Nobody Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 The new Lahm tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smal Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Judging by today's performance he'd probably do better playing where Sissoko was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Judging by today's performance he'd probably do better playing where Sissoko was. You know what, i think you're right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I cant believe what i'm reading. He did do ok in possession, wasn't that bad going forward either, but defensively was abysmal. Play him there all you like but we will concede goals like a f***ing sieve. In typical Pardew fashion, it was his first ever match in that position (that I know of as a professional) and he was being made to track the likes of Hazard, Willian, and Oscar. It was not exactly a League Cup match against Gillingham when you try new things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I cant believe what i'm reading. He did do ok in possession, wasn't that bad going forward either, but defensively was abysmal. Play him there all you like but we will concede goals like a f***ing sieve. In typical Pardew fashion, it was his first ever match in that position (that I know of as a professional) and he was being made to track the likes of Hazard, Willian, and Oscar. It was not exactly a League Cup match against Gillingham when you try new things. Fair comment, but even basic defending seem go missing with him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_Taylor Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Isn't a holding midfielder. Who'd have thunk it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Lee Ryder @lee_ryder 4m Mourinho: "Alan surprised us with Santon playing where he did and played well." #nufc #cfc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 He's somehow mates with Alan, so sure, he's not going to slag him off for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 I thought he played well, he's not a DM but he recycled possession well, and that pass to sissoko was quality Santon could play at any position on the pitch outside of striker and keeper and look fine, because he is a good footballer and a good athlete. I thought he looked fine today. The problem will still be a certain intelligence, aggression, and confidence lacking from his game. I don't know what has happened, but he has become very passive imo, and this trait has become more and more pervasive since his drop in form around the turn of the new year last season. He is around the age where he should becoming more and more sure of himself as a top level player, but is instead playing scared and in danger of losing his position. As with many of our players, I hate what has happened to him from his arrival until now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Recoba Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 The further away from our goal he is the better. Bench would be ideal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted February 8, 2014 Share Posted February 8, 2014 The wrong game to try him in that position. He was good on the ball but pretty ineffective off it. Maybe try that again in the Villa game if our options aren't back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest zicomartin Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I thought he played well, he's not a DM but he recycled possession well, and that pass to sissoko was quality Santon could play at any position on the pitch outside of striker and keeper and look fine ...except LB, RB, LW, RW, CD, No.10 and DM maybe. Somebody has told him he is an AM and dead ball expert. Probably Pardew believing Mourinho's BS. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Didn't think he was very good at CM. Failed experiment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettNUFC Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Didn't think he was very good at CM. Failed experiment. Away to Chelsea Majority of DM's in the league probably don't look very good at Stamford Bridge the way Chelsea overrun your midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexf Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I do wonder, had Tiote been playing, whether that first goal would even happen. Santon's inability to get back goal side, which would have only taken a tiny bit of effort, cost us that goal in my opinion. I feel if he wasn't going to play left back then he should have been in one of the wide roles like people thought he would be pre-match. He could have helped double up on Hazard, instead of having Hatem doing that job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Didn't think he was very good at CM. Failed experiment. Away to Chelsea Majority of DM's in the league probably don't look very good at Stamford Bridge the way Chelsea overrun your midfield. It's not exactly polemic to suggest he's not CM!!!!! He just didn't offer any protection at all. I don't think we'd have won if Gosling had played instead. But by the same token. Why not play Marveaux if you're convinced we're going to lose? At least SM gets 90 minutes to get some fitness in. Might even discover a bit of desire and apply himself.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Didn't think he was very good at CM. Failed experiment. Away to Chelsea Majority of DM's in the league probably don't look very good at Stamford Bridge the way Chelsea overrun your midfield. He's not arsed when the right winger is goal side of him at LB, he doesn't care at CM/DM. He won't put a foot in. He won't count. A passenger always. