|
Post by saintsfan73 on Jan 20, 2019 14:57:51 GMT
The transformation under RH is nothing short of remarkable. Let’s not get carried away about our CBs though! . We still didn’t keep a clean sheet and again came perilously close to blowing a two goal lead. Most important is that RH is being forced into playing 3 centre backs when he doesn’t want to. RH said at the fan’s meeting that he doesn’t like playing this way as it invites too much pressure. Yesterday we got 39% possession at home against an average PL team. We can’t continue to do this long term. A new CB is desperately needed to allow RH to get the best out of the rest of the players. And also we have one 15m CB who the manager doesn’t even want in the squad. I think we need to seriously question whether our CB targets would actually give Ralph what he needs before we commit in January. We need to be absolutely sure that they would be an improvement on what we have; and glib comments like “anyone would be better” no longer apply because the three yesterday have been playing pretty well recently. If we do sign someone else and they take the place of Bednarek, Stephens or Vestergaard, then we’ve got another expensive defender not playing football. If we can get someone who will palpably improve us and enable Ralph to play 4 at the back, then I say absolutely go for it. But if there’s any risk that we’ll end up with just another non-playing CB, with no discernible improvement but 15m lighter, then best that we keep our powder dry for the summer when there is clearly going to be a bit of a clear-out. If we do sign a new one and want to play 2 CBs ,on current form it would have to new bloke and Bednarnek. Stephens is too weak aerialy to play in a back 4 and I’m not sure JV has the speed to.
|
|
|
Post by Batts on Jan 20, 2019 15:05:17 GMT
I think we need to seriously question whether our CB targets would actually give Ralph what he needs before we commit in January. We need to be absolutely sure that they would be an improvement on what we have; and glib comments like “anyone would be better” no longer apply because the three yesterday have been playing pretty well recently. If we do sign someone else and they take the place of Bednarek, Stephens or Vestergaard, then we’ve got another expensive defender not playing football. If we can get someone who will palpably improve us and enable Ralph to play 4 at the back, then I say absolutely go for it. But if there’s any risk that we’ll end up with just another non-playing CB, with no discernible improvement but 15m lighter, then best that we keep our powder dry for the summer when there is clearly going to be a bit of a clear-out. If we do sign a new one and want to play 2 CBs ,on current form it would have to new bloke and Bednarnek. Stephens is too weak aerialy to play in a back 4 and I’m not sure JV has the speed to. Exactly. Presumably Stephens would be on the bench, so you’d have 15m of Vestergaard sitting in the stands. Whoever the new guy is, they’d better be good. I suspect we’ll try to eke out a deal for Orban, as at least Good Ralph knows what he is getting, so it reduces the risk. If that fails, we’ll probably sit tight until the summer rather than move down the list to the next target. Recently Ralph ha gone very quiet on the talk about needing a new centre back, probably to dampen expectations, should their target not happen.
|
|
|
Post by Mandochris on Jan 20, 2019 18:56:35 GMT
The transformation under RH is nothing short of remarkable. Let’s not get carried away about our CBs though! . We still didn’t keep a clean sheet and again came perilously close to blowing a two goal lead. Most important is that RH is being forced into playing 3 centre backs when he doesn’t want to. RH said at the fan’s meeting that he doesn’t like playing this way as it invites too much pressure. Yesterday we got 39% possession at home against an average PL team. We can’t continue to do this long term. A new CB is desperately needed to allow RH to get the best out of the rest of the players. And also we have one 15m CB who the manager doesn’t even want in the squad. I have to say, this rather makes me think of those Trump supporting pundits on CNN, who continue to bang on about "yeah but the economy" as the evidence mounts that the guy is a crook, a traitor and a walking disaster for the USA. The team is playing well, players are improving all over the pitch, "yeah, but a back 4!"
