• Current Donation Goals

Sir

Squad Status: 2019/2020 Season

Recommended Posts

Ham   
4 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

Give up on him.  He works on the basis of proof by repetition and opinion-based evidence.  

Now that sounds a tad ad hominem and I know you hate that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueWill   
On 02/05/2018 at 7:38 PM, Martin1905 said:

He's spent two years playing at right back for us. 

Last year we played predominantly 2 dm's.  Bakayoko has started 36 games for us this season. Whatever way you want to spin it we play with two dm's more often than not.

Nope, under AC he has played at Wing Back, which a pleyer fill the role of full back or winger as the need arises.

I see nothing wrong in principle with using 2 HMF in front of back 3. Where I disagree with you is this claim that we have a back 5 and 2 HMF.

Baka has spent some of those appearances as a 'few minutes sub.' , he is not a HMF and almost equals Cesc's appearances which further clouds your 2 HMF claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueWill   
On 02/05/2018 at 7:40 PM, Droy was my hero said:

He's never going to be a winger again though.  However you want it, Conte either took him on as a FB or he converted him from winger to FB so we got one less winger and one extra FB.  

Seems to deceive everyone except opponents then.

He is a wing back which means he is either a winger of a full back as the need arises. By definition he is still a winger when needed.

His athleticism is there for all to see. You may not rate his ability although his current form is at least good! His athleticism is not subjective and cannot be denied although on TV the chance to witness that through ball-watching cameras is distinctly limited.

Since we are of a similar age this is a serious question for you - Since you believe AC converted Moses to a full back, what attributes do you believe caused AC to view that as a realistic option?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlueWill said:

I see nothing wrong in principle with using 2 HMF in front of back 3. Where I disagree with you is this claim that we have a back 5 and 2 HMF.

 

Then there's not much point discussing it anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlueWill said:

He is a wing back which means he is either a winger of a full back as the need arises. By definition he is still a winger when needed.

His athleticism is there for all to see. You may not rate his ability although his current form is at least good! His athleticism is not subjective and cannot be denied although on TV the chance to witness that through ball-watching cameras is distinctly limited.

Since we are of a similar age this is a serious question for you - Since you believe AC converted Moses to a full back, what attributes do you believe caused AC to view that as a realistic option?

 

Crosses poorly and can't beat an oppo FB (in a trade where having one skill makes the other much much easier as defenders either back off or close you down tightly).  So he is never going to play in the PL as an AM or winger.  Sorry - is just not going to happen again (and didn't happen that much before - since we bought him in summer 2001 he has had 50 PL starts as a winger/AM and 53 as WB for Conte ).  

Instead of asking me what he is, why don't you actually say the words "I think he would be a good AM/winger for Chelsea (or some other PL club)"

Athleticism - I don't see it - can't remember the last time he beat anyone for pace or outjumped anyone.  Not slow, lots of energy, but  nothing more.

Attributes - well for pretty much all top clubs a decent FB or WB earns about half that of a decent AM while being able to play a lot more games a season.  The point being you really don't need to be that good as a WB.  That is precisely why Moses fits there for Chelsea better than he fitted as an AM at Stoke or WHU (let alone Liverpool or Chelsea).  Much like fading wingers at Man U turn out to be better than expensively bought younger FBs, or that Milner can do a job there too.  In the club more than most, Chelsea save money by dropping AMs, only having 3 at the club and playing 5 defenders.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sea foot   

🎶 Like a circle in a circle,

like a wheel within a wheel.

Never ending or beginning, 

like an ever spinning wheel.🎶

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
4 minutes ago, Sea foot said:

🎶 Like a circle in a circle,

like a wheel within a wheel.

Never ending or beginning, 

like an ever spinning wheel.🎶

Quite.  The old "back 3 or back 5" argument again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ham said:

Quite.  The old "back 3 or back 5" argument again

And it never gets old.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueWill   
1 hour ago, Droy was my hero said:

Crosses poorly and can't beat an oppo FB (in a trade where having one skill makes the other much much easier as defenders either back off or close you down tightly).  So he is never going to play in the PL as an AM or winger.  Sorry - is just not going to happen again (and didn't happen that much before - since we bought him in summer 2001 he has had 50 PL starts as a winger/AM and 53 as WB for Conte ).  

Instead of asking me what he is, why don't you actually say the words "I think he would be a good AM/winger for Chelsea (or some other PL club)"

Athleticism - I don't see it - can't remember the last time he beat anyone for pace or outjumped anyone.  Not slow, lots of energy, but  nothing more.

Attributes - well for pretty much all top clubs a decent FB or WB earns about half that of a decent AM while being able to play a lot more games a season.  The point being you really don't need to be that good as a WB.  That is precisely why Moses fits there for Chelsea better than he fitted as an AM at Stoke or WHU (let alone Liverpool or Chelsea).  Much like fading wingers at Man U turn out to be better than expensively bought younger FBs, or that Milner can do a job there too.  In the club more than most, Chelsea save money by dropping AMs, only having 3 at the club and playing 5 defenders.  

So in your opinion AC decided "Moses is rubbish at everything, I could copy numerous predecessors and put him out on loan but no I will play him in a position vital to my preferred 3 CB system"? Hmmm

BTW Luke Shaw>Ashley Young 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, BlueWill said:

So in your opinion AC decided "Moses is rubbish at everything, I could copy numerous predecessors and put him out on loan but no I will play him in a position vital to my preferred 3 CB system"? Hmmm

No - in my opinion Moses is rubbish at most things.

You haven't yet said he'd be good anywhere (I'm waiting), you are relying on the term "wingback" as a definition of Moses.

IMO WBs don't need to be very good and Conte IMO knows that too.  Look at how we play - the WBs stay wide and don't get involved in play, our 8 match their 10 players and every now and then the ball goes out wide to our WB who just has to put in a good cross to be a star.  And Moses can't do that well.  (this is pretty standard knowledge btw, to say that the skills of a WB is some how crucial to a system would be very controversial).

30 minutes ago, BlueWill said:

BTW Luke Shaw>Ashley Young 

You're on a controversial roll today.  IMO shaw is much worse.

 

2 hours ago, Ham said:

Quite.  The old "back 3 or back 5" argument again

You mean it's called "wingback" so he must be good at attacking argument.  
I'm sticking to "It's Moses, he is ordinary, whatever you call him".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now