Alex Pritchard

[braineclipse]

They will not be competing for the same position. Pritchard is a natural fit in the wide forward position while berahino is as Dublin says a central forward, more an out an out striker, comparable to Kane, Benteke sturridge etc.

Well this weekend Pulis picked Anichebe ahead of Berahino up front... I've not seen WBA much this season, but when I've seen Berahino on the pitch it's not been in a striker role. With Rondon and Lambert also in the squad I think Pritchard and Berahino will be competing for game time in those wide or central attacking midfield roles quite often.

 

[Robspur12]

I watched the whole match against Saudi Sportswashing Machine. The gulf in class between the two was enormous - technique, intelligence, energy. One looked like a bottom half of the table player, the other a top 6 player.

Most young players with a bit of pace look threatening for a year or so before they get found out. Pritchard in contrast looks like he's got a full locker.

Honestly mate you cannot compare them on basis of one game and where Pritchard was brought in by the current manager and Berahino who is not wanted/ played correctly by the same manager.

 

[braineclipse]

Alongside Kane if the manager feels he needs two up front where we are having difficulties breaking down a defence, or rotating for Kane or in front of Kane. Ultimately he can also be a wide forward but that is not his best position.

That means playing him ahead of one of the attacking midfielders though. To play two up front you have to drop one of the 3 playing behind the lone striker, no?

 

[Robspur12]

Well this weekend Pulis picked Anichebe ahead of Berahino up front... I've not seen WBA much this season, but when I've seen Berahino on the pitch it's not been in a striker role. With Rondon and Lambert also in the squad I think Pritchard and Berahino will be competing for game time in those wide or central attacking midfield roles quite often.

Pulls is using him wrongly in my opinion, may be to make a point to him or because he doesn't suit his system. Have to say playing anichebe ahead of berahino says it all for me. It's like buying sturridge and sticking him out wide.

 

[Robspur12]

That means playing him ahead of one of the attacking midfielders though. To play two up front you have to drop one of the 3 playing behind the lone striker, no?

Yes just one of the positions he could play.

 

[braineclipse]

Pulls is using him wrongly in my opinion, may be to make a point to him or because he doesn't suit his system. Have to say playing anichebe ahead of berahino says it all for me. It's like buying sturridge and playing out wide.

That may be. But that doesn't mean that Pritchard and Berahino wont' be competing for game time in those roles... Which is kind of the argument here isn't it?

 

[braineclipse]

Yes just one of the positions he could play.

So instead of putting Berahino on the pitch to break down some team we could put Lamela/Son/Chadli/Pritchard on the pitch and keep Kane as the lone striker... That's assuming taking off Alli or Lamela even makes marginal sense in this particular situation, something it often wouldn't imo.

Comparisons between the effectiveness of Pritchard and Berahino are well within reason for me. And as this is the Pritchard thread I'll try to go back on topic. A lot of people are rating Pritchard very highly. He did really well in the Championship last season being one of the stand out players for a Brentford team that pushed for promotion having just been promoted from League One the season before that. Already Pritchard is getting some praise and attention, even from the unbiased Greg, for a sub appearance returning from injury with no real match fitness. It will be interesting to see how Pritch gets on at WBA.

 

[billyiddo]

That means playing him ahead of one of the attacking midfielders though. To play two up front you have to drop one of the 3 playing behind the lone striker, no?

His versatility is what makes him a good fit - instead of having a player who can solely deputise for the CF position you have a player which can deputise several (CF+ WF positions) as well as giving the option to play 2 up top if required. This means there's less chance of him getting restless waiting for Kane to need a rest as there will be more opportunities to play him.

More options is a good thing, no? If he's good enough to start in the WF positions then that's also a good thing as he will be there on merit meaning we will have improved another position in the starting XI

 

[Robspur12]

That may be. But that doesn't mean that Pritchard and Berahino wont' be competing for game time in those roles... Which is kind of the argument here isn't it?

We are going in circles brain so knock yourself out. I don't think you can fairly compare two players one of whom is playing in their favoured position while the other is not.

 

[braineclipse]

His versatility is what makes him a good fit - instead of having a player who can solely deputise for the CF position you have a player which can deputise several (CF+ WF positions) as well as giving the option to play 2 up top if required. This means there's less chance of him getting restless waiting for Kane to need a rest as there will be more opportunities to play him.

More options is a good thing, no?

In isolation more options is a good thing. And versatility is easily a good thing. But there is such a thing as too many options imo.

We already have players that can deputise the CF position in Son and Chadli that I think are also better in the attacking midfield roles than Berahino. For Berahino to not get restless do we play him ahead of players that are better than him in attacking midfield roles? This is what I continue to struggle with. Berahino is apparently an option in all these attacking midfield roles, but if he's not even better than Pritchard in those roles how is his versatility going to give him game time in a way that benefits the team?

And this is why a comparison between Berahino and Pritchard in attacking midfield roles makes a lot of sense.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Alongside Kane if the manager feels he needs two up front where we are having difficulties breaking down a defence, or rotating for Kane or in front of Kane. Ultimately he can also be a wide forward but that is not his best position.

2 upfront doesn't help against a stubborn, bus-parking defence. Better quality AMs do

A Berahino is not as good in that role as most of the 8 AMs we've got on our books.

