The midfield

[Howaythelads]

Our problems in defence and attack just gloss over the fact that our midfield is pretty shit. To ignore that would be ridiculous, be all well and good having a good backline and an effective strikeforce, but if the central midfield are doing F*** all then its all pointless. Its arguably the most important position on the pitch, and all of ours do nothing.

 

I think we've looked ok with Butt/Emre and I think Butt/Dyer could do quite well. It hinges on getting Parker out of there, tbh. We look better everytime he's not playing, we even looked better last season with 2 from Faye, Clark and Bowyer than with Parker/Emre, so poor is their partnership.

 

As I've said before, nobody should be surprised. Parker and Emre were signed as a pairing by the worst Newcastle manager in decades.

[Zero]

Two goals by Scholes simply shows how bad Parker's decision is.

Sold him, 4m is acceptable, and buy someone who really understand what defensive midfielder is.

 

For the other position, N'Zogbia and Milner are future stars, while Duff and Dyer are decent squad members considering their fitness.

Butt is still useful and Emre sometimes shows he can boss the midfield, he is just unlucky to have too much injuries.

 

Parker is the weakest link, in conclusion.

[Guest mikefin]

Two goals by Scholes simply shows how bad Parker's decision is.

Sold him, 4m is acceptable, and buy someone who really understand what defensive midfielder is.

 

 

I dont think its all about Parker. It's about Glenn Roeder who should play him as dm, and force him to stop that fancy box-to-box horseshit which is anything but good for the team. You cant be a playmaker because you dont have a "football brains". So stop it!

It makes Parker look bad and it makes Emre look bad. They never create anything and they are always late when its time to go defensive.

[Howaythelads]

Two goals by Scholes simply shows how bad Parker's decision is.

Sold him, 4m is acceptable, and buy someone who really understand what defensive midfielder is.

 

 

I dont think its all about Parker. It's about Glenn Roeder who should play him as dm, and force him to stop that fancy box-to-box horseshit which is anything but good for the team. You cant be a playmaker because you dont have a "football brains". So stop it!

It makes Parker look bad and it makes Emre look bad. They never create anything and they are always late when its time to go defensive.

 

But he doesn't have the ability to play DM. Just because you want him to be used there doesn't mean he's any good at it.

[Guest Knightrider]

We need a goalscoring midfielder, an anchorman, some genuine creativity and lots of athletisicm, pace and power. Oh, and some tactics in there.

 

ManU had Paul Scholes and Darren effing Fletcher in central midfield.

 

Very little protection for the back four there, poor/weak tackling, moderate athleticism, little pace, little power.

 

So why are these attributes a requirement for us, yet not for them? Because theyre coached alot better than our lot. Movement, sharpness, linkup play - out of our league. They also have superior players around them, both in defence and attack. Quite simply, theyre a much better team with better players and much better movement/tactics/drilling, and thats helping each individual player to play his game well. I think quite a few of those players would struggle if they were here (eg Fletcher, Evra wouldnt have settled, same with Vidic, etc etc).

 

Getting better players is going to make little difference when we come up against ManU next time. Theyll still play us off the park because of the two reasons just stated. If we want to get back to simply competing at that level, being able to live with a side of that calibre in terms of performances, then wed do better to bring better coaches or coaching systems in. If Pearson can make such a big difference to coaching the defence, then I wonder who else is out there that might make an even bigger impact on the midfield/attack from coaching alone.

 

You are quite right that if the coaching isn't there it won't really matter one bit who plays and the quality of those players when up against teams like Man Utd, and you're also right that Man Utd's midfield doesn't contain a lot of athleticism, pace and power etc. and that it isn't working against them, quite the opposite in fact.

 

However, those are things I'd like to see in our midfield and believe to be key attributes in the modern game. Man Utd are the exception and kind of like the Brazil of the Premiership, they play differently to everyone else and aren't as conventional as other sides.

 

If you look at their midield you wonder how they dominate teams to the extent they do given the lack of tackling ability, height, power, athleticism etc. and of course the age of some of their players (Giggs and Scholes - neither are the most energetic), but they do and I'd say they are quite unique in that way. Like you said put their midfield in black and white and they wouldn't work so well. Of course the coaching they recieve is partly responsible for how they play but I'd also say the culture at Man Utd and ethos is also responsible - kind of like Liverpool's famous playing style in their period of dominance which was unique to them, or Forest's, and maybe Newcastle under KK and of course Arsenal under Wenger.

