All these midfielders.

[BroadstairsR 2,168]

How did we come to accumulate so many? Johnson, Fox, Tettey, Howson, Surman, Snodgrass, Hoolihan, Butterfield, Bennett and Pilkington and I am sure I''ve missed one. Oh yes, Simon Lappin and Korey Smith (that''s two if Korey is still here.)

 

Twelve, with four needing to start (assuming two forwards up front) two/three on the bench and possibly one out injured. Competition yes is good but over-much confuses things and I can never remember so many lining up for their chance.

 

I see it as a surplus that can  be a bit detrimental and in three ways, expense, organisation and consistency in the middle of the team The first ten particulary seem to have their varying qualities in abundance. This means though that a few too many costly, highly paid and useful players are are sitting on the bench or ommitted from the match day squad all too often.

 

Organisation? It''s a tough job for Hoots to come up with the best combinations with such a luxery of riches surely. He still hasn''t achieved this, although hampered by injuries.

 

Consistency? I like to see a consistent team put out in defense and also in midfield and up front, whenever possible changing only for a bit of tinkering with the srarting X1 in respect  of the on-coming opposition or from the bench with regards to tactical changes or whatever during games. I feel players play better in line-ups that are nor subject to constant change. A more settled team reaps more points. I will probably now get panned for being out of date and reminded of some of Lambo''s trinkering here, but many will probably appreciate the point I have made.

 

Back to my main point. I would happily release two of our mid-fielders for two more strikers, and now if it were possible.

 

Who though? Andrew Surman and Simon (best loved reserve on the books) Lappin. would be my two. The former, I have rated in his play with us to date and he has contributed a lot since he came from Wolves, but many of his weaknesses such as lack of pace, unimaginative distribution on many occasions, intermittant tackling and weak dead-balling, push him below the Premiership bar (just) IMO.

 

Simon L. has had a good run with our Club, but would no longer grace any Premiership 25.

 

Less midfield constipation and a bit more of the runs up front please.

[Redders Right Foot 22]

I agree midfielders should/probably will make way for some strikers in jan.

Lapin is the obvious choice, however not sure if I''d like to see surman go or not... but that might be just because I have a slight bias towards him.

it seems detrimental to the cause in one way, but a striker for a striker seems more likely than surman leaving. Martin obviously isn''t getting the time of day when it comes to getting on the bench let alone in the first team, and as much as I like him and love that he is from our own back yard, there''s no point in paying him to turn up to training and playing the odd cup game, it''s not going to get us PL goals or points.

[Oz Canary 0]

Not sure how we got so many but surely Butterfield, E. Bennett, Tettey and Fox & Pilks (if they are fit) should get a start this weekend. I think Howson, Johnson and Surman certainly need a rest.

Not a midfielder, but think R.Bennett deserves a start ahead of Turner.  

[kellybrook 0]

What else can we have a go about?  Not enough strikers (wrong), hmm, ok done that. I know lets have a go at Hughton because we have too many midfielders.Bloody unbelievable.Lets destroy your pathetic attack right now.Korey Smith and Lappin are back-ups.  For emergencies and minor cup games at best, the padding every squad has and one is a possible "one for the future".Two weeks ago, Hoolahan, Pilks, Bennett and Butterfield were all injured.  Tettey had no game time.So that actually left us with a real midfield strength of 5.  If we played five across the midfield, that would have let NOBODY on the bench.So with all those injuries, good job we do have two for every position.If you had ditched Surman, who would have played on the left?  Exactly.

And finally, I see another attack on Surman. Surman who is a technically gifted CENTRAL midfielder, who anyone can see does not have the engine to get up and down the flank ut who through INJURIES is having to play there.

[ZLF 274]

We have some real options in midfield, good wide ones, Bennett, snod, Pilkington, good attackers lo surman. Wes and howson, mixed defensive options in bj, fox and tettey. Battlefield has unfulfilled potential. Laps is the cover man unlikely to appear excepting an injury crisis. I can''t see smith playing

Smith laps are the twoobvious ones but would not like to lose any others. Loan butters or bj?

[Shack Attack 0]

Hughton appeared to be looking to play with five midfielders as ''Plan A'' so you would probably want two or three midfielders on the bench in any one game as replacements due to injury/poor performance. That is seven or eight midfielders being used every week. Considering that of the midfielders mentioned by the OP around half of them have either been injured (Pilks, Bennett, Butterfield, Wes) or lacked match fitness (Tettey) already I would say that tens was about right.It''s not as if it is the ten midfielders have left us short in other areas as we have five strikers named in the squad. If you feel that those strikers are not quite good enough then that is a different argument.

[BroadstairsR 2,168]

Fair enough Shack Attack, but we have not played one up front since the Fulham game and many of us supporters were crying out for this tactic never to be used again. Some may see it that a five man midfield was indeed Hoot''s plan from the start and that he bowed to pressure after the disaster that was Craven Cottage. We have enough quality in the middle to play five, but sadly no DeFoe up front.

 

Having so many quality midfielders is a positive and fitting with our Premiership status. This is the strongest this area of our squad has ever been IMO. The negative is that it would seem to be proving difficult for Hughton to arrange/use them in the most effective or consistent way. I feel, for example, that Howson has been used too deeply and has not been as good since Snoddy''s arrival. Hoolahan had a good game at Newcastle, yet was dropped to the bench for Liverpool. I value consistency, not tinkering.

 

The broth seems to be being spoiled by too many cooks, and Butterfield and Tettey have yet to be unveiled (properly.) Maybe one or both of these will be the ingredient needed.  

[Redders Right Foot 22]

I really didn''t see this post as an attack-orientated opinion, and its a good concern, one of which I''m sure hughton has probably thought about. but anyway;

the next two games are going to be hard. I agree that 1 up front with 5 mid is where hughton wants to take the team, but the question is when?

if he plays it vs chelsea, and it pays off, think of the confidence it will give the players (and perhaps bring some back to the fans.) but if it doesn''t work out, it''s going to be ''Hughton should of played holt + jackson up front, what a stupid decision'' and the players may not feel confident in that formation again (but then again, we have no idea how confident they are now, and maybe a change up will help change them.)

it''s risk vs reward, and being the premier league, the reward is never guarenteed. I say he goes for 1 up front v both arsenal and chelsea. most expect us to lose anyway, and it gives some game time in that formation ready for villa.

if we''re using a 5 mid, my preferred options are; Hoolahan, snodds, pilks, tettey, then either butterfield/fox.

and i''d be shocked if I was alone in that.