• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Cristian Romero

You can't have everything. Having a midfielder drop into the back 3 allows your fbs to push on without leaving acres of space behind them.
It's exactly what Dier did in what was Pochs best team.

I don't want everything - I'm just offering a counterpoint to the discussion. Palinha for me being a top tackler would be better used closer to the action, we give the ball away alot so having him further forward available to mop up turnovers and win back possession higher up the pitch is preferable. If you disagree fine, doesn't matter
 
I don't want everything - I'm just offering a counterpoint to the discussion. Palinha for me being a top tackler would be better used closer to the action, we give the ball away alot so having him further forward available to mop up turnovers and win back possession higher up the pitch is preferable. If you disagree fine, doesn't matter
Fair enough. I'd rather have the two fbs that can contribute to an attack involved rather than a player that can only contribute when we lose the ball.
 
Fair enough. I'd rather have the two fbs that can contribute to an attack involved rather than a player that can only contribute when we lose the ball.

If we didn't give up possession so much I'd be inclined to agree.


Winning the ball back higher up the pitch shouldn't be viewed as negative play btw
 
If we didn't give up possession so much I'd be inclined to agree.


Winning the ball back higher up the pitch shouldn't be viewed as negative play btw
It's not viewed as negative play. I just prefer having creative players on the ball further up rather than having a defensive minded player that can do nothing on the ball involved.
 
I'd say you want your best tackling midfielder further forward than your defensive line during buildup to pounce on any turnovers
That would be a trade off, yes.

To me our struggles with ball progression are one of our biggest issues and improving that would be well worth some trade offs, but can understand people seeing that differently.
 
If we didn't give up possession so much I'd be inclined to agree.


Winning the ball back higher up the pitch shouldn't be viewed as negative play btw
On the flip side that's also part of why we give up possession so much imo.

We're choosing to be more solid when we lose it rather than more likely to hurt the opposition if we succeed. That will also lead to losing the ball more. For significant periods of many games, when teams press real high and aggressively we can't even get out.

Find a way to get out or sign a huge guy to lump it to. Or we're left riding out those periods, hoping we don't concede until they can no longer press as hard and we can start playing again.
 
No, suspended tomorrow vs Villa in the FA Cup.

So he gets suspended for his behaviour vs Liverpool?? He did nothing special. Meanwhile, Martinelli will get get off scot free for his disgusting actions against the same team! Guaranteed!
will get off, he already has, no further action taken against him !!
only the 4 yellow card offences he committed in that passage of play
 
they claim in a roundabout way it does as they use their revenue to invest in football (as a non profit), up to you how much you want to buy it

They do to be fair, I’m involved in youth football and they make a lot of free training available for coaches, they also make grants available for equipment and supplies.
 
Back