So after the dust has settled from yesterdays disappointment and people have vented their over reactive spleen I feel that we are right to ask the following question!
After many seasons of discussing 'how do we cope without JV?' and thinking that we are a one player team, we need decent back up if he gets injured etc. are we now at a point where we can ask the same question about Wilf.
It has become apparent over the last couple of games that the loss of Wilf hits us more than if we are without Jamie.....
Wilf is the glue that sticks all of the individual components together and lets the other players perform in the knowledge that he has got their back. Without him our midfield looks lightweight and does not have the strength to break up the opposition attacks or break forward on a marauding run.
If we lost Jamie for a couple of games then (as we have seen) we do have players capable of covering for his loss and creating/finishing chances.
But it is apparent that Hamza and Papa are not in the same class as Wilf or anywhere near.
So can we say that Wilf is our most important player and the first name on the team-sheet now?
Hurry back Wilf!!!
UTF
Big 'Wilf'........
posted on 20/1/20
comment by Brown Starr: The rusty sheriff of 606 (U12353)
posted 2 hours, 54 minutes ago
I don’t think it’s about formations, we just haven’t got the personnel in the middle of the park to put the fires out the way he does for us. You could put Mendy and Choudhury in front of a back 4 and that 2nd goal on Saturday is still scored
We need to be putting chances away at the other end though and doing far more with the ball. Vardy and Maddison misfiring isn’t helping us to ride out the N’didi problem
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree and disagree BS. Yes we should have beat Burnley, but I think our chances are falling to the wrong people in the main.
Formation change will help us get Vardy in more goalscoring positions more often. We have to aim to be doing that and not assuming he will always take his one chance in a game.
Barnes and Perez are hopeless in front of goal, and Maddison is not getting a clear sight. We need to be making teams like Southampton and Burnley think more about how to stop us rather than how to affect us.
For me we have to get back to causing teams problems. That means Tielemans and Maddison central. Then only way that works currently is is with Mendy or Choudhury in a 4-1-4-1 which looking shakier than and arthritic dog having a poo, or switch formation.
posted on 20/1/20
You see I think you’re too obsessed with formations. Formations don’t win games - players win games. There were 2 clear chances for Barnes to thread Vardy through on goal - clean through against pope, and he dithered on the ball and played an alternative hopeless pass to someone else.
Vardy is making the same runs he always makes and if the likes of Barnes and Perez made better use of the ball we would have come away with 3 points. Should have been wrapped up at half time
Play whatever formation you like - if the final ball doesn’t get better then Vardy is going to continue not scoring
posted on 21/1/20
Think we’ll have to agree to disagree that a formation doesn’t allow players to play at their best.
However I agree that individual decisions are costing us at the minute. I watched the highlights back aim MOTD2 and actually, we weren’t as bad as we have been recently. The highlights made us look good in fact.
You’re totally right in suggesting that the wide service to Vardy is pishh at the minute. That’s why I’d change it to remove Perez and Barnes for a bit.
A narrow midfield 3 of Praet, Tielemans and Madders feeding Nacho coming deep and Vardy stretching play appeals to me.
It does rely on Chilwell for width though, which takes us back to square 1!
So whilst the formation doesn’t win a game, it is critical to getting the best out of your most dangerous and best players. Puel proved how a formation and tactics can get good players playing rubbish. What more evidence do you need!!
posted on 21/1/20
I agree that the formation needs to allow the players to best express themselves or set up defensively in the right shape - but that wasn’t the issue on Saturday. We didn’t lose the game because of our formation.
The two goals we conceded were nothing to do with the formation. A headed goal from a corner and a rare mistake from Evans. It really was individual decision making that cost us and it’s been creeping in a lot lately
I’m not saying formations aren’t important, but to be honest every time we don’t win a game, it’s your go to argument.
posted on 21/1/20
I’m not sure it is. Don’t I normally blame Perez first?
posted on 21/1/20
You feeling better now Brown Starr sweetie?
posted on 21/1/20
comment by Merseysidefox (U4842)
posted 5 hours, 34 minutes ago
I’m not sure it is. Don’t I normally blame Perez first?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 21/1/20
Rumours now that The Big Bad Wilf (I'm running with this for now) could even be back for tomorrow.
Seriously, I hope the club aren't rushing this out of desperation.
posted on 21/1/20
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 31 minutes ago
Rumours now that The Big Bad Wilf (I'm running with this for now) could even be back for tomorrow.
Seriously, I hope the club aren't rushing this out of desperation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Little chance that would happen in today’s game I think. Players are incredibly valuable assets to clubs and they won’t risk long term injury just for the sake of 90 mins of game time.
Managers nearly always manage fans expectations by overstating a players length of time on the sidelines and I think that’s what Rodgers initially did.
posted on 21/1/20
It's what Solskjaer has done with Rashford though.
I hope we wouldn't do it but it's not without precedent, even at the top level.