Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Sweden away I believe. I remember Forde playing well and Greene doing ok. Long had a chance early on that he ballooned over
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Sweden away I believe. I remember Forde playing well and Greene doing ok. Long had a chance early on that he ballooned over
ya longs chance was it in the 27th minute or somewhere around that, I was behind the goals. Such a great chance he should have done much better.
I think it's Greg Halford. It's difficult to make out his number for the Hoolahan goal but from later on in the highlights it looks like number 15. He's awful for the other two goals also, as well as a tame attempt to block Jerome's shot in the next clip after Wessi's goal.Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
Named in the EFL team of the week http://www.efl.com/news/article/2016...016-10-17_1707
Green had Ibra in his pocket from what I remember.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82
That game was the highlight of a terrible campaign really. Was a decent point and performance away from home.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Yes I had look a it myself and came to the same conclusion, I think he normally plays left back but got dragged over to the right trying to get the ball, when he failed he just gave up and quit playing! Notice the Norwich attack didn't there was a player running in looking for a tap in. What you might call the bare minimum, I think he has some England U20 caps, but not quite good enough to fail at internatinal level it seems!!Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Wes scored a 9.51 in his stats for the game!
Man of the match, 2nd of the season, same as Brady, Hourihane tops the lot with with 3 MoM awards, he (Connor) also has 3 goals and 3 assists.
Clarke is 7th in the stats Wes 14th.
Subbed last night when the going got tough. Norwich were 0-2 up but pulled one back after 55. Hoolahan is then subbed after 63 and Fulham equalise after 66. Now I don't know whether he was injured but it looks like a tactical sub to try and hold back the flood which didn't work. Does Hoolahan try too much on the ball that managers don't like it when trying to defend a lead ?
Not sure it's that he tries too much on the ball but they may see him as too big a luxury in certain fixtures or situations. I'm pretty sure any goal concession stats with and without Hoolahan on the pitch make a mockery of this mindset though. A player with the ability to hold possession, calm things down or better still help put the game to bed can be a far greater asset in these scenarios sometimes. Last night would have been his third game in nine days though so perhaps it was just a fatigue issue.
I think he is very good when its level or losing and you want someone to try things and get on the ball and make things happen. There is a difference to someone who actually calms things down by just holding up the ball and waiting for others around him to make a simple pass or the easy pass. Hoolahan, half the time it seems will always try something extra or try and take an extra touch, and quite often gets dispossesed or it doesn't come off. If you are trying to hold onto possession and hold onto a lead, this isn't really what you want. It makes sense to take him off. Maybe playing him deeper when a lead is taken is an idea, but most managers seem to be happy to take him off and replace with a battler or defensive midfielder.
Best form of defence is attack, I think you would get more points overall, but you have to be brave to do it.
Mnd you I don't think Wes generaly lasts the full 90?
Forgettable day for Wes today. He was badly at fault for a couple of Brighton's goals.
O'Neill alludes to the lack of physical strength that POSH bemoans.
O'Neill on Wes Hoolahan's Ireland role
Lack of physical strength or stamina?Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Wes was vulnerable to a sloppiness entering into his game v Austria, was that old age kicking in?
Probably both. Personally I don't see the lack of physical strength as a major issue with Hoolahan. He gets shrugged off the ball easily maybe once or twice a game max, usually in an area of the field where we've plenty of time to recover. Most of our other players cough up possession much more easily despite having physical strength in abundance.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
I honestly don't know where this kerfuffle is coming from.
He lost the ball cheaply once in the first half and I don't recall any other instances that stood out.
Whelan lost the ball similarly cheaply shortly before he went off.
Arter and Hendrick lost the ball as much as Hoolahan.
On at least two occasions I counted he was surrounded by Austrian shirts in tight space and managed to find Arter but Arter lost possession.
Sure what he is he to do if other players aren't on his wavelength?
He offers composure and skill that nobody else does for us.
Goal against Sweden, assist against Italy, involved in our last four competitive goals.
What is there to complain about exactly?
God forbid it was Hoolahan and not Whelan pulling out of that challenge in Moldova for the opposition goal!
For me there are two problems with HOolahan that have stopped him being a truly top player:
He loses possession too cheaply due to a lack of strength and a hesitation on the ball from time to time. I put the first one down to probably not getting the right S&C from a very early age and not being involved in a professional setup till near his mid 20's. The second one I put down to playing a lower level consistently that he would normally have that time on the ball so he can afford to hesistate a little as playing at that level you would have that extra yard or half a second to think about things. Funny thing is sometimes he seems to overthink things. I put that down to also not being picked up earlier and involved at a higher level earlier in his career, the thinking behind this is he would have erradicated the sloppiness in order to evolve into a better player at that level, consistently not having the yard of space or the time to dilly dally.
The second one, could be related to wavelength, he seems to pick the wrong pass or try something that is silghtly frustrating. But the thing is, it was this kind oF inventiveness that setup brady to put in the ball for walters in the first half. This flick came off perfectly and put brady in space to whip in a cracking ball. There are occassions when he does this and you are like WTF Wes. Sometimes it works somtimes it doesn't. I am happy enough once he isn't doing it too often and he isn't doing it in defense - although he has done that too on occassion.
He put through Walters with an excellent ball out of nothing at the beginning of the second half right before we scored.
I say put through but Walters was on a different planet at the time.
Now if we had a top class striker and not Walters, or for the sake of a long argument, Long, playing for us, 9 times out of 10 that would have been a goal. At least if Long was available he would have had the footballing intelligence and pace to react to the pass - whatever about the resulting finish.
