Right Winger

[Dahnsouff]

28 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

And that, for me, despite the injuries that we and other teams sustained, is why we failed to make top 4 from such a commanding position last season. 

So with a decent RW, say even Mahrez, we would have made top 4? With the injuries to Barnes and others?  Along with Vardy's loss of goal scoring?

[volpeazzurro]

23 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

So with a decent RW, say even Mahrez, we would have made top 4? With the injuries to Barnes and others?  Along with Vardy's loss of goal scoring?

No, that's not what I meant tbh.

When there were other options, Rodgers chose to, just imo, slavishly persist in a poor 3 at the back set up. By putting for example Ndidi there, he not only weakened our defence, he substantially weakened our midfield. Likewise, Castagne was very poor at centre half, so bad that pundits at halftime for one match highlighted his poor stats. Ricardo as a winger or wing back was also poor and demonstrably frustrated even allowing for him coming back from injury. We've seen how much more solid defensively and fluid in attack we are in a four against Villareal and Manchester City, even allowing for Armarty being there. 

 

We appeared to be conservatively playing not to lose rather than trying to win, even against supposed lesser teams. Winners imo, play to their strengths not to there weakness.  You could perhaps highlight the same issues with Southgate and Mancini at the Euros. The winner there too was the manager who played to win using their strengths not merely overcompensating for the odd weakness and trying not to lose. 

 

There's no denying that having Marhez in front of Ricardo or Castagne would have considerably helped matters 😅 but Rodgers had to realistically work with what was available to him.

Edited 16 August 2021 by volpeazzurro

[Deeg67]

21 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

So with a decent RW, say even Mahrez, we would have made top 4? With the injuries to Barnes and others?  Along with Vardy's loss of goal scoring?

Yes.

[Dahnsouff]

35 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

Yes.

Ok then  

[dorsetboy]

i like ricardo at rm or rw and tbh at rb he does get a ittle exposed at times 

 

with castangne and justin due back we could see this line up 

 

----------------------------------kasper---------------------------------

castangne-------vest/evans-----------soyenchu----------------bertrand/thomas

--------------------------ndidi-----------------tielmans---------------------------

ricardo---------------------------maddison------------------------barnes-------------

----------------------------------vardy/daka------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

[Dahnsouff]

41 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

No, that's not what I meant tbh.

When there were other options, Rodgers chose to, just imo, slavishly persist in a poor 3 at the back set up. By putting for example Ndidi there, he not only weakened our defence, he substantially weakened our midfield. Likewise, Castagne was very poor at centre half, so bad that pundits at halftime for one match highlighted his poor stats. Ricardo as a winger or wing back was also poor and demonstrably frustrated even allowing for him coming back from injury. We've seen how much more solid defensively and fluid in attack we are in a four against Villareal and Manchester City, even allowing for Armarty being there. 

 

We appeared to be conservatively playing not to lose rather than trying to win, even against supposed lesser teams. Winners imo, play to their strengths not to there weakness.  You could perhaps highlight the same issues with Southgate and Mancini at the Euros. The winner there too was the manager who played to win using their strengths not merely overcompensating for the odd weakness and trying not to lose. 

 

There's no denying that having Marhez in front of Ricardo or Castagne would have considerably helped matters 😅 but Rodgers had to realistically work with what was available to him.

I get the frustration and there is an unknowable open question as to if we would have finished top 4 without injuries, with a RW. I get why 5 3 at the back though. as without this right sided player, we looked bereft of creativity that side

[An Sionnach]

Strangely , with the supposed best "right' winger in the world playing for them Man. City keep firing blanks. It most certainly is not the answer to everything.

Edited 16 August 2021 by An Sionnach

[filbertway]

12 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Strangely , with the supposed best "right' winger in the world playing for them Man. City keep firing blanks. It most certainly is not the answer to everything.

 

Because they haven't got a centre forward. So for them a striker is pretty important as they already have several wonderful wide players. What a weird take haha

[Dahnsouff]

11 minutes ago, filbertway said:

 

Because they haven't got a centre forward. So for them a striker is pretty important as they already have several wonderful wide players. What a weird take haha

They coped well enough last year when Aguero was injured (i.e.; most of the time) so I am not sure thats the reason  

[An Sionnach]

8 minutes ago, filbertway said:

 

Because they haven't got a centre forward. So for them a striker is pretty important as they already have several wonderful wide players. What a weird take haha

They have Jesus and Torres both internationals, in truth both Mahrez and Sterling are looking past their best. A right winger is not fundamental to a successful team and the obsession on here with it is strange to me. We have a pretty potent attack anyway , 68 goals last season was a decent effort.

[Deeg67]

39 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Ok then  

We came within 20 minutes of making it as is.  We played the last several games of the season in a ponderous back five that Rodgers switched to when Barnes went out.  If we'd had a competent RW (one that Rodgers was willing to use, anyway) I don't think it's a stretch. 

[Dahnsouff]

2 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

We came within 20 minutes of making it as is.  We played the last several games of the season in a ponderous back five that Rodgers switched to when Barnes went out.  If we'd had a competent RW (one that Rodgers was willing to use, anyway) I don't think it's a stretch. 

Yes, but you are keeping everything unchanged except the last 20 minutes at which point Mahrez appears like the wide wizard he once was, which is ridiculous. If Mahrez has been here all season then other things may be impacted instead and we never even got to be 20 minutes from success in the first place. Its all hypothetical anyway.  

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Yes, but you are keeping everything unchanged except the last 20 minutes at which point Mahrez appears like the wide wizard he once was, which is ridiculous. If Mahrez has been here all season then other things may be impacted instead and we never even got to be 20 minutes from success in the first place. Its all hypothetical anyway.  

