Quote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 11:28:08 AMQuote from: Dave on September 24, 2015, 11:24:24 AMQuote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 11:16:44 AMYou tell meI would guess not. A manager might pick a player because he feels that he is better at following his instructions over a better player who doesn't. Is that any different to having 'favourites'?In my eyes yes.Are you telling me that when Bacuna plays at right back it's because Sherwood feels he can follow instructions better than Hutton or Richards?Presumably either that or that he just thinks that Bacuna gives the team more in that position than Hutton.If it were neither of those two things, what else would there be that makes him a 'favourite'?
Quote from: Dave on September 24, 2015, 11:24:24 AMQuote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 11:16:44 AMYou tell meI would guess not. A manager might pick a player because he feels that he is better at following his instructions over a better player who doesn't. Is that any different to having 'favourites'?In my eyes yes.Are you telling me that when Bacuna plays at right back it's because Sherwood feels he can follow instructions better than Hutton or Richards?
Quote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 11:16:44 AMYou tell meI would guess not. A manager might pick a player because he feels that he is better at following his instructions over a better player who doesn't. Is that any different to having 'favourites'?
You tell me
Quote from: Dave on September 24, 2015, 11:54:24 AMQuote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 11:28:08 AMQuote from: Dave on September 24, 2015, 11:24:24 AMQuote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 11:16:44 AMYou tell meI would guess not. A manager might pick a player because he feels that he is better at following his instructions over a better player who doesn't. Is that any different to having 'favourites'?In my eyes yes.Are you telling me that when Bacuna plays at right back it's because Sherwood feels he can follow instructions better than Hutton or Richards?Presumably either that or that he just thinks that Bacuna gives the team more in that position than Hutton.If it were neither of those two things, what else would there be that makes him a 'favourite'?Look at it from my side. Bacuna is not and never will be a right back, so I believe that Sherwood maybe prefers his character than that of his alternative. He maybe a yes man, arse licker, call it what you wish and that suits the manager
What I am saying is that in my opinion Bacuna is a yes man to Sherwood and that it goes a long way with the manager.
Quote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 12:08:19 PMWhat I am saying is that in my opinion Bacuna is a yes man to Sherwood and that it goes a long way with the manager.In what sense? Doing what he's told and following instructions? Well, that's precisely what I said originally. What other things are you suggesting that he is saying "yes" to?
For the record, I think Richards would be better suited in the position of right back over anyone else
Quote from: Dave on September 24, 2015, 12:16:29 PMQuote from: in exile on September 24, 2015, 12:08:19 PMWhat I am saying is that in my opinion Bacuna is a yes man to Sherwood and that it goes a long way with the manager.In what sense? Doing what he's told and following instructions? Well, that's precisely what I said originally. What other things are you suggesting that he is saying "yes" to?Maybe I should say that because of his personality he gets on with the manager better.
Quote from: ktvillan on September 23, 2015, 11:34:22 PMI confess to be somewhat old fashioned and therefore a little unimpressed when people praise Westwood by saying things like he keeps the ball moving, and he keeps play ticking over. I've no real idea what keeping play ticking over means, or why it is supposedly a good thing. Or why keeping the ball moving is something to be admired. I'd prefer a player held on to it rather than keep it moving in the general direction of the opposition, as Westwood all too frequently does. I'd rather have a player who can put a foot in to win the ball, keep hold of it when he needs to, play the right pass at the right time, play an occasional killer pass, get some goals and assists, take a decent set piece, get forward and back quickly and effectively, and impose himself on the game and the opposition especially when we're under pressure. The kind of things that unfortunately Westwood regularly demonstrates he's not very good at. I just don't think he's particularly good I guess, but then I didn't rate Petrov much either.You don't understand why keeping the ball moving is something to be admired? Not every pass can be a killer pass but keeping possession until that opportunity arises is a fundamental part of the game - the water carrier as Cantona described them - and essential to any team. The wrong player in that role results in things like over ambitious passes or dribbles in your own half. There are obviously better players at it than Westwood (then again you could say that for all of our squad) but not to have anyone playing the role because you don't understand it is a dangerous game to play. I think Sherwood likes him because it is the role he used to do himself.
I confess to be somewhat old fashioned and therefore a little unimpressed when people praise Westwood by saying things like he keeps the ball moving, and he keeps play ticking over. I've no real idea what keeping play ticking over means, or why it is supposedly a good thing. Or why keeping the ball moving is something to be admired. I'd prefer a player held on to it rather than keep it moving in the general direction of the opposition, as Westwood all too frequently does. I'd rather have a player who can put a foot in to win the ball, keep hold of it when he needs to, play the right pass at the right time, play an occasional killer pass, get some goals and assists, take a decent set piece, get forward and back quickly and effectively, and impose himself on the game and the opposition especially when we're under pressure. The kind of things that unfortunately Westwood regularly demonstrates he's not very good at. I just don't think he's particularly good I guess, but then I didn't rate Petrov much either.
Quote from: Chris Smith on September 24, 2015, 07:50:39 AMQuote from: ktvillan on September 23, 2015, 11:34:22 PMI confess to be somewhat old fashioned and therefore a little unimpressed when people praise Westwood by saying things like he keeps the ball moving, and he keeps play ticking over. I've no real idea what keeping play ticking over means, or why it is supposedly a good thing. Or why keeping the ball moving is something to be admired. I'd prefer a player held on to it rather than keep it moving in the general direction of the opposition, as Westwood all too frequently does. I'd rather have a player who can put a foot in to win the ball, keep hold of it when he needs to, play the right pass at the right time, play an occasional killer pass, get some goals and assists, take a decent set piece, get forward and back quickly and effectively, and impose himself on the game and the opposition especially when we're under pressure. The kind of things that unfortunately Westwood regularly demonstrates he's not very good at. I just don't think he's particularly good I guess, but then I didn't rate Petrov much either.You don't understand why keeping the ball moving is something to be admired? Not every pass can be a killer pass but keeping possession until that opportunity arises is a fundamental part of the game - the water carrier as Cantona described them - and essential to any team. The wrong player in that role results in things like over ambitious passes or dribbles in your own half. There are obviously better players at it than Westwood (then again you could say that for all of our squad) but not to have anyone playing the role because you don't understand it is a dangerous game to play. I think Sherwood likes him because it is the role he used to do himself.Isn't football all about moving a football around? It is not something that strikes me as particularly valuable in itself, it has to be moved with purpose. I fully understand that at times that purpose may be to shift around the opposition to open up a gap when they are sitting deep, but at other times there will be the opportunity to do a whole lot more . At those times, your basic water carrier type can become a liability unless he has something else to offer. And in Westwood's case he too often drops his bucket by playing it straight at an opponent or getting hustled off the ball way too easily. As for being essential to any team , is that really the case? Do top teams have players whose main talent is that they keep the ball moving? You might point to the likes of Xavi and Iniesta in the successful tika taka teams of Spain and Barcelona, but they were also capable of a lot more besides when the time was right.