►►►►►► Match Ratings VS Bolton Wanderers ◄◄◄◄◄◄

MOTM?


  • Total voters
    187

talkshowhost86

Mod-Moose
Staff
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
44,703
#81
Friedel - 7 - Didn't do alot wrong
Walker - 7 - Relatively solid and has a great understanding with Lennon
Gallas - 7.5 - Dealt well with Bolton's fairly direct style
Kaboul - 7.5 - Again a very useful man to have around against a team like Bolton
Rose - 6 - Looked jittery and clearly isn't at the same level as the rest of the team
Lennon - 8 - Looked dangerous throughout the first half and did well for the 3rd goal
Sandro - 8 - Brilliant again. I do wonder whether his positional play compared to Parkers improves us
Modric - 8.5 - Great goal, great passing, looked back to the old Luka
Bale - 7 - Relatively quiet but did well for the crucial 2nd goal
Rafa - 7.5 - Well taken goal, ran his nuts off and linked play up well
Ade - 6.5 - Was absolutely toilet for most of the game but you can't argue with two goals
 

JimmyG2

SC Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
7,235
#83
Didn't think Modric was much better than he usually is. That is our best player again.
I think our expectations of him are much higher than for others and of course the Chelsea business
las year and uncertainty this year about whther he will leave sours our apreciation of his ability.
He operated from much deeper than usual which is where I prefer him
He also came up with a goal from a set piece,worked brilliantly by our two best players.
Prefer Sandro to Parker as his runs are more purposeful, he releases the ball more quickly and
can both shoot and tackle.
Modric 9/ Van and Lennon 8/ Bale, Sandro and Adebyor 7/ Rose 5 rest 6/6.5

At this end of the season many teams can't park the bus, they have to play which suits
our speedy counter attacking style.
Should work well against Villa.
 

ShelfSide18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
8,386
#84
Modric was no different from usual in his passing/moving/ticking role - saw the most ball as standard and also hit the first man with his corner - no change there.

The only thing that was unusual for him was that one of his shots had requisite power to reach their goal, and better still it flew in.
 

MrWoolley

Moderator
Staff
Joined
May 26, 2004
Messages
13,006
#85
Anybody else think that the link up play between Lennon and Walker was really good last night? Walker played some lovely weighted balls in behind Sam Ricketts (who granted was finding it tough going against Lennon anyway), but the movement and awareness of one another really impressed me.

As for my MOTM, I voted Modric as goals change games. He played well in the middle, but a screamer for the first and a magical ball for the 3rd really put us in the game winning position.

I like reading match ratings when we win :)
 

ShelfSide18

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
8,386
#86
Walker threaded Lennon through with a peach of a ball early on, more of this please.

Great technique and vision. Can of worms open...
 

double0

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
10,832
#88
Excellent performance we ride the Bolton storm well enough and at last dealt with Kevin Davis. Kaboooul

Friedel-7 Steady performance (as side from that I hope we bid for Lindegaard)
Walker-7 Well played in general but needs to read the game better instead of relying soley on pace handy though also impressed by is aeiral ability.

Gallas-7 Good game.

Kaboul-8 Excellent strong commanding really felt comfortable knowing Kaboul was at the back.

Rose-6 needs to get up to speed has great potential imo at left back

Sandro-7 Who needs Parker when you have Sandro...battled well with K Davis at set pieces broke up play winning possession well.

Modric-8 Superb goal superb pass to release Lennon who then assisted Adebayor first goal... hope he stays

Lennon-8 That’s the Lennon we've missed! great the see it. Seemed to play without fear of injury something I reckon his been worried about.

Bale-7 Inconsistent performance but still good enough needs to improve is right foot (being hard) IMO.

Van De Vaart-9 When playing like that busy involved fit VdV is star dust.

Adebayor-7 Hope we sign him. Played with intelligence and held the quadrant well enough to allow Bale Van De Vaart Lennon to play off him.


Redknapp. Now Englands out of the way we should allow him to see out the remaining of contract
 

mpickard2087

Fantastic Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
19,309
#89
Friedel 6 - Not a lot wrong, but I was shouting at him to come off his line more than once and he got away with one that he palmed out into the centre of the area.

Walker 7 - Good test against Petrov and he did reasonably well. Linked up with Lennon at times which we need to see more of.

Gallas 7 - Coped well enough with Boltons physical threat up front.

Kaboul 7 - Ditto.

Rose 6 - Stuck to his job well but looked a bit nervy. He could probably do with a bit more help from Bale and it is only his 2nd league start of the season so still finding his feet.

Lennon 7.5 - Was our main outlet especially in the first half, some poor decision making as per but pretty decent game.

Sandro 8 - Not quite as good as Sunday, but thats two damn good games he has had now protecting the back four.

Modric 8 - Great goal for the first, great pass for the third. Much better the last two games. Was guilty of not following his man for Bolton's goal, and got away with an almost carbon copy a few mins later, but on the ball was very good.

Bale 7 - Eventually got going, as usual could work harder but an improved second half showing.

VDV 7 - Composed finish for the goal, did pretty well and just went about his job quietly.

Adebayor 7 - His mark saved by the two goals, thought he pretty average until that point.
 

sloth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
8,993
#92
Some good posts in here, a lot which agree with.

I'd like to add that for some reason I really think Livermore's got what it takes. I don't know why, because he didn't really do anything when he came on, but there's something about the lad which tells me he gets it. People have been talking about Sandro or Parker, as if they're similar players, but for me it's Livermore or Parker. Obviously it's Parker at the moment, when he's fit he can drive the team in a way that Livermore can't, but I think they both perform similar roles, and I really look forward to seeing Livermore develop next year; although when Hudd returns he probably won't get a look in :(

On the whole debate about formations, it's hard to make an argument when we've just won so handsomely playing a way I think is incorrect, and I notice BBLG couldn't help a premature "I told you so" ejaculation, but I think he and other have missed the point. Briefly then...

The claim isn't that you can't win and win well playing 4-4-2, it's not even that 4-4-2 isn't the right option in some circumstances, the claim is that generally, playing 4-2-3-1/4-3-3, with our personnel will over the course of a season get you more points then playing the way we have in the last couple of games.

But let's use each game as a case-study, Bolton first. I think that against that 4-4-2, with Bolton's ambition to get something out of the game the wrong way to play was 4-4-1-1, and we absolutely should have set out the way we did against them in the replayed game at WHL. With them only playing two in CM we had a chance to dominate, and given the quality of their defending this year, and their desire to get something out of the game (hence not going to simply sit back), we could have dominated them without the second half blip, without needing to give them a chance, without requiring us to hit them on the break when under the cosh for a sustained period. If's, but's and maybe's I realise, and no way to 'prove' my point, other than to point to the two games we played against the same opponents already, the abandoned match in which we were dominated at WHL, and the replay in which we dominated them. But anyway, Wednesday's game was not an advertisement for 4-4-1-1, but an advertisement against it imo!

On the other hand, against Blackburn 4-4-1-1 was the correct formation imo, however we were wrong to start that way. Why? Because we couldn't have guessed that Keane would set out his team so conservatively and with such little ambition, that he did meant we were right to have pace, trickery, and width with Lennon and Bale on the pitch, and there was no purpose in having an extra CM as we'd have been trying to break down a row of four and then five with intricate passing, much better to just get behind them in the way that we did. However, had Blackburn come with greater ambition then starting the wa we did may well have given them a sniff, it certainly would have made the result more random, with a good chance they'd nick one because we'd have not bee able to properly control the game. The point being that you may well start 4-2-3-1, but there's nothing to say we shouldn't adjust. In other words, when the unknowns are unknown set out in the best way over all, but once the knowns become known, adjust in the light of them.

The last thing to acknowledge, is that to some degree, given the number of game left, it's more justifiable for Harry to roll the dice in the way that he has. This has been a mini-six game series, and just as a boxer who is behind on points some times has to come out swinging in the later rounds with the knowledge that he might get caught, so I can see where Harry's coming from. I just don't think, given the quality of our team, throwing wild haymakers is the best way to secure a knock-out, especially when you know your opponent, in the case of Bolton, is even more desperate than you. It makes for exciting viewing, seeing boxers go toe-to-toe, but the Champs are usually the ones who keep their cool, while their opponent loses their's.
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
32,568
#93
I'd like to add that for some reason I really think Livermore's got what it takes. I don't know why, because he didn't really do anything when he came on, but there's something about the lad which tells me he gets it.
I agree. He's been decent this season, and for such a young lad, and one we have produced ourselves, I think we should be happier than some members of the forum (who seem more intent on finding occasional errors to rip into him about) seem to be.
 