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettNUFC Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Didn't think he was very good at CM. Failed experiment. Away to Chelsea Majority of DM's in the league probably don't look very good at Stamford Bridge the way Chelsea overrun your midfield. It's not exactly polemic to suggest he's not CM!!!!! He just didn't offer any protection at all. I don't think we'd have won if Gosling had played instead. But by the same token. Why not play Marveaux if you're convinced we're going to lose? At least SM gets 90 minutes to get some fitness in. Might even discover a bit of desire and apply himself.. Just find it strange that you'd only give him one chance away to Chelsea to shine and because he didn't, say it's failed. I think he was alright like considering it was his first game there for us and against the calibre of players up against him. Defensively poor again like he is at left back but he was good on the ball and helped us build attacks. If nobody was back fit again for Wed, I’d have no problems with Santon having another stint in the middle. I'd personally prefer Marv to be given a chance but it's not looking likely, would have done himself a favour if he hadn't of missed the great chance at the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Didn't think he was very good at CM. Failed experiment. Away to Chelsea Majority of DM's in the league probably don't look very good at Stamford Bridge the way Chelsea overrun your midfield. It's not exactly polemic to suggest he's not CM!!!!! He just didn't offer any protection at all. I don't think we'd have won if Gosling had played instead. But by the same token. Why not play Marveaux if you're convinced we're going to lose? At least SM gets 90 minutes to get some fitness in. Might even discover a bit of desire and apply himself.. Just find it strange that you'd only give him one chance away to Chelsea to shine and because he didn't, say it's failed. I think he was alright like considering it was his first game there for us and against the calibre of players up against him. Defensively poor again like he is at left back but he was good on the ball and helped us build attacks. If nobody was back fit again for Wed, I’d have no problems with Santon having another stint in the middle. I'd personally prefer Marv to be given a chance but it's not looking likely, would have done himself a favour if he hadn't of missed the great chance at the end. Unless i've missed something i don't expect Santon to be a regular at CM for us for the rest of the season so it's, at best, a moot point. I'm not sure he should be in the side at all tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brazilianbob Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Santon was marking Hazard but let him get away from him for the first goal on saturday. It was nothing to do with Hazard being an exceptional player, it was simply a case of Santon ball watching and suddenly realizing he had let Hazard get away from him. By the time Santon caught up with Hazard it was already too late as the ball was nestling in the back of the net. Schoolboy error stuff as far as I'm concerned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MW Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 he should have tracked Hazard for the first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Santon was marking Hazard but let him get away from him for the first goal on saturday. It was nothing to do with Hazard being an exceptional player, it was simply a case of Santon ball watching and suddenly realizing he had let Hazard get away from him. By the time Santon caught up with Hazard it was already too late as the ball was nestling in the back of the net. Schoolboy error stuff as far as I'm concerned. I've been waiting to see how long it was before someone picked up on this...I noticed it too but I'm getting tired of saying that Santon is not a good defender so I wondered if anyone else had noticed Saturday's howler. He's not a decent PL LB and now it appears that he's not good in m/f either because his defensive frailties show up there too. In an ideal situation - i.e. with a decent owner/manager I would sell this guy in an instant because he is never going to do the job he is there for. Has decent skill on the ball but can't cross with his left foot to save his life...well done for picking it up BB... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 9 Ball recoveries (2nd best on both sides), 6 interceptions (best on both teams), highest attacking 3rd chances for us, 95% completion rate, and highest pass amount on our team. Now I'm no purveyor of stats but that strikes me as pretty decent for a bloke playing his first game in CM against arguably the best midfield in the league. You can make facts prove anything tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 so he made one mistake playing in a role he's never played in,against arguably the best MD in the country. So now he's s***? madness in this thread. EVERY goal is a mistake from someone, should we sell tiote when he doesn't track, cabaye? Anita? The thought of selling Cabaye Why would we do that when he's our best player? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 he should have tracked Hazard for the first. Actually think he just got caught flat footed. Coupled with his non existent recovery pace i think it made it look like he'd f**ked worse than he had. Justa bad body position to start with. Would be due to being unfamiliar in the role i would think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now