Steve McClaren

[mozy]

A question to ElCid - As you clearly dislike the Colback-Anita duo starting games so much, who would you play ahead of them with current options available? I'm not judging McClaren on transfers as 1. He isn't wholly responsible for them and 2. Our transfer business has actually been quite good.

 

Did I not state that in my message above and who is judging the transfers which I again mentioned are good? This is about two players who are currently at the club and should not be playing. Instead of trying to be clever why do you think they should be playing and why don't you take on some of the points I raised.

 

No - what you've said is that McClaren should be banging Ashley's door down for two new central midfielders, and if he keepers playing Colback-Anita, then you deem him a failure from the off.

 

My view is that playing only one of Colback-Anita doesn't give enough defensive cover or work rate in central midfield, and we don't have anyone currently at the club who is talented enough (as a Carrick style deep lying playmaker) to take their place. Furthermore, playing two (nominal) deep midfielders doesn't automatically invite pressure, it's the mentality of the team as a whole. So many big teams play with two 'holders' even when playing at home against shite teams. And we have actually seen the formation morph between 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 depending on game situation and opponent.

 

I'm just absolutely baffled as to why you view this as the management crime of the century. It's a perfectly rational and reasonable decision.

[Guest ElCid]

A question to ElCid - As you clearly dislike the Colback-Anita duo starting games so much, who would you play ahead of them with current options available? I'm not judging McClaren on transfers as 1. He isn't wholly responsible for them and 2. Our transfer business has actually been quite good.

 

Did I not state that in my message above and who is judging the transfers which I again mentioned are good? This is about two players who are currently at the club and should not be playing. Instead of trying to be clever why do you think they should be playing and why don't you take on some of the points I raised.

 

No - what you've said is that McClaren should be banging Ashley's door down for two new central midfielders, and if he keepers playing Colback-Anita, then you deem him a failure from the off.

 

My view is that playing only one of Colback-Anita doesn't give enough defensive cover or work rate in central midfield, and we don't have anyone currently at the club who is talented enough (as a Carrick style deep lying playmaker) to take their place. Furthermore, playing two (nominal) deep midfielders doesn't automatically invite pressure, it's the mentality of the team as a whole. So many big teams play with two 'holders' even when playing at home against s**** teams. And we have actually seen the formation morph between 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 depending on game situation and opponent.

 

I'm just absolutely baffled as to why you view this as the management crime of the century. It's a perfectly rational and reasonable decision.

 

Yeah and what does that have to do with the current transfers as you stated which are good - I didn't say anything about the current transfers being enough though and any NON PUPPET manager would have been banging on the door demanding more transfers.

 

You're second point is players currently at the club who can do a better job than either Anita or Colback then I would say Tiote is a far better option currently as I know he can't spray 30  - 40 yard balls but at least he can dominate a player phsically which neither of these two can. Yes he hasn't been in the best of form the last two years but he has also missed large chunks and has at least in the past demonstrated that he can do the role very well. If I had to choose between the two out of Anita and Colback I would say Anita.

 

If you have players who can spray the ball in 30 - 40 yards and dominate physically then you're right (i.e. Vierra and Petit) but unfortunately your talking about Colback and Anita who can do neither and spend most of the time mistiming 10 - 15 yard balls backwards and sideways. I just don't think your getting my point in having two rank average players in the middle of the park which is the problem - how many big teams or any team play with holding players with the quality of Colback and Anita who offer nothing and are always being overrun by teams in that department. As I said last year they were the midfield that were part of the five worst displays last year conceding 18 goals in those games.

 

If you think it's a perfectly rational and reasonable decision to play Colback and Anita every game then I'm just not interested in what you say as your either clueless or one of the sheep fans. You even say yourself playing both does not give enough defensive cover or work rate and then question why I think it is so wrong - make your mind up will you.

[mozy]

I would assume McClaren could clearly see that CM wasn't a pressing need, so pressured for transfers in other areas.

 

It's not about playing 30-40 yard passes and it's not about being physically dominant. How many times does Tiote get turned by agile opponents. I want my CM's to keep the ball and control the tempo of the game above all else. That means short, sharp passes, to move the opposition around the pitch. Anita and Colback are the best we have at doing that. Wijnaldum might be better but we don't know yet.

 

I'll point out again that Spurs finished 5th with Benteleb and Mason playing CM. They are not fundamentally better than Anita-Colback.

 

I'm not saying you have to agree with playing them both, but if you fail to grasp the rationale behind doing so, then I don't hold out much hope.

[triggs]

I would assume McClaren could clearly see that CM wasn't a pressing need, so pressured for transfers in other areas.

