How often in the second half of the season did we get sliced through easier than butter?
Carrick sets us up to avoid the massive hole in midfield we had under ETH and Amorim.
Based on Santos and Tielemans, predict Utds third midfield signing
- Thread starter dinostar77
- Start date
Carrick sets us up to avoid the massive hole in midfield we had under ETH and Amorim.
Don’t think so. Our new additions are more robust defensively than some seem to think, and Carrick’s not going to set us up in a way that leaves our midfield too exposed. There might be a few physical games we struggle with, but we’ll outplay most teams.
That was my understanding.
Probably no one but if we do sign someone it could be Berge as cheapest option. Maybe Kone if Roma accept 50m or whatever. Have to say Kone fits age profile (25), type of midfielder we're looking for and had good World Cup. Injury recory would be biggest concern. Last year we signed three attacking players, two from PL and one from European League. Getting Kone would mean the same this summer.
This is demonstrably false based on both who won the league and the CL though. Even City has them. It's not necessarily about pace, it's about being able to get to people quickly and often. If it's not Rice, it's J. Neves, B. Silva. City have just spent mega money on Anderson for that very reason. Even Villa have McGinn, Onana. Cheslea have Caicedo.
Also let's not pretend like we still weren't susceptible to counters last year. I don't think we've done anything to address this and our possesion game is moving higher up the pitch.
The answer is unequivocally yes.
SAF used to have Carrick, Scholes, Fletcher and Anderson. And players like Gibson and Park still got games in midfield.
Sometimes Carrick-Scholes would start, sometimes Fletcher would come in for Carrick, or Anderson for Scholes. Sometimes we would switch to a 3 man midfield in big games.
You need 2 players in every position to last 60 games in a season.
We were still very easy to get through in the second half of last season.
Hence part of the clamour for new midfielders
Exactly. And we do have that in most positions (even three players for right CB and right wing counting Shea Lacey) but only have one LB if Amass is to leave and 1 player missing in midfield with Ugarte injured.
Think its going to be someone like Goretzka at this point. Who else is there? Scott (expensive and dont want to sell), Baleba (injured and expensive), Lewis Skelly (Arsenal wont sell and if they do he will be expensive), Kone (transfer seems off at this point), Touchemeni (No chance)
I think we could mitigate this in getting some recovery pace in defence, if not in midfield. I currently only see Yoro and Dalot as anyone with real pace going back the other way.
Bernardo Silva was agile, aggressive and has stamina but he was never quick or strong or great at covering large distances like Caicedo or Rice. He was a brilliant player for all other reasons.
What about Jorthy Mokio (Ajax, 18 year old, 1.84, left-footed)? He is still very young but has been playing on professional level for quite a while, is a huge talent (if not the best DM talent out there), very good at defending and versatile (he is a DM but also can play as a LB and CB). Could learn from his countryman Tielemans too.
That's not really what you said though and I mean, I watched him against Arsenal covering the whole pitch. Also running back with Havertz one on one and saving a certain a goal. Either way, we don't have anyone as athletic as Bernardo in our midfield and every top midfield has an elite athlete in there.
Lacey has not played 1 minute as RW under Carrick, I believe, he has only played in AM. So I think he sees him as an AM and not a winger, which tracks because he lacks the speed and acceleration required of a good winger.
Equally, Carrick sees Mount more as a CM than an AM. He started our last 2 league games last season and all our friendlies in CM. he has yet to start a game in AM for Carrick, even when Bruno was off. I appreciate that it's a big bet on him staying fit for the majority of the season, but I think he is the 4th CM for now. Arguments can be made for signing a 5th CM or taking a loan option on someone, just to add depth to cover for the Ugarte loss.
For me, going into the season with only Shaw as a senior player for the LB position, is suicide. That should be the priority for the next signing, above the CM.
Last edited:
We have plenty of players as athletic as Bernardo. City also played a very different way. Our midfield can function fine with a mix of Santos, Tielemans, Mainoo or players like that if we want to add further depth. Just like it was the core of one of the best sides of the past 25 years with Carrick and Scholes at the heart of it.
Its Mason Mount guys.
like a new signing
every time he comes back.
