Sandro Tonali

[Nobody]

1 minute ago, ponsaelius said:

He has looked good for Italy. They've landed onto something now with him, Ricci and Barella when he's back as a three.

 

Hope he can show similar for us.

What position has he been playing for Italy? 

[ponsaelius]

Just now, Nobody said:

What position has he been playing for Italy? 

 

Similar to with us but LCM and in a 3-5-2. Ricci as the deepest midfielder.

[joeyt]

1 hour ago, STM said:

 

Doesn't make any sense because in the last couple of match threads I've heard that he's been anonymous.

 

Nonsense

[STM]

27 minutes ago, joeyt said:

 

Nonsense

I know right? I don't why them idiots keep saying it.

[joeyt]

4 minutes ago, STM said:

I know right? I don't why them idiots keep saying it.

 

People thought Tonali was great second half against Man City

[54]

1 minute ago, joeyt said:

 

People thought Tonali was great second half against Man City

I also thought he was good against Everton bar a few misplaced passes when he got fatigued. His movement and quick passing adds so much to our midfield transition.

[joeyt]

To be fair he was anonymous against WImbledon

[54]

2 minutes ago, joeyt said:

To be fair he was anonymous against WImbledon

In fairness not many people escape the pocket of Myles Hippolyte.

[TRon]

20 hours ago, 54 said:

I also thought he was good against Everton bar a few misplaced passes when he got fatigued. His movement and quick passing adds so much to our midfield transition.

 

Feels like the fault lies more in the players around him in regard to the quick passing. If teammates were alive to it, could cause a lot of damage.

[Heron]

I don't think so to be honest. Both he and Trippier were perhaps trying slightly more direct/dangerous passes that they are absolutely capable of but simply didn't come to fruition. It had nowt to do with the players they were passing to and it was simply sloppy by their such high standards.

 

That's what is interesting about player ratings etc. It's arguably a bit of a grey area.

 

For me, player ratings are (somewhat) a combination of how well they played within their capability and how much impact they left on the game. For example Sean Longstaff could play a 10 and be as impactful as Tonali on a 7, simply because Tonali has more "in his locker".

 

What is interesting is Sean Longstaff as an example can play say an 8 (by his standards) and do virtually nothing wrong but because folk know he's not as good as Tonali they will rate him a 4/5 and they'll cite his "safe passing" etc. As a reason why his stats are high. But sometimes keeping things simple and retaining possession is just as important as trying a decisive pass that may or may not work. 

 

Whereas seemingly, Tonali can play something like a 5/6 by his standards and folk will say he was a 7 simply because he tried more difficult or quick passing which frankly lost us the ball, allowing the opposition to counter attack, and because folk know he is (of course) a better player than Longataff.

 

Frustrates me to be honest. Doesn't seem to be a level playing field when critiquing players on a match by match basis and surely you can only do that based on the metrics I've suggested and not on who is usually the better player.

 

This is my interpretation of folks comments following the Everton game as an example.

 

Mind...by my own admission, there is some hypocrisy in my "level playing field" based on individual match-by-match player ratings. As I would more likely rate the Tonali's of the world more harshly simply because on their day they are absolutely unplayable.

 

 

Edited October 17 by Heron

[Rod]

2 hours ago, Heron said:

I don't think so to be honest. Both he and Trippier were perhaps trying slightly more direct/dangerous passes that they are absolutely capable of but simply didn't come to fruition. It had nowt to do with the players they were passing to and it was simply sloppy by their such high standards.

 

That's what is interesting about player ratings etc. It's arguably a bit of a grey area.

 

For me, player ratings are (somewhat) a combination of how well they played within their capability and how much impact they left on the game. For example Sean Longstaff could play a 10 and be as impactful as Tonali on a 7, simply because Tonali has more "in his locker".

 

What is interesting is Sean Longstaff as an example can play say an 8 (by his standards) and do virtually nothing wrong but because folk know he's not as good as Tonali they will rate him a 4/5 and they'll cite his "safe passing" etc. As a reason why his stats are high. But sometimes keeping things simple and retaining possession is just as important as trying a decisive pass that may or may not work. 

 

Whereas seemingly, Tonali can play something like a 5/6 by his standards and folk will say he was a 7 simply because he tried more difficult or quick passing which frankly lost us the ball, allowing the opposition to counter attack, and because folk know he is (of course) a better player than Longataff.

 

Frustrates me to be honest. Doesn't seem to be a level playing field when critiquing players on a match by match basis and surely you can only do that based on the metrics I've suggested and not on who is usually the better player.

 

This is my interpretation of folks comments following the Everton game as an example.

 

Mind...by my own admission, there is some hypocrisy in my "level playing field" based on individual match-by-match player ratings. As I would more likely rate the Tonali's of the world more harshly simply because on their day they are absolutely unplayable.

 

 

 

To summarise, Tonali is a great passer of the ball and makes himself available most of the time.  Great players always look like they have loads of time on the ball and he is great at it.

[Sibierski]

On 16/10/2024 at 16:15, ponsaelius said:

 

Similar to with us but LCM and in a 3-5-2. Ricci as the deepest midfielder.

Belongs in a different thread, but giving we didn’t spend in summer, wonder if there’s scope for the team to evolve into a 3-5-2 giving what we’ve got as a base moving forward? 
 

Tino and Hall feel like effective wing backs long term, midfield we have numbers and can add another top one, CBs need adding, then in attack, it’s really only Barnes long term who’s a winger, but he strikes me as someone who can play through middle like we’ve seen Bowen do. 
 

Solidity through middle, bodies packing it out when defending, width in wing backs, and then you’ve still got Isak as the striker who can be deadly but someone always alongside him who can run beyond to stretch defences in Gordon/Barnes. 

