Discussion: Manuel Pellegrini 2015/16

[lasereyes]

In my first post I stated what Pellegrini said. In you initial response you quoted the full quote INCLUDING the excerpt I took out to express my surprise that:

1. MP doesn't consider Kelechi as a main striker.
2. MP considers Sterling and KDB as more competent striking options.

It's all about opinions, but in mine KDB should have been on the bench as we needed the industry and pace of Navas & Sterling. So if it was up to me Navas would have started and Kelechi would have come on for Bony had he got injured and KDB would have replaced Yaya when fatigue set in considering this was his 3rd game in 8 days. I also anticipated that Villa would be buoyed by having a new manager and being at home too notwithstanding the fact they had an axe to grind with Delph.

IMO, it was obvious Villa would be right up for this match irrespective of their league position, this is why I would have treated Villa away exactly the same as we treated SeVilla away. But That's just me and how I would have tackled the Villa match, the boss did it his way which is what he's paid to do and IMO he didn't get a great deal wrong aside from the changes as I've outline....... all in my humble opinion of course.

I think your opinions are all fair, but I don't think MP was definitively wrong to: (1) start KDB who has been one of our best players this season (albeit a bit off colour of late); and (2) view Sterling and KDB as better striking options for 70+ minutes than Kelechi at this stage of his career. I reckon Sterling/KDB would score those goals at least 8 times out of 10 and it was their excellent movement that resulted in them being in position to get on the end of those Navas crosses.

Kelechi had a full game against Norwich and didnt exactly set the world alight. I am not going to judge an 18 year old based on one performance, but neither will I accept that he is a demon in front of goal based on 1 PL goal so far. To me it was a toss up whether to bring on Kelechi or have KDB/Sterling upfront. I would have been ok with either.

 

[Dribble]

I think your opinions are all fair, but I don't think MP was definitively wrong to: (1) start KDB who has been one of our best players this season (albeit a bit off colour of late); and (2) view Sterling and KDB as better striking options for 70+ minutes than Kelechi at this stage of his career. I reckon Sterling/KDB would score those goals at least 8 times out of 10 and it was their excellent movement that resulted in them being in position to get on the end of those Navas crosses.

Kelechi had a full game against Norwich and didn't exactly set the world alight. I am not going to judge an 18 year old based on one performance, but neither will I accept that he is a demon in front of goal based on 1 PL goal so far. To me it was a toss up whether to bring on Kelechi or have KDB/Sterling upfront. I would have been ok with either.

I hear what you're saying, but I suppose it comes down to do you trust in youth or not? As far as I'm concerned for a club with our ambitions, if Kelechi isn't good enough to fill in as a 3rd striker, then he shouldn't be on the bench.

As I mentioned a few days ago, we seem to be showing little faith in our youth and just seem happy to let other clubs take the risk of playing them and then we come along after the fact and pay £44m. The only way we're going to know if Kelechi is good enough is to play him when needed and to trust he repays our faith in him. I dread to think what was going through his mind after hearing from MP that he's not a striker. If Kelechi isn't trusted enough to be our third striker, questions need to be asked as to why we've gone into this season with effectively 2 senior strikers, with one being injury prone and the other just recovering from malaria and still yet to properly find his feet with us.

I've seen enough of Kelechi to at least give him more that a cursory 7 minutes at the end of the odd match here and there. We along with Chelsea seem to have a aversion to playing our youth products, I hate to say this but could this be down to the fact that both clubs have enough resources to continually go out and buy the near finished/finished article?

 

[grim up north]

I hear what you're saying, but I suppose it comes down to do you trust in youth or not? As far as I'm concerned for a club with our ambitions, if Kelechi isn't good enough to fill in as a 3rd striker, then he shouldn't be on the bench.

As I mentioned a few days ago, we seem to be showing little faith in our youth and just seem happy to let other clubs take the risk of playing them and then we come along after the fact and pay £44m. The only way we're going to know if Kelechi is good enough is to play him when needed and to trust he repays our faith in him. I dread to think what was going through his mind after hearing from MP that he's not a striker. If Kelechi isn't trusted enough to be our third striker, questions need to be asked as to why we've gone into this season with effectively 2 senior strikers, with one being injury prone and the other just recovering from malaria and still yet to properly find his feet with us.

I've seen enough of Kelechi to at least give him more that a cursory 7 minutes at the end of the odd match here and there. We along with Chelsea seem to have a aversion to playing our youth products, I hate to say this but could this be down to the fact that both clubs have enough resources to continually go out and buy the near finished/finished article?

Just depends what your definition of a striker is, think yours and Pellers might just differ and got lost in translation

 

[Dribble]

Just depends what your definition of a striker is, think yours and Pellers might just differ and got lost in translation

I was thinking about this and it occurred to me, what is a main striker anyway? Kun, Bony, Dzeko, Tevez, Balotelli, Adebayor, Negredo, Kelechi?

They can all play centrally in the front line and at some point they'll be engaged by opposition midfielders and defenders whether more advanced or slightly withdrawn. Where does a number 10 stop and a deep lying striker start? If Kelechi was used as a 2nd striker in a 442 and Bony went off injured, would we also remove Kelechi as he can't play as a central striker on his own? Again if we were playing 442 and Bony went off leaving Kelechi as the one striker, would we put KDB, Sterling or even Yaya up as the main striker instead of Kelechi?

Personally I always thought applying a one size fits all philosophy to football players as being difficult anyway as players come in all shapes and sizes with differing levels of pace and stamina. I always considered Tevez as a No 10, but he proved that he can play as a lone striker, so I suppose it all comes down to opinions as to what type of striker a striker is.

