QuoteFrom todays English Independent
'James McCarthy as natural a 21-year old midfielder as any in the division..'
Not a plodder for Derby county..
no but his performances for us would suggest he's notOriginally Posted by the bear
From todays English Independent
'James McCarthy as natural a 21-year old midfielder as any in the division..'
Not a plodder for Derby county..
The irony is that McCarthy is improved now that he's gone from an attacking midfielder into a holding midfielder. He's actually more of a Trappatoni-style player now than he was before... Yet he still gets ignored.
green had a few stinkers for us which started the ball rolling on him getting dogs abuse.
he is not as bad as is let on, but is not particularily good either. personally i don't want whelan in the side at all. mccarthy has yet to be given a chance so i'm not going to herald him as a great international standard player, but i can't see any good reason why he's not been tried out yet. amazing that he's only 21, 5 full senior seasons behind him already.
In fairness he has'nt been in that roll for all that long and Wigan have only come good over the last couple of weeks.
I think he should be going to the euros and it will be interesting to see if Trap takes him.
nail on the head as to why he's not rated by many
started well enough and scored in his debut. was reasonable then against armenia away, started really well against russia a month later but like the rest of the team that night wasnt great after.
as i said not a world beater but not the disaster many make him out to be either.
I seen Keith Andrews throw himself at balls against Russia over there, and my over riding thought was that in spite of the potential and arguable superior technique, I couldn't imagine McCarthy doing the same thing.
I haven't seen much of McCarthy since* to say whether he's improved or not, but it's that discipline, appetite and bite that Trapp seems to prefer in the middle.
(* I've seen F all football lately for one reason or another. Getting the Sports Packages back in for next season. Don't care what she says.)
Interesting that Wigan were good both with and without the ball last night. I liked how they soaked up pressure yet still committed bodies going forward.
I'd still like to see us put more pressure on the ball when not in possession, and break with more purpose and retain the ball better when we have it. I was impressed by McCarthy's composure last night but felt that the whole team was well drilled and more adventurous than we usually are.
It wasn't unlike the game in Liege in some respects.
That said, on another day they'd have been spanked by Arsenal.
I've seen McCarthy put in shifts for Wigan all season against decent teams.
I think both McCarthy and Gibson are good players. Gibson is particularly good at retaining possession under pressure. It's one of the things I like about him.
In fairness to Gibson, pretty much all of Everton disappeared on Saturday.
Could it be argued though that if we had a midfield capable of controlling the ball for a reasonable period then we wouldn't have to rely on players hurling their bodies at the ball in last-ditch blocks??
about mid way through the first half (25 mins) McCarthy tried a slightly backwards cross field pass which was cut out and almost lead to
a goal. He was played into a tight spot though and being closed down. Bit careless.
Could it also be argued that if we had a defense that didnt automatically pump long balls up to our strikers that the midfield might see more of the ball thus allowing them to control the ball for a reasonable period meaning we wouldn't have to rely on players hurling their bodies at the ball in last-ditch blocks??
I like high energy football. A little bit rock and roll. Many finishes instead of waiting for the perfect one.
I would argue that that could be argued also.Could it also be argued that if we had a defense that didnt automatically pump long balls up to our strikers that the midfield might see more of the ball thus allowing them to control the ball for a reasonable period meaning we wouldn't have to rely on players hurling their bodies at the ball in last-ditch blocks??
One of the problems with playing the ball of of defence is of course that when you lose the ball there is nobody left to make those
last ditch blocks!!
If the long ball game is good enough for Chelsea then surely it is good enough for us?
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...e-7654779.html
Chelsea are no Barcelona and I don't think we are either?
Well what better way to test the theorem than in the Chelsea V Barcelona match coming up in a few minutes,
long ball V short ball who will win?
Book makers say Barca Chelsea (17/4) v (16/5) Barcelona (8/11)
I think a 1-1 draw.
1-0 Chelsea and the long ball. ( A mistake from the Spanish Keane).
Still 45 mins to go so my 1-1 is still on.
so Trap was right all along
Well pretty much, however this is only the first leg and Barcelona are still favourites to win the Cup.
Chelsea were pretty lucky to win, could have been 1-3.
Last edited by tricky_colour; 19/04/2012 at 12:19 AM.
But that's the way it often is in these games.
Here's a virtual fact: the inferior team will always get at least one good chance to score. If it takes its chance(s) while the better team misses its chances the lesser team will win. Happens regularly. Switzerland v Spain at WC10, Eng v Spain at Wembley last year, Chelsea last night…
That's why I always hold some hope for Ireland no matter who we play.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks