2014/2015 Season Thread

[Adam Easy Wishes]

And Jay McEveley lol.

 

This Giroud injury could be a bit of a blessing in disguise for Arsenal fans if they do indeed now go and spend a bit of cash on a striker.

[The Milner]

I don't know anyone who did!

 

Milner you're forgetting Naysmith but still a fair point.

 

Is Gary still playing? I thought he was a manager now.

Foster is always an option i guess......

[Paranoid Android]

You said the first real left back we've had since Davie Robertson. I just meant that Naysmith was a good proper left back we had after him.

[The Milner]

You said the first real left back we've had since Davie Robertson. I just meant that Naysmith was a good proper left back we had after him.

 

Ah! Yeh your right he was a player back in the day.

[Eupraxia]

On the topic of the dearth of quality centre-backs, I think the main reason centre-backs seem to be "worse" these days is due to the rapid advancement in the overall quality of the game of football. We often hear generations above us pontificating about how old football was so much better, but I think anyone who has watched both old and current football can recognise how erroneous that is.

 

There's multi-faceted science behind football now - contemporary football is faster, significantly more technical, and more tactically aware than it ever was. The game is less about percentages, and more about intelligent movement and key moments - I think this works in favour of attacking players, and puts defenders under far more duress physically and mentally.

 

I think it also ought to be recognised that some of the top teams play a very high defensive line - not because they have pacey centre-backs - but because the overall team unit requires a high defensive line to facilitate the offensive strategy and attacking full-backs: centre-backs need to frequently make themselves available for a pass from full-backs and deeper lying midfielders. A high defensive line will expose even the best centre-backs in the world, because the most effective attacking players' abilities focus around their pace on the transition. As a result, containment and counter is a very mainstream strategy, even for some of the best teams in the world.

 

Defensive positional play is a very difficult thing to excel at, particularly when we see such fluid lateral attacking movement from all the best teams. Some of the best centre-backs in the world right now are absolutely excellent footballers, it's just the game has developed so much - especially with the evolution of the full-back and wing-back roles. But defensive organisation is very underrated when it's done correctly, and it can be achieved with a unit containing limited players in terms of technique and athleticism - we've seen Tony Pulis achieve this for numerous years without a single 'class' centre-back - and we saw Van Gaal do it at the World Cup.

 

Basically, what I'm suggesting is that less focus should be directed at centre-backs these days, because defending as a unit has become more important and effective, and I would cite Borussia Dortmund and Atletico Madrid as the two primary examples of this in current mainstream football. Two teams I absolutely love to watch go about their business on the pitch.

[Paranoid Android]

Neville and Carragher did some good analysis last night of how City's defence worked well together and Liverpool's didn't.

[Scootray]

Not sure how anyone can be out of form when the season has barely started...

[Moose]

http://www.goalsaim.com/blackburn-vs-bournemouth-3-2-highlights-2014-championship/

 

Rhodes goal vs Bournemouth at the weekend.  That's the kind of goal he scores all the time.  Plus it was his 100th appearance for Rovers (and his 54th goal).

[Eupraxia]

I think Jordan Rhodes is the best striker available to the Scottish national team at the moment, and probably will be for a few years to come. He is the only exclusion from the current national team that irks me a little, but we all know how Gordon Strachan likes to operate - thriving on solid, compact football, utlising a mobile and hard-working centre-forward to hold the ball and allow midfielders to link up in support. Strachan tries to sugar-coat his favoured shape as a 4-3-3, but it's the most 4-5-1 you'll ever see. If any of Gordon Strachan's strikers happens to score a goal, it seems to be an added bonus, as he often asks them to do the dirty work of chasing the ball and moving into channels to receive direct balls.

 

From what I have seen over the past few years, Rhodes does not excel at holding up the ball and linking play, and nor does he always seem willing to press defenders with any sort of intensity. When he does hold it up and retain possession, he's rarely imaginitave with it - his game is primarily about finding pockets of space inside the box, and attacking the ball. For Scotland to play to Rhodes' strengths would mean dramatically altering how Strachan likes to set up his team, and Strachan is rarely so accommodating.

