Dele Alli

[Rorschach]

That's a good question, to be fair. But it isn't just limited to using Dembele at DM: I wonder why Poch seemed so reluctant to use Dembele anywhere last season. We put in some of our best performances in the games where he did feature (Chelsea at the Lane, for example), so Poch's reluctance to use him more is still somewhat baffling to me.

I found this a bit confusing myself. I thought we played our best and most fluid with him as number 10. He is not the slide rule passer, or the arrive late in the box type but the ball sticks and he is an excellent fulcrum for the attack. The argument that he slows play down is overstated. His ball retention brings others into the game in the opposition half rather than the quick turnover which is a characteristic of the Chadli/Eriksen/Lamela trio. He should have got way more minutes IMO.

 

[DubaiSpur]

@milo - What Rorschach said.

 

[milo]

I'd be happy seeing him get more game time further forward. Him hanging onto the ball is more of a problem when he plays deeper because it slows down attacks

 

[glasgowspur]

I found this a bit confusing myself. I thought we played our best and most fluid with him as number 10. He is not the slide rule passer, or the arrive late in the box type but the ball sticks and he is an excellent fulcrum for the attack. The argument that he slows play down is overstated. His ball retention brings others into the game in the opposition half rather than the quick turnover which is a characteristic of the Chadli/Eriksen/Lamela trio. He should have got way more minutes IMO.

If he doesn't pass though then others aren't in the game. Dembele and where to play him is a real conundrum. Very talented but not effective.
My view as why he doesn't play more, training. I think others show more desire and hunger in training. Not saying he's lazy, maybe not just as willing as others. Pooch wants players that will through brick walls for and dembele doesn't strike me as that kind of guy.

 

[braineclipse]

I'd be perfectly happy for Alli to be the deep-lying rotation option for Bentaleb this season. Set up like so:

New DM/Dembele----------Bentaleb/Alli

------------------Eriksen/Mason-------------

....would suit me just fine, as far as our central midfield goes.

I don't quite get this. Bentaleb and Mason was the preferred combo last season, with Bentaleb as the more holding of the two. Now all of a sudden Dembele and a new DM will be the primary deeper options, Bentaleb more attacking and Mason not in the reckoning even as a "first backup".

What's changed since last season to make Dembele-Bentaleb preferrable to Bentaleb-Mason?

"His game"!?!

Jeez, read the actual quotes - he talks solely about endurance running

Well, he also said: “Everyone knew about Nabil but Dele seems to be getting close to him so it’s been interesting! He’s put up a good test!”

I don't think that's solely about his endurance running.

If he doesn't pass though then others aren't in the game. Dembele and where to play him is a real conundrum. Very talented but not effective.
My view as why he doesn't play more, training. I think others show more desire and hunger in training. Not saying he's lazy, maybe not just as willing as others. Pooch wants players that will through brick walls for and dembele doesn't strike me as that kind of guy.

Nope. Quick pass and move football is a skill set Dembele is not very good at. Huge part of why he's not very effective despite his talents in other areas.

 

[Rorschach]

If he doesn't pass though then others aren't in the game. Dembele and where to play him is a real conundrum. Very talented but not effective.
My view as why he doesn't play more, training. I think others show more desire and hunger in training. Not saying he's lazy, maybe not just as willing as others. Pooch wants players that will through brick walls for and dembele doesn't strike me as that kind of guy.

The team is way more effective with him in it though which trumps any individual contribution IMO. I can;t say how he performs in training (Townsend plays a blinder in training I've heard) but on the pitch he never shys away from the ball or shows lack of commitment.

My opinion is, and I think it that a commonly shared view on here, is that he could and should do better. And sometimes that frustration colours some fans view of his contribution on the pitch which is often very good to excellent.

 

[milo]

The team is way more effective with him in it though which trumps any individual contribution IMO. I can;t say how he performs in training (Townsend plays a blinder in training I've heard) but on the pitch he never shys away from the ball or shows lack of commitment.

My opinion is, and I think it that a commonly shared view on here, is that he could and should do better. And sometimes that frustration colours some fans view of his contribution on the pitch which is often very good to excellent.

I think that he needs more games further forward under Poch before we can say that with any certainty.

 

[DubaiSpur]

I don't quite get this. Bentaleb and Mason was the preferred combo last season, with Bentaleb as the more holding of the two. Now all of a sudden Dembele and a new DM will be the primary deeper options, Bentaleb more attacking and Mason not in the reckoning even as a "first backup".

What's changed since last season to make Dembele-Bentaleb preferrable to Bentaleb-Mason?

The idea is to free Bentaleb up to be more of a B2B midfielder, and with Alli already proficient at that particular role, to have a decent backup ready to rotate into the midfield should Bentaleb struggle to adapt (very low chance of that happening, however).

Let me put it another way: I don't think the design was to have Bentaleb be as defensive as he ended up being. I think he was forced into being a bit more conservative because of the positional indiscipline of Mason alongside him, and if we remove that impediment, I have no doubt that he'd flourish into a far better player than he'd be as a holding DM. I've held for a while now that Mason would do a brilliant job as a pressing, hustling CAM with great ball skills to boot: and thus, I'd like to see him moved up into contention for that role, although I can't put him in as a definite starter because, well, y'know, Eriksen.

 

[braineclipse]

The idea is to free Bentaleb up to be more of a B2B midfielder, and with Alli already proficient at that particular role, to have a decent backup ready to rotate into the midfield should Bentaleb struggle to adapt (very low chance of that happening, however).

Let me put it another way: I don't think the design was to have Bentaleb be as defensive as he ended up being. I think he was forced into being a bit more conservative because of the positional indiscipline of Mason alongside him, and if we remove that impediment, I have no doubt that he'd flourish into a far better player than he'd be as a holding DM. I've held for a while now that Mason would do a brilliant job as a pressing, hustling CAM with great ball skills to boot: and thus, I'd like to see him moved up into contention for that role, although I can't put him in as a definite starter because, well, y'know, Eriksen.

Poch had options in Stambouli (who covered well for Bentaleb during the ACN) and Dembele last season. Yet despite the relative unhappiness (amongst fans/posters) about Mason last season he kept playing Bentaleb deep almost exclusively.

I think Bentaleb is being developed into that holding/deep playmaker role, by design not coincidence. If we manage to sign Schneiderlin that might change I suppose. But like last summer I think it might be a case of trusting Bentaleb as first choice in that role if we can't pick up Schneiderlin.

I struggle to see that there are many better deep/holding midfielders for Bentaleb's role from last season we can sign that will make an immediate impact and be better than young Nabil. He was the best midfielder on the pitch in several games against top teams last season and extremely impressive overall.

 

[milo]

The idea is to free Bentaleb up to be more of a B2B midfielder, and with Alli already proficient at that particular role, to have a decent backup ready to rotate into the midfield should Bentaleb struggle to adapt (very low chance of that happening, however).

Let me put it another way: I don't think the design was to have Bentaleb be as defensive as he ended up being. I think he was forced into being a bit more conservative because of the positional indiscipline of Mason alongside him, and if we remove that impediment, I have no doubt that he'd flourish into a far better player than he'd be as a holding DM. I've held for a while now that Mason would do a brilliant job as a pressing, hustling CAM with great ball skills to boot: and thus, I'd like to see him moved up into contention for that role, although I can't put him in as a definite starter because, well, y'know, Eriksen.

I don't think that we are going to see us play with an out and out defensive midfielder. Having two central midfielders who can turn around play and start attacks is too important to Poch's system.

 

[parklane1]

Dembele is a very talented footballer but he slows things down too much, I have seen players make runs into space so many times when Dembele has the ball but he never releases it quick enough. I really think that he will be allowed to leave if a good enough offer comes in and if not will be on the fringes of the team again.

