Way ahead?

[It's Character Forming]

I have to agree there were too many long balls on Saturday and to avoid this we need Hoolahan and Redmond in the side.  the problem with your approach is that although we could have 2 defensive midfielders (Tettey + ?), we'd then need to have Redmond on one flank (ok if he bucks his ideas up) and either Naismith or Hoolahan on the other flank (not good - we know it doesn't suit Wes and there has been plenty of comments from Everton fans that it doesn't suit Naismith either). 

The problem for me is that both Naismith and Hoolahan need to play centrally to be effective and we can't afford to have both of them there (unless Naismith starts as sole striker).  I think we need Wes in the centre with a free role because with Redmond on the right, we've got the creative options to cause problems for other teams.  So, do we give Naismith a go on the left wing or use him as a substitute ?  Not happy either way really but you've got to go with what you've got.

 

[Lavanche]

Well I agree that Hoolahan should be sure starter at least against opponents we consider equal and specially slotted in his prefered role. I just doubt our management sees it that way and we keep using this new 4-4-1-1. Naismith was big money signing and now his name is almost cemented for starters to prove his worth even thought our team harmony would suffer.

Anyway we just have to wait and see I doubt we see dropping Naismith or dropping big centre forward, so we will keep seeing players to keep playing outside of their position and Redmond compete his playing time with Hoolahan, Howson and VOO.

 

[It's Character Forming]

Agree I can't see us dropping Naismith given he's our record signing (who's not out on loan because we can't get rid of them).  And I do think he's a quality player, it just feels like we can't fit him in the team without undermining our overall mix of players. People complain about Wes's performance on Saturday but I thought he played well given he was out of the left flank which largely nullifies his abilities.

I am beginning to wonder if we'd actually have done better if we hadn't signed Naismith and had just got Bamford as another striking option instead ?

Our formation Saturday may have been 4411 in theory but in practice it panned out as 442 from my perspective, and I just don't think our midfield are good enough to play that in the Prem.

 

[Beauseant]

My view is the obsession with Wes is a large part of the problem as the rest of the midfield is shuffled about to accommodate him. If you play Wes with Naismith and Mbokani you have to play two holding midfielders as he will give the ball away in dangerous areas. That means that if he's not at his best (and he hasn't been for some time) you have the dual problem of the opposition frequently getting the ball in areas where they can hurt you and a midfield that isn't equipped to get back into a game once we go behind.

I would go with a 4-1-4-1 set up with (after his suspension is finished) Tettey behind Redmond, Howson, Naismith and Brady with Bamford up top, but with the proviso that Redmond is told to pin his ears back and attack his fullback at every opportunity. I'd bring Ruddy back as Rudd is shot to bits and at fault for both goals at Villa, where he should have come for the first and definitely shouldn't for the second, and I'd go with Martin, Bennett, Klose and Olsson at the back. That set up gives us the best balance of getting players forward quickly and having some defensive steel. Then all you have to do is eliminate the individual errors.......

 

[It's Character Forming]

Strange how people can see the game differently.  I thought Rudd had no chance to come for the ball for the first goal at Villa, the cross was way too deep and the header was deflected so he had no chance.  for the second goal, I would fault the defence mainly for being far too far up field, allowing Villa to play a simple through ball which had Agbonlahor running direct on goal.  Rudd made the decision to come out which with hindsight may have been a mistake - it depends whether the defender could have recovered enough to make it hard for Agbonlahor to shoot.  Probably a mistake but a goalie has to make those decisions in a split second.  Ruddy was regularly making worse mistakes in the games before he was dropped so I wouldn't see any benefit in bringing him back.  Aside from that I thought Rudd looked very composed, dealt comfortably with Villa crosses that he could be expected to reach.  But it's all about opinions...

 

[Beauseant]

Of course!

 

[GJP]

 I thought Rudd looked very composed,

Apart from when it mattered.

 

[It's Character Forming]

 for the second goal, I would fault the defence mainly for being far too far up field, allowing Villa to play a simple through ball which had Agbonlahor running direct on goal. 

If we're quoting selectively....

 

[hogesar]

My view is the obsession with Wes is a large part of the problem as the rest of the midfield is shuffled about to accommodate him.

But there's a reason for the "obsession". Particularly at home. I can understand not including him away from home in some games.

But 4 goals, 3 assists in 11 appearances at home - we don't have anyone even nearly offering that level of influence. He also has an 84.3% pass accuracy. For all this "he gives the ball away in dangerous positions", Tettey has the identical %, and Howson for example, has almost 10% less pass accuracy. These are players in deeper positions who are at least as likely as Hoolahan to give the ball away, without the potential to unlock a defence and create a chance.

Look back at our best performances / wins this season. The majority include Hoolahan. It's been the case for some years now. I'm not happy about it, because it makes us far too reliant upon him, but I can see why AN etc are desperate to get him into the team somehow.

 

[It's Character Forming]

I have to agree.  Wes tries more difficult passes, which are the ones that can create goals.  It's surprising he has as high a completion % as that really - you'd expect him to have a lower success rate than players who more often play the simple ball on to the next City player along the line.  As for giving the ball away, he sometimes dwells on the ball while trying to pick a pass - but if he didn't, again he'd be less creative and less useful. 

It seems odd to say he often gives it away in dangerous positions - mostly he's playing further forward so if he does give it away, it's in a less dangerous position for us.  There have been other culprits that have conceded possession in places that have led to goals against.

On Saturday, rather than the rest of the midfield being shuffled around to accommodate Wes, instead Wes was stuck out on the left wing, which makes it much harder for him to influence the game.  And the outcome was that we didn't create many chances.

