Please point me to the ones that have a psychological effect from his challenges that the next time he (said DM) is approached, the striker or whoever doesn't try to beat him and just passes it out wide or something.prairiemoon said:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Do you think your midfield is strong enough without Nigel?
- Thread starter Jumanji
- Start date
scenecreamer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 3,503
So you're saying Nigels main strength is that opponents fear him? That is a good trait I hadn't considered.Jumanji said:Please point me to the ones that have a psychological affect from his challenges that the next time he (said DM) is approached, the striker or whoever doesn't try to beat him and just passes it out wide or something.prairiemoon said:NDJJumanji said:Superior to whom?
I hate conceding I'd rather win anything- nil ,not a dig each to his ownjohnmc said:Our midfield isnt as strong from a defensive point of view, but is stronger from an offensive view.
Personally I would win every game 4-3 than 1-0 but thats not a realistic situation. Nigel will play and we will win games and Nigel wont play and we will win games as well.
Horses for courses with our squad now. Could be over 60 games all going way on top of internationals
Braggster said:Sabster said:I still don't rate his defensive side of the game that highly though - I neither think he makes enough tackles or is athletic enough to cover the ground that a solely defensive midfielder should.
I view the chief role of the defensive midfielder as being to prevent the centre of the defence being exposed to runners with and without the ball, and to prevent the opposition getting space in area in front of D. It's not really about covering ground or making tackles.
I would note that Fulham's equalizer came because (among other things) Murphy had the time and space to shoot on the edge of the box.
It's exactly these areas in which we are vulnerable when he doesn't play.
I agree with you to an extent - I would have loved Nigel to have come on instead of Zabaleta and if he did I am sure we would have won that match.
Basically what I am saying is that against teams that we are expected to be under a lot of pressure NDJ is a good DM.
But against teams which we dominate I simply think a DM needs athleticism - for when the other team attacks it will be fast and incisive and to put it simply NDJ is not quick enough to stop that (see Swansea match amongst many others) + to occasionally threaten the other teams goal with strength pace and heading (Essien in his pomp).<br /><br />-- Fri Sep 23, 2011 5:50 pm --<br /><br />
Jumanji said:Please point me to the ones that have a psychological effect from his challenges that the next time he (said DM) is approached, the striker or whoever doesn't try to beat him and just passes it out wide or something.prairiemoon said:NDJJumanji said:Superior to whom?
That just simply isn't true.
Jumanji said:How can a request be false?
Ok sorry I will rephrase that: the implied assumption is clearly false.
Hart Dog
Well-Known Member
Citys midfield is super strong with or without Nigel, but there is this feeling that either he thinks he is too good for City, or, he's not quite good enough for City
Love Nige - total tower, but i think something is going on behind the scenes and its probably got a pound sign on it.
Love Nige - total tower, but i think something is going on behind the scenes and its probably got a pound sign on it.
Implied assumption? You mean implication?Sabster said:Jumanji said:How can a request be false?
Ok sorry I will rephrase that: the implied assumption is clearly false.
And who says it implies anything? Maybe it does ;), but isn't that assumption clearly a manifestation of your own judgement?
I hope one day you meet Stephen Ireland and ask him about my "implied assumption."