 

[braineclipse]

I don't think that we are going to see us play with an out and out defensive midfielder. Having two central midfielders who can turn around play and start attacks is too important to Poch's system.

Seems likely based on last season. Although Poch did play Schneiderlin and Wanyama at Southampton, and they signed Wanyama whilst Poch was there.

Will be interesting to see what happens with our young (potential) central midfielders. Alli, Carroll and Veljkovic all at the age where they could be getting involved. I might be naively optimistic, but I wonder what would happen if those 3 + Mason and Bentaleb were our (deep) central midfield options for next season...

 

[billyiddo]

Seems likely based on last season. Although Poch did play Schneiderlin and Wanyama at Southampton, and they signed Wanyama whilst Poch was there.

Will be interesting to see what happens with our young (potential) central midfielders. Alli, Carroll and Veljkovic all at the age where they could be getting involved. I might be naively optimistic, but I wonder what would happen if those 3 + Mason and Bentaleb were our (deep) central midfield options for next season...

I certainly wouldn't grumble if that was what we were left with going in to next season and because of that im quite happy to play the risky move of holding out for Schneiderlin

 

[DubaiSpur]

Poch had options in Stambouli (who covered well for Bentaleb during the ACN) and Dembele last season. Yet despite the relative unhappiness (amongst fans/posters) about Mason last season he kept playing Bentaleb deep almost exclusively.

I think Bentaleb is being developed into that holding/deep playmaker role, by design not coincidence. If we manage to sign Schneiderlin that might change I suppose. But like last summer I think it might be a case of trusting Bentaleb as first choice in that role if we can't pick up Schneiderlin.

I struggle to see that there are many better deep/holding midfielders for Bentaleb's role from last season we can sign that will make an immediate impact and be better than young Nabil. He was the best midfielder on the pitch in several games against top teams last season and extremely impressive overall.

Well, like I mentioned, I don't quite know why Poch doesn't use Dembele much: on Stambouli, I'll only say that I suspect a political tussle between ol' Danny and Poch over that particular player, which resulted in his (imo) unnecessary underutilization last season. Although that's my opinion, of course. Either way, perhaps he really had no choice but to use Bentaleb and Mason in those two DM positions. And as for which role each player occupied...I actually think Mason was employed as our deep-lying playmaker to a far greater degree than Bentaleb was. A glance at the stats bears this out:





....as you can see, Bentaleb's behind on every deep playmaker-related stat (with two of our commonly linked potential targets, his team-mate and the archetypal deep-lying playmaker for comparison), and Mason outdoes him on all counts (namely average pass length, total forward passes, key passes and chances created). So I don't think Bentaleb was used as our playmaker much, if at all. And I don't think he has the potential to be a very good one, judging by those stats.

That leaves two positions he could occupy: either a standard DM or something more technical than that. The standard DM role, I think, would be a waste of Bentaleb's talents, a criminal waste: yes, he played defensively last season, but by necessity due to Mason's roaming. But I don't think he belongs in that role: and for evidence of this, I direct your attention to the last two stats, namely the successful take ons per game and the percentage of take ons that were successful. As you can see, Bentaleb both attempted more take-ons than anyone else on that list and did so with a greater success rate than anyone on that list. The kid's a natural dribbler, and his technical skills are indisputable (the huge number of breathtaking tricks, flicks and bits of skill he displayed last season is a testament to that assertion). So, with all that, and to cut a long story short....I don't think he's at all suitable for a standard DM. I think the kid's got it in him to become a Pogba-esque B2B midfielder par excellence.