 

Would mean a different approach to summer attacking signings.

[Funtime Frankie]

44 minutes ago, Sibierski said:

Belongs in a different thread, but giving we didn’t spend in summer, wonder if there’s scope for the team to evolve into a 3-5-2 giving what we’ve got as a base moving forward? 
 

Tino and Hall feel like effective wing backs long term, midfield we have numbers and can add another top one, CBs need adding, then in attack, it’s really only Barnes long term who’s a winger, but he strikes me as someone who can play through middle like we’ve seen Bowen do. 
 

Solidity through middle, bodies packing it out when defending, width in wing backs, and then you’ve still got Isak as the striker who can be deadly but someone always alongside him who can run beyond to stretch defences in Gordon/Barnes. 

 

Would mean a different approach to summer attacking signings.

Have you been reading my mind. I have thought this for ages.

 

If you have between 2200 -2215 is my time so no mind reading then lol

[BoSelecta]

I have a feeling we’ll see some magic from him tomorrow. It’s time. 

[Fak]

2 minutes ago, BoSelecta said:

I have a feeling we’ll see some magic from him tomorrow. It’s time. 

Imagine he picked a fan to climb into a box in the centre circle and Tonali cut him in half. 

[Myleftboot]

1 hour ago, Sibierski said:

Belongs in a different thread, but giving we didn’t spend in summer, wonder if there’s scope for the team to evolve into a 3-5-2 giving what we’ve got as a base moving forward? 
 

Tino and Hall feel like effective wing backs long term, midfield we have numbers and can add another top one, CBs need adding, then in attack, it’s really only Barnes long term who’s a winger, but he strikes me as someone who can play through middle like we’ve seen Bowen do. 
 

Solidity through middle, bodies packing it out when defending, width in wing backs, and then you’ve still got Isak as the striker who can be deadly but someone always alongside him who can run beyond to stretch defences in Gordon/Barnes. 

 

Would mean a different approach to summer attacking signings.

             Isak.      Gordon 

    
Hall.  Willock.  Bruno.  Tonali.   Tino

 

          Kelly.    Burn.     Shar

 

                        Pope

 

[HayDen Traces]

2 minutes ago, Myleftboot said:

             Isak.      Gordon 

    
Hall.  Willock.  Bruno.  Tonali.   Tino

 

          Kelly.    Burn.     Shar

 

                        Pope

 

Or Gordon playing as a 10 behind Isak 3-5-1-1?

[buzza]

Why don't we go 3-4-3 with the full backs creating width (similar to klopps liverpool) and have tonali bruno axis being both defnsive and offensive at the same time.

Gordon and Barnes would play more inside and closer to the box and Isak

[The College Dropout]

When was the last time a fit Joelinton was benched?

 

 

On Sandro - I didn’t have heady ambitions for him. And he’s yet to hit best case scenario due to the ban. When he joined, his data suggested he could be loose in possession and he’s proving that. I’m not going to blame others for something he’s shown his entire career.  
 

I was hoping for physical dominance, creativity and a higher technical floor than a Longstaff or Joelinton. Haven’t seen all of that just yet. But we’ve seen good signs. 

[Shearergol]

40 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

When was the last time a fit Joelinton was benched?

 

 

On Sandro - I didn’t have heady ambitions for him. And he’s yet to hit best case scenario due to the ban. When he joined, his data suggested he could be loose in possession and he’s proving that. I’m not going to blame others for something he’s shown his entire career.  
 

I was hoping for physical dominance, creativity and a higher technical floor than a Longstaff or Joelinton. Haven’t seen all of that just yet. But we’ve seen good signs. 

 

God I love football 

[Lotus]

In the absence of watching all of the football played everywhere the usual data sites do provide an idea of what kind of player someone is.

Tonali is still an exciting prospect. We still haven’t seen him be a dominant force over a stretch of games. He certainly looks like he can be but it hasn’t happened yet (when he’s been available). Lots of mitigating factors but at some point he has to actually do it to be worth the money and the hassle. 
I also think his natural style is being hampered by the lack of quality around him. Bruno, Isak, Hall and Tripps would, I think fit in with his style very well of fast paced passing and some decent movement to create a bit of time and space. 

[Sibierski]

1 hour ago, Myleftboot said:

             Isak.      Gordon 

    
Hall.  Willock.  Bruno.  Tonali.   Tino

 

          Kelly.    Burn.     Shar

 

                        Pope

 

You’d want Schar in the middle IMO, to play the balls, so would be Burn LCB and Krafth RCB if going that approach this season IMO.

 

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Don’t think we have good enough CBs to want to play 3 TBH, although not fully against the idea. 

[Heron]

10 hours ago, Rod said:

To summarise, Tonali is a great passer of the ball and makes himself available most of the time.  Great players always look like they have loads of time on the ball and he is great at it.

He is. I'm not disputing that.

 

It's just funny that when someone like Longstaff makes themselves available for the ball and gets in good positions that element of his game is entirely overlooked in any critiquing by certain folk and the focus then switches to how shit he was with the ball in whatever given circumstance. Yet for someone like Tonali, who we should rightly expect more of because he's a better player - folk switch to whatever positive spin they want to put on it.

 

If a player is passing the ball lots and accurately then surely that suggests he is also readily available to receive the ball. Yet the same "makes himself available" seemingly isn'tever attributed to someone like Longstaff.

 

Make no qualms about it. Tonali is a better player, by some stretch. I just feel that there's some discrepancy on how players are judged that's all.

[The College Dropout]

It’s the usual NO pattern.  
 

When Sissoko first joined people attributed his lack of pass accuracy to other team mates not making themselves available. 
 

Then it Swang the other way and he became worse than shit to people.