Vurnon Anita (now playing for RKC Waalwijk)

[Pilko]

Funny how when the rest of the team are doing shite, he never manages to drop to their level.

 

He's an absolute class act this lad, would be gutted if he left.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

  On 08/05/2014 at 09:41, Optimistic Nut said:

We all know if Pardew's still here in August, he'll be on the bench while we watch Tiote & Colback together, Sissoko shoehorned on the right still and a new left sided player if we're lucky. (Or Gouffran)

 

[Ronaldo]

  On 06/05/2014 at 13:43, Ian W said:

  Quote

He's a good little player but for me he's only viable in a 433 playing as the deepest player in midfield covering the fullbacks and the space in front of the defence.

 

Disagree, IMO he's better with a proper DM where his job is to keep the ball moving. A bit like Lucas and Allen at Liverpool.

 

You can't have 2 out of the 3 midfielders having no goal threat or creativity whatsoever. It just doesn't work.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

  On 08/05/2014 at 19:31, Ronaldo said:

  Quote

  Quote

He's a good little player but for me he's only viable in a 433 playing as the deepest player in midfield covering the fullbacks and the space in front of the defence.

 

Disagree, IMO he's better with a proper DM where his job is to keep the ball moving. A bit like Lucas and Allen at Liverpool.

 

You can't have 2 out of the 3 midfielders having no goal threat or creativity whatsoever. It just doesn't work.

 

Course you can, if you have an attacking midfielder and 3 forwards.

[Tiresias]

Anita and Tiote is overkill on the defensive side actually, no reason he couldn't play alongside a deeplying playmaker and we'd not be overexposed imo. I also think Anita could develop more of a cutting edge and work better forward with some work.

[Guest]

There's no need for Tiote. Anita & Sissoko in the centre, with a proper Cabaye replacement would be immense.

[Ronaldo]

  On 08/05/2014 at 19:51, Ian W said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

He's a good little player but for me he's only viable in a 433 playing as the deepest player in midfield covering the fullbacks and the space in front of the defence.

 

Disagree, IMO he's better with a proper DM where his job is to keep the ball moving. A bit like Lucas and Allen at Liverpool.

 

You can't have 2 out of the 3 midfielders having no goal threat or creativity whatsoever. It just doesn't work.

 

Course you can, if you have an attacking midfielder and 3 forwards.

 

3 forwards, man. As if.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I know, I'm speculating.

[Ronaldo]

Midfielders are there to make an impact going backwards and forwards as far as I'm concerned. I can't live with two players in there who go missing in the final third. Anita's perfectly capable of utilising his movement as a deep lying CM, anyway, he just needs two relatively capable midfielders - in an attacking sense - to negate his weaknesses.

[Tiresias]

  On 08/05/2014 at 21:22, Ronaldo said:

Midfielders are there to make an impact going backwards and forwards as far as I'm concerned. I can't live with two players in there who go missing in the final third. Anita's perfectly capable of utilising his movement as a deep lying CM, anyway, he just needs two relatively capable midfielders - in an attacking sense - to negate his weaknesses.

 

[Hughesy]

  On 08/05/2014 at 19:51, Ian W said:

  Quote

  Quote

  Quote

He's a good little player but for me he's only viable in a 433 playing as the deepest player in midfield covering the fullbacks and the space in front of the defence.

 

Disagree, IMO he's better with a proper DM where his job is to keep the ball moving. A bit like Lucas and Allen at Liverpool.

 

You can't have 2 out of the 3 midfielders having no goal threat or creativity whatsoever. It just doesn't work.

 

Course you can, if you have an attacking midfielder and 3 forwards.

 

Agree with this.

[Ronaldo]

Head, clouds.

[Hughesy]

I am not sure what your point is - is your point that Anita cannot play alongside a DM or that, under Pardew, we would not play enough attacking players to make this viable?  Because they are two completely different points.

[Ronaldo]

I don't think completely absolving two starting midfielders of creative/scoring duty is feasible for any club who don't have 3 world class attacking players in front of them. It certainly isn't viable at Newcastle United.

[Hughesy]

It is viable if you were playing 4-4-2 and had two wingers and intelligent strikers.  It could work if you were playing 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3.  It can work - you just have to get the proper personnel in to do it.

[Ronaldo]

When has it ever worked in a 4-4-2?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I get your point in theory Ronaldo, but we have the personnel we have. If we're talking about addressing our weaknesses then we should just get the attacking players we need to be more dangerous. It's not really about Anita at all.

[Ronaldo]

I've said, I'd happily play Anita as the deepest midfielder.

[Hughesy]

  On 08/05/2014 at 22:09, Ronaldo said:

When has it ever worked in a 4-4-2?

 

It depends if you are genuinely proposing that the two central midfielders don't create anything at all - which is highly unlikely.  I think we are getting into comparing slightly odd variations of formations, but in any 4-4-2 formation with two defensive central midfielders you would have a set up with wingers and it is likely that one of the strikers would drop back into midfield.

 

But as an example, I think Sacchi's Milan team used a 4-4-2 formation without particularly creative central midfielders.  Atletico Madrid play a variant of 4-4-2/4-2-3-1 with two defensive midfielders.

[Ronaldo]

So, at best, it's never worked in the PL.

[Hughesy]

Arsenal with Vieira and Petit.  That's one PL example.  I am sure there are others if I was to think about it.

 

I still haven't quite worked out the point of this argument though.  Having 4 attacking players can be enough (ie two wingers and two strikers).  As I have said, it is likely that one of your strikers would play a more withdrawn role and play a more 'Beardsley-esque' role which would effectively create a 4-2-3-1 at times.

[Ronaldo]

  On 08/05/2014 at 22:33, Hughesy said:

Arsenal with Vieira and Petit.

 

:lol:

 

As if Viera and Petit had no scoring or creative duties, man.

[Pilko]

If you're going to have one of your three central midfielders in the Anita mould (keeps side ticking over, great energy/pressing, mobile, excellent short passing, distribution, not overly physical but a fair tackler, little to no attacking impetus) then at least one of the other ones has to have a very good range of long passing and an eye for the 'killer/key pass', even from deep. Tiote ticks the boxes with strength, tenacity, tackling and the ability to generally spoil if required, but doesn't fulfil that role absolutely in the slightest.

 

That role was filled by Cabaye, and now it's fucking Dan Gosling. Go figure.

[Hughesy]

  On 09/05/2014 at 00:11, Ronaldo said:

  Quote

Arsenal with Vieira and Petit.

 

:lol:

 

As if Viera and Petit had no scoring or creative duties, man.

They were most certainly primarily there as defensive midfielders. Sure they were both box to box midfielders but their primary function was to defend. Vieira and Petit scored a total of 4 goals in their double winning season. :)

[The College Dropout]

  On 08/05/2014 at 19:54, Tiresias said:

Anita and Tiote is overkill on the defensive side actually, no reason he couldn't play alongside a deeplying playmaker and we'd not be overexposed imo. I also think Anita could develop more of a cutting edge and work better forward with some work.

 

I think the two with a proper AM worked very well. Throw in a real striker - some attacking wide men and we are laughing.

 

Without a genuinely creative player (e.g. not Colback) it's too lacking I agree. I don't want to see Tiote-Anita-Colback in the same side.