Dicker - Pathetic performance.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊



mreprice

Active member
Sep 12, 2010
691
Sydney, Australia
Exactly. We were swamped in midfield. The attacking central midfielder who doesn't tackle seems too much of a luxury sometimes. How some people can suggest a midfield of Bridcutt, Lua Lua, Noone and Vicente is laughable. I'd have thought the way forward for the moment is to get grafters like Vincelot and Navarro in there from time to time and let Noone float about on the wings and behind the front 2. Tonight we were simply outmuscled in midfield and deserved to lose.

Glad to see this thread is actually full of sensible, thoughtful, analysis.

Gus places way too much emphasis on attacking qualities at the expense of overall team balance, and so do many people on this board. Maybe, just maybe, we could get away with playing four out of Noone\Vicente\ Lua Lua and CMS\Barnes\Hoskins/Buckley if our full backs and keeper were strong defensively. Playing five is just a joke.

Why this becomes a Dicker thread is because his is the most contentious position in the team.

I do think we should play two up front. (Sadly I think CMS & Murray would be by far the best we could do. We had the choice of the top four scorers in League One last year, and I think Gus got it wrong letting Murray go for the other two).

We can play one purely attacking central midfielder/deep lying attacker - either Vicente, Buckley or Harley.

We can play one out and out winger in Noone or Lua Lua.

And Bridcutt is our most critical player.

That leave one midfield spot. What do we need there? Given the rest of the line-up, the first priority has to be somebody who can stiffen the team defensively, and ican defend opposing wingers if the full backs want to bomb forward. Ideally they can spray a pass or get forward centrally themselves - they don't need to get to get crosses in themselves.

Dicker is in this position but isn't quick enough or strong enough defensively. A box to box midfielder (like Crofts, who Gus sold for a pittance) would be great, but Sparrow doesn't seem up to it. Navarro is too defensive and too slow (but might be the best fit). The rest of the midfielders are too attacking and not strong enough defensively.

In fact the only person in the squad who almost fits the bill is Vincelot.
 






NorthStandN1A

Member
Aug 1, 2011
946
Hove
Well Halleluja

Absolutely spot on but you missed off the biggest problem ie. GK.

Tonight was cringifying and embarrassing as so few actually turned up after the first quarter.

Barnes is OK to come on as a Sub but definitely not good enough to start.

Dicker, Painter, (add Navarro and Sparrow) just aint going to cut the mustard if we have realistic ambitions for the premiership, and, there are others who are good enough for the Championship but !

No-one has to agree but just look at the numbers who left before the end (which of course I did not)

GK goes without saying - thing is who could replace him?

People running for the exits were a disgrace. I can almost expect it from WSL but not in the North. WHAT A JOKE!!!
 




trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
11,365
Hove
I assume that was because Palace put a fresh marker on him in the shape of Parr, as Ramage was frankly shit.

Nooney wasn't seeing so much of the ball by that point - I thought at the time it seemed a pretty reasonable change. Fresh legs for the final half hour. If CMS had got even the slightest touch on that superb cross Lua Lua put in at 1-1, I suppose everyone would be saying Gus is a genius.

But then if my granny had balls, she'd have been my Granddad - as Liam Brady would say.
 




Davemania

Well-known member
Jul 11, 2011
1,752
Uckfield
Thought Dicker was our best player out of a bad bunch tonight. No one had a good game bar him and Noone.

Errr what? Im sorry but dicker is a complete liability at this level, hes not the only one but central midfield is a key position especially on an enormous pitch. He cant run, hes utterly weak in the tackle hes just lethargic all round.
 


ferring seagull

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2010
4,607
Originally posted by NorthstandN1A

Not saying it is easy but, if you have a bucket with a hole in it, you start looking for another bucket.

The whole thing is to do with ambition !
 








mreprice

Active member
Sep 12, 2010
691
Sydney, Australia
Money though isn't it. And we wanted CMS. I don't think anyone would have been happier with Glenn if it meant we couldn't sign Mackail-Smith.

I know in the end it came down to money, but that was more a matter of principle (or stubbornness) than an inability to afford it.

CMS and Murray would have been awesome together.
 






Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
65,089
The Fatherland
Is Dunk beyond criticism? I thought he was ropey at times, especially when he gave the ball away for the Murray shot which went wide.
 


Vegas Seagull

New member
Jul 10, 2009
7,782
Is Dunk beyond criticism? I thought he was ropey at times, especially when he gave the ball away for the Murray shot which went wide.

No, the free header he put over when unmarked 6 yards out at 1-0 cost us the game...only CMS has scored (exc pen which he won) in last 4 games, no midfielders or defenders chipping in at all, Buckley missed big time. So 1 point from 9 & a defeat to Liverpool, we don't have the squad formultiple fixtures, Gus kept us in JPT far too many games last year, our only wobble & going thru against Sunderland has taken it's toll, mentally & physically, with the Liverpool match. If we'd had a free night then bet we'd be higher up & happier this am and losing to Sunderland would be seen as a price well worth paying
 






Husty

Mooderator
Oct 18, 2008
11,998
Is Dunk beyond criticism? I thought he was ropey at times, especially when he gave the ball away for the Murray shot which went wide.

No but he is still very young, and has to date had an excellent season, in contrast to the likes of Dicker, Painter, Ankergren, Barnes, Harley who have struggled from the word go and do not look up to it.
 


Bwian

Kiss my (_!_)
Jul 14, 2003
15,898
calm down people. They had 5 in midfield and pushed us back, pushed us back, so there were massive gaps to our front 2. Harley and Dicker both tried to cover the ground from defence to attack, but got knackered doing so, and by the end were spent.

So why didn't we have a plan B? Not just one that involves changing players. I'm sure Gus and the coaching staff learned a lot from last night and I trust them to get things back on track.
 


trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
11,365
Hove
I know in the end it came down to money, but that was more a matter of principle (or stubbornness) than an inability to afford it.

CMS and Murray would have been awesome together.

Was it? Do we have an unlimited budget for players then? I'd have thought keeping Murray would have meant we'd need to make cuts elsewhere which would have left us with a weak squad overall in Championship terms.. we're still short of options in certain areas.
 






BLOCK F

Well-known member
Feb 26, 2009
6,943
During August,we flattered to deceive and found ourselves top of the table.We have now been found out for what we are,........an average team.Frankly I was amazed we had such a good start,but without some signings in January I reckon we will peter out.IMHO a class goalkeeper is number one priority and I reckon Gus must surely regret not signing one.He is a stubborn bugger and the next few weeks will give us a glimpse of how he and the team cope now that reality has dawned.
 


trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
11,365
Hove
On the back of yesterday's performance, if we could spend all or the majority of the season in the top half I'll be more than happy. That puts me back where I was before a ball was kicked... like Gus said a 'reality check'. Not a bad thing really.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top