• 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

The case for the defence

i don't think there's anything wrong to point out faults and for vicario its two games in a row, very similar weak deflection back into play.
Vicario also misjudged at least two crosses, one rodon headed onto the crossbar too.

sure he's a good shot stopper but not good enough for me IF he doesn't improve.
 
metalgear said:
i don't think there's anything wrong to point out faults and for vicario its two games in a row, very similar weak deflection back into play.
Vicario also misjudged at least two crosses, one rodon headed onto the crossbar too.

sure he's a good shot stopper but not good enough for me IF he doesn't improve.
Click to expand...
By all means criticise the flaps, the poor positing on the Rodon header etc but the goal was a deflected shot. If you expect a keeper to react perfectly and save it perfectly you're expecting too much.

Im all for criticism of the things within his control, ie. How he reacts to crosses, palming weak shots back into play, punch catchable crosses etc but a twice deflected shot is not one of them.
 
Against Leeds, the ball was pinging back and forth, Tel won it in the centre circle and quickly played in Xavi who ran forwards. Romero broke rank and sprinted after him, with Bentancur filling in (I think). Then Xavi cut back and tried a crap rabona and we lost it again. Romero was way out of position and tried to run back; eventually he put in a wild sliding block but missed the ball, 2 seconds later Leeds flashed the ball right through our 6 yard box but the Leeds striker DCL was too slow to get a tap in.

Had that gone in, there would be a lot of discussion about Romero charging around. As with most things in here, people tend to react much more strongly to the goals and the actual results.

E.g. Longstaff received a nice pass, spun in a trice and smashed a good shot a foot wide of the post with Vic rooted. If that had gone in, the whole game would have changed and we'd be asking how Longstaff was allowed to do that. But because it flashed wide, it is not mentioned at all.
 
Bullet said:
Against Leeds, the ball was pinging back and forth, Tel won it in the centre circle and quickly played in Xavi who ran forwards. Romero broke rank and sprinted after him, with Bentancur filling in (I think). Then Xavi cut back and tried a crap rabona and we lost it again. Romero was way out of position and tried to run back; eventually he put in a wild sliding block but missed the ball, 2 seconds later Leeds flashed the ball right through our 6 yard box but the Leeds striker DCL was too slow to get a tap in.

Had that gone in, there would be a lot of discussion about Romero charging around. As with most things in here, people tend to react much more strongly to the goals and the actual results.

E.g. Longstaff received a nice pass, spun in a trice and smashed a good shot a foot wide of the post with Vic rooted. If that had gone in, the whole game would have changed and we'd be asking how Longstaff was allowed to do that. But because it flashed wide, it is not mentioned at all.
Click to expand...

Look at Romeros position on the move where Bentancur was "covering" for him and lost the ball 25 yards from goal. He's way up the pitch.
Nevermind his position, watch his reaction, he starts to run back, checks, and then walks back.
Three times in two PL games he's been way out of position. He's not as good as good as he thinks he is, and certainly not good enough to go charging around the pitch and destroying our shape.
 
Bullet said:
Against Leeds, the ball was pinging back and forth, Tel won it in the centre circle and quickly played in Xavi who ran forwards. Romero broke rank and sprinted after him, with Bentancur filling in (I think). Then Xavi cut back and tried a crap rabona and we lost it again. Romero was way out of position and tried to run back; eventually he put in a wild sliding block but missed the ball, 2 seconds later Leeds flashed the ball right through our 6 yard box but the Leeds striker DCL was too slow to get a tap in.

Had that gone in, there would be a lot of discussion about Romero charging around. As with most things in here, people tend to react much more strongly to the goals and the actual results.

E.g. Longstaff received a nice pass, spun in a trice and smashed a good shot a foot wide of the post with Vic rooted. If that had gone in, the whole game would have changed and we'd be asking how Longstaff was allowed to do that. But because it flashed wide, it is not mentioned at all.
Click to expand...

I was actually screaming at Xavi for being an idiot. He got no purchase on the rabona but would have easily made that simple pass with his left foot. I'm pretty certain if that had gone in, Xavi would have been called bang to rights for showboating. He needs to pick his moments.
 
Muttley said:
I was actually screaming at Xavi for being an idiot. He got no purchase on the rabona but would have easily made that simple pass with his left foot. I'm pretty certain if that had gone in, Xavi would have been called bang to rights for showboating. He needs to pick his moments.
Click to expand...
Every player needs to pick their moments but that’s football
 
Bullet said:
Against Leeds, the ball was pinging back and forth, Tel won it in the centre circle and quickly played in Xavi who ran forwards. Romero broke rank and sprinted after him, with Bentancur filling in (I think). Then Xavi cut back and tried a crap rabona and we lost it again. Romero was way out of position and tried to run back; eventually he put in a wild sliding block but missed the ball, 2 seconds later Leeds flashed the ball right through our 6 yard box but the Leeds striker DCL was too slow to get a tap in.