 

[Din]

Ruddy
Pinto Bennett Klose Olsson
Redmond Howson Tettey Brady
Naismith
Jerome​

Subs: Rudd, Martin, O'Neil, Odjidja, Jarvis, Hoolahan, Mbokani.

Ruddy has to be in. Rudd did well initially when he came into the side. However his confidence has slowly dwindled and I think at this level he's a pretty limited goalkeeper. Decent enough shot stopper but not much else. He certainly doesn't inspire confidence in the back four, and him needlessly rushing out of his goal for Villa's second on Saturday was the tip of the iceberg really. Hopefully this break would've done Ruddy some much needed good and he'll be looking to prove himself again. It would surprise me if he isn't back in for West Ham.

I would have Pinto as first choice right back right now. Was admittedly very poor against Spurs, but the week before against Liverpool he grew into the game and didn't look too bad by the end. The only two teams he's played are two teams with very good attacking players, I would've liked to have seen him against Villa, who don't have the offensive quality that Spurs or Liverpool possess, for whatever reason though, Neil put Martin back in. For me Pinto would be first choice, followed by Wisdom, then Whittaker, then Martin. Wisdom actually had a couple of good games before getting injured which lost him his place. Whittaker is decent going forward but woeful defensively.

Klose is yet really to prove that he is worth £8m. He has done ok though in his first 2 games. Hasn't done an awful lot wrong but is simply doing what's expected really, but for £8m you want him to do more. I think though in a couple of games when he's adjusted the league more he could be much improved. Bassong hasn't been in good enough form for a while now. On his day an excellent defender but recently he hasn't been showing that. Bennett, all in all, was good in his run in the team. The way he's been dropped behind Martin in the pecking order is disappointing, and I would certainly bring him back in. He's probably been our best centre back this season.

I much prefer Brady when he's further up the field. That's his most natural position and he offers a genuine attacking threat there. He does as well whilst at left back, but to a lesser extent, and his defending is sometimes questionable. Olsson was rightly man of the match against Spurs and although he probably isn't too much better than Brady defensively, playing him would mean playing Brady higher up. Olsson is also effective going forwards, and the two of them have the right attributes to work together well down our left. Brady is also a nice finisher, but as he's played in defence he hasn't really been able to show that.

Redmond was probably our best player throughout our good early season run. He's completely lost that form since, but still remains our joint top scorer. He's our most natural right winger, and when he is on it he is a real threat. Offers genuine pace and skill and does have end quality as well. If I was Neil I would give him a kick up the backside and give him another opportunity from the start. At his best you could argue he's our most effective offensive player.

Howson and Tettey is our best centre midfield combination easily. The one that got us promoted and it offers a really nice balance between defence and attack. O'Neil is a good player who is good at maintaining possession, but playing him means either having to move Howson out wide or change the system.

Naismith has to play really. He showed against Liverpool the quality he has and it's clear he is a real asset. Harsh on Hoolahan to be on the bench but for me you have to play him in behind the striker or not at all, and with Naismith in the side that only leaves room for him as a sub. Naismith though offers us a genuine goal-threat which Hoolahan doesn't really, plus his link-up play with the striker and with the midfield is superb, not to mention he has an excellent work rate. 

I personally would also have Jerome up top. I am a fan of Mbokani but I think he may be better used as an impact player. His hold-up play and aerial ability is superb but I don't think it's really what we need right now. Jerome though offers much better movement and energy, meaning that we can play balls over the top for him to run onto rather than play it into his feet which is what we have to do with Mbokani. 

 

[Lavanche]

Why playing Naismith is must?

Against Aston Villa and Spurs he didn't get anything special done and specially against Spurs using him and a striker instead of winger we weakened our right hand side of the field where most action happened.

I totally agree that he is one of the better players of the team but he shouldn't have guaranteed place in the starting line up as someone need to create those scoring chances and bring the ball up or find those passing routes that we can have slow attacks that doesnt end in desperate long shot or cross.

People tend to forget that in Liverpool game both Redmond and Hoolahan were on the field which is part of the reason Naismith could have so much ball at the last third of the field. After creators went to bench, we didn't see much Naismith either in those ten minutes.

We need playmaker and we have only two of them in the squad or three if you count Vadis as one. Howson and Tettey aren't one and Dorrans is quite far in pecking order behind them and O'Neil so it is either Hoolahan in the middle or VOO in the middle.

Everything else means long balls and I start to be quite bored to see that kind game from us as it has never brought us results since Lambert days.

I have now cried us to sign playmaker 8 windows or so to get younger Hoolahan or deeplaying playmaker who is signed as a starter, but no we always sign strikers and wonder why they all suck in scoring when the truth is we don't create enough chances and reason for that is that we don't either play wingers or we dont have playmaker on the field. That has been our problem at least three premiership seasons now and still 2/3 of people asks new starting centre forward in every window. Kind a frustrating.

 

[Canaryboy]

Also scored his famous hat-trick against Chelsea after coming off the bench. 

 

[Canaryboy]

I personally would also have Jerome up top. 

Deserves a chance.

Plus Mbokani has proven he can make an impact from the bench.

I'd say this is worth a try now. 

 

[lyb]

I'd quite like to see us have a go at a midfield diamond along the lines of...

Pinto           Klose              Bassong/Bennett          Brady

                                 Tettey

              Howson                         Naismith

                                  Hoolahan

             Bamford                             Jerome

I just think that seeing as Pinto and Brady are both quite keen going forwards and both pretty quick then it works well on that score, plus it puts Hooligan where he's most effective. 

 

[Lavanche]

Narrow midfield diamond would need good centre back pairing and full backs that are more oriented to defend than going forward and two box to box midfielders.

We have none of these in our current prefered line up and playing Naismith as a midfielder shouldn't never be option.