 

Rhodes is a reasonably tall player, and good at attacking aerial balls in the box, but he is definitely not the target man Strachan is looking for - I would be suprised if statistics show Rhodes winning many aerial duels outside the box, and this is what Strachan needs for his system to work. It's archaic, but it is pragmatic given the collective abilities of the pool of players available to him. Scotland rarely have the ball in the opponent's penalty area, so why field a player who only really comes alive when it's in there?

[Moose]

http://www.goalsaim.com/blackburn-vs-bournemouth-3-2-highlights-2014-championship/

 

Rhodes goal vs Bournemouth at the weekend.  That's the kind of goal he scores all the time.  Plus it was his 100th appearance for Rovers (and his 54th goal).

 

I can't see him doing this against Mats Hummels or Per Mertesaker, tbf. 

[Alkaline]

I think Jordan Rhodes is the best striker available to the Scottish national team at the moment, and probably will be for a few years to come. He is the only exclusion from the current national team that irks me a little, but we all know how Gordon Strachan likes to operate - thriving on solid, compact football, utlising a mobile and hard-working centre-forward to hold the ball and allow midfielders to link up in support. Strachan tries to sugar-coat his favoured shape as a 4-3-3, but it's the most 4-5-1 you'll ever see. If any of Gordon Strachan's strikers happens to score a goal, it seems to be an added bonus, as he often asks them to do the dirty work of chasing the ball and moving into channels to receive direct balls.

 

From what I have seen over the past few years, Rhodes does not excel at holding up the ball and linking play, and nor does he always seem willing to press defenders with any sort of intensity. When he does hold it up and retain possession, he's rarely imaginitave with it - his game is primarily about finding pockets of space inside the box, and attacking the ball. For Scotland to play to Rhodes' strengths would mean dramatically altering how Strachan likes to set up his team, and Strachan is rarely so accommodating.

 

Rhodes is a reasonably tall player, and good at attacking aerial balls in the box, but he is definitely not the target man Strachan is looking for - I would be suprised if statistics show Rhodes winning many aerial duels outside the box, and this is what Strachan needs for his system to work. It's archaic, but it is pragmatic given the collective abilities of the pool of players available to him. Scotland rarely have the ball in the opponent's penalty area, so why field a player who only really comes alive when it's in there?

Kris Boyd struggled to get in the team for the same reason: both are poachers and offer very little more which, as you rightly say, doesn't play to the advantages of the team as a whole.

[The Milner]

 

I think Jordan Rhodes is the best striker available to the Scottish national team at the moment, and probably will be for a few years to come. He is the only exclusion from the current national team that irks me a little, but we all know how Gordon Strachan likes to operate - thriving on solid, compact football, utlising a mobile and hard-working centre-forward to hold the ball and allow midfielders to link up in support. Strachan tries to sugar-coat his favoured shape as a 4-3-3, but it's the most 4-5-1 you'll ever see. If any of Gordon Strachan's strikers happens to score a goal, it seems to be an added bonus, as he often asks them to do the dirty work of chasing the ball and moving into channels to receive direct balls.

 

From what I have seen over the past few years, Rhodes does not excel at holding up the ball and linking play, and nor does he always seem willing to press defenders with any sort of intensity. When he does hold it up and retain possession, he's rarely imaginitave with it - his game is primarily about finding pockets of space inside the box, and attacking the ball. For Scotland to play to Rhodes' strengths would mean dramatically altering how Strachan likes to set up his team, and Strachan is rarely so accommodating.

 

Rhodes is a reasonably tall player, and good at attacking aerial balls in the box, but he is definitely not the target man Strachan is looking for - I would be suprised if statistics show Rhodes winning many aerial duels outside the box, and this is what Strachan needs for his system to work. It's archaic, but it is pragmatic given the collective abilities of the pool of players available to him. Scotland rarely have the ball in the opponent's penalty area, so why field a player who only really comes alive when it's in there?

