Given, Beye, Coloccini, Bassong, Enrique...

[Guest optimistic nit]

This is the same defence that couldn't defend for their lives against Wigan, no?

 

Anyway I'd play:

 

Taylor Colo Beye Bassong

 

Taylor is better going forward than Bye where as Bassong is stronger down the left than Enrique. That back four has height, pace and strength and in Colo and Beye leadership.

 

Having said all that it doesn't really matter who plays there we'll still concede goals unless our tactics change and we somehow find a good balance in midfield which is the weakest area of our team by far.

 

Yet another person missing my point. They've shown yesterday that they CAN perform, and against a team bang in form. I don't see why we should be chopping and changing it every week. Stick with them and let them develop an understanding.

 

If Bassong had a mare at LB then would you want him out of the team again? Ad infinitum.

 

We ought to pick our best back four - with everyone in their natural positions - and stick with it IMO.

 

I agree 100% that the back four should be the same week in week out, I just don't think Enrique at LB and Beye at RB in particular give us great attacking options which for my money is the best way to defend, i.e. from the front.

 

so you would change them with bassong and taylor?

[Guest Howaythetoon]

This is the same defence that couldn't defend for their lives against Wigan, no?

 

Anyway I'd play:

 

Taylor Colo Beye Bassong

 

Taylor is better going forward than Bye where as Bassong is stronger down the left than Enrique. That back four has height, pace and strength and in Colo and Beye leadership.

 

Having said all that it doesn't really matter who plays there we'll still concede goals unless our tactics change and we somehow find a good balance in midfield which is the weakest area of our team by far.

 

Yet another person missing my point. They've shown yesterday that they CAN perform, and against a team bang in form. I don't see why we should be chopping and changing it every week. Stick with them and let them develop an understanding.

 

If Bassong had a mare at LB then would you want him out of the team again? Ad infinitum.

 

We ought to pick our best back four - with everyone in their natural positions - and stick with it IMO.

 

I agree 100% that the back four should be the same week in week out, I just don't think Enrique at LB and Beye at RB in particular give us great attacking options which for my money is the best way to defend, i.e. from the front. The Chelsea match saw 10-11 men behind the ball whenever they were on it so not surprisingly the defence did well - all that cover and protection would help any under fire defence. We shouldn't use that one match in any way to justify the current back-four though as they were s**** against Wigan, especially at RB and LB. Hence my choice of Taylor at RB and Bassong at LB who hase the athleticism and pace to get forward from there while also being a competent defender. Enrique rarely passes the half-way line and that doesn't helpe neither the defence or the attack. On the other flank I think Beye is an excellent defender but going forward isn't the best. He isn't aggressive enough whereas Taylor is. Furthermore from yesterday's evidence a lot of Beye's best work came in the centre of defence covering for Colo or Bassong, he's a cool head in there and reads play well. I'd play him there alongside Colo.

 

So you'd play 3 players out of position, basically? Fantastic.

 

The players in question have played in the positions I'd personally like to see them operating from numerous times enough to be competent at least in those positions so I'd be more than willing to shift them around. Either way its give or take with whoever plays where anyway. Play Enrique at LB and you get a natural LB but you lose out in the final 3rd. Play Bassong at LB and you don't get a natural LB but as he's shown you do get some mobility down there and some pace too. Swings and roundabouts really with the personnel we have at our disposal. None of them fully convince me in their own "natural" positions except for Colo. I'd play Taylor and Bassong at full-back because they are better attacking options in those positions than Enrique and Beye in my view. I want my full-backs to attack and to support the wide men, to overlap and to give the front runners options as it pushes the opposition back and in doing so keeps them as far away from our own defence as possible which in theory anyway limits the risk of conceding. Taylor and Bassong are better suited and more inclined to play like that. Beye is suited to the centre alongside Colo who likes to vacate his position a lot. Bassong doesn't have the reading capabilities nor experience to cover for him in that way just yet and nor does Taylor, well he does try but makes a balls up of it, Beye reads the game well and has a wealth of experience. Against Chelsea when Colo went on walkabouts vacating his position, Beye filled in a number of times doing the job Bassong should have been doing. That's not a dig at the Frenchman by the way, he's young and learning still.