|
|
|
Post by Batts on Jan 20, 2019 20:00:01 GMT
The transformation under RH is nothing short of remarkable. Let’s not get carried away about our CBs though! . We still didn’t keep a clean sheet and again came perilously close to blowing a two goal lead. Most important is that RH is being forced into playing 3 centre backs when he doesn’t want to. RH said at the fan’s meeting that he doesn’t like playing this way as it invites too much pressure. Yesterday we got 39% possession at home against an average PL team. We can’t continue to do this long term. A new CB is desperately needed to allow RH to get the best out of the rest of the players. And also we have one 15m CB who the manager doesn’t even want in the squad. I have to say, this rather makes me think of those Trump supporting pundits on CNN, who continue to bang on about "yeah but the economy" as the evidence mounts that the guy is a crook, a traitor and a walking disaster for the USA. The team is playing well, players are improving all over the pitch, "yeah, but a back 4!" Exactly. Concerns about a back 5 resulting in more defensive pressure and less attacking thrust are somewhat negated by the fact that we are mostly defending pretty well, scoring enough goals to win games, and people are being entertained. What, therefore, is the incentive to move to a back 4? I don’t doubt that it will benefit us long term to have options- particularly if we can switch between the two seamlessly mid-game- but for now, the priority has to be to stick to a winning formula now that we’ve found one.
|
|
|
Post by stsaint on Jan 20, 2019 20:36:59 GMT
I have to say, this rather makes me think of those Trump supporting pundits on CNN, who continue to bang on about "yeah but the economy" as the evidence mounts that the guy is a crook, a traitor and a walking disaster for the USA. The team is playing well, players are improving all over the pitch, "yeah, but a back 4!" Exactly. Concerns about a back 5 resulting in more defensive pressure and less attacking thrust are somewhat negated by the fact that we are mostly defending pretty well, scoring enough goals to win games, and people are being entertained. What, therefore, is the incentive to move to a back 4? I don’t doubt that it will benefit us long term to have options- particularly if we can switch between the two seamlessly mid-game- but for now, the priority has to be to stick to a winning formula now that we’ve found one. With 10 days until Palace I wouldn't be surprised if he switches formation, though don't see that whether we play a back 5 or 4 that we need to add another CB. The ones we have a re doing a good job and the screen the midfield provides is solid.
|
|
|
Post by thestartledsaint on Jan 20, 2019 21:51:07 GMT
and again came perilously close to blowing a two goal lead. That is a very dramatic.
|
|
|
Post by Batts on Jan 20, 2019 22:00:24 GMT
and again came perilously close to blowing a two goal lead. That is a very dramatic. Some will see it as winning 2-1, others will see it as nearly drawing 2-2.
|
|
|
Post by Sir B3na1i on Jan 21, 2019 7:20:09 GMT
Some will see it as winning 2-1, others will see it as nearly drawing 2-2. Yes depends on your perspective and how you want to see things. I imagine there's an Everton version of SF73 (feck, imagine the whinging in that accent!) Saying we came dangerously close to losing 6-1, as they add up the hit woodwork and the two excellent saves by Pickford... ultimately we won 2-1, only thing that matters
|
|
|
Post by arfurdent on Jan 21, 2019 7:36:08 GMT
Some will see it as winning 2-1, others will see it as nearly drawing 2-2. Yes depends on your perspective and how you want to see things. I imagine there's an Everton version of SF73 (feck, imagine the whinging in that accent!) Saying we came dangerously close to losing 6-1, as they add up the hit woodwork and the two excellent saves by Pickford... ultimately we won 2-1, only thing that matters eventually it is what is written down as history that matters. As our favorite ex-manager who lives in Sandbanks once said "it is all tomorrows chip paper"* * since when did chippies use old news paper to wrap fish and chips. The joy of black ink on the chips. No, these days it the H&S conscious white cardboard tray and light beige wrapping paper. Another part of history consigned to the crapper
|
|
|
Post by Mandochris on Jan 21, 2019 7:53:43 GMT
Yes depends on your perspective and how you want to see things. I imagine there's an Everton version of SF73 (feck, imagine the whinging in that accent!) Saying we came dangerously close to losing 6-1, as they add up the hit woodwork and the two excellent saves by Pickford... ultimately we won 2-1, only thing that matters eventually it is what is written down as history that matters. As our favorite ex-manager who lives in Sandbanks once said "it is all tomorrows chip paper"* * since when did chippies use old news paper to wrap fish and chips. The joy of black ink on the chips. No, these days it the H&S conscious white cardboard tray and light beige wrapping paper. Another part of history consigned to the crapper Another nail in the EU's coffin
|
|
|
Post by theallseeingeye on Jan 21, 2019 9:48:48 GMT
Some will see it as winning 2-1, others will see it as nearly drawing 2-2. I refused to look when it went 2:1... was half expecting to see FT - 2:3.