 

Coaching is the key I agree and will always be the case, and I'd dearly love to see our midfield (and team) coached to great effect, but I don't think Roeder and his staff are capable of it and I don't trust the club to appoint such coaches or a management team capable so in our case, I really do think we're better off bringing in quality players signed to do specific jobs etc. I.e. a creative midfielder, a box to box midfielder etc. rather than trying to coach that into the team.

 

BTW for all of Man Utd's dominance in midfield yesterday, I think they tired towards the end and they do lack variety at times, they also lack a driving force through the centre, so while they are strong, they have their weaknesses too and I suspect Fergie will look strongly at his midfield during the transfer window. Hargreaves would be perfect for them because of his energy and driving force, much better than Carrick anyway.

[Guest mikefin]

Two goals by Scholes simply shows how bad Parker's decision is.

Sold him, 4m is acceptable, and buy someone who really understand what defensive midfielder is.

 

 

I dont think its all about Parker. It's about Glenn Roeder who should play him as dm, and force him to stop that fancy box-to-box horseshit which is anything but good for the team. You cant be a playmaker because you dont have a "football brains". So stop it!

It makes Parker look bad and it makes Emre look bad. They never create anything and they are always late when its time to go defensive.

 

But he doesn't have the ability to play DM. Just because you want him to be used there doesn't mean he's any good at it.

 

Cant deny that. I'm not a one who rate someone just because he run his socks off.

[Guest Knightrider]

Two goals by Scholes simply shows how bad Parker's decision is.

Sold him, 4m is acceptable, and buy someone who really understand what defensive midfielder is.

 

 

I dont think its all about Parker. It's about Glenn Roeder who should play him as dm, and force him to stop that fancy box-to-box horseshit which is anything but good for the team. You cant be a playmaker because you dont have a "football brains". So stop it!

It makes Parker look bad and it makes Emre look bad. They never create anything and they are always late when its time to go defensive.

 

But he doesn't have the ability to play DM. Just because you want him to be used there doesn't mean he's any good at it.

 

Did it to great effect under Souness HTL so I don't know why you keep insisting he doesn't have the ability to play DM, he also did it to great effect yesterday. He broke up numerous moments of play, sat, pressed and even tried to get forward once or twice, culminating in one long range effort and a few moments of "shoooooooooot" from the crowd. That to me is good DM play. He's no Makalele of course but then many aren't.

 

You rate Butt highly it seems, but he lacks two key attributes to play the role well IMO, and that's his passing which is often poor and his discipline, he can't tackle (not very well anyway) either. You say Parker goes to ground a lot and that because he appears to be making tackles, it looks good, I don't see it like that, however. Sure he misses a few and goes in hard and it raises cheers from the crowd, but he very rarely misses his man or allows players to escape his clutches. He did a great job on Rooney in the first-half for example who because of Parker was forced deeper and deeper and had to keep turning his back on our goal, that is first-class pressing and closing down.

 

I think for many Parker has become some kind of scapegoat and people are failing to see the bigger picture, he isn't the problem, in fact none of them individually are, they all have their good points and bad points, its that midfield unit as a whole that is the problem - hence my opening post.

[Howaythelads]

Two goals by Scholes simply shows how bad Parker's decision is.

Sold him, 4m is acceptable, and buy someone who really understand what defensive midfielder is.

 

 

I dont think its all about Parker. It's about Glenn Roeder who should play him as dm, and force him to stop that fancy box-to-box horseshit which is anything but good for the team. You cant be a playmaker because you dont have a "football brains". So stop it!

It makes Parker look bad and it makes Emre look bad. They never create anything and they are always late when its time to go defensive.

 

But he doesn't have the ability to play DM. Just because you want him to be used there doesn't mean he's any good at it.

 

Did it to great effect under Souness HTL so I don't know why you keep insisting he doesn't have the ability to play DM, he also did it to great effect yesterday. He broke up numerous moments of play, sat, pressed and even tried to get forward once or twice, culminating in one long range effort and a few moments of "shoooooooooot" from the crowd. That to me is good DM play. He's no Makalele of course but then many aren't.

 

You rate Butt highly it seems, but he lacks two key attributes to play the role well IMO, and that's his passing which is often poor and his discipline, he can't tackle (not very well anyway) either. You say Parker goes to ground a lot and that because he appears to be making tackles, it looks good, I don't see it like that, however. Sure he misses a few and goes in hard and it raises cheers from the crowd, but he very rarely misses his man or allows players to escape his clutches. He did a great job on Rooney in the first-half for example who because of Parker was forced deeper and deeper and had to keep turning his back on our goal, that is first-class pressing and closing down.

 

I think for many Parker has become some kind of scapegoat and people are failing to see the bigger picture, he isn't the problem, in fact none of them individually are, they all have their good points and bad points, its that midfield unit as a whole that is the problem - hence my opening post.

 

I'm really surprised that even you're now into this deliberate misrepresentation lark that some others indulge in. And that's a serious comment mate, I'm really surprised at you doing it. Here's why I'm saying it:

 

I don't think I've said anywhere how highly or otherwise I rate Butt, good of you to make that one up, like. As it happens I don't think Butt is in the same class as the likes of Makele or Gilberto, so if that's what you're trying to imply you're miles away. What I say about Butt is that he's far better in the DM role than Parker. He is a specialist at it. I also say that Emre is a better attacking midfielder than Parker. Now that isn't saying I think Emre is the dogs bollocks, but you may as well make that up as well while you're at it, mate.

 

I also don't think Parker did anything to great effect under Souness. We were crap under Souness, which is why he got the sack. The midfield was shite under Souness and I was going on about it for ages. Just as you don't know why I keep mentioning Parker not being good enough I don't know why you keep claiming Parker did the business under Souness.

 

You've been taken in by the grit and determination he shows, which are commendable attributes, but nowhere near enough. A lot of people have been taken in by it and still won't face up to it, however some are now seeing him for what he is, a very average player.

 

Talking about 'big picture'...... it is people like me who are seeing beyond the individual and ARE seeing the big picture. Some prefer a hero, it's always the way.

[Keefaz]

The main problem is we couldn't keep the ball. Our passing was shoddy all over the pitch and they pressured very well when the ball fell to either Martins or Sibs.

[Guest mikefin]

 

I think for many Parker has become some kind of scapegoat and people are failing to see the bigger picture, he isn't the problem, in fact none of them individually are, they all have their good points and bad points, its that midfield unit as a whole that is the problem - hence my opening post.

 

Big picture - in my mind - is that Roeder has no clue how to take their abilities out of them

[Howaythelads]

The main problem is we couldn't keep the ball. Our passing was shoddy all over the pitch and they pressured very well when the ball fell to either Martins or Sibs.

 

Good point, and highlights well why we need to bring in a quality striker if possible. Can you imagine how we'd play without Martins if he was injured next week, for example? People list various other players who *could* play as a striker but we would basically be knackered. Our entire play would be damaged badly should Martins be crocked.  It will be a big risk to go into the remainder of the season with only Martins and Sibierski.

[STM]

There's no problem with our wide players, we hav a nice mix of youth and experiance. We have alot of talent in the central area, just no balance whatsoever. Emre and Parker don't know what type of midfielders they are and because of this don't support or defend well enough.

 

I'd rather play Butt and Dyer just because they know their roles naturally. Roeder has two options looking at next season:

 

1. Sign a permenent attacking and defending midfielder.

2. Work on Emre and Parker and really drill their roles into them so they both know what they are doing.

 

I'd rather we saved the money and tried to work with what we have. However, should someone like Barton come availible i would gamble.

[NE5]

We need a goalscoring midfielder, an anchorman, some genuine creativity and lots of athletisicm, pace and power. Oh, and some tactics in there.

 

good possession and movment has always been the key to defending well and dictating the pace of a game. We have lacked this all season and need more offensive outlets and support to the front men.

 

 

 

 

[ChezGiven]

The main problem is we couldn't keep the ball. Our passing was shoddy all over the pitch and they pressured very well when the ball fell to either Martins or Sibs.

 

Good point, and highlights well why we need to bring in a quality striker if possible. Can you imagine how we'd play without Martins if he was injured next week, for example? People list various other players who *could* play as a striker but we would basically be knackered. Our entire play would be damaged badly should Martins be crocked.  It will be a big risk to go into the remainder of the season with only Martins and Sibierski.

 

And discussions about the midfield are important in the long run but that is most pressing issue HTL.

 

For the record, i thought Parker should have been the player to keep scholes under control but Manu's passing and movement was exceptional and he was probably instructed to ensure the back four had cover and help dealing with R & R. With those 2 in their side, its not surprising that the one of the best attacking midfielders the premiership has seen found 'just' enough space to score 2 cracking goals. Not seen the game on tv but my impression from the gallowgate was that we came very close to blocking both.

