Future Wingers

[Larry Stranger]

There's way too much emphasis put on pace and power, even though we see the most creative player in world football in De Bruyne every week, who is quick but not lightening quick. There's no point being able to sprint like a fucking mad man into a great position, if your delivery is piss poor (e.g. Adama Traore) and that's even more pertinent against deep and narrow defences. I'm not suggesting pace isn't important because it absolutely is, however, it has to be balanced with quality delivery.

First of all De Bruyne is a midfielder. Pace isn't needed as much for that position. If you also noticed when he did go to the byline to put in a cross, it was actually blocked quite a lot this season. Opposition learned to track his runs. Of course there is no point if you are lightning quick and have a piss poor cross. Sterling isn't used this way for that reason. So no Traore isn't what we need especially against deep defences like you say, but we already have 2 really good players in Mahrez and Bernardo who you'd think are perfect to break down a low block. They both have good crosses and trickery yet rarely played on the left and weren't effective when they did.

 

[Ederson's smiley tattoo]

I suggest you go and watch his assists again on YouTube; there's one low powerful cross against Bournemouth and one pullback against West Ham, the rest are either hopeful high balls/punts which Giminez throws himself at or deflected crosses. Assists doesn't mean his delivery has been great, he's had a purple patch in numbers for him but even then they're still not great.

I've watched almost every Wolves match broadcasted on TV this season, Traoré has definitely improved his crossing. Assists or not, his delivery is good for a winger

 

[ctid1894]

I've watched almost every Wolves match broadcasted on TV this season, Traoré has definitely improved his crossing. Assists or not, his delivery is good for a winger

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

[hcblue95]

Dwight Mcneil would be a Rodwell type signing in my opinion.

 

[ctid1894]

First of all De Bruyne is a midfielder. Pace isn't needed as much for that position. If you also noticed when he did go to the byline to put in a cross, it was actually blocked quite a lot this season. Opposition learned to track his runs. Of course there is no point if you are lightning quick and have a piss poor cross. Sterling isn't used this way for that reason. So no Traore isn't what we need especially against deep defences like you say, but we already have 2 really good players in Mahrez and Bernardo who you'd think are perfect to break down a low block. They both have good crosses and trickery yet rarely played on the left and weren't effective when they did.

Mahrez absolutely no doubt could play down the left with his skillset but he's too selfish. Mahrez plays for Mahrez, not the team. Bernardo hasn't got the range of delivery, he's very good in tight intricate spaces, his short range passing is superb but he's not got the power to provide different types of crosses. All Bernardo's crosses are pin point, floated onto someone's head in space, he's never going to smash one across the six yard box or whip a cross in like De Bruyne.

And of course a lot of De Bruyne's crosses were blocked, low hard crosses always will be. They're high risk, high reward; the previous two seasons have resulted in pundits calling it the "City goal" because it happened so frequently when we played Sterling and Sane down their natural wings.

 

[Larry Stranger]

Mahrez absolutely no doubt could play down the left with his skillset but he's too selfish. Mahrez plays for Mahrez, not the team. Bernardo hasn't got the range of delivery, he's very good in tight intricate spaces, his short range passing is superb but he's not got the power to provide different types of crosses. All Bernardo's crosses are pin point, floated onto someone's head in space, he's never going to smash one across the six yard box or whip a cross in like De Bruyne.

And of course a lot of De Bruyne's crosses were blocked, low hard crosses always will be. They're high risk, high reward; the previous two seasons have resulted in pundits calling it the "City goal" because it happened so frequently when we played Sterling and Sane down their natural wings.

I'd argue quite the opposite. A low ball flashed across the box behind the defence, but just out of the reach of the keeper for a tap in is exactly what Pep wants. That's what makes it a "City goal". The risk is actually low because if it doesn't come off the ball is still far from our own goal so the opposition can't counter quickly. Higher risk is actually a high cross which the defender can head out where the ball is in an area for the opposition to counter quickly. Highest risk is taking a shot at goal from deep and it getting blocked really high up.