The Apprentice

Charles Big Potatoes
Joined
Mar 10, 2005
Messages
7,669
#95
I didn't think the performance was hugely different to most of our games for the last 2 months. We just happened to take a few chances last night.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,742
#97
Some good posts in here, a lot which agree with.

I'd like to add that for some reason I really think Livermore's got what it takes. I don't know why, because he didn't really do anything when he came on, but there's something about the lad which tells me he gets it. People have been talking about Sandro or Parker, as if they're similar players, but for me it's Livermore or Parker. Obviously it's Parker at the moment, when he's fit he can drive the team in a way that Livermore can't, but I think they both perform similar roles, and I really look forward to seeing Livermore develop next year; although when Hudd returns he probably won't get a look in :(

On the whole debate about formations, it's hard to make an argument when we've just won so handsomely playing a way I think is incorrect, and I notice BBLG couldn't help a premature "I told you so" ejaculation, but I think he and other have missed the point. Briefly then...

The claim isn't that you can't win and win well playing 4-4-2, it's not even that 4-4-2 isn't the right option in some circumstances, the claim is that generally, playing 4-2-3-1/4-3-3, with our personnel will over the course of a season get you more points then playing the way we have in the last couple of games.

But let's use each game as a case-study, Bolton first. I think that against that 4-4-2, with Bolton's ambition to get something out of the game the wrong way to play was 4-4-1-1, and we absolutely should have set out the way we did against them in the replayed game at WHL. With them only playing two in CM we had a chance to dominate, and given the quality of their defending this year, and their desire to get something out of the game (hence not going to simply sit back), we could have dominated them without the second half blip, without needing to give them a chance, without requiring us to hit them on the break when under the cosh for a sustained period. If's, but's and maybe's I realise, and no way to 'prove' my point, other than to point to the two games we played against the same opponents already, the abandoned match in which we were dominated at WHL, and the replay in which we dominated them. But anyway, Wednesday's game was not an advertisement for 4-4-1-1, but an advertisement against it imo!

On the other hand, against Blackburn 4-4-1-1 was the correct formation imo, however we were wrong to start that way. Why? Because we couldn't have guessed that Keane would set out his team so conservatively and with such little ambition, that he did meant we were right to have pace, trickery, and width with Lennon and Bale on the pitch, and there was no purpose in having an extra CM as we'd have been trying to break down a row of four and then five with intricate passing, much better to just get behind them in the way that we did. However, had Blackburn come with greater ambition then starting the wa we did may well have given them a sniff, it certainly would have made the result more random, with a good chance they'd nick one because we'd have not bee able to properly control the game. The point being that you may well start 4-2-3-1, but there's nothing to say we shouldn't adjust. In other words, when the unknowns are unknown set out in the best way over all, but once the knowns become known, adjust in the light of them.

The last thing to acknowledge, is that to some degree, given the number of game left, it's more justifiable for Harry to roll the dice in the way that he has. This has been a mini-six game series, and just as a boxer who is behind on points some times has to come out swinging in the later rounds with the knowledge that he might get caught, so I can see where Harry's coming from. I just don't think, given the quality of our team, throwing wild haymakers is the best way to secure a knock-out, especially when you know your opponent, in the case of Bolton, is even more desperate than you. It makes for exciting viewing, seeing boxers go toe-to-toe, but the Champs are usually the ones who keep their cool, while their opponent loses their's.

Effectively, what you (and I) are saying is that occasionally you get lucky because the other manager(s) (like Keane & Coyle) are just as capable of making a tactical balls up of the whole shebang.

But the last time we got that lucky was November last year.

Before this week the last few times Redknapp has played that way he was quoted directly afterwards (every time) as saying things like "We were far to open and these players can't play this system because they don't track back".

You just cannot, therefore, grasp what goes through his brain, and how his internal thought process rationalises starting games that way, away from home especially.

Like you I also think it's far better to have someone like Lennon to come off the bench to change things if needed, rather than throw all your ammo on at once and if that doesn't work you've really got fuck all left to radically change anything.

Personally I think without the stupid gambles he's taken this year (despite the poor coaching) we'd be absolutely home and hosed in third by now. If we end up in a CL place it will be in spite of not because of. Last year we failed directly because of them.
 

Grey Fox

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
3,752
Sandro was immense last night gave Davis a really hard time and kept him quite, won the ball in all areas of the pitch and drove forward when he could. He also gave Modric the space to play in unlike Parker who seems to want to occupy the same area.
 
Top