 

It's not about playing 30-40 yard passes and it's not about being physically dominant. How many times does Tiote get turned by agile opponents. I want my CM's to keep the ball and control the tempo of the game above all else. That means short, sharp passes, to move the opposition around the pitch. Anita and Colback are the best we have at doing that. Wijnaldum might be better but we don't know yet.

 

I'll point out again that Spurs finished 5th with Benteleb and Mason playing CM. They are not fundamentally better than Anita-Colback.

 

I'm not saying you have to agree with playing them both, but if you fail to grasp the rationale behind doing so, then I don't hold out much hope.

Mainly because of Harry Kane getting 21 goals. Now he's not scoring and they haven't won a game this season. Having Anita and Colback in midfield is a major reason we aren't creating much

[Dave]

Ah well, at least he wasn't lying about not selling anyone [this time]. It's a start.

[Guest ElCid]

I would assume McClaren could clearly see that CM wasn't a pressing need, so pressured for transfers in other areas.

 

It's not about playing 30-40 yard passes and it's not about being physically dominant. How many times does Tiote get turned by agile opponents. I want my CM's to keep the ball and control the tempo of the game above all else. That means short, sharp passes, to move the opposition around the pitch. Anita and Colback are the best we have at doing that. Wijnaldum might be better but we don't know yet.

 

I'll point out again that Spurs finished 5th with Benteleb and Mason playing CM. They are not fundamentally better than Anita-Colback.

 

I'm not saying you have to agree with playing them both, but if you fail to grasp the rationale behind doing so, then I don't hold out much hope.

 

Tiote has given 10 times more good performances for this club than either Anita and Colaback and against the so called better teams also. I won't even go on about agile opponents cos if you think Anita and Colaback are better at stopping these players then you're just talking utter shit.

 

Anita and Colback short sharp passes are you for real - I must have missed the bids coming from Barcelona. Mason and Benteleb are not the best I agree but still a lot better than Anita and Colback (Benteleb actually played in the 4- 0 and 3 - 1 victories last season so your point again is mute). Please name me one game when these two have dominated midfield even one game please do and don't say West Ham last year as they were not even giving 100% that game 

 

If you fail to grasp the rationale that by continuing to play Colback and Anita in midfield to the detriment of the team then your clueless - what makes it even funnier is that you contradict yourself be saying you wouldn't play both either and yet still argue the point - LAUGHABLE!! Let's see in another six matches if these two play what the results are and the league position the team is in as we won't be out of the bottom 3 if they are playing every game.

[Guest ElCid]

I would assume McClaren could clearly see that CM wasn't a pressing need, so pressured for transfers in other areas.

 

It's not about playing 30-40 yard passes and it's not about being physically dominant. How many times does Tiote get turned by agile opponents. I want my CM's to keep the ball and control the tempo of the game above all else. That means short, sharp passes, to move the opposition around the pitch. Anita and Colback are the best we have at doing that. Wijnaldum might be better but we don't know yet.

 

I'll point out again that Spurs finished 5th with Benteleb and Mason playing CM. They are not fundamentally better than Anita-Colback.

 

I'm not saying you have to agree with playing them both, but if you fail to grasp the rationale behind doing so, then I don't hold out much hope.

Mainly because of Harry Kane getting 21 goals. Now he's not scoring and they haven't won a game this season. Having Anita and Colback in midfield is a major reason we aren't creating much

 

Exactly honestly I find it bewildering I really do how anyone can say playing these two is in the best interests of the team and the way forward it just defies common sense.

[sempuki]

Didn't know Billy Whitehurst was his best man. Saw him play and he was a hard nut. Was there when he gave two fingers to the crowd in his last game - not many around like him these days.

 

[Incognito]

Didn't know Billy Whitehurst was his best man. Saw him play and he was a hard but. Was there when he gave two fingers to the crowd in his last game - not many around like him these days.

I once saw Billy Whitehurst volley Brian Kilcline full force right in the mush, I was that close you could hear the impact. Killer walked off like Trevor Berbick after Tyson had chinned him.

[mozy]

I would assume McClaren could clearly see that CM wasn't a pressing need, so pressured for transfers in other areas.

 

It's not about playing 30-40 yard passes and it's not about being physically dominant. How many times does Tiote get turned by agile opponents. I want my CM's to keep the ball and control the tempo of the game above all else. That means short, sharp passes, to move the opposition around the pitch. Anita and Colback are the best we have at doing that. Wijnaldum might be better but we don't know yet.

 

I'll point out again that Spurs finished 5th with Benteleb and Mason playing CM. They are not fundamentally better than Anita-Colback.

 

I'm not saying you have to agree with playing them both, but if you fail to grasp the rationale behind doing so, then I don't hold out much hope.