Who exactly? Bruno would be the only one close in my eyes, maybe Mount if he could stay fit, but he's not proven that in a long time. Of course it can function, but I assumed we were talking about competing with the best, which there are obvious gaps. Carrick and scholes were regularly flanked by Park, Valencia, Fletcher, etc. You're also going back well over a decade. Any more recent examples? Even if I take Real in their pomp, Casemiro and Modric were serious legs around Kroos.
It needs Carrick to find inventive tactical solutions out of possession and I'm not sure Carrick is Pep levels in that regard. But this is the prevaling tactico take on Twitter as well.
Casemiro at his best was never incredibly quick. Andrey Santos and Mainoo are mobile enough to make it work in midfield.
Also you're comparing our midfield to one of the best all time midfield. It's never going to compare favorably. Just like Ronaldo, Bale and Benzema make our current midfield group look pathetic. We have to just keep incrementally improving our team based on how the manager plays and what he needs and keep addressing the weak points. The midfield is currently not a problem position anymore relative to some other spots we have.
Don't start because it's getting boring
It's bit of an exaggeration to say nothing has been done. Santos and Tielemans whilst not big distance covers with recovery pace themselves are much younger and more mobile than Casemiro, whilst having better passing accuracy and are very good defensive contributors. On the ball, we should be more accurate and more progressive, which should lead to less counters. Of course the overall point still stands in that we need more athleticism going backwards. It seems our approach off the ball (after an initial press) is to cede possession and go into a conservative mid-block. With our individual and defensive quality, this is a practical and understandable decision considering our weak underbelly. I've not seen much of a coordinated (high) press and patterns in pre-season, which is something that worries me although it is admittedly a very small sample size. However, I said the same about our midfield play last season and so far what I've seen in the middle has me quietly hopeful. Perhaps it's 'just' a matter of coaching time and player personnel availability. Even if it doesn't happen, I think we have definitely taken a step forward, which is as good as it gets when it comes to improving overall i.e you can't expect giant leaps.
No, but he got to people quickly and had elite defensive numbers. Again, "making it work" is different to what I thought we're discussing. It will be good and it will also have obvious issues - Chelsea fans even alluded to Santos struggling when the game gets stretched.
No, that was just what I was pointing out as a top example, before I was just comparing PSG and Arsenal. You're more than welcome to give a comparison, I was just throwing out the first one that came to mind. I would say it's not a problem in terms of possession, but it still has the issue of being countered on and potential to be played around by well drilled counters - this is the what the likes of Forest, Brentford, Bournemouth and Brighton will do, so I'd like to see what we plan to address it.
We're moving away from those tactics from what I've seen in pre-season and what was hinted at by Carrick. Generally speaking, we were playing a mid block and attacked on transition. I see us building from the back with shorter line breaking passes and also holding posession higher up the pitch (Santos is camped in the oppos half and aggressively defending in the games I've watched). Tactically, what do you do when inevitably someone breaks through the press? Your full backs are high, your opponents will be breaking at speed into space you've left. The idea that you can tactically adjust for space left by being proactive in attack is just nonsense - you've literally committed players and left space. To mitgate that, you have to have players that can positionally and physically cover the space.
That Jon Mackenzie guys says a lot of nothing there. He then tries to use Bournemouth as an example, in a reply which is renowned for running teams off the park. I'm not really sure what this tactical solution is, no one can really point at one and every team seems to use athletcisim to counter it.
Fair cop, we have done in terms of controlling possession, so I think we'll hold the ball higher and that will lead to much lower turnovers of possession. In turn, making it less basketbally. I don't think that actually stops the effectiveness of counters against us, it will just limit the amount we're exposed to. I don't actually think the solution needs to come into midfield necessarily. I see Dalot and Yoro as two who can cover spaces well, Martinez can defend high aggressively, but as we start to play higher up the pitch, I get a bit tetchy. Robinson would actually be a good shout in that regard.
Yeah it really depends on our approach from the manager and the choices the individuals make on the field to see how well we mitigate our weaknesses. I hope Carrick has some plan or nuance to our high press because I can see issues if we have players like Shaw, who IMO is a big weak link playing in 2nd gear like he does most of a game. We need to be able to squeeze space effectively as a team collectively to reduce the burden on personal responsibility and you can't do that if you're half arsed or not in sync.
