I'm a bit concerned that Ole is going to ask some of our guys to play out of their natural position too often just to suit his personal gameplans. If you haven't got the right players to play to a system, don't do it. Both Daehli and Le Fondre were wasted on Friday. They were both like fish out of water, although Alfie did put in a very good shift. Neither are wide men in a month of Sundays, and the absence of Noone makes it essential to play a 4-4-2 or even a 3-5-2 if we had the CB resources. If Ole wants width, I'd even give a thought to giving Kadeem Harris a shot at it instead of repeating that again. Neither Le Fondre nor Daehli posed any threat and were used very negatively - square pegs in round holes. Trying to use them to give us width left the midfield exposed, and when you couple that with the lack of pace of both Whitts and Gunnar in there, we struggled to close them down until Adeyemi came on. We got a point and probably deserved it, but the system has to suit the squad as it is. It's all very well Ole saying that Le Fondre had said he'd be happy just to be on the pitch. That won't last. He's a goal scorer who had no chance on Friday to play to his strengths. Daehli needs play more centrally just behind the front men and I can't see both him and Whitts starting together. Someone said that Whitts would be far more effective further forward playing the old no. 10 role and I agree - unfortunately, I think Ole would have to make a choice between them to play alongside Adeyemi, Eikrem and Burgstaller ina 4-3-1-2. If we went for 3 at the back (sort of 3-4-1-2) with Brayford and Fabio playing wide, we'd just need one other to play with Adeyemi in the middle.
It's the old adage of play the system to suit the players or sign the players to suit the system. Keegan liked 5 at the back but insisted on playing Adams. One of the best centre halves around wasted. The same when Liverpool insisted on playing two wingers who slung crosses over with only Michael Owen in the middle, watching everything go over his head. We need to take full advantage of what is at our disposal. I thought we'd settled on a formation against Wolfsburg which looked effective, if a bit suspect at the back but we went forward with purpose and kept the ball. Pleased with the signings we've made, less so with how they were utilised on Friday.
Agree 100%. I just wish someone in the know could just have a quiet word in his ear to make sure OGS knows he just cannot keep on trying to fit round holes into square pegs; and possibly someone of influence could raise the problem with the board, and get an experienced no 2 brought in.
But to whom would OGS listen? I get the impression it would have to be someone with a great track record and if we had him, then we wouldn't need OGS. Or do we need SAF for a few weeks consultancy?
I have to say i really enjoy reading this forum, you guys make good comments glad i joined! But yeah i agree with the sentiment in your post i wanted to write something similar in the match thread after watching the blackburn match. I was very surprised with how city played, i was expecting OGS to be positive and attack minded. Instead I saw a team that seemed reluctant to go forward and relied on long balls at an old fashioned big target man. What disappoints me was that city played some our most potent attacking players out of position/very deep as a result the players looked out of their depth and the whole team looked void of creativity. i do wish OGS would play to the strength of his squad. The best teams play their own game, they are confident in their own ability. On the basis of the first match of the season it looked like OGS was building his tactics around opposition. I would ask you one thing though, do you really feel Whitts and Daehli are up for the same position? Daehli should clearly never be played out wide as he was on saturday. But as a winger he was very exciting last season, although i do agree he potentially has a bigger potential in the hole. Eikrem for me is the player that is very similar to Whitts. They are both extremely good on set pieces, very good passers of the ball, great strikers of the ball but neither has that more unpredictable quality where they have the kind of close control,quick feet, mobility and balance were they can dribble through a defence on their own. For me they are different type of players with different qualities that city need I actually think Whitts and Eikrem is more suited to a deep lying playmaker position. A sort of Pirlo, scholes position (regista) whereas Daehli is more an attacking playmaker (trequartista). The problem for me is how to accommodate both a daehli and a whitts/eikrem because city always seem to need more muscle in central midfield so you are tempted to go with adeyemi and dikgacoi for defensive safety.
Whitts and Daehli are both skillful creative players who can supply the front men with the opportunities they need. There are obvious differences, but their games are too similar unless you decide to play one of them (Whitts) in a more withdrawn defensive role - we have other players better suited to that. I agree Eikrem looks similar to Whitts and defensively would be the better option, but he's not as skillful. The two have been likened in the media, but I don't see it as clear cut as that. The problem with playing Daehli and Whitts both at the same time is that you weaken the midfield physically and this is a very tough division on that score. Adeyemi and/or Dikgacoi need to be in there to add some grunt - they'll provide some energy and strength whilst the likes of Daehli/Whitts can go about their business doing what they do best. With that in mind, and I think Ole is going to stick with two up front given the choices he's got, he's got to decide between Eikrem/Kimbo/Burgstaller/Gunnar - and that's without Noone when he does come back into the reckoning. Lots of options - let's just hope Ole gets it right.
Well i have to say i see them as quite different. Daehli is a much more mobile playmaker, he plays a much more high intensity game, his running at defenders and dribbling ads an unpredictable quality that city need. Whitts is more static, doesn't run at the defence but his shot and set pieces are much better. The thing they have in common for me is they both have really good vision and are both capable of pulling the strings in attack. But i reckon you need the individual qualities both bring to the team OGS talked about his central midfielders, he mentioned Dikgacoi, Adeyemi, Gunnarson,Eikrem and Whitts, I get the impression Daehli is not in the running for Whitts position. Daehli was mostly played as a (inverted) winger last season and i think thats what OGS will stick with for now. When we play a 4 man midfield we will play them both in my opinion. In the formation city played on saturday i most definitely agree that city looks too weak physically with the two of them. But it has to be said that Gunnarson was also part of the problem, Gunnarson does not read the game well and he isn't pacey so he is not able to make up for his positional errors, add to that he is not a very good passer, so he can't help city keep the ball in the team. I would have thought that a Dikgacoi on form or possibly Adeyemi would have made more of a difference. As you said, as as soon as Adeyemi came on city managed to close the game down more. But on the other hand there was a noticeable drop in possession after he came on so i do wonder about playing him and Gunnarson together, its counterproductive if they break up play but can't keep hold of the ball. Is Dikgacoi any better in possession?
Every other week at the CCS, there are over 20,000 CCFC managers watching the game from the stands, but in the end, there's only one that counts. We all think we know better, but let's just hope the one that counts reads his squad the right way and gets it spot on for the rest of us. Opinions are what this board is about, and we can only offer our own on our team whilst respecting those of others - except Dai's of course...........