 

Tiote has given 10 times more good performances for this club than either Anita and Colaback and against the so called better teams also. I won't even go on about agile opponents cos if you think Anita and Colaback are better at stopping these players then you're just talking utter shit.

 

Anita and Colback short sharp passes are you for real - I must have missed the bids coming from Barcelona. Mason and Benteleb are not the best I agree but still a lot better than Anita and Colback (Benteleb actually played in the 4- 0 and 3 - 1 victories last season so your point again is mute). Please name me one game when these two have dominated midfield even one game please do and don't say West Ham last year as they were not even giving 100% that game 

 

If you fail to grasp the rationale that by continuing to play Colback and Anita in midfield to the detriment of the team then your clueless - what makes it even funnier is that you contradict yourself be saying you wouldn't play both either and yet still argue the point - LAUGHABLE!! Let's see in another six matches if these two play what the results are and the league position the team is in as we won't be out of the bottom 3 if they are playing every game.

 

Do you read?

 

Colback and Anita are the best that WE have. Would it be nice to go out and buy Busquets and Modric? Yes, absolutely but it isn't going to happen. I'm speaking about the CURRENT squad we have here. Otherwise we all might as well just pick our world XI's and blame McClaren for not banging on the door hard enough.

 

My point is not redundant just because someone played in a team that beat Alan Pardew and John Carver. Anita and Colback are comparable players to Mason and Benteleb and Tottenham were able to finish 5th. As Triggs points out, this was largely because of Harry Kane (and others), but we have players of that quality in Sissoko, De Jong, Thauvin, Mitrovic, Wijnaldum, etc. The fact is, you can do well as a team with average players starting at CM as long as they know their jobs.

 

What I said was, I wouldn't play just one of Colback-Anita, as neither is good enough defensively to play as a single anchor.

 

 

[The College Dropout]

Bentaleb is a decent unit, decent in the air and gets across the pitch with ease. Mason too, can cover ground very well.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Bentaleb is quite similar in his role to Anita really, literally all he does is play 5 yard passes.

[The College Dropout]

Except he's 6'0 and can impose himself physically on a match. Also good in the air. Gets stuck in properly too. He wouldn't need Colback to hold his hand (apparently).

 

Also 6 years younger than Anita.

[Guest ElCid]

I would assume McClaren could clearly see that CM wasn't a pressing need, so pressured for transfers in other areas.

 

It's not about playing 30-40 yard passes and it's not about being physically dominant. How many times does Tiote get turned by agile opponents. I want my CM's to keep the ball and control the tempo of the game above all else. That means short, sharp passes, to move the opposition around the pitch. Anita and Colback are the best we have at doing that. Wijnaldum might be better but we don't know yet.

 

I'll point out again that Spurs finished 5th with Benteleb and Mason playing CM. They are not fundamentally better than Anita-Colback.

 

I'm not saying you have to agree with playing them both, but if you fail to grasp the rationale behind doing so, then I don't hold out much hope.

 

Tiote has given 10 times more good performances for this club than either Anita and Colaback and against the so called better teams also. I won't even go on about agile opponents cos if you think Anita and Colaback are better at stopping these players then you're just talking utter s***.

 

Anita and Colback short sharp passes are you for real - I must have missed the bids coming from Barcelona. Mason and Benteleb are not the best I agree but still a lot better than Anita and Colback (Benteleb actually played in the 4- 0 and 3 - 1 victories last season so your point again is mute). Please name me one game when these two have dominated midfield even one game please do and don't say West Ham last year as they were not even giving 100% that game 

 

If you fail to grasp the rationale that by continuing to play Colback and Anita in midfield to the detriment of the team then your clueless - what makes it even funnier is that you contradict yourself be saying you wouldn't play both either and yet still argue the point - LAUGHABLE!! Let's see in another six matches if these two play what the results are and the league position the team is in as we won't be out of the bottom 3 if they are playing every game.

 

Do you read?

 

Colback and Anita are the best that WE have. Would it be nice to go out and buy Busquets and Modric? Yes, absolutely but it isn't going to happen. I'm speaking about the CURRENT squad we have here. Otherwise we all might as well just pick our world XI's and blame McClaren for not banging on the door hard enough.

 

My point is not redundant just because someone played in a team that beat Alan Pardew and John Carver. Anita and Colback are comparable players to Mason and Benteleb and Tottenham were able to finish 5th. As Triggs points out, this was largely because of Harry Kane (and others), but we have players of that quality in Sissoko, De Jong, Thauvin, Mitrovic, Wijnaldum, etc. The fact is, you can do well as a team with average players starting at CM as long as they know their jobs.

 

What I said was, I wouldn't play just one of Colback-Anita, as neither is good enough defensively to play as a single anchor.