But that's basically what I've already agreed with
I agreed with you that Mount will probably end up being fifth choice anyway, particularly if we bring in the versatile player I've mentioned.I think we're arguing over something we largely agree on at this point. My original point was simply that for two midfield positions, most teams have three players taking the bulk of the minutes, a fourth providing proper depth, and then additional versatile/youth options behind them.
If you're saying you don't trust Mount to be that fourth player and would rather have someone more reliable ahead of him, fair enough - I've already said I can understand that. That would leave us with Mainoo, Santos, Tielemans + another midfielder as the main four, with Mount effectively fifth choice and additional versatile cover if needed.
That's hardly miles away from what I've been suggesting
The only thing I disagree with is the idea that we need loads of midfielders because we're competing on four fronts. The examples I originally gave show you don't need five or six specialist CMs all playing significant minutes. You need enough quality and depth to cover two positions without leaving players sitting around barely playing.
So if your argument is now essentially "three main midfielders + a reliable fourth + Mount as additional cover", then we're pretty much agreeing.
Yeah, I get that I said the fourth midfielder is "hardly used", and maybe I could've worded that better. What I meant was they're generally used less than the main three, rather than barely playing at all. And when you actually look at the starts and minutes, barring significant injuries to the main options, I think the numbers back that up.
I wasn't particularly impressed with our pressing in pre-season, but I've not seen our most aggressive pressers in Cunha and Bruno. Weird thing is with Shaw, he will be more than capable - sometimes standout, one game and then absolutely diabolical the next. He also seems to need a Telles type signing behind him to kick his arse into gear. It would be nice to have someone who could actually push him out or push him to a level of consistency we're yet to see.
What Jon is saying is that the easy way to deal with out of possession problem is just to go sign players who have space coverage. But instead, there is a decent space of tactical solutions that could work that don't involve space coverage type players.
It's very minor details but one concrete idea he has for example is:
There's a lot more content out there in which he covers this idea (tactical solutions rather than OOP beast) in more depth. Clearly he could do it with Mainoo and Casemiro, so in theory it's possible.
I think you just have a solid rest defence. i.e., don't leave crazy spaces in behind when you attack. Again City could do it with the likes of Bilva, Foden as the two #10s. Just control + good rest defence + good counter press + in-game tactical management do a lot of the heavy lifting.
For me, Carrick hasn't proven enough in this regard. You need to be an elite tactician to find these types of solutions.
I'm not sure that's particularly accurate, I think that's an oversimplfication of what happens. You can't get around the fact if you want to win the ball higher up the pitch, you need to leave space behind you.
I see that as more of a pressing issue than actually controlling the space behind you. I'll go and have a look at some of his stuff, as I suspect I'm missing something.
See I feel like City do leave crazy spaces behind them and that's exactly why they needed Guehi and Khusanov. They are also very good at packing the middle and Rodri is the best in the business.
I think Carrick hasn't had the requisite players to do it - he's tried it at Boro with lower level players and unfortunately it inevitably becomes boring if you can't score. Pep regularly got out done by Palace and even the mighty Ten Hag and Amorim on the counter. The issue always stems from playing higher up the pitch, you need to handle when the ball does get turned over, because it will happen.
But that's basically what I've already agreed with
I think we're arguing over something we largely agree on at this point. My original point was simply that for two midfield positions, most teams have three players taking the bulk of the minutes, a fourth providing proper depth, and then additional versatile/youth options behind them.
If you're saying you don't trust Mount to be that fourth player and would rather have someone more reliable ahead of him, fair enough - I've already said I can understand that. That would leave us with Mainoo, Santos, Tielemans + another midfielder as the main four, with Mount effectively fifth choice and additional versatile cover if needed.
That's hardly miles away from what I've been suggesting
The only thing I disagree with is the idea that we need loads of midfielders because we're competing on four fronts. The examples I originally gave show you don't need five or six specialist CMs all playing significant minutes. You need enough quality and depth to cover two positions without leaving players sitting around barely playing.
