The funny thing is that in the second half, the ball was virtually camped in their half... Sort of deflects the 'not having enough attacking threat' really. Cedric would have given us something, but it was a sensible tactic for me. We may have been two or three down otherwise.... Nobody knows.
He was neat and tidy too. Must have been brought up well in a footballing sense. It was also a great reaction when he scored.
Here's what I think about the debate. I don't know. I can see the reasoning between both Yoshida and Cedric (though I'd disagree on Martina - there's too much risk throwing him into a game of that importance as a starter). Would we have scored more with Cedric? I don't know. Would we have conceded more without Yoshida? No idea. But I absolutely understand why that decision was made.
Well yes that was the second half, but in the first half.... No I'm not really pedantic, just having a joke. As others have touched on its all part of the fun of debate isn't it? Personally I'd have liked to see a fully fledged full back but I can see why you (and Ron for that matter) chose otherwise. Maybe that's why I sucked at football manager! It shows how far we have come too when we are discussing how we may have won instead of drawn against the Danish champions rather than what are the chances we might get a point against Bristol Rovers.
I think I watched my own game as I was impressed with yoshida's touch, his interplay and most of his defending. He looked quality up until a totally awful pass in the last five minutes when I turned to my mate and said: "That's all anyone will remember now". Maybe I was right...
Well I think that just goes to show how different a game can look from different parts of the ground.I sit same as Shoot Spiderman. Plus when you read these posts it is clear some folks make up their minds from the team sheet..
What? I never at any point said Mane and Rodriguez didn't get into decent positions did I? The fact is the whole attack was less effective as Yoshida was at right back and Ward-Prowse was at left midfield. Mane would have been far more dangerous with Cedric behind him. Targett and Ward-Prowse could have offered more if Ward-Prowse wasn't constantly drifting in. There is no chance we'd have let in two or three because of just one player having less height. Our team is big as it is as I mentioned. On the set pieces he could have been covering short or on the second ball. Are you telling me you wouldn't have played Lahm or Cafu in that game because they aren't great in the air? Despite the fact they are great going forward and we had the majority of possession and territory? The way the team was set up for a home leg was negative. We dominated the game. Cedric should have been in there for his attacking ability. We'd have got at least one more goal in my opinion and not let any more in. It's my opinion.
I agree that Cedric should have played but you can hardly use those two as an example. Cafu was one of the great right backs in recent times and is a multiple world cup winner and Lahm is world class and also won the world cup.
He was using their physical size as an example. I fully agree with him. Cedric can beat a man, Yoshida constantly had to stop and check inside onto his left foot. Constantly slowed our attacking play down, and meant Mane had no-one to support him. We will never know what would have happened with Cedric playing, but my opinion is that we would have won the game.
I admit they are extreme examples, but I was interested in what his answer would be. It was the fact they are a similar size and stature as Osvaldorama mentions. Cedric has looked really dangerous going forward when he's played. The home game we were bound to dominate possession and territory. I find it negative picking Yoshida at home at right back. We should have been pushing to get a 2 goal advantage. We would have been on the front foot even more with Cedric playing. The opposition would have been deeper and would have offered even less going forward. If they had been ruthless when they had the two vs one with Caulker then we would be in big trouble right now.
I thought it was the perfect game for Cedric to come in and show us what he's about, would clearly have offered us much more going forward than Yoshida. I also feel it sent a lack of confidence message to the 2 conventional RB's sat on the bench when a player comes in in front of them playing out of position? I like Yoshida and think he's much improved, but with the best will in the world he's only ever going to be a stopper, hoofer?
The opposite was my opinion On the strikers, your post inferred Pelle was the only one who looked dangerous by saying it was critical he had a good game or we wouldn't have done anything going forward. I thought Jayrod and Mane caused problems too and it now seems like you agree, so not so critical about Pelle.