 

 

 

You do with a midfield of average players starting in midfield as long as they know they job what a total pile of shit and these two are the best out of our current squad total bollocks are they. The Tottenham players are better end of and nothing you will say will change that. If you play average players you get beat ffs man you really are on a different planet, they are being totally dominated in every game. Let's see after 10 games who is right and wrong because if these two are playing in those games we will be in the bottom 3 and you can bookmark that also.

[AY]

Colback and Anita played against Spurs last season when we won there btw.. I think Anita has played well in the new system, drops deep between centre halves in the build up and allows the fullbacks to push up. The worrying thing is Colback cannot receive a ball and play it forward.

 

Bentaleb is not really rated among Spurs fans that I know either.

 

Still don't think both should play. Both like to choose the easy pass too often. But we have decent players in midfield, need fullbacks and a striker to replace Cisse.

[mrmojorisin75]

 

 

Colback and Anita played against Spurs last season when we won there btw.. I think Anita has played well in the new system, drops deep between centre halves in the build up and allows the fullbacks to push up. The worrying thing is Colback cannot receive a ball and play it forward.

 

Bentaleb is not really rated among Spurs fans that I know either.

 

Still don't think both should play. Both like to choose the easy pass too often. But we have decent players in midfield, need fullbacks and a striker to replace Cisse.

 

This is the real issue with the system and players we have, Anita could do what Colback is doing just as well but the reverse isn't true.

 

Such a shame this is what we're stuck with in CM like. The answer has to be to drop the ginger knacker and bring Perez in as an ACM to start getting at the other team a bit. Relieve the pressure that way.

 

[AY]

I think Wijnaldum will drop a bit deeper very soon. Either De Jong or Perez as a no 10 in that case. Perez hopefully. The formation may change to 4-3-3 soon anyway, or 4-1-4-1 like againt ManU.

[Guest]

Billy Whitehurst was his best man back in their Hull days together according to the Chronicle today.

[buzza]

Agree completely, wijnaldum needs to drop into the two middle player section and one of anita or colback get dropped. bring ayoze or SDJ into the No10 spot.

Probloem solved, we all see it clearly apart from Mclaren who thinks Wiji's position os No10 (Wiji has said his preferred place). He is playing very well in that position also, bit of a conundrum really, would be good to try it out though...

[TRon]

Didn't know Billy Whitehurst was his best man. Saw him play and he was a hard nut. Was there when he gave two fingers to the crowd in his last game - not many around like him these days.

 

 

I was there too, and proud to say I was in that section of the crowd he gave the two fingered salute to. He deserved all the abuse he got, absolute donkey of a player.

[TRon]

Bentaleb is a decent unit, decent in the air and gets across the pitch with ease. Mason too, can cover ground very well.

 

I think that's a big problem with these two, they look fine when we are sitting deep and defending, but it means we are limited when it comes to pushing teams onto the back foot, I just don't think they have either the physicality or the legs to go box to box.

[The College Dropout]

I do not understand why we would sign Wijnaldum to play as #10.

 

At the beginning of the season we had Perez, De Jong & Cabella that could play there.

[Guest DebuchyAndTheBeast]

I would assume McClaren could clearly see that CM wasn't a pressing need, so pressured for transfers in other areas.

 

It's not about playing 30-40 yard passes and it's not about being physically dominant. How many times does Tiote get turned by agile opponents. I want my CM's to keep the ball and control the tempo of the game above all else. That means short, sharp passes, to move the opposition around the pitch. Anita and Colback are the best we have at doing that. Wijnaldum might be better but we don't know yet.

 

I'll point out again that Spurs finished 5th with Benteleb and Mason playing CM. They are not fundamentally better than Anita-Colback.

 

I'm not saying you have to agree with playing them both, but if you fail to grasp the rationale behind doing so, then I don't hold out much hope.

 

Spurs have a lot of physical midfielders and I remember them making us look like boys at SJP two seasons ago when we had Sissoko and Anita as CMs. The lack of physical presence in our midfield was apparent on Saturday when both of our CMs were always yards away from the Arsenal player with the ball . That's because even if they did press they would always struggle to put in a tackle against a big guy without fouling 

[KaKa]

I do not understand why we would sign Wijnaldum to play as #10.

 

At the beginning of the season we had Perez, De Jong & Cabella that could play there.

 

Who said we signed him to play number 10?

 

Our number 10 will be De Jong. Wijnaldum is just filling in because De Jong is working his way back.

[Away Toon]

Well Wijnaldum said he was signed to play number 10 and that's certainly where he wants to play. He was specifically quoted as saying he didn't want to play as a winger or in centre midfield. Thauvin actually said the same thing. De Jong can pretty much only play as a 10. I'm sure that Perez wants to play as a 10. Pretty crowded that number 10 spot.