We would have won the league by Christmas mate, pretty obvious really.

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Strokes said:

We would have won the league by Christmas mate, pretty obvious really.

Yeah, but we would have missed on The Community Shield ffs  

[volpeazzurro]

49 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

I get the frustration and there is an unknowable open question as to if we would have finished top 4 without injuries, with a RW. I get why 5 3 at the back though. as without this right sided player, we looked bereft of creativity that side

I think we have enough strength in depth now to employ an effective 433 if required. Last year, I just think there were better alternatives with round pegs in round holes. 

 

Agreed, another right sided player would be ideal but, if they or Barnes got injured, do we necessarily have to go into our shell again? We've got plenty of options now to play fluid attacking football. 

[filbertway]

24 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

They coped well enough last year when Aguero was injured (i.e.; most of the time) so I am not sure thats the reason  

Teams will wise up to how they play. It's why managers sometimes have one superb season, then teams wise up and can just nullify them.

 

Obviously they're packed with so much quality that they can scored 5 or 6 in a game without trying, but if they run this season without signing a proper striker that Pep rates then I can't see them getting close to Chelsea.

[An Sionnach]

11 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Teams will wise up to how they play. It's why managers sometimes have one superb season, then teams wise up and can just nullify them.

 

Obviously they're packed with so much quality that they can scored 5 or 6 in a game without trying, but if they run this season without signing a proper striker that Pep rates then I can't see them getting close to Chelsea.

Aguero is one of the greatest strikers of recent times , he won't replace him . Pep got lucky having him and Silva at club when he joined. Now you take De Brunye out of the team and they are good but not that good. Grealish and possibly Kane are not going to change that much. Their high press ,possession football can be outmanoeuvred as Chelsea, Man.Utd., Tottenham and yes, us have proved.

[Deeg67]

35 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said:

Agreed, another right sided player would be ideal but, if they or Barnes got injured, do we necessarily have to go into our shell again? We've got plenty of options now to play fluid attacking football. 

Who?

[An Sionnach]

5 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

Who?

How about Vardy, Daka, Iheanacho, Tielemans, Maddison, Praet, KDH ,Soumare for a start and I haven't mentioned Perez of course. Kamal Sowah looks promising as well. That looks OK to me perhaps Son or Mané would improve that but otherwise I think we are in good shape.

[Pliskin]

 

35 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

Aguero is one of the greatest strikers of recent times , he won't replace him . Pep got lucky having him and Silva at club when he joined. Now you take De Brunye out of the team and they are good but not that good. Grealish and possibly Kane are not going to change that much. Their high press ,possession football can be outmanoeuvred as Chelsea, Man.Utd., Tottenham and yes, us have proved.

Kane will score hat fulls for them. He’s proven already that he only needs a sniff and he will get a goal. If they sign Kane they will walk the league again, if they don’t then they will struggle to score enough goals to challenge Chelsea in my opinion. 

[ARM1968]

5 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

 

Kane will score hat fulls for them. He’s proven already that he only needs a sniff and he will get a goal. If they sign Kane they will walk the league again, if they don’t then they will struggle to score enough goals to challenge Chelsea in my opinion. 

This. It’s that simple. They will be close without Kane. With Kane they’ll be untouchable. 

[Pliskin]

7 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

This. It’s that simple. They will be close without Kane. With Kane they’ll be untouchable. 

Sounds like they are. One of my closest mates is a Spurs ST holder, and he says the word is he will leave, they just didn’t want him to have to face the Spurs crowd as soon as he leaves. He will be gone by the weekend. 

[Deeg67]

25 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

How about Vardy, Daka, Iheanacho, Tielemans, Maddison, Praet, KDH ,Soumare for a start and I haven't mentioned Perez of course. Kamal Sowah looks promising as well. That looks OK to me perhaps Son or Mané would improve that but otherwise I think we are in good shape.

Iheanacho and Daka are strikers, not wingers or even wide forwards.  Praet will never be in Rodgers' circle of trust.  KDH and Sowah are totally inexperienced and Soumare is primarily a DM.  We had Vardy, Maddison and Tielemans at the end of last season and still sputtered to the wire, only Kelechi's hot streak salvaging anything from that run of games.  We're desperately thin for wide attackers and no less so than we were last season.  If Barnes goes down, we're screwed again.

[sacreblueits442]

2 hours ago, An Sionnach said:

Strangely , with the supposed best "right' winger in the world playing for them Man. City keep firing blanks. It most certainly is not the answer to everything.

.. did you see him in the Charity Shield, he was out of condition!!!

  Not sure if he is carrying an injury but to come back in that shape was pretty unprofessional. 

  If there were family problems or an agreement to come back late was previously accepted by both parties then I could understand, but he looked well overweight. Pep allowing him to be in that shape must be disconcerting to his teammates. 

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

How about Vardy, Daka, Iheanacho, Tielemans, Maddison, Praet, KDH ,Soumare for a start and I haven't mentioned Perez of course. Kamal Sowah looks promising as well. That looks OK to me perhaps Son or Mané would improve that but otherwise I think we are in good shape.

Given that all but one (or potentially two depending how you view Perez) of those play centrally, I don't think that's a particularly good argument that we've got great depth for our preferred system of 4-3-3/4-2-3-1. If Barnes gets injured again or needs a rest we're not all going to be thinking "not a problem, we've got a natural replacement on that left wing in the shape of Soumaré or Iheanacho".

 

We are in reasonable shape but there are obviously problems with regards to depth on the left and quality on the right, neither of which would take a signing anywhere near the calibre of Son and Mané to rectify.