Pacheco vs. Swansea

[Row D Seat 7 0]

Read a few posts on here talking about his performance on Saturday against Swansea. Most saying he was our only bright spark. One Liverpool fan on here said Lambert made a mistake bringing him off.

To be honest, I thought he tried, but nothing he did worked, resulting in a poor display. I was more shocked that Crofts was taken off. Pacheco substition came as no shock to me.

On another thread someone mention the words ''Pacheco reality check''. I agree with that. I fear he''ll try and live off that Scunthorpe performance for a while.

[walks on water 0]

He''s what 20? you''re unlikely to get consistently fantastic performances at that age given he hasn''t had much game time.

For the record, I think Lambert is God, but unless it was for fitness reasons, or to protect him (if Wes is out for the season) I thought it was a mistake. Pacheco was the one player for me who looked capable of unlocking what was a solid Swans defence.

But we all have opinions

[Row D Seat 7 0]

Your final sentence is something a lot of people on here should realise.

I agree about the age thing, but to me he tried the odd pass, but as nothing was coming off I felt he just didn''t look in the game. However, that goes for a 85% of our team on that day.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,019]

A friend of mine, who does not support NCFC (or Liverpool) and who watched the game on Sky told me he thought Pacheco is a class player, I value his opinion because it was based purely on football terms......

[San Miguel 0]

I agree with Holt in his article - it was just one of those days where nothing was going right, and nothing was going to go in the net for us.  No one played fantastically or terribly, in my opinion.

I thought Pacheco put in a good performace, remebering his position was slightly altered without Hoolahan.  The two of them linked up well vs Scunthorpe so we''ll have to see what happens the next time they start together.

I''m a bit nervous of our next 2 games - both very tough fixtures - so i hope we are back to our best for them.

OTBC!

[Row D Seat 7 0]

If Wes is out of Watford then I hope Pacheco plays in his position. Holt and Jackson up top with Lansbury dropping to bench.

[San Miguel 0]

an attacking set up vs Watford will surely get better results than it did vs Swansea.  Watford have conceded 28 goals at home so far, compared to (and i can''t believe how low this is) the 9 goals Swansea have let in at home this year.

[GMF 736]

I would agree on Jackson up front with Pacheco at the tip of the diamond. I''d put Lansbury wide right and put Crofts at the base of the diamond, leaving Surman wide left.

 

As you say, it''s all about opinions!

[ZLF 271]

Not sure whether he was inconsistent - but he did create a couple of good chances for Holt and forced a good save from DeVries with prob our best effort on goal.

We need a spark of creativity and he gives it - def starter tomorrow for me

[CanaryOne 0]

Who puts the ball in the net if Holt does not score is still a big problem for us even with the loan signing of Pacheco and Vokes . Borini''s goals have now bagged Swansea 6 points since his loan , have our loanees got goals in them ? to me Jackson still seems our best option up front and thats the position we were supposed to be strengthening.

[Paul 0]

Lanabury is on loan and he has won us games with late goals against Millwank and Bristol City.

I thought Pacheco was poor, done brilliantly to create the opportunity in the first 10 mins but poor finish, after that he drifted in and out and his passing was awful, gave the ball away too much trying for an "eye of the needle" pass rather than a simplier ball.

He is however a very gifted player and at will play more good games than bad for us.

[mikewalker 0]

He was even worse than the Scunthorpe game. Woeful player. I''d like to see him do that* on a wet Tuesday at Watford.

 

*whatever he does/did that people think is so amazing. All I see is a ball-greed on the halfway line.

[walks on water 0]

[quote user="mikewalker"]

He was even worse than the Scunthorpe game. Woeful player. I''d like to see him do that* on a wet Tuesday at Watford.

 

*whatever he does/did that people think is so amazing. All I see is a ball-greed on the halfway line.

[/quote]

Just in case it gets lost translation, he''s joking Dani!

+1[Y] for Pacheco at the tip behind Holt and Jackson. Lansbury to the bench to provide drive later. Surman and Dani to link and thread killer balls to our strikers

It''s STILL in our hands!...quite amazing actually [:D]

[Chunky Norwich 0]

I thought a problem we had in the first half was that Pacman kep dropping too deep. Left Holt too isolated. I think Pacman''s a tidy little player but he''s not an out-and-out striker. If we play a formation where we have someone sitting in the hole, it''s crying out for him in that position (particularly if Hoolahoop is injured).

For me personally, at Watford I''d stick Jackson or Vokes up front with Holt, drop Pacman to the tip of the diamond and move Lansbury back to midfield.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

He tried a lot of things that didn''t come off and he definitely wasn''t as good as against scunthorpe but he still produced 3 or 4 moments of class that on another day might have resulted in goals for us. He is only young and will have ups and downs. I was disappointed he got taken off as from that point onwards we lost our grip on the midfield and were not able to keep possession as well. I thought after he switched to the top of the diamond he started to look quite dangerous.

I would also start Jackson with Holt and play Pacheco at the tip of the diamond. Thats where he appears to naturally position himself anyway. Jackson looked quite threatening after he came on as well.

[CambridgeCanary 0]

[quote user="mikewalker"]

He was even worse than the Scunthorpe game. Woeful player. I''d like to see him do that* on a wet Tuesday at Watford.

 

*whatever he does/did that people think is so amazing. All I see is a ball-greed on the halfway line.

[/quote]

Very amusing though I bet, given some City fans, that there is probably someone somewhere who actually believes that for real.

[canaryfan68 0]

Thought Pacheco played better when he came deeper in the second half, first half he was just out muscled by their central defenders. Having said that, I did think he didn''t get much support from those around him although at times he was trying to beat too many.

Hopefully the team will have learnt a bit more about him but thought Pacheco should have scored from his first chance. I think he grew into the game and thought PL took him off at the wrong time as he was starting to worry the Swansea back four when coming from deep.

Against Watford I think he should be played in the Wes role if Hooly is not playing.

[birchfest 397]

Am I the only one picking up on the irony of criticising people for getting excited about 1 performance...... based on well 1 other performance. Probably the best team we have faced this season, against a slightly off Norwich, lets give him a few more games before we start slinging mud or applying for a statue of him on top of the castle walls!

[Largey 0]

I don''t understand when people say ''he will live off his Scunthorpe performance''. Coaches and managers aren''t dumb, they''ll know he played well in his debut game but they will want to see more of the same from him. They won''t let him rest on his laurels and I know he won''t be allowed to at City. Being a young lad full of energy and willingness to learn, he will want to build on his great debut. But I don''t see how you can say someone has lived off one performance, as though he has impressed everyone and doesn''t need to play well anymore.

[Europe_93 11]

When Jackson came on and Pacheco dropped deeper we looked much better. I''m pretty sure that is what we will start with at Watford. Would think Surman would be the one left out rather than Lansbury, but not so sure on that.

I think Lambert probably brought him off due to fitness reasons, in that he hasn''t had too many 90 minutes this season. Psychologically, it shows him he has to perform too.

In fairness Swansea City''s defence is about as good as it gets in this league.