[Skirge]

DIOP!! I have been saying it for seasons now, he is the only midfield player we should be even thinking about buying, unless we sell any of our current ones.

A big powerhouse in the middle is what we are desperate for and he is ideal.  :thup:

The only downside to buying him is having to deal with Coleman.

 

I am also a fan of playing a rightfooter on the left wing and a left footer wideright. We are no longer playing the type of football that requires loads of crosses from outwide into the box, like the Shearer and Sir Les times. If we play Milner wide left like yesterday it gives him more of a chance to drift in and shoot on his right with a more natural angle.

Likewise if we played Zoggy wide right.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

DIOP!! I have been saying it for seasons now, he is the only midfield player we should be even thinking about buying, unless we sell any of our current ones.

A big powerhouse in the middle is what we are desperate for and he is ideal.  :thup:

 

Appiah is better, and would be cheaper.

[Skirge]

DIOP!! I have been saying it for seasons now, he is the only midfield player we should be even thinking about buying, unless we sell any of our current ones.

A big powerhouse in the middle is what we are desperate for and he is ideal.  :thup:

 

Appiah is better, and would be cheaper.

Dunno about better would be cheaper but Diop us usd to the Prem, thats got to be a big +

[oldtype]

We're blaming this on Parker AGAIN?

 

Parker's DMFing yesterday was at least as good as Butt's best day, you know, the days when everyone is pissing all over themselves to call him Godly.

 

We got slightly out-posessioned yesterday because they were Man-Frigging-United and we're just an average squad missing half our first team. NOT because of Parker. How does Scholes scoring goals immediately correlate to blame on Parker?

[Guest tobiazvanderziaz]

We're blaming this on Parker AGAIN?

 

Parker's DMFing yesterday was at least as good as Butt's best day, you know, the days when everyone is pissing all over themselves to call him Godly.

 

We got slightly out-posessioned yesterday because they were Man-Frigging-United and we're just an average squad missing half our first team. NOT because of Parker. How does Scholes scoring goals immediately correlate to blame on Parker?

 

:thup:

[Howaythelads]

We're blaming this on Parker AGAIN?

 

Parker's DMFing yesterday was at least as good as Butt's best day, you know, the days when everyone is pissing all over themselves to call him Godly.

 

We got slightly out-posessioned yesterday because they were Man-Frigging-United and we're just an average squad missing half our first team. NOT because of Parker. How does Scholes scoring goals immediately correlate to blame on Parker?

 

Sorry, but jumping on some comments made about Parker being to blame for a goal is too simplistic.

 

When I talk about Parker I'm talking about his contribution over the entire time he's been at the club. During that time it's clear his passing isn't up to the role of anchorman, he is nowhere near as good as Butt in this role and never will be because he doesn't have the range of pass, he doesn't have the ability to read the game as well and see the pass before he's even received the ball. This is what really good anchormen do. Butt does this and also like really good anchormen he does it in an unspectacular style that goes largely unnoticed. Meanwhile, Parker dives into last ditch challenges, wonderful 100% blood and thunder stuff, but he twirls as though he's drilling for oil and passes the ball backwards 90% of the time, slowing down our attacks in a ridiculous fashion.

 

All in my opinion of course.

[Taylor Swift]

I don't remember seeing one good forward pass from Parker in the game at all.

 

Most of the passes he makes are just layoffs back to the defender who actually fucking passed the ball to him. He just runs towards the defender from the center of the pitch, then taps the ball that is passed to him back to the original passer. The ball then gets hoofed up bluesigh.gif

 

He doesn't even turn to face their goal often enough and pass the ball forward and it contributes to why we lose possession so much and why we're usually under the cosh when he plays. When he does, the passes usually don't find their man (take notice of this in the next game - his forward passing in the Bolton and Everton game was atrocious).

 

Parker was good when the team was shite, remember that. We always played shite football under Souness, always under the cosh, could never string more than 5 passes together yet during that time, Parker shown through because he excels when a team is under pressure, he excels when he's having opportunities to make last-ditch tackles. That's not a bad thing on his part, but it is a negative when in consideration with the type of football we would like to play and how we should be attacking other teams, not vice versa. We never really onced played a team off the park during the Souness era, we might have hustled them off the park (ie. against Arsenal at home) but it was a rarity that we won the game because of the way we passed the ball. In this season alone, we have already played Portsmouth off the park and in the other games [when Parker was injured], our attacking play has been much improved, showed in the increase of goals during the 'run'.