That's two very solid chances he set up in an away game against Austria. And it's the momentum Wes gave us and the confidence he gives our other players that allowed us to seize the initiative after those two missed chances.
Before this campaign, a lot of observers said that the margin of error against teams like Austria, away from home no less, was so small that we may only get one bonafide chance to score a goal in a game like this - and stated the importance of being ready to to take it.
He set up two.
I don't see a need for a postmortem re: Wes.
I think his contributions against Moldova and Austria and the team performance against Serbia and Georgia speaks for itself.
I think he is our best player on the ball by a mile but there was definitely more than one instance where he was just plain sloppy in possession in Austria. I’d say he ran into avoidable trouble 3 or 4 times and at least once in a dangerous position. He also delayed a simple pass on a couple of occasions and turned into trouble instead. His decision making wasn’t as good as it often is. He’s not being indicted for war crimes, just uncharacteristic mistakes.
I wouldn't say he was our best player by far or at all but he pulled out the big guns when it mattered.
I'd understand the plaudit "best player on the ball by a mile" to be different than "best player by far".Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
His physical strength is the same, I think O'Neill was referring to his stamina, his ability to last out a game and has questions to do with best use of his talents in relation to his age affected dwindling stamina.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Is O'Neill an ageist?
Sorry, might need to invest in a set of glasses soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Then smash them over my head in the hope it'll teach me to read better.
Spectacles if appropriate may assist with a vision issue but will hardly help with inner madness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
He seems to talk about both in the article. He says that physical strength is usually necessary in top level football and Wes is a bit fragile in that sense. He then adds the bit about stamina, managing his game time, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Yes MO'N talked about both but what's changing is not Wes' strength, it's his endurance levels in a game and the direct question is about how long he can last, therefore MO'N's probably upping the magnitude of his managerial responsibility by indicating that he's the man to make those delicate burdensome decisions :)
What would be a greater issue is if more mistakes were creeping into Wes' game
But the real question is what is the problem with his endurance ? It's not that he is only being subbed in the last year but has been subbed around the 70/75th minute at club level for a number of years now when other players of his age have remained on the pitch. To my unprofessional eye he still seems to be motoring well when up goes his number on the board. I wonder how many games has he finished in the last 3 seasons. Appears bizarre to me but obviously the managers see something I don't.
I was going to go on a ramble. I'll keep it short. Hoolahan offers something that none of our other players currently being considered for selection offer. He retains the ball more often than not in positive areas of the pitch, and always looks to retain possession as a first option. I'll take that everyday of the week and twice on Sunday's. If he loses possession 50% of the time trying to engineer something, I wouldn't care. There's only so many times the Germany game rope-a-dope trick will work. Wes offers an alternative.
I have felt for a while that O'Neill always seems ready to knock Hoolahan.
I agree with the rest of your post but I think this is a bit harsh. He picks him more often than not and often talks about his qualities. He probably feels the need to dampen some of the hysteria surrounding Hoolahan which is probably fair enough given he not always going to see him as the best option, rightly or wrongly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom
I don't really buy the Hoolahan stamina thing to be honest. I've never seen Wes walk off a pitch looking absolutely wrecked. I've seen Walters, Whelan, Hendrick all leave the pitch looking like they've run a marathon but never Wes.
He is definitely lightweight, there's no getting around that. And I understand a manager taking him off to protect a lead if the game is getting more physical and he can tend to lose the ball at times.
He was in bits at the end of the Germany game. Think he'd forgotten that we'd used a substitution early on because he kept signalling to the bench that he had to come off. When Germany were in possession in the late stages of the game, he was barely moving, but he'd start again if we got possession back
Does he work much harder than everyone else? I'd love to see those stats which indicate how much ground a player covers.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
He's got little legs too, so covering the ground is harder for him :)
Well you can say he is light weight but then when it comes to creativity he is a heavy weight, he can create an opening in an instant
with a bit of quick thinking and ingenuity when all the huffing and puffing from the rest of the team is getting us nowhere.
He may not weight much but he is worth his weight in gold whereas with some others it would be more a case of worth their weight in spuds after a bumper harvest.
He has the ability to unlock defences and that is priceless.
Having seen your comment, I watched the incident. Lovely back heel by Hoolahan and Walters read it and got to the ball but was closed out by three defenders - not helped by the fact, I'll admit, that he miscontrolled it. So he wasn't on a different planet at all. You shouldn't turn your pro-Murphy campaign in to an anti-Walters campaign, or am I too late.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
I disagree that O'Neill looks to knock Wes when talking about him.
Last week he was speaking of how they plan to manage him closely over the next couple of years....
which reads to me like they rate him so highly they're planning on him always being involved for the next couple of years (they can't even foresee having to drop him!) and they are paying special attention to him in order that he can deliver us his best possible football. Wes is pretty old, in fairness. I know some here might try and argue about the concept of time/physics/whatever.....but I am happy to understand that 34 IS old, 35 is really quite old and 36 is kinda ancient.
I think that sounds very sensible and respectful. If he's ever said anything negative I bet it was to Tony O'Donoghue and is therefore null and void as their confrontations are like something you'd witness in a Westmeath chipper at 2am on a Saturday night.
I think there was an article online saying how Wes is actually one of MON's most regularly used players.
No he is never left waiting, hanging around.Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
It was poor play from Walters. You can dress it up any way you want to.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan