Jump to content

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

Two defensive holding midfielders behind another holding midfielder??

McLean's no holding midfielder. He's a box-to-box man. Rupp's the same. Just because both McLean and Rupp can win a tackle doesn't mean they're defensive or holding midfielders.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m surprised that there’s not more suggestions that Onel play. Granted he’s often more effective as an impact sub, but his pace and ability to get past a couple of markers makes teams panic and can disturb a rigorously organised defence, which let’s face it, is what we play against at least 75% of the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nuff Said said:

I’m surprised that there’s not more suggestions that Onel play. Granted he’s often more effective as an impact sub, but his pace and ability to get past a couple of markers makes teams panic and can disturb a rigorously organised defence, which let’s face it, is what we play against at least 75% of the time. 

Works better with Placheta on the bench, I'd think. Get one jet-heeled runner on to start with, and throw another on against tiring legs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People clamouring for Dowell to start on little evidence he can be the No 10 we thought we had signed.   If he needs a run of games put him in U23's or wait for pre season.  Its just too important not to tinker with line up for tinkering sake for the coming games.  Even if Mario becomes unavailable not sure Farke would gamble on Dowell at 10,  inserting Mclean or Stiepermann before Dowell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

McLean's no holding midfielder. He's a box-to-box man. Rupp's the same. Just because both McLean and Rupp can win a tackle doesn't mean they're defensive or holding midfielders.

...my point was that he's no no.10...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

...my point was that he's no no.10...

Sure, but he's not a holding midfielder either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot see Farke changing it unless there are injuries. You are more likely to see Stiepermann back in soon as Farke has been waxing lyrical about how valuable a player he is. I watched him play for the u-23's yesterday in his comeback game against Leeds and on that showing I would rate Dowell and Sorenson or even Josh Martin ahead of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

McLean's no holding midfielder. He's a box-to-box man. Rupp's the same. Just because both McLean and Rupp can win a tackle doesn't mean they're defensive or holding midfielders.

At least someone understands 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

...my point was that he's no no.10...

No more or less so than Vrancic though, which is why your argument made no sense 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ken Hairy said:

No more or less so than Vrancic though, which is why your argument made no sense 

It was more that there were 2 defensive holding players in the team (Skipp/Sorenson)...with no real no.10 in front of them (McLean instead)...as opposed to one defensive holding player..alongside a box to box midfielder alongside (McLean)...with a more attacking option then in front of them i.e Vrancic or a Dowell.

You said that your suggestion was no more defensive or neagtive than any other suggestion...when it was the most negative and defensive

..hope that makes 'sense"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorensen with Skipp in midfield, EMI to no 10 and Idah on the right. Idah has the pace and physicality that we need

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

It was more that there were 2 defensive holding players in the team (Skipp/Sorenson)...with no real no.10 in front of them (McLean instead)...as opposed to one defensive holding player..alongside a box to box midfielder alongside (McLean)...with a more attacking option then in front of them i.e Vrancic or a Dowell.

You said that your suggestion was no more defensive or neagtive than any other suggestion...when it was the most negative and defensive

..hope that makes 'sense"

No, not at all.. My line up was no less attacking that the line up Farke has been using, pushing McLean into the 10 is no less attacking than using Vrancic, McLean would obviously adopt a more attacking stance than vs Coventry. Using Dowell into the equation changes nothing, we have seen nothing from him to suggest he offers more quality in the 10 than McLean, or Vrancic for that matter. 

Your argument was not as McLean as a B2B midfielder but a holding one, so you've already changed your tune purely because someone else pointed out the obvious flaw in your argument.

But hey, if you don't want to get it, you don't want to get it I suppose 🤷‍♂️, we'll just see what Farke does. I have a sneaky feeling he'll stick with McLean/Skipp deeper and bring in Dowell for Vrancic, if he does make any changes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

No, not at all.. My line up was no less attacking that the line up Farke has been using, pushing McLean into the 10 is no less attacking than using Vrancic, McLean would obviously adopt a more attacking stance than vs Coventry. Using Dowell into the equation changes nothing, we have seen nothing from him to suggest he offers more quality in the 10 than McLean, or Vrancic for that matter. 

Your argument was not as McLean as a B2B midfielder but a holding one, so you've already changed your tune purely because someone else pointed out the obvious flaw in your argument.

But hey, if you don't want to get it, you don't want to get it I suppose 🤷‍♂️, we'll just see what Farke does. I have a sneaky feeling he'll stick with McLean/Skipp deeper and bring in Dowell for Vrancic, if he does make any changes. 

Sorenson or McLean may start in the poisition alingside Skipp (really didnt think I'd need to explain this)...but its what either will do from that position which makes your suggestion the most negative. Sorenson would sit alongside Skipp whereas McLean would break forward and support the attack more, creating another potential attacking threat.

Thats the difference....jesus christ.

If a team will come to Carrow Rd to park the bus , which Rotherham may well do , we would need all the attacking threats to break them down.

If the opposition intend to defend deep saw a mid of Skipp Sorenson and McLean on the teamsheet it would be music to their ears

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

Sorenson or McLean may start in the poisition alingside Skipp (really didnt think I'd need to explain this)...but its what either will do from that position which makes your suggestion the most negative. Sorenson would sit alongside Skipp whereas McLean would break forward and support the attack more, creating another potential attacking threat.

Thats the difference....jesus christ.

If a team will come to Carrow Rd to park the bus , which Rotherham may well do , we would need all the attacking threats to break them down.

If the opposition intend to defend deep saw a mid of Skipp Sorenson and McLean on the teamsheet it would be music to their ears

 

What makes you think Sorenson would just sit alongside Skipp?? Of course he wouldn't, the instructions would be the same for him as McLean playing there, he's shown he can be attacking hence why Farke deployed him, successfully I'll add, as an attacking LWB. 

As you say...... Jesus Christ 😁

Anyway, we're going round in circles on what is more than likely a mute argument, so I'll leave it here with me knowing exactly how I would deploy that midfield 3 and you choosing not to get it 😉

Enjoy the game 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ken Hairy said:

What makes you think Sorenson would just sit alongside Skipp?? Of course he wouldn't, the instructions would be the same for him as McLean playing there, he's shown he can be attacking hence why Farke deployed him, successfully I'll add, as an attacking LWB. 

As you say...... Jesus Christ 😁

Anyway, we're going round in circles on what is more than likely a mute argument, so I'll leave it here with me knowing exactly how I would deploy that midfield 3 and you choosing not to get it 😉

Enjoy the game 👍

Well I suppose it comes down to who we believe would provide more of an attacking drive from the deeper position out of McLean or Sorenson....I know who I would choose

...and Sorenson was 'ok' as an attacking full back but no more than that, hence why he's been replaced by Giannoulis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 19/02/2021 at 13:15, Yellow Fever said:

Pukki until recently again hadn't been filling me with confidence at No 9 (indeed if Hugill had been fit I might have dropped him). Vrancic appears now to of taken over from McLean in this respect as the scapegoat.

Luckily none of us are football managers and only see what we want to see, usually not the oft missed running off the ball and making space. Was it Greavsie in his day could have a stinker, never touch the ball but always had two players marking him out of the game (hence making space elsewhere).

Just opinions. 

Leave as is.

 

Kenny is not good enough for our first team in my opinion. He doesn’t score enough, create enough and can be weak in the challenge and a liability with his passing.  I would give Sorensen a go as he seems to be a decent upgrade with room to improve.

Vrancic is fine until Marco is fit again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

I’m surprised that there’s not more suggestions that Onel play. Granted he’s often more effective as an impact sub, but his pace and ability to get past a couple of markers makes teams panic and can disturb a rigorously organised defence, which let’s face it, is what we play against at least 75% of the time. 

That’s a good call. Put Cantwell in the centre and Onel on the left.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jersey Canary said:

That’s a good call. Put Cantwell in the centre and Onel on the left.

Well this would be my shout...at Coventry Cantwell seemed to be fairly central for most of it...if he's going to play there anyway , we may aswell have a left winger on the pitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Alfie54 said:

Sorensen with Skipp in midfield, EMI to no 10 and Idah on the right. Idah has the pace and physicality that we need

Wouldn't put Idah on a flank. Emi should be a number 10 in the long run if you ask me though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Wouldn't put Idah on a flank. Emi should be a number 10 in the long run if you ask me though.

I used to think this but someone on here (Bethnal I think?) pointed out that Emi benefits from the extra space that comes from starting out wide and coming in, instead of always picking the ball up in the middle which makes sense when you watch him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, king canary said:

I used to think this but someone on here (Bethnal I think?) pointed out that Emi benefits from the extra space that comes from starting out wide and coming in, instead of always picking the ball up in the middle which makes sense when you watch him.

I agree completely in this set-up, but would just say I did say "in the long run" - I simply mean that's his long-term position if you ask me.

Could be wrong though. Buendia, with his engine and tenacity, would cause problems coming out of the deep in the same way he causes problems coming off a flank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...