[Taylor Swift]

In the end, it's all coaching. It's why Arsenal's style of football hasn't really changed in 10 years, even with the massive turnover in players. Losing arguably one of the finest midfielders to have graced the Premiership (Vieira), they're still playing flowing football and have seemingly replaced him with a different but arguably more effective player (Fabregas).

 

Coaching is also why Manyoo's style of football hasn't changed as well. And it's why both of these teams have been successful and why they will still be successful if their respective managers and coaches remain, even if they continue to change their players. The system works, and that's the key.

[Howaythelads]

I don't remember seeing one good forward pass from Parker in the game at all.

 

Most of the passes he makes are just layoffs back to the defender who actually f***ing passed the ball to him. He just runs towards the defender from the center of the pitch, then taps the ball that is passed to him back to the original passer. The ball then gets hoofed up bluesigh.gif

 

He doesn't even turn to face their goal often enough and pass the ball forward and it contributes to why we lose possession so much and why we're usually under the cosh when he plays. When he does, the passes usually don't find their man (take notice of this in the next game - his forward passing in the Bolton and Everton game was atrocious).

 

Parker was good when the team was shite, remember that. We always played shite football under Souness, always under the cosh, could never string more than 5 passes together yet during that time, Parker shown through because he excels when a team is under pressure, he excels when he's having opportunities to make last-ditch tackles. That's not a bad thing on his part, but it is a negative when in consideration with the type of football we would like to play and how we should be attacking other teams, not vice versa. We never really onced played a team off the park during the Souness era, we might have hustled them off the park (ie. against Arsenal at home) but it was a rarity that we won the game because of the way we passed the ball. In this season alone, we have already played Portsmouth off the park and in the other games [when Parker was injured], our attacking play has been much improved, showed in the increase of goals during the 'run'.

 

[Northern Monkey]

We're blaming this on Parker AGAIN?

 

Parker's DMFing yesterday was at least as good as Butt's best day, you know, the days when everyone is pissing all over themselves to call him Godly.

 

We got slightly out-posessioned yesterday because they were Man-Frigging-United and we're just an average squad missing half our first team. NOT because of Parker. How does Scholes scoring goals immediately correlate to blame on Parker?

 

Sorry, but jumping on some comments made about Parker being to blame for a goal is too simplistic.

 

When I talk about Parker I'm talking about his contribution over the entire time he's been at the club. During that time it's clear his passing isn't up to the role of anchorman, he is nowhere near as good as Butt in this role and never will be because he doesn't have the range of pass, he doesn't have the ability to read the game as well and see the pass before he's even received the ball. This is what really good anchormen do. Butt does this and also like really good anchormen he does it in an unspectacular style that goes largely unnoticed. Meanwhile, Parker dives into last ditch challenges, wonderful 100% blood and thunder stuff, but he twirls as though he's drilling for oil and passes the ball backwards 90% of the time, slowing down our attacks in a ridiculous fashion.

 

All in my opinion of course.

 

I can only think of one midfielder who could hold their head up high on that point, and evan THAT'S a tenuous one.

[Taylor Swift]

We're blaming this on Parker AGAIN?

 

Parker's DMFing yesterday was at least as good as Butt's best day, you know, the days when everyone is pissing all over themselves to call him Godly.

 

We got slightly out-posessioned yesterday because they were Man-Frigging-United and we're just an average squad missing half our first team. NOT because of Parker. How does Scholes scoring goals immediately correlate to blame on Parker?

 

Sorry, but jumping on some comments made about Parker being to blame for a goal is too simplistic.

 

When I talk about Parker I'm talking about his contribution over the entire time he's been at the club. During that time it's clear his passing isn't up to the role of anchorman, he is nowhere near as good as Butt in this role and never will be because he doesn't have the range of pass, he doesn't have the ability to read the game as well and see the pass before he's even received the ball. This is what really good anchormen do. Butt does this and also like really good anchormen he does it in an unspectacular style that goes largely unnoticed. Meanwhile, Parker dives into last ditch challenges, wonderful 100% blood and thunder stuff, but he twirls as though he's drilling for oil and passes the ball backwards 90% of the time, slowing down our attacks in a ridiculous fashion.

 

All in my opinion of course.

 

I can only think of one midfielder who could hold their head up high on that point, and evan THAT'S a tenuous one.

 

Rob Lee, Ginola, Solano, Gary Speed... That took me barely 10 seconds to think of. You might also be able to add Robert and maybe some of the underrated ones such as Acuna in as well.