 

 

I think your being a touch harsh on Strach there. We dont play lump ball with him in charge of Scotland, it would be pointless as we dont have a target man to speak off. We have little choice but to set up with a 5 man midfield in modern football, as we are so far behind in quality we need to try and make it up in numbers, but i've been quite pleased with the football he has had the national team playing, slowly, we seem to be getting more comfortable on the ball.

[Alkaline]

I think your being a touch harsh on Strach there. We dont play lump ball with him in charge of Scotland, it would be pointless as we dont have a target man to speak off. We have little choice but to set up with a 5 man midfield in modern football, as we are so far behind in quality we need to try and make it up in numbers, but i've been quite pleased with the football he has had the national team playing, slowly, we seem to be getting more comfortable on the ball.

A lot of the stronger international teams like Germany, France and Spain (up until the last World Cup) have largely won games with possession and the ability to move the ball quickly into the oppositions half when the play breaks in their favour. In my opinion Strachan has made an admirable attempt at trying to play that type of game. There's speed up the flanks which helps, Robertson and Hutton certainly have the pace to bring the ball forward and Anya and Morrison have the pace and ability to take the ball past defenders and put dangerous balls into the box. What the team needs is someone to attack that ball in the air and either stick it in the net or bring it down for someone like Maloney or Naismith on the edge of the box. I don't think any of the current options have that going for them. Fletcher is just Miller Mk2 and Rhodes only seems to be able to stick ground level stuff in. I'm not sure about Martin at Derby either, Russell is a similar sort of player to Naismith. I think Stevie May might be the answer in all honesty, for a physical player with target man qualities he also moves the ball really well at his feet and is aware of his options very quickly.

[Eupraxia]

None of that was a criticism of Gordon Strachan at all. It was a post identifying, and understanding, exactly why I feel Jordan Rhodes is not in serious contention for Scotland under Strachan.

 

I never once accused Scotland of playing lump ball either, all I said was that there will be a fair share of direct balls for the centre-forward to chase and apply pressure to. This is still unquestionably a feature of Scotland's strategy, and it always will be. It has to be due to the limited skill-set of the players.

[The Milner]

None of that was a criticism of Gordon Strachan at all. It was a post identifying, and understanding, exactly why I feel Jordan Rhodes is not in serious contention for Scotland under Strachan.

 

I never once accused Scotland of playing lump ball either, all I said was that there will be a fair share of direct balls for the centre-forward to chase and apply pressure to. This is still unquestionably a feature of Scotland's strategy, and it always will be. It has to be due to the limited skill-set of the players.

 

Apologies if i read it the wrong way man  

[The Milner]

A lot of the stronger international teams like Germany, France and Spain (up until the last World Cup) have largely won games with possession and the ability to move the ball quickly into the oppositions half when the play breaks in their favour. In my opinion Strachan has made an admirable attempt at trying to play that type of game. There's speed up the flanks which helps, Robertson and Hutton certainly have the pace to bring the ball forward and Anya and Morrison have the pace and ability to take the ball past defenders and put dangerous balls into the box. What the team needs is someone to attack that ball in the air and either stick it in the net or bring it down for someone like Maloney or Naismith on the edge of the box. I don't think any of the current options have that going for them. Fletcher is just Miller Mk2 and Rhodes only seems to be able to stick ground level stuff in. I'm not sure about Martin at Derby either, Russell is a similar sort of player to Naismith. I think Stevie May might be the answer in all honesty, for a physical player with target man qualities he also moves the ball really well at his feet and is aware of his options very quickly.

 

I quite like Martin, i watched the Derby game at the weekend and he is a handful, him and Russel seem to be linking up great as well. I was kinda hoping Russel would have made this squad. Good to see Bryson involved as well, he has been fantastic for two seasons in the championship. 

[Eupraxia]

Apologies if i read it the wrong way man

 

That's cool, I can sort of see how it could be read that way to be honest.