If we get him for £8-9m as a Kane bench-warmer then fine (bthough Dembele on a tribunal payment is far more fitting). But it's pointless paying more and levering him in ahead of superior wide forwards like Son and Lamela.

 

[braineclipse]

We are going in circles brain so knock yourself out. I don't think you can fairly compare two players one of whom is playing in their favoured position while the other is not.

Read billy's post above yours. What's being argued is that Berahino's versatility is what makes him a good fit. And that versatility reads exactly like Berahino playing in positions that Pritch has as his favoured positions. Doesn't matter if it's fair or not in terms of how good a player is overall, the comparison is valid in terms of what the players would bring in those roles/positions playing for us.

I don't particularly care how good a player is overall in his favoured position playing in a system that suits him if the question is if a player would be good for us in our current system playing the positions he would actually be playing.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Honestly mate you cannot compare them on basis of one game and where Pritchard was brought in by the current manager and Berahino who is not wanted/ played correctly by the same manager.

Could you tell after 1 game that Modric was a different calibre to Zokora?

 

[braineclipse]

2 upfront doesn't help against a stubborn, bus-parking defence. Better quality AMs do

A Berahino is not as good in that role as most of the 8 AMs we've got on our books.

If we get him for £8-9m as a Kane bench-warmer then fine (bthough Dembele on a tribunal payment is far more fitting). But it's pointless paying more and levering him in ahead of superior wide forwards like Son and Lamela.

Very much this! To me the "throw another striker on the pitch" approach to changing the game is at best simplistic and stems from a lack of an overall game plan and functional system of play.

 

[Robspur12]

His versatility is what makes him a good fit - instead of having a player who can solely deputise for the CF position you have a player which can deputise several (CF+ WF positions) as well as giving the option to play 2 up top if required. This means there's less chance of him getting restless waiting for Kane to need a rest as there will be more opportunities to play him.

More options is a good thing, no? If he's good enough to start in the WF positions then that's also a good thing as he will be there on merit meaning we will have improved another position in the starting XI

I agree bill but his favoured position for me is still CF and we need effective cover for Kane. To me it seems like comparing Sturridge, Benteke even Kane to wide forwards. I just don't see it as fair even if they could all play there that would not be their favoured positions.

 

[Gutter Boy]

So instead of putting Berahino on the pitch to break down some team we could put Lamela/Son/Chadli/Pritchard on the pitch and keep Kane as the lone striker... That's assuming taking off Alli or Lamela even makes marginal sense in this particular situation, something it often wouldn't imo.

That's exactly what you do.

Berahino isn't someone who can break down a stubborn defence. He can't play in the small pockets or with his back to goal.

He's actually a sub you bring on when you are protecting a narrow lead and want to stretch the game at the other end of the pitch. In that situation I'd bring him on for a Son or an Eriksen.

 

[Robspur12]

Could you tell after 1 game that Modric was a different calibre to Zokora?

This argument is just getting more and more ridiculous so I'm out.

 

[Gutter Boy]

His versatility is what makes him a good fit - instead of having a player who can solely deputise for the CF position you have a player which can deputise several (CF+ WF positions) as well as giving the option to play 2 up top if required. This means there's less chance of him getting restless waiting for Kane to need a rest as there will be more opportunities to play him.

That's exactly what Son, Chadli, Lamela and Njie already are. Our problem is we have too many versatile forwards, but only one specialist #9.

 

[billyiddo]

That's exactly what Son, Chadli, Lamela and Njie already are. Our problem is we have too many versatile forwards, but only one specialist #9.

No they aren't, Berahino is a CF primarily which the others are not this gives us better cover/competition for Kane than we currently have.

As has been explained to you countless times in various threads over the summer by posters that have seen a lot more of him than you have.

 

[braineclipse]

No they aren't, Berahino is a CF primarily which the others are not this gives us better cover/competition for Kane than we currently have.

As has been explained to you countless times in various threads over the summer by posters that have seen a lot more of him than you have.

How is the "Berahino is a striker who can play in attacking midfield whereas Clinton and Son are attacking midfielders who can play up front" argument different from the Bale is a left winger (or left back), Kane is a #10, Modric isn't a deep playmaker arguments that have been made about so many young players over the years only to be proven wrong at a later stage?

What is it about Son and Clinton that makes them "not primarily a CF" apart from the fact that it's not where they've been playing primarily for the majority of their so far short careers?

Chadli said himself that he can play up front. In an alternative universe either Chadli, Son or Clinton was signed by a PL team like WBA a couple of years back and played as a striker until now and people would be claiming that "he's not primarily an attacking midfielder, he's primarily a striker".

Soldado was also primarily a CF. Did he give us better cover/competition for Kane than we currently have? I would argue no, and that's why we sold him. Berahino is "PL proven", but for a much smaller team playing a very different style of play to ourselves (yes, I'm talking about WBA pre-Pulis, I don't need it explained to me).

I'm not usually one to make the "computer game argument". But sometimes I feel that there's an undue focus on what a player's position is ahead of other factors that often can be more important in deciding if a player will succeed or not. As if a player moving from one position to another automatically dropped his attributes by X because "it's not his natural position".