So if your argument is now essentially "three main midfielders + a reliable fourth + Mount as additional cover", then we're pretty much agreeing.
Yeah, I get that I said the fourth midfielder is "hardly used", and maybe I could've worded that better. What I meant was they're generally used less than the main three, rather than barely playing at all. And when you actually look at the starts and minutes, barring significant injuries to the main options, I think the numbers back that up.
What do you mean "if your argument now is" - that was my argument the entire time! In my very first reply to you I said Mount should be the versatile squad option, not the fourth CM.
This whole back and forth boiled down to you saying fourth midfielders are rarely used and me disagreeing. Even if they rarely start, they still get used fairly often. I never claimed we need "need five or six specialist CMs all playing significant minutes" so I have no idea where you're getting that from? I haven't seen anyone claim that. My only argument was that fourth midfielders are used often enough that we shouldn't rely on someone as unreliable as Mount for that role.
He doesn't need a Telles type signing. And we especially don't need a Telles type signing. We just need a starting quality LB.
You're probably right and my instincts agree with you but just wanted to represent the counter point going about in tactico circles that you don't necessarily need a monster ground coverage guy to make a successful OOP system.
If it was up to me, we'd get an LCB to upgrade on Licha, LB to upgrade on Shaw and a ground covering DM. Obviously I don't sit around and nerd out about football tape like a video analyst so I don't know if I'm missing something that these guys are saying.
Yeah that was lazily worded, I meant he needs the pressure of someone gunning for his spot for him to be more consistent. I want to upgrade him.
Yeah, I'm definitely interested to see what they say. I feel like it would be more prevalent if it were so simple!
Yeah, same as me. I think Santos basically does what Martinez does now, maybe not to as high level yet, but same role. I'm gonna have a search!
Fair. Just a little sensitive to this as our LB signings have been so poor for a while which is what's led us here. Telles, Reguilon, Malacia - all lower tier punts which haven't worked out, and so ended up being a false economy. We know Shaw's future has questions marks so it's time to invest in a proper first team solution.
I literally agreed with you on that in my first reply
so I'm not really sure why we're still debating that particular point.The only disagreement here seems to be over the words "rarely used". I used the starts and minutes to explain exactly what I meant - the fourth-choice midfielder generally plays considerably less than the main three. Perhaps "rarely used" wasn't the perfect wording, but I think you're getting far too wrapped up in the semantics rather than the actual point I was making.
So I'll happily clarify the wording: fourth-choice midfielders obviously get used, but generally nowhere near as much as the main three, barring injuries. That's what I meant, the numbers support it, and that's really all there is to it.
I literally agreed with you on that in my first reply
The only disagreement here seems to be over the words "rarely used". I used the starts and minutes to explain exactly what I meant - the fourth-choice midfielder generally plays considerably less than the main three. Perhaps "rarely used" wasn't the perfect wording, but I think you're getting far too wrapped up in the semantics rather than the actual point I was making.
So I'll happily clarify the wording: fourth-choice midfielders obviously get used, but generally nowhere near as much as the main three, barring injuries. That's what I meant, the numbers support it, and that's really all there is to it.
Well kinda, but you also followed up with something I disagreed with. I just think it's easier to try and justify not getting a proper fourth CM if the idea holds that they're rarely used. More accurately, they're often used, even if not heavily used. Which is why I've been fine with us getting someone like Berge rather than spending more on a marquee signing for that role. I want our other three to get the bulk of the minutes, but still believe a fourth CM would contribute in significant ways.
Definitely. In the Page thread, I'm happy if we take a chance on him for a much lower fee, if it means we can seriously invest in a LB. Obviously I'd like both, but LB has moved up my priority list.
Yeah same. I think investing in a top level LB would make a bigger impact on our starting XI than a third new CM would, even though I still deem the latter as essential for squad depth. The balance on our left flank just isn't right with Shaw + Dorgu/Cunha/Rashford.
Who knows as well, we may see a flurry of activity towards the end that will allow us to go for depth. I even think I replied early in the Hall thread to someone, I'd trade a 3rd CM signing for Hall - it was their suggestion, for clarity.