Santoryo
ripping the reward
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2014
- Messages
- 6,302
Exactly this. People in the match day thread were busy conflating the 2. Being poor simply means he'd played poorly through his own fault. That first half performance from Martial was a case of him not seeing enough of the ball because the midfield wasn't doing enough.Surprised that there are a few who think he was poor in the first half yesterday. I don’t recall thinking that. From recollection, I think I told a mate that the few touches he had was positive but he hasn’t been in the game much - as a result of us not really creating much chances, or controlling the match, after going 2 nil up. And even then, he got an assist.
Isn’t there a difference between playing poorly as a CF and not just seeing enough of the ball? I guess a better way I would put it, was that he needed to/we needed to involve him in the game more. That doesn’t necessarily equate to poor. Not as a CF anyway.
I just tried to look at his stats for the match but couldn’t find a first and second half breakdown.
Those saying he wasn't making himself available are having a laugh. Perreira being poor meant that he failed to find or link up with Martial at any time. Martial himself came short, try to make runs and open up space but the ball simply wasn't coming, again expected given how poor Perreira was.
Second half Fred stepped up several notches and Martial started finally enjoying and seeing the ball then behold he can actually make things happen when on the ball, especially close to the box.
Problem with most posters on these boards they just don't understand these things and as soon as they see Martial not involved as much they automatically assume that he's been poor when a deeper look would show how starved he was from the midfield.