 

[cibaman]

Kelechi had a stormer against Palace, then a few days later looked a little bit lost against Norwich. That's how it goes with young players, especially young "strikers".

I just think Pellegrini was reluctant to give him the responsibility of leading the line for 65 mins. He's still integrating him gradually.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

Kelechi had a full game against Norwich and didnt exactly set the world alight. I am not going to judge an 18 year old based on one performance, but neither will I accept that he is a demon in front of goal based on 1 PL goal so far.

He had about 50 minutes and looked as lively as anyone else during that time imo. Just shows how 2 people can see the game differently. I'm a Bony fan, but based on the first half against Norwich then Kelechi was more entitled to stay on the pitch than Bony imo.

I don't really understand why we're continually overlooking our youth players. I know there's a lot of pressure on us to win games but sometimes these guys want to prove themselves and are pretty much guaranteed at this stage in their career not to put in a lethargic performance that unfortunately we see so often (even if not for a full 90 minutes).

Despite all the 'toys out of the pram' type comments, it's an obvious concern that Kelechi's development will stall fairly rapidly. Yes he's training with very good players every day but he needs game time to improve.

If pellegrini has no intention of using the lad when we need him and doesn't trust him to help us get a result when we need it, I don't see the point of him being in the first team squad at all. Game time in the EDS would be more beneficial to him.

Sadly though, he seems to be stuck in no man's land. When pellegrini arrived he was described as 'the engineer' and there seemed genuine belief that he'd be the man to integrate youth into the first team. Mancini was often described as stubborn, but Pellegrini takes the piss in that respect.

 

[Neville Kneville]

I was thinking about this and it occurred to me, what is a main striker anyway? Kun, Bony, Dzeko, Tevez, Balotelli, Adebayor, Negredo, Kelechi?

They can all play centrally in the front line and at some point they'll be engaged by opposition midfielders and defenders whether more advanced or slightly withdrawn. Where does a number 10 stop and a deep lying striker start? If Kelechi was used as a 2nd striker in a 442 and Bony went off injured, would we also remove Kelechi as he can't play as a central striker on his own? Again if we were playing 442 and Bony went off leaving Kelechi as the one striker, would we put KDB, Sterling or even Yaya up as the main striker instead of Kelechi?

Personally I always thought applying a one size fits all philosophy to football players as being difficult anyway as players come in all shapes and sizes with differing levels of pace and stamina. I always considered Tevez as a No 10, but he proved that he can play as a lone striker, so I suppose it all comes down to opinions as to what type of striker a striker is.

A 'main striker' imo, is someone who can get on the ball & do something with it, under pressure from defenders, in a typical match situation, as well as score goals.

All of those players in that list, have proven themselves in exactly that capacity, in the Premier League, at one time or another.

Apart from Kelechi, who, like DeBruyne & Sterling, has no pedigree in the role, but has talent. All 3 are a different option than a typical 'main striker' which may or may not work depending on the game. We won about 10 games last season with people like Silva or Milner playing that position, so it isn't some kind of terrible mistake to try DeBruyne or Sterling there. We have no way of knowing if Kelechi would have been better or worse. If he proves he is better, over the season, then he'll get selected more in that role.

 

[BobKowalski]

So pragmatic Pellers. Ever since Khaldoon give him a massive slapping in the summer along with brand spanking new players Pellers has embraced pragmatism - and the concept of playing with one striker by and large. Good man.

A bit random I know. Just wanted to say it.

 

[Father Paul]

He had about 50 minutes and looked as lively as anyone else during that time imo. Just shows how 2 people can see the game differently. I'm a Bony fan, but based on the first half against Norwich then Kelechi was more entitled to stay on the pitch than Bony imo.

I don't really understand why we're continually overlooking our youth players. I know there's a lot of pressure on us to win games but sometimes these guys want to prove themselves and are pretty much guaranteed at this stage in their career not to put in a lethargic performance that unfortunately we see so often (even if not for a full 90 minutes).

Despite all the 'toys out of the pram' type comments, it's an obvious concern that Kelechi's development will stall fairly rapidly. Yes he's training with very good players every day but he needs game time to improve.

If pellegrini has no intention of using the lad when we need him and doesn't trust him to help us get a result when we need it, I don't see the point of him being in the first team squad at all. Game time in the EDS would be more beneficial to him.

Sadly though, he seems to be stuck in no man's land. When pellegrini arrived he was described as 'the engineer' and there seemed genuine belief that he'd be the man to integrate youth into the first team. Mancini was often described as stubborn, but Pellegrini takes the piss in that respect.

Fully agree. Peller missed a great chance to introduce a talented young player in this instance. The injury gave him a golden opportunity to give Nacho a shout and few if any would have condemned the manager if the lad had a howler. That said I felt Navas done well and perhaps should have started with a certain Mr Toure sat on the bench having a rest. This episode has established one thing at least. As far as the manager is concerned Kelechi is the fourth choice stricker at the club not the third in line as many including myself thought.

 

[come-on-barney]

So pragmatic Pellers. Ever since Khaldoon give him a massive slapping in the summer along with brand spanking new players Pellers has embraced pragmatism - and the concept of playing with one striker by and large. Good man.

A bit random I know. Just wanted to say it.

Spot on that. His remarks of how we played in the Derby were interesting. He said basically he does not like playing this way. Think someone has definitely had a word but not a bad thing.