|
|
|
Post by saintsfan73 on Jan 21, 2019 10:17:44 GMT
The transformation under RH is nothing short of remarkable. Let’s not get carried away about our CBs though! . We still didn’t keep a clean sheet and again came perilously close to blowing a two goal lead. Most important is that RH is being forced into playing 3 centre backs when he doesn’t want to. RH said at the fan’s meeting that he doesn’t like playing this way as it invites too much pressure. Yesterday we got 39% possession at home against an average PL team. We can’t continue to do this long term. A new CB is desperately needed to allow RH to get the best out of the rest of the players. And also we have one 15m CB who the manager doesn’t even want in the squad. I have to say, this rather makes me think of those Trump supporting pundits on CNN, who continue to bang on about "yeah but the economy" as the evidence mounts that the guy is a crook, a traitor and a walking disaster for the USA. The team is playing well, players are improving all over the pitch, "yeah, but a back 4!" Donald Trump, a man who never has qualms about diving head-long into any debate, even when he doesn't really understand what is being debated. Some might say that almost makes him the French Chris of World politics.
|
|
|
Post by saintsfan73 on Jan 21, 2019 10:17:58 GMT
I have to say, this rather makes me think of those Trump supporting pundits on CNN, who continue to bang on about "yeah but the economy" as the evidence mounts that the guy is a crook, a traitor and a walking disaster for the USA. The team is playing well, players are improving all over the pitch, "yeah, but a back 4!" Exactly. Concerns about a back 5 resulting in more defensive pressure and less attacking thrust are somewhat negated by the fact that we are mostly defending pretty well, scoring enough goals to win games, and people are being entertained. What, therefore, is the incentive to move to a back 4? I don’t doubt that it will benefit us long term to have options- particularly if we can switch between the two seamlessly mid-game- but for now, the priority has to be to stick to a winning formula now that we’ve found one. I'm not sure we can continue to only have thirty-something % possession against mid-table or worse teams at home and continue to regularly win games. It might be a good strategy of trying to play the big boys on the break but not when we're playing the likes of Palace at home. 4 of our next 5 games are very winnable ones against non Big 6 opponents. I'm not sure why there is a reticence about us buying a new CB. It's almost as if some are looking to take us getting a massive upgrade of manager to justify the signings of the past 3 seasons as not being as bad as the stats suggest. The comments about us having the CBs to play 4 at the back don't seem to be borne out by results on the pitch. Whenever we have tried it is has been a disaster. We did it against a weakened Derby team at their place and conceded two and then tried it at home against them and also conceded two in one half. We need to be able to let RH play his favoured formation. This means we need 4 decent CBs so we can pick the best two. Bednarnek looks like he can develop into a good CB so you would have to say we have one starting CB there but I'm not sure you could play him with JV as the latter seems to need two CBs playing alongside him to make up with his lack of pace. Likewise I can't see any future for Stephens as a PL CB with a team playing 4 at the back as he has zero aerial ability. RH does seem very hot on him as an intelligent footballer so I wouldn't be at all surprised if RH was able to get him playing the role(s) Dier does at Spurs. CB when the team is playing 3 CBs but also as a MF player. If we look at where we need to strengthen, CBs would seem the obvious area, even if for no other reason that we are a man down there as RH has gone on record as saying our £15m man Wes Hoedt has no future at the club. In MF we have lost Davis but added Hesketh, in attack we have lost Gabbiadini but added both Obafemi and Gallagher so I can't see we will be bringing in more players in either of those areas. If we can sell Cedric then a new RB may be an option but, with Valery playing well, it's not exactly a desperate need.
