BRIGHT ON Q
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 9,135
March was right back a lot of the time because Schelotto struggles in a back 4.
I think its easy to understand - he doesn't want to disrupt our defensive shape & understanding by making certain subs late on in games, presumably considering that the odds of a sub making a positive attacking change are less than the odds of us conceding at the other end as a result, particularly in an away game where we are under pressure and have a valuable point on the line (we'd have been in the relegation zone if we'd lost)
Whether one agrees with this is of course up to them, but the logic makes sense
March wasn't tearing up trees and I'm not sure Izquierdo touched the ball in the second half, yet there was no indication that Knockaert was going to be given a run out at all.
He didn't make the squad v Chelsea and an unused sub today when it felt like we needed to try, well, something or anything in the second half.
I was slightly surprised we didn't see him given a go at some point tonight.
I love Chris.
I will always love his Chris. But I find his lack of attacking subs/delaying until the last few mins of match utterly baffling. When our inverted wingers are such a massive part of how we play I just don’t understand why they’re not subbed when looking totally out on their feet.
No, but it's generally considered desirable, even if only to get a fresher pair of legs on. Our opponents seem to do it almost all the time, often to good effect.It's not compulsory to do so.
March was right back a lot of the time because Schelotto struggles in a back 4.
March wasn't tearing up trees, but crucially with about 10 minutes to go, he battled won the ball and looked up to pass it forward.
Great - no.
At the time Solly was behind the Greyhound almost able to touch the by-line, and the area he was looking to pass into was missing one key component...
...no prizes for guessing what that was!!
The truth is that Knocky simply hasn’t delivered in the Prem, found his level in championship
I thought March was particularly poor, his crossing terrible (corner in the last minute straight at the keeper...) whenever Schelotto, an ever willing running overlapped, March kept giving the ball away, and because he bottles pretty much every tackle he goes for, he gives away numerous free kicks including the one they scored from. He looks like his confidence has evaporated.
I thought March was particularly poor, his crossing terrible (corner in the last minute straight at the keeper...) whenever Schelotto, an ever willing running overlapped, March kept giving the ball away, and because he bottles pretty much every tackle he goes for, he gives away numerous free kicks including the one they scored from. He looks like his confidence has evaporated.
March played as a Right back for long periods. It looked ridiculous having him and schellotto there. Never seen a team play 2 RBs.
I think there's a awful lot of 'rosy specs' surrounding March.
There's no way he was as good as posters thought, before promotion.
It was all but impossible for him to become as good as poster assumed.
After a poster wrote this:-
Solly is more than capable of x 7 - 10 goals, Antony Knock x 10 if both fit across a full season.
I pointed out that in the Premier League that were unrealistic, I was told to put my money where my mouth was, by 2 posters.
I guess they are grateful I wouldn't bet on one of ours 'failing', instead sincerely hoping they were able to my pessimism.
So now in some peoples eyes he's a 'failure' through no fault of his own, he's just not living up to their hype.
The bee in your bonnet is Solly's lack of tackling, that's fine and understandable but, can you please name 1 crunching, 50/50, tackle Solly launched into before the Premier League?
Is that the first time he and Schelotto have played together down the right hand side? This season, March has been dropped despite arguably being our best player in the first 5 games of the season, played left wing, basically as a LB, played right wing (and consequently as a RB), as an interior attacker against Chelski... all whilst having no real opportunity to build any relationship with any particular player due to our full backs changing more regularly than I change my underwear.
And you wonder why the kid isn’t looking quite so sharp in his first season in the top flight...
He did start well and also IMO he was harshly dropped.
He gets pushed into the LB and RB position and Bruno, Suttner, Bong and Schelotto should be in his ear pushing him up.
But, can’t tackle (the free-kick was stupidity). His crossing is so poor, his first touch is to slow the play down, rather than making an incisive movement.
For me he doesn’t warrant a starting place.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I love Chris.
I will always love his Chris. But I find his lack of attacking subs/delaying until the last few mins of match utterly baffling. When our inverted wingers are such a massive part of how we play I just don’t understand why they’re not subbed when looking totally out on their feet.
I think its easy to understand - he doesn't want to disrupt our defensive shape & understanding by making certain subs late on in games, presumably considering that the odds of a sub making a positive attacking change are less than the odds of us conceding at the other end as a result, particularly in an away game where we are under pressure and have a valuable point on the line (we'd have been in the relegation zone if we'd lost)
Whether one agrees with this is of course up to them, but the logic makes sense
They did switch with 10 minutes to go.
But agree that Jose was completely anonymous with terrible decision making on the rare occasions he got the ball. Very surprised AK didn't come on.
Also he is a vastly better finisher that Jose. Another reason why he should be playing.