and Elmo had Ben Arfa in front of him, things would look a lot better.

It's just frustrating seeing huge assets being stretched into a liability.
 
I think they would both be fine in a standard full-back role, but they are expected to be wingers too. If Robertson had Brady in front of him, and Elmo had Ben Arfa in front of him, things would look a lot better.

It's just frustrating seeing huge assets being stretched into a liability.

I think Elmo, Robertson (and to some extent Brady) are natural wingbacks and playing them there is using the asset to its best potential. If we want to use a formation with fullbacks then we need to use Rosie and erm ... well thats the problem and why in my opinion we are better off not doing so.
 
Fev said:
I think they would both be fine in a standard full-back role, but they are expected to be wingers too. If Robertson had Brady in front of him, and Elmo had Ben Arfa in front of him, things would look a lot better.

It's just frustrating seeing huge assets being stretched into a liability.

I think Elmo, Robertson (and to some extent Brady) are natural wingbacks and playing them there is using the asset to its best potential. If we want to use a formation with fullbacks then we need to use Rosie and erm ... well thats the problem and why in my opinion we are better off not doing so.
Click to expand...

Having Rosie at RB and Robertson at LB would be absolutely fine if Robertson actually had a player in front of him to cover for him and take off some of his workload.
 
Brucey got it wrong in my humble opinion on Saturday, when the opposition is playing a lone striker we don't need 4 at the back and should have reverted to 3. They had an extra man in midfield on Saturday and it showed. Even when we were 2up I feared the worst, we looked shaky throughout. Quinny and Greegsy culpable for their first goal, Robertson the second. Elmo at right back not solid enough either.

Whats the saying, if it isn't broken don't fix it! Overall we've got better players and it will settle down over the coming weeks. That said I anticipate major changes for mid week against WBA away, balancing act for Brucey, progression in the cup against playing too many players that are not match fit and we blow it.
 
TigerRoo said:
I agree with you there but Aluko and Sagbo are nowhere near 'proper' strikers.
Click to expand...

If Sagbo had been on the pitch, we'd have had a target and one who can hold the ball up well, with Aluko we had nothing and the ball kept coming straight back at us.

Your opinion of Sagbo's ability as a striker is completely irrelevant in this situation, not having him available was a mistake and may well have cost us two points.
 
Sagbo would have been the ideal sub to bring on at 2-0 up, yes, though hindsight is a wonderful thing as they say.
 
renegadetiger said:
Sagbo would have been the ideal sub to bring on at 2-0 up, yes, though hindsight is a wonderful thing as they say.
Click to expand...

Indeed, though this isn't hindsight, I wanted Sagbo to come on before the substitution was made(before I realised he wasn't even on the bench) and without another striker available, Jelavic shouldn't have come off in the first place.
 
renegadetiger said:
Sagbo would have been the ideal sub to bring on at 2-0 up, yes, though hindsight is a wonderful thing as they say.
Click to expand...

originallambrettaman said:
Indeed, though this isn't hindsight, I wanted Sagbo to come on before the substitution was made(before I realised he wasn't even on the bench) and without another striker available, Jelavic shouldn't have come off in the first place.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more, he would have been a much better replacement than Aluko.
 
I wonder what Ince must be thinking. Aluko has been dire for months yet he is selected for the bench ahead of him.
 
originallambrettaman said:
Indeed, though this isn't hindsight, I wanted Sagbo to come on before the substitution was made(before I realised he wasn't even on the bench) and without another striker available, Jelavic shouldn't have come off in the first place.
Click to expand...

I agree with everyone that Jelly should have stayed on and I am unsure as to the reason he was brought off.
I don't understand people who think Sagbo is capable at this level. In his last season at Evian he scored 6 from 35. He has scored 2 from 28 for us. 2 from 5 in the FA Cup. There has been one faint rumour of interest at a lower level in taking him off our hands but that fell through. Other than that no interest whatsoever. If Sagbo had the slightest bit of quality he would have had Clubs beating a path to the KC Stadium to sign him on. There has been none. To bring Aluko in (way out of his depth in the Premier League) before Sagbo shows how lowly he is rated by Steve Bruce and his selection team. I've heard all this before with Proschwitz and Altidore being 'hold-up' players, 'time to settle in', 'need match time' etc., etc., They didn't have it and neither has Sagbo. A blind man can see it.
 
We were talking about the benefits of bringing Sagbo on to defend a lead, which doesn't require him to score, it requires him to hold the ball, which he does very well.
 
renegadetiger said:
We were talking about the benefits of bringing Sagbo on to defend a lead, which doesn't require him to score, it requires him to hold the ball, which he does very well.
Click to expand...

This.

He was the ideal player to bring on if Jelavic had to come off, it was a mistake not doing so(or even giving ourselves the opportunity to do so by having him on the bench).
 
renegadetiger said:
We were talking about the benefits of bringing Sagbo on to defend a lead, which doesn't require him to score, it requires him to hold the ball, which he does very well.
Click to expand...

I understand that but we only had 37% possession. We have better players capable of 'holding the ball' but they weren't able to.
The Newcastle side were far superior to the side that played Southampton the week before and were very tenacious throughout the game giving us little time with the ball.
We started falling back and that was fatal for our 2 goal lead.
 
johnbo said:
Mac is a great keeper but has let in some stupid goals in this season, yesterday at is near post should never have been beaten, again in mid week West hams second goal he should have done better with and the one against Lockeren when he kicked it straight to their forward. I know he is a top keeper and as made some great saves this season but at this level he as to cut out the daft mistakes, perhaps he needs a bit more competition.
Click to expand...


Absolute agree with this, Robertson should of marked his man for both goals! But mcgregor has got to be saving that first goal, I think jaukopovic would of got that, I am questioning McGregor at the moment! He also had a bad FA Cup final!....people seem to like him, but I think he is conceding way too many, most of them been easy shots or mistakes! ....the one against Stoke was terrible, where he palmed it into the post, he looks a liability to me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back