|
|
|
Post by saintsfan73 on Jan 21, 2019 10:37:46 GMT
I'm excited to see what he can do with Hesketh and Gallagher. He's also turned Bedernek into an absolute beast and I can see him being one of the best CB's in the league within 12 months. Imagine what he could do with Boufal as well... Sell him? The comment that RH made at the fans forum was very telling about his feelings of the sort of players he wants. He said it is easier to train players to play the way he wants to if they have 'am empty hard drive rather than a full one'. This is something that explains his liking for young players both here and at RBL. If you look at the type of player that would thrive under RH's high intensity form of football I can't think of worse fit than Boufal. Lemina would be another bad fit and we can see how little impact he is having since RH took over
|
|
|
Post by Batts on Jan 21, 2019 10:46:34 GMT
Exactly. Concerns about a back 5 resulting in more defensive pressure and less attacking thrust are somewhat negated by the fact that we are mostly defending pretty well, scoring enough goals to win games, and people are being entertained. What, therefore, is the incentive to move to a back 4? I don’t doubt that it will benefit us long term to have options- particularly if we can switch between the two seamlessly mid-game- but for now, the priority has to be to stick to a winning formula now that we’ve found one. I'm not sure we can continue to only have thirty-something % possession against mid-table or worse teams at home and continue to regularly win games. It might be a good strategy of trying to play the big boys on the break but not when we're playing the likes of Palace at home. 4 of our next 5 games are very winnable ones against non Big 6 opponents. I'm not sure why there is a reticence about us buying a new CB. It's almost as if some are looking to take us getting a massive upgrade of manager to justify the signings of the past 3 seasons as not being as bad as the stats suggest. The comments about us having the CBs to play 4 at the back don't seem to be borne out by results on the pitch. Whenever we have tried it is has been a disaster. We did it against a weakened Derby team at their place and conceded two and then tried it at home against them and also conceded two in one half. We need to be able to let RH play his favoured formation. This means we need 4 decent CBs so we can pick the best two. Bednarnek looks like he can develop into a good CB so you would have to say we have one starting CB there but I'm not sure you could play him with JV as the latter seems to need two CBs playing alongside him to make up with his lack of pace. Likewise I can't see any future for Stephens as a PL CB with a team playing 4 at the back as he has zero aerial ability. RH does seem very hot on him as an intelligent footballer so I wouldn't be at all surprised if RH was able to get him playing the role(s) Dier does at Spurs. CB when the team is playing 3 CBs but also as a MF player. If we look at where we need to strengthen, CBs would seem the obvious area, even if for no other reason that we are a man down there as RH has gone on record as saying our £15m man Wes Hoedt has no future at the club. In MF we have lost Davis but added Hesketh, in attack we have lost Gabbiadini but added both Obafemi and Gallagher so I can't see we will be bringing in more players in either of those areas. If we can sell Cedric then a new RB may be an option but, with Valery playing well, it's not exactly a desperate need. I don’t think there is a reticence to buy a new CB. Just a reticence to buy one in January who might not be our top target and will come overpriced. If we get this signing wrong, we’ll have another 15m man sitting in the stands. And there’s more chance of getting it right in the summer. The club needs to learn from Januaries past, where we’ve been forced to buy hurriedly and poorly.
|
|