And accordingly, I don't think we should hold him back from fulfilling that potential. Hence my assertion that Mason being moved up to CAM is the something I'd be happy with: it would allow for a more defensive DM to be brought in, but also one who can pass the ball from deep with some modicum of playmaking skill. And this, in turn, would free Bentaleb to do what (imo) he does best: take the ball forward, while tackling and pressing and hustling every inch of the way. And in that scenario, we can also use Alli as a handy rotation option for Bentaleb: judging by the reports of his performances at MK Dons last season, he does basically the same thing anyway.

 

[braineclipse]

....as you can see, Bentaleb's behind on every deep playmaker-related stat (with two of our commonly linked potential targets, his team-mate and the archetypal deep-lying playmaker for comparison), and Mason outdoes him on all counts (namely average pass length, total forward passes, key passes and chances created). So I don't think Bentaleb was used as our playmaker much, if at all. And I don't think he has the potential to be a very good one, judging by those stats.

What makes those "every deep playmaker-related stat"???

I was talking about Bentaleb as the more holding of the two, whilst Mason had more freedom to get forward (more box-to-box). Might be a confusion of terms here, I included the "holding" to make it clear, but might not have been clear enough. I see Bentaleb-Mason as Bentaleb more holding - thus the deep lying playmaker. He stays deep (most of the time) and dictates play from that deeper role. Mason has more freedom to get forward, thus he's not a deep lying playmaker.

I'm guessing heat maps, passing maps or involvements maps would support my claim that Bentaleb stays deeper more compared to Mason, at least that's what I remember from the games and from such maps last season. Mason getting more key passes, chances created and forward passes doesn't seem like a bad fit with my description. Not sure about pass length, and take ons, seems much more related to style of play than role played.

 

[DubaiSpur]

What makes those "every deep playmaker-related stat"???

I was talking about Bentaleb as the more holding of the two, whilst Mason had more freedom to get forward (more box-to-box). Might be a confusion of terms here, I included the "holding" to make it clear, but might not have been clear enough. I see Bentaleb-Mason as Bentaleb more holding - thus the deep lying playmaker. He stays deep (most of the time) and dictates play from that deeper role. Mason has more freedom to get forward, thus he's not a deep lying playmaker.

I'm guessing heat maps, passing maps or involvements maps would support my claim that Bentaleb stays deeper more compared to Mason, at least that's what I remember from the games and from such maps last season. Mason getting more key passes, chances created and forward passes doesn't seem like a bad fit with my description. Not sure about pass length, and take ons, seems much more related to style of play than role played.

I don't think you quite understood the thrust of my post, braine. Those stats provide evidence for the assertion that Bentaleb wasn't being used as a deep-lying playmaker last season: on average, his pass length was the shortest out of all the players mentioned there, which indicates that he sat quite deep but only passed it forward a minimal distance. Similarly, on average, he completed the fewest forward passes of any of those players (Save for McCarthy), made the fewest key passes (again, save for McCarthy) and created the fewest chances (ditto). That isn't 'dictating play', not by any appreciable measure.

I'm not disagreeing with Bentaleb being the deeper of the two last season: I completely agree that he was. However, my argument was (and firmly remains) that he a) only did so out of necessity due to Mason's roaming (i.e, he wasn't trying to be a deep-lying playmaker), and b) played more as a B2B midfielder from that position, bursting forward on the rare occasions where Mason stayed back and taking on (and beating) players while bombing forward. That's what I believe his best role is in the future, not a pure DM and certainly not a deep-lying playmaker role. Hence, I don't want a defensively indisciplined roamer like Mason next to him next season, as I feel that would inhibit his potential to become a great B2B mdfielder.

 

[monkeybarry]

The idea is to free Bentaleb up to be more of a B2B midfielder, and with Alli already proficient at that particular role, to have a decent backup ready to rotate into the midfield should Bentaleb struggle to adapt (very low chance of that happening, however).