 

 

[Wullie]

What world do you live in where Taylor and Bassong are better attacking options than Beye and Enrique?

[Guest firetotheworks]

This is the same defence that couldn't defend for their lives against Wigan, no?

 

Anyway I'd play:

 

Taylor Colo Beye Bassong

 

Taylor is better going forward than Bye where as Bassong is stronger down the left than Enrique. That back four has height, pace and strength and in Colo and Beye leadership.

 

Having said all that it doesn't really matter who plays there we'll still concede goals unless our tactics change and we somehow find a good balance in midfield which is the weakest area of our team by far.

 

Yet another person missing my point. They've shown yesterday that they CAN perform, and against a team bang in form. I don't see why we should be chopping and changing it every week. Stick with them and let them develop an understanding.

 

If Bassong had a mare at LB then would you want him out of the team again? Ad infinitum.

 

We ought to pick our best back four - with everyone in their natural positions - and stick with it IMO.

 

I agree 100% that the back four should be the same week in week out, I just don't think Enrique at LB and Beye at RB in particular give us great attacking options which for my money is the best way to defend, i.e. from the front. The Chelsea match saw 10-11 men behind the ball whenever they were on it so not surprisingly the defence did well - all that cover and protection would help any under fire defence. We shouldn't use that one match in any way to justify the current back-four though as they were s**** against Wigan, especially at RB and LB. Hence my choice of Taylor at RB and Bassong at LB who hase the athleticism and pace to get forward from there while also being a competent defender. Enrique rarely passes the half-way line and that doesn't helpe neither the defence or the attack. On the other flank I think Beye is an excellent defender but going forward isn't the best. He isn't aggressive enough whereas Taylor is. Furthermore from yesterday's evidence a lot of Beye's best work came in the centre of defence covering for Colo or Bassong, he's a cool head in there and reads play well. I'd play him there alongside Colo.

 

So you'd play 3 players out of position, basically? Fantastic.

 

The players in question have played in the positions I'd personally like to see them operating from numerous times enough to be competent at least in those positions so I'd be more than willing to shift them around. Either way its give or take with whoever plays where anyway. Play Enrique at LB and you get a natural LB but you lose out in the final 3rd. Play Bassong at LB and you don't get a natural LB but as he's shown you do get some mobility down there and some pace too. Swings and roundabouts really with the personnel we have at our disposal. None of them fully convince me in their own "natural" positions except for Colo. I'd play Taylor and Bassong at full-back because they are better attacking options in those positions than Enrique and Beye in my view. I want my full-backs to attack and to support the wide men, to overlap and to give the front runners options as it pushes the opposition back and in doing so keeps them as far away from our own defence as possible which in theory anyway limits the risk of conceding.

 

 

 

Am I missing something? When has and how is Taylor a better attacking right back than Beye? Im not being sarky btw, I'd genuinely like to know.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

What world do you live in where Taylor and Bassong are better attacking options than Beye and Enrique?

 

Neither get forward much and when they do they hesitate or play it safely, they both lack aggression and mobility or thrust. Their mindset seems to be "OK I've went this far, I should trot back now", especially Enrique.

[Guest firetotheworks]

What world do you live in where Taylor and Bassong are better attacking options than Beye and Enrique?

 

Neither get forward much and when they do they hesitate or play it safely, they both lack aggression and mobility or thrust. Their mindset seems to be "OK I've went this far, I should trot back now", especially Enrique.

 

...and you dont think Bassong and taylor do that too?

[Wullie]

What world do you live in where Taylor and Bassong are better attacking options than Beye and Enrique?

 

Neither get forward much and when they do they hesitate or play it safely, they both lack aggression and mobility or thrust. Their mindset seems to be "OK I've went this far, I should trot back now", especially Enrique.

