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.
The fact that we are not in big trouble right now, may suggest that Ron dos ok with his selection.
I think we looked pretty dangerous in the second half and I am happy with what Ron did last night.
As FR picking Cafu and Lahm, there may well have been games when a coach decided to change things tactically. As Tom said, we're hardly comparing dropping the best RB in the world are we?
I just don't understand why people are moaning about the RB selection when the result isn't a bad one and it was pretty clear why he did it.
As for your other comment about us scoring at least another goal, purely speculative and so so easy to sit there and say so. You don't know that. We might not have. I can sit here and say that if Pelle hadnt fallen over the defenders leg (accidentally) from a brilliant Yoshida cross, he'd have scored and we'd have won the game with Maya assisting the winner - I wonder if people would have moaned then. It's all ifs and buts.
People need to remember that Ron doesn't make his selection with the wonderful power of hindsight.
Missed my point entirely, in fact so wide of it! You, me, Ron everyone knows that! My point was that the hindsight is everyone saying afterwards he should have played the attacking RB and Ron makes his decision based on what he wants from the game and how he thinks it will play tactically.