 

I think Chris Martin is a useful addition to the Scotland squad, given the limited options available. He's a bit of a warrior, and has plenty of club experience. He's playing well in a very expansive and expressive Derby team, and I agree that Johnny Russell and Craig Bryson have started this season well, too. Bryson has been very productive for two full years in the Championship and seems to be well respected at that level; a level at which Scotland would probably be pretty competent. I always liked him at Kilmarnock, but his game has really come on during his time in England, and I'd love to see him starting more games for Scotland, especially in place of the massively underwhelming and truculent Scott Brown.

 

Less trouble-making, more play-making please.

[Alkaline]

That's cool, I can sort of see how it could be read that way to be honest.

 

I think Chris Martin is a useful addition to the Scotland squad, given the limited options available. He's a bit of a warrior, and has plenty of club experience. He's playing well in a very expansive and expressive Derby team, and I agree that Johnny Russell and Craig Bryson have started this season well, too. Bryson has been very productive for two full years in the Championship and seems to be well respected at that level; a level at which Scotland would probably be pretty competent. I always liked him at Kilmarnock, but his game has really come on during his time in England, and I'd love to see him starting more games for Scotland, especially in place of the massively underwhelming and truculent Scott Brown.

 

Less trouble-making, more play-making please.

I'd go with Graham Dorrans ahead of both Brown and Bryson. Much better distributor of the ball and gets stuck in to challenges without losing the plot. He's also playing quite regularly at a higher level than both.

[Eupraxia]

Y'know, I've always overlooked Dorrans, because he's never played particularly well whenever I've seen West Brom play. He was criticised by Steve Clarke a wee while back of being grossly inconsistent and deficient in his own match management (mainly expending energy at the wrong times, and frequently making the wrong decisions at key moments), and Steve Clarke is a football God in my book. I feel we never know what we're going to get with Dorrans, but Bryson has been the epitome of consistency and productivity over the past couple of seasons.

 

I certainly wouldn't be unenthused to see Dorrans line up in Scotland's starting midfield trio, though. He doesn't play in the English Premier League for no reason.

[Alkaline]

Benatia to Bayern Munich looks like a done deal.

[Alkaline]

Y'know, I've always overlooked Dorrans, because he's never played particularly well whenever I've seen West Brom play. He was criticised by Steve Clarke a wee while back of being grossly inconsistent and deficient in his own match management (mainly expending energy at the wrong times, and frequently making the wrong decisions at key moments), and Steve Clarke is a football God in my book. I feel we never know what we're going to get with Dorrans, but Bryson has been the epitome of consistency and productivity over the past couple of seasons.

 

I certainly wouldn't be unenthused to see Dorrans line up in Scotland's starting midfield trio, though. He doesn't play in the English Premier League for no reason.

Bryson is good but he needs to make that step up to EPL and sooner rather than later.

[Mr Owl PhD]

Man United 'concentrating on the league' this season, I see.

[Soda Jerk]

3-5-2 is the worst. Nobody knows what they are doing. Did Van Gaal really need to go with a back 3 against a League 1 side? It just doesn't work without proper complete wing backs who can take their men on and attack like a winger would. No width, no overlap. No midfield either, because an extra man is in the backline when in possession.

When United have the ball, it's like they're playing with 10 men. When they don't have the ball, nobody knows what's going on. A huge gap between the midfield and the three headless charlatans clobbering about infront of the goalkeeper, and the opposing widemen can just do what they want, because the wingbacks are miles out of position from being on the attack.

 

The defenders in the system aren't even bad defenders, they just don't know how to play in a back 3. There's probably good reason why English teams rarely use it. Manicni experimented with it at City and it was disastrous, and he quickly reverted back.

 

I'll be flabbergasted if he doesn't revert to 4-3-3 after getting cunted by a League 1 side. Embarrassing stuff.

[Captain America]

Afobe scored two of them?

 

That's the striker crisis over for Arsenal then.  Recall him.

[Mr Owl PhD]

Afobe scored two of them?

 

That's the striker crisis over for Arsenal then.  Recall him.

 

To be honest I think your nan could have scored two goals against United tonight.