 

Beye's not like that at all which is why he contributed so much last year. And where does this idea about Taylor and Bassong come from? I assume you've not seen either of them try to cross a ball.

[Dave]

Taylor got forward well against Everton apparently.

 

One game...

[Mowen]

Taylor got forward well against Everton apparently.

 

One game...

 

Both of their goals came from the side he was defending as well.

[Rich]

The whole idea is insanity, man. Anyone who's seen Taylor and Bassong at FB could surely attest to that. Neither are good going forwards, having that pair would equate to the pace of the current pair, just on opposite sides, we'd be reducing the size of our central defensive pairing along with it by putting Beye in there... I could go on, and on, and on.

 

I've seen Taylor have 1 good game at RB, which Dave has already mentioned. When Bassong has played LB I've thought "good defender, offers nowt going forwards."

 

The fact the whole post I had issue with said that you can't use 1 match to justify the current back four and then went on to say "from yesterday's evidence a lot of Beye's best work came in the centre of defence covering for Colo or Bassong" to justify Beye being played in there says it all really.

 

[Ronaldo]

Taylor got forward well against Everton apparently.

 

One game...

 

Both of their goals came from the side he was defending as well.

 

[Mowen]

Taylor got forward well against Everton apparently.

 

One game...

 

Both of their goals came from the side he was defending as well.

 

 

Would have been three if it was Bramble

[Lotus]

This is the same defence that couldn't defend for their lives against Wigan, no?

 

Anyway I'd play:

 

Taylor Colo Beye Bassong

 

Taylor is better going forward than Bye where as Bassong is stronger down the left than Enrique. That back four has height, pace and strength and in Colo and Beye leadership.

 

Having said all that it doesn't really matter who plays there we'll still concede goals unless our tactics change and we somehow find a good balance in midfield which is the weakest area of our team by far.

 

Yet another person missing my point. They've shown yesterday that they CAN perform, and against a team bang in form. I don't see why we should be chopping and changing it every week. Stick with them and let them develop an understanding.

 

If Bassong had a mare at LB then would you want him out of the team again? Ad infinitum.

 

We ought to pick our best back four - with everyone in their natural positions - and stick with it IMO.

 

I agree 100% that the back four should be the same week in week out, I just don't think Enrique at LB and Beye at RB in particular give us great attacking options which for my money is the best way to defend, i.e. from the front. The Chelsea match saw 10-11 men behind the ball whenever they were on it so not surprisingly the defence did well - all that cover and protection would help any under fire defence. We shouldn't use that one match in any way to justify the current back-four though as they were s**** against Wigan, especially at RB and LB. Hence my choice of Taylor at RB and Bassong at LB who hase the athleticism and pace to get forward from there while also being a competent defender. Enrique rarely passes the half-way line and that doesn't helpe neither the defence or the attack. On the other flank I think Beye is an excellent defender but going forward isn't the best. He isn't aggressive enough whereas Taylor is. Furthermore from yesterday's evidence a lot of Beye's best work came in the centre of defence covering for Colo or Bassong, he's a cool head in there and reads play well. I'd play him there alongside Colo.

 

So you'd play 3 players out of position, basically? Fantastic.

 

The players in question have played in the positions I'd personally like to see them operating from numerous times enough to be competent at least in those positions so I'd be more than willing to shift them around. Either way its give or take with whoever plays where anyway. Play Enrique at LB and you get a natural LB but you lose out in the final 3rd. Play Bassong at LB and you don't get a natural LB but as he's shown you do get some mobility down there and some pace too. Swings and roundabouts really with the personnel we have at our disposal. None of them fully convince me in their own "natural" positions except for Colo. I'd play Taylor and Bassong at full-back because they are better attacking options in those positions than Enrique and Beye in my view. I want my full-backs to attack and to support the wide men, to overlap and to give the front runners options as it pushes the opposition back and in doing so keeps them as far away from our own defence as possible which in theory anyway limits the risk of conceding. Taylor and Bassong are better suited and more inclined to play like that. Beye is suited to the centre alongside Colo who likes to vacate his position a lot. Bassong doesn't have the reading capabilities nor experience to cover for him in that way just yet and nor does Taylor, well he does try but makes a balls up of it, Beye reads the game well and has a wealth of experience. Against Chelsea when Colo went on walkabouts vacating his position, Beye filled in a number of times doing the job Bassong should have been doing. That's not a dig at the Frenchman by the way, he's young and learning still.

 

 

 

Problem with FB's getting high up the pitch a lot is that when the oppostion counters it's a ball into the space vacated by the FB, CB comes across to cover and we have to rely on Nippy Nicky Butt to get back, fill the space and mark the on running midfielder who's about to have a free shot at goal.

 

Can you see where this plan falls down?

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Its all irrelevant anyway regardless of permutations because we'll still concede goals with that midfield "protecting" it or rather them being so useless as a unit to keep the ball long enough to fend off any opposition advances. I'd still put Beye alongside Colo, bring in Taylor to RB and drop Enrique for Bassong at LB however if I were building the team based on the players we have. I'd also put Jonas centrally rather than out wide, with Martins off him free to roam up top and Owen playing the deeper role he played under KK with Barton, Guthrie and N'Zogbia the others in that midfield quartet with Guthrie the anchorman and Owen obviously the playmaker, and Barton and N'Zogbia the width.

[Yorkie]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted? He's a player that works well with space. He can still be effective on the wing even when his personal game is being combated, because it pulls the other team out of position.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

[STM]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted? He's a player that works well with space. He can still be effective on the wing even when his personal game is being combated, because it pulls the other team out of position.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

 

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm well and truely sick of people suggesting Jonas in the centre. For the record i'd be looking to play him on the left and buying a right winger. Valencia would be nice.

[fredbob]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted? He's a player that works well with space. He can still be effective on the wing even when his personal game is being combated, because it pulls the other team out of position.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

 

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm well and truely sick of people suggesting Jonas in the centre. For the record i'd be looking to play him on the left and buying a right winger. Valencia would be nice.

 

I dont like having inbalanced wing attacks, if Jonas plays on the left then i think we should look to buy a player who cuts in as well for the right. That gives us an extra dimension on the wing.

[STM]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted? He's a player that works well with space. He can still be effective on the wing even when his personal game is being combated, because it pulls the other team out of position.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

 

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm well and truely sick of people suggesting Jonas in the centre. For the record i'd be looking to play him on the left and buying a right winger. Valencia would be nice.

 

I dont like having inbalanced wing attacks, if Jonas plays on the left then i think we should look to buy a player who cuts in as well for the right. That gives us an extra dimension on the wing.

 

It worked with Ginola/Gillespie

[Rich]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted? He's a player that works well with space. He can still be effective on the wing even when his personal game is being combated, because it pulls the other team out of position.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

 

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm well and truely sick of people suggesting Jonas in the centre. For the record i'd be looking to play him on the left and buying a right winger. Valencia would be nice.

 

I dont like having inbalanced wing attacks, if Jonas plays on the left then i think we should look to buy a player who cuts in as well for the right. That gives us an extra dimension on the wing.

 

It worked with Ginola/Gillespie

 

Pires/Ljungberg weren't bad either.

 

Symmeticral doesn't always = better, although being fairly OCD I do appreciate a nice bit of symmetry when it comes to formations.

[Tooj]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted? He's a player that works well with space. He can still be effective on the wing even when his personal game is being combated, because it pulls the other team out of position.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

 

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm well and truely sick of people suggesting Jonas in the centre. For the record i'd be looking to play him on the left and buying a right winger. Valencia would be nice.

 

I dont like having inbalanced wing attacks, if Jonas plays on the left then i think we should look to buy a player who cuts in as well for the right. That gives us an extra dimension on the wing.

 

It worked with Ginola/Gillespie

 

Pires/Ljungberg weren't bad either.

 

Symmeticral doesn't always = better, although being fairly OCD I do appreciate a nice bit of symmetry when it comes to formations.

 

And chebs.

[fredbob]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted? He's a player that works well with space. He can still be effective on the wing even when his personal game is being combated, because it pulls the other team out of position.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

 

Thank you for pointing that out. I'm well and truely sick of people suggesting Jonas in the centre. For the record i'd be looking to play him on the left and buying a right winger. Valencia would be nice.

 

I dont like having inbalanced wing attacks, if Jonas plays on the left then i think we should look to buy a player who cuts in as well for the right. That gives us an extra dimension on the wing.

 

It worked with Ginola/Gillespie

 

Thats a fair point. Pissed on my point form a great height in fact.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Surely the wingers being unsemmetrical is better anyway? If both wingers naturally play inside and make runs inside then there's less space and less of a dynamic.

 

Playing Jonas in the middle is pointless when you have no one replacing what he does on the wings. Valencia on the right would be bloody brilliant, but Id be surprised if we got anyone that well known for being good in our league any time soon.

[Yorkie]

Aye, having an out-and-out winger and an in-cutting winger is generally more flexible and gives you more options. Providing they're both good, obviously. I would say that Duff tries to be one of those that cuts in, given how he comes very narrow quite a lot, but i think he's just generally clueless. I can't remeber him having a range shot for us, erm, ever... tbh.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Aye, having an out-and-out winger and an in-cutting winger is generally more flexible and gives you more options. Providing they're both good, obviously. I would say that Duff tries to be one of those that cuts in, given how he comes very narrow quite a lot, but i think he's just generally clueless. I can't remeber him having a range shot for us, erm, ever... tbh.

 

Dont tempt me to start laying into Duff again, its far too easy; because he's far too shite.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

I'm always aghast at people suggesting Jonas for the centre. Haven't we got enough evidence from the last two or three games that, if he's got two or three opposition players piled on top of him, he's very very restricted?

 

Its far easier to double up on someone on the flank and for the attacker much harder to evade markers stuck out on the flank. They can only go forward or backwards really in terms of their role and position in the side. They can go infield of course which is what Jonas has resorted to whenever he's been marked by two or more defenders, often bumping into traffic or of no real benefit to the side in part due to the lack of overlapping or runners into the space he's vacated from full-back or the front men which leaves us playing very narrow and a congested game which is easy to play against. When he does leave the flank we also lose our shape which is a big no no.

 

As for marking in general, most players will struggle to evade the attentions of two or more markers regardless of how good they are and what position they're playing so I wouldn't use that as a rule against playing Jonas or any other player for that matter in different positions or at least trying them out.

 

He's a player that works well with space.

 

Centrally it is easier to evade markers and statistically central players especially in midfield get more space to work in, although not all players make good use of such space. Jonas has the attributes and qualities to make good use of space as he's shown us, although his end product is very suspect, suspect enough to nullify most of the good approach work he does out wide in my opinion hence why I'd personally move him infield behind Martins. Centrally he can carry the ball and twist and turn defenders which opens up pockets of space around the opposition central players for your Martins to run into using his pace or more applicable your Owens to anticipate and sniff out.

 

Sticking him down the middle naturally has two or three players on top of him and we won't benefit at all. Neither from his personal game, or from him pulling opposition players out of position. It'd be a totally pointless switch imo.

 

You don't see Martins or Owen marked by two or three players do you? Traditionally in a flat back-four one centre-back will look after two strikers and that is more often than not how central forwards are marked, leaving the 'spare' centre-back to look after the runners, to sweep up or if his team is in possession, to join in with play to bolster midfield numbers/options.

 

Jonas centrally would have far more licence, far more space and far less attention. His wing play gets you off the seat but its more eye candy than anything else. I guess I'm saying for all those tricks and runs he rarely hurts the opposition out wide, not enough anyway.

 

I say that based on our team and the way we play at the moment. With better players around him in a system that is based on passing and moving at high tempo I'd play him on the flank.

 

I'd like to see what he could do centrally though either in midfield itself or up top behind Martins as a second forward if you like.