KaKa

Nah, no way man. If that's the other way the player is getting sent off. This is incredible

Jenas saying it's a yellow man ... what a freak.

That's a red card!

Liverpool look such a soft touch without Mane man. Can't believe it.

Diaz is a fantastic player, but just doesn't have the same level of presence or force of will that Mane did.

If Maupay could hit the target there it wouldn't have been an issue.

Liverpool are a disgrace

Maupay has a talent for  missing wasting chances man. Ridiculous.

Jenas speaks so matter of factly like he wasn't one of the most disappointingly passive players you've ever seen. What a joker.

Love Firmino in the number 10 position. 

Think this makes Liverpool a lot more dangerous the rest of the way.

What a strike from Nunez!

Liverpool really miss Mane's tenacity and dynamism. Just seem so much more tepid now.

Lampard has Everton looking a decent outfit. They are well organised and look to use the ball well.

I think he's going to be alright. Definitely a much better manager than Gerrard. Certain of that now.

Piss off man

I'm not discussing this anymore. I never said anything about changing the system man, go back and read the post. My goodness!

1 minute ago, St1pe said:

I missed the Gilmour to Brighton transfer but that seems like a fantastic bit of business given Potter’s style of play. 

Yup, he's got a perfect slot for him in the team too.

They've been using that MacAllister to initiate their play from a deeper central midfield role, and he's been doing well to be fair to him.

However, longer term and maybe even sooner that role is perfect for Gilmour to step into.

21 minutes ago, Conjo said:

 

Henry didn't come to Arsenal under the same premise though. Wenger had coached Henry at Clairefontaine and thought he was a striker even back then. Henry was then brought in on the back of a disappointing spell at Juve where he had not performed well as LWB/LCM/LW.

 

Isak is coming in as our record signing, on the back of doing well as a striker his entire career. If he ends up not performing well as a striker it would make more sense to try him elsewhere at a later stage, but why try to give him a new unfamiliar role now?

 

It's easy to say position doesn't matter it's how he's utilized in that position, but by putting him out wide and not asking him to do the defensive work Almiron does, we will have to give up defensive cover elsewhere, in addition to having less guarantees that his new role will work well while we know what he can do as a striker. If we ask him to do Alimiron work, he'll have way less energy to do the offsensive stuff we bought him to do in the first place.

 

I just don't see why Howe would revamp our whole play style that has worked so well just to accommodate one player. Imagine how great it would be to have the option of putting Wilson on for Isak or vice versa during a game? We've been crying out for a bench with options. Now that we have a chance to have that, people want to shoehorn our perceived best players into the starting line-up while maintaining an uninspiring bench?

 

 

I've discussed how the system would work defensively, similar to how a team playing a diamond formation defends full backs, on the last page, and also covered how his role would not be too dissimilar to how he played as a right sided forward in a front two with Sociedad.

I'm going to bow out of this debate now. I think people perhaps skim over previous posts or maybe don't read them and the whole discussion just starts all over again.

All we're really doing is speculating on how Eddie might play both he and Wilson together. We're not demanding he does it. It's just a discussion based on what some of us have seen of Isak previously.

Regardless of how he's used, one thing I am confident of is that he is going to be brilliant.

7 minutes ago, Ikon said:

Typical blah kaka blah blah as usual. I didn’t say anything about him not playing with Wilson! I just said that he won’t play wide. So I’m not sure why you started babbling. I wasn’t questioning anyones post in particular to begin with. All I was saying is that he didn’t come here to play wide or even close to your typical wide man. He might play slightly to the side of a CF or off him or similar in something more of a two. But not wide with any real defensive responsibilities whatsoever like your typical wide forward. He’s a star signing for a ton of money. It’s only a question of time before Wilson is on the bench even when fit. 
 

You have a typical behaviour to defend things when there is no reason to. But you choose to read things that way too often I guess. I didn’t quote you. All I said is that he didn’t come here to play the wide man role. Lord have mercy!

 fair enough man.

Judging by what you said about his positioning and defensive responsibilities you definitely weren't responding to my post as I covered all that, so yeah, fair play 

1 minute ago, Happinesstan said:

He's also not fully developed yet. Had Thierry Henry ever played as a striker before Wenger got his hands on him. I genuinely don't know he answer but I assume very little.

I don't believe he had. Even Henry questioned the change when Wenger suggested it. He thought he wasn't good enough in front of goal.

Just now, Happinesstan said:

Hs goal return was affected by the choice of CF. Cisse is a goal poacher not the type to bring in the IFs.

That is another aspect to it as well. I agree.

5 minutes ago, Ikon said:

Isak didn’t come here to play wide. 

And this is why I find the whole discussion tiring at this point.

You try to go into the details of it and have a proper discussion and it gets diluted to him being shunted out wide.

Lawd have mercy!

1 minute ago, The Prophet said:

 

He was an inside forward, but it did affect his goal return.

Yes, the point is that he wasn't hugging the touchline playing as a winger.

His goal return was affected, yes, but that was still Pardew ball. It was nowhere near the type of football we are playing under Howe generally as a team, and so I would expect the quality and quantity of chances to be better, which would mean a better goal return from those areas.

16 minutes ago, Adam P said:

I've only been following the thread this week. 

Ah, so you've likely missed a lot of the discussions on this.

@HaydnNUFC has just made a good point about how we might have used Maddison if we signed him. Interestingly enough if you watched Maddison last night he started on the right side, but was far more central most of the match, playing off Vardy. 

Real Sociedad used a diamond formation last season, where Isak was the right sided striker and so a lot of his work was done in that right side half space, which would not be too dissimilar to how he would play as a right side forward if we used him there. In that setup, the opposition full back is covered by the midfield shifting over defensively, so that the RCM supports his full back on that right side, and so the right sided forward (Isak) could then stay high up the pitch. A similar defensive approach would have to be employed for us defensively to keep him forward so he's not tracking back with full backs, if we use him as a wide man.

2 minutes ago, Adam P said:

 

Because to make the point succinctly you just have to say how Ba was deployed, rather than saying 'how would you describe that'. Added to harumphing and irritation that this completely resolved question has come up again and that you cant be bothered with it, dont be surprised if it comes over as patronising. I was looking forward to hearing your thoughts, you essentially came back with 'i cant be bothered to engage with you, use the search function and read my posts i've covered it before'. Its a bit snooty mate. 

It wasn't directed at you personally. The conversation has just been had a few times now.

I just think some people don't think he can be played as a wide forward and others disagree, and it's been explained by a few different people about how it would work, but others aren't convinced, and so I don't know where else to go with the whole thing.

When Howe has everyone available and decides to play them together we'll see how he does it. He's already come out and said he sees them playing together and so we will see it at some point.

1 minute ago, Adam P said:

 

Is this where you argue Pardew was a forward thinking coach? Why dont you just say what you think instead of using slightly patronising rhetoric? (that not irony either).

What? How is that patronising?

You know what ... never mind. When Howe plays them together however he wants to it can be discussed then.

Can I ask a question ...

When Demba Ba was playing on the left side for us, how would people describe that position he was playing?