Had that gone in, there would be a lot of discussion about Romero charging around. As with most things in here, people tend to react much more strongly to the goals and the actual results.

E.g. Longstaff received a nice pass, spun in a trice and smashed a good shot a foot wide of the post with Vic rooted. If that had gone in, the whole game would have changed and we'd be asking how Longstaff was allowed to do that. But because it flashed wide, it is not mentioned at all.
Click to expand...
I've said this about Romero and VDV. They aren't good enough tactically or positionally. Just because it doesn't always cost us doesn't mean they don't both leave us exposed far too often which over a season WILL cost us. Whole defence needs upgrading if we are to really challenge for anything IMO.
 
Bullet said:
Against Leeds, the ball was pinging back and forth, Tel won it in the centre circle and quickly played in Xavi who ran forwards. Romero broke rank and sprinted after him, with Bentancur filling in (I think). Then Xavi cut back and tried a crap rabona and we lost it again. Romero was way out of position and tried to run back; eventually he put in a wild sliding block but missed the ball, 2 seconds later Leeds flashed the ball right through our 6 yard box but the Leeds striker DCL was too slow to get a tap in.

Had that gone in, there would be a lot of discussion about Romero charging around. As with most things in here, people tend to react much more strongly to the goals and the actual results.

E.g. Longstaff received a nice pass, spun in a trice and smashed a good shot a foot wide of the post with Vic rooted. If that had gone in, the whole game would have changed and we'd be asking how Longstaff was allowed to do that. But because it flashed wide, it is not mentioned at all.
Click to expand...
There was a moment in the game where Frank and the coaches were all screaming at Romero to not charge up the field, so I hope it's something they are trying to work on with him.
 
Danso & MvdV to surpass our Dutch duo?!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Bullet said:
Against Leeds, the ball was pinging back and forth, Tel won it in the centre circle and quickly played in Xavi who ran forwards. Romero broke rank and sprinted after him, with Bentancur filling in (I think). Then Xavi cut back and tried a crap rabona and we lost it again. Romero was way out of position and tried to run back; eventually he put in a wild sliding block but missed the ball, 2 seconds later Leeds flashed the ball right through our 6 yard box but the Leeds striker DCL was too slow to get a tap in.

Had that gone in, there would be a lot of discussion about Romero charging around. As with most things in here, people tend to react much more strongly to the goals and the actual results.

E.g. Longstaff received a nice pass, spun in a trice and smashed a good shot a foot wide of the post with Vic rooted. If that had gone in, the whole game would have changed and we'd be asking how Longstaff was allowed to do that. But because it flashed wide, it is not mentioned at all.
Click to expand...
To me the big question about our defensive solidity is how do we manage to keep most of that while also improving our attacking play.

To me it seems necessary for players to take more risks and get further forward.

With two fairly dedicated defensive midfielders I think centre backs getting forward at times (both counter attacks and in more settled play) can be a good thing. Depending on the scoreline and game state of course. But also the deep midfielders themselves being more attack minded in their off the ball positioning when we have possession.

As an example quite a few screenshots going around of us essentially having a 6-1-3 buildup structure. Back 4 and two defensive midfielders all fairly deep. One #10 player isolated and then the wingers and strikers. That will be solid when we lose the ball, but we'll also be dull and far from threatening in settled possession. Hasn't always looked like that, but imo should only be for some specific situations.
 
braineclipse said:
To me the big question about our defensive solidity is how do we manage to keep most of that while also improving our attacking play.

To me it seems necessary for players to take more risks and get further forward.

With two fairly dedicated defensive midfielders I think centre backs getting forward at times (both counter attacks and in more settled play) can be a good thing. Depending on the scoreline and game state of course. But also the deep midfielders themselves being more attack minded in their off the ball positioning when we have possession.

As an example quite a few screenshots going around of us essentially having a 6-1-3 buildup structure. Back 4 and two defensive midfielders all fairly deep. One #10 player isolated and then the wingers and strikers. That will be solid when we lose the ball, but we'll also be dull and far from threatening in settled possession. Hasn't always looked like that, but imo should only be for some specific situations.
Click to expand...
Yes; 2 CBs and 2 DMs should allow the full backs to press on and get involved.
Even Dan Burn was playing super far forward tonight.
And against Everton, Mikolenko was playing left wing whilst Grealish came deeper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back