Let me put it another way: I don't think the design was to have Bentaleb be as defensive as he ended up being. I think he was forced into being a bit more conservative because of the positional indiscipline of Mason alongside him, and if we remove that impediment, I have no doubt that he'd flourish into a far better player than he'd be as a holding DM. I've held for a while now that Mason would do a brilliant job as a pressing, hustling CAM with great ball skills to boot: and thus, I'd like to see him moved up into contention for that role, although I can't put him in as a definite starter because, well, y'know, Eriksen.

I actually think he would be perfect in a fluid, interchangeable, front 3.

Like you say, he can do a lot of the chasing that often those type players ( Eriksen, Chadli) don't do (or not naturally at least).

Further to our Mirallas discussion, I'd probably prefer this scenario and bringing in a quality CM than bringing in Mirallas.
Although both, with Townsend moving on, would be excellent IMHO.

 

[DubaiSpur]

I actually think he would be perfect in a fluid, interchangeable, front 3.

Like you say, he can do a lot of the chasing that often those type players ( Eriksen, Chadli) don't do (or not naturally at least).

Further to our Mirallas discussion, I'd probably prefer this scenario and bringing in a quality CM than bringing in Mirallas.
Although both, with Townsend moving on, would be excellent IMHO.

Agreed, but my whole point was that the only way Mirallas could get sufficient playing time (imo) was if he could also cover up front effectively (as I think he can, judging by his spell as centre-forward for Olympiakos): surely you'd agree that Chadli, Eriksen, Lamela, Pritchard, and Mason are already plenty of options to have in AM, without shoehorning Mirallas in to only act as a replacement for Townsend (i.e, Lamela's backup).

Mirallas would be a good buy, imo, if we're looking to simultaneously have him cover the right wing and up front, with Soldado hanging around for another season to provide the 3rd striker option. Otherwise it's better to go for a younger right winger who'd be willing to be a backup to just the one position.

 

[billyiddo]

Agreed, but my whole point was that the only way Mirallas could get sufficient playing time (imo) was if he could also cover up front effectively (as I think he can, judging by his spell as centre-forward for Olympiakos): surely you'd agree that Chadli, Eriksen, Lamela, Pritchard, and Mason are already plenty of options to have in AM, without shoehorning Mirallas in to only act as a replacement for Townsend (i.e, Lamela's backup).

Mirallas would be a good buy, imo, if we're looking to simultaneously have him cover the right wing and up front, with Soldado hanging around for another season to provide the 3rd striker option. Otherwise it's better to go for a younger right winger who'd be willing to be a backup to just the one position.

no need for a young RW option as Lamela is only 23 himself - although im not particularly enthused with Mirallas himself, on paper he fits the bill as a rotational player for that position...Premier League savy and experienced so shouldn't need to 'settle' in as much as a player from abroad or a younger player with potential so would therefore should be able to slot in and perform when called upon.

conversely on the left we'd have the premier league experienced performer (Chadli) being understudied by the young/potential player (Pritchard)

 

[DubaiSpur]

no need for a young RW option as Lamela is only 23 himself - although im not particularly enthused with Mirallas himself, on paper he fits the bill as a rotational player for that position...Premier League savy and experienced so shouldn't need to 'settle' in as much as a player from abroad or a younger player with potential so would therefore should be able to slot in and perform when called upon.

conversely on the left we'd have the premier league experienced performer (Chadli) being understudied by the young/potential player (Pritchard)

That's the thing: a young player (Oduwa, for example) would probably be more willing to accept being a rotation option for Lamela than a 27-year old PL-proven player with national team responsibilities looking for his first (and probably last, given the trajectory of his career so far) big contract. It's the same reason I think Austin will likely move elsewhere (and in his case he'd be a rotation option for a direct opponent for the NT spot he's eyeing, so a Spurs move would likely be even less appealing to him).

I agree wholeheartedly with Pritchard being Chadli's understudy, and something similar would work for the right as well: however, Mirallas would ask for games, which we're going to be obliged to give him if he does come. I think we can get him if we want him, but we'd need to promise him regular football.