This is why the "City goal" happened frequently with Sane and Sterling. Sane with his pace got behind the defence and put the ball in for Sterling to tap in. Sane was also really good at finishing on the break which is what we need.

 

[ctid1894]

I'd argue quite the opposite. A low ball flashed across the box behind the defence, but just out of the reach of the keeper for a tap in is exactly what Pep wants. That's what makes it a "City goal". The risk is actually low because if it doesn't come off the ball is still far from our own goal so the opposition can't counter quickly. Higher risk is actually a high cross which the defender can head out where the ball is in an area for the opposition to counter quickly. Highest risk is taking a shot at goal from deep and it getting blocked really high up.

This is why the "City goal" happened frequently with Sane and Sterling. Sane with his pace got behind the defence and put the ball in for Sterling to tap in. Sane was also really good at finishing on the break which is what we need.

I completely agree with low hard crosses being what Pep wants. You've completely jumped the gun in terms of understanding what I meant by high risk though. The only reason I said it's high risk is due to the chances of it being blocked and subsequently losing possession when it could easily be retained by passing backwards (and trying to "walk it in" like we do every time with inverted wingers).

Getting in behind is as much, if not more, about positioning and patterns of play designed to move opposition defenders out of position. Pace just makes that process easier.

 

[Paul1970]

I've watched almost every Wolves match broadcasted on TV this season, Traoré has definitely improved his crossing. Assists or not, his delivery is good for a winger

I just can’t see him being good enough for a top table team like us . Would he be good enough for Barca , Madrid, Liverpool , juve . I think not mate

 

[Ederson's smiley tattoo]

I just can’t see him being good enough for a top table team like us . Would he be good enough for Barca , Madrid, Liverpool , juve . I think not mate

He's not good enough for us, never said it. Just pointed out that the guy I answered to was wrong regarding Traoré's crossing abilities. He has improved his delivery a lot

 

[ctid1894]

He's not good enough for us, never said it. Just pointed out that the guy I answered to was wrong regarding Traoré's crossing abilities. He has improved his delivery a lot

You didn't because I disagreed, his crossing is fucking atrocious. Even I can fluke the odd spectacular goal and cross, it doesn't mean I'm any good. It's all about consistency (e.g. De Bruyne) and the only thing consistent about Traore is his inconsistency.

 

[ctid1894]

Dwight Mcneil would be a Rodwell type signing in my opinion.

Why?

 

[Ederson's smiley tattoo]

Why?

Because he's bang average. The only reason to buy him is to stack up on englishmen due to homegrown quota

 

[ctid1894]

Because he's bang average. The only reason to buy him is to stack up on englishmen due to homegrown quota

And you've seen him live how many times? Thought so.

 

[Ederson's smiley tattoo]

And you've seen him live how many times? Thought so.

He runs in a straight line and crosses, and because he isn't near Sané levels when it comes to speed he would struggle and become too predictable with us. If he comes to City I can only see him having a future at LB

 

[ctid1894]

He runs in a straight line and crosses, and because he isn't near Sané levels when it comes to speed he would struggle and become too predictable with us. If he comes to City I can only see him having a future at LB

That'll be zero then, just proving my point :)

If you only watch one game, watch Liverpool v Burnley, he does Alexander-Arnold at least 4 times with pace, different tricks and leaves him for dead.

 

[Larry Stranger]

I completely agree with low hard crosses being what Pep wants. You've completely jumped the gun in terms of understanding what I meant by high risk though. The only reason I said it's high risk is due to the chances of it being blocked and subsequently losing possession when it could easily be retained by passing backwards (and trying to "walk it in" like we do every time with inverted wingers).

Getting in behind is as much, if not more, about positioning and patterns of play designed to move opposition defenders out of position. Pace just makes that process easier.

When KDB puts in a low cross he always thinks it will get past the defender and not get blocked or he wouldn't even try. Just because it does from time to time he still needs to take that chance. That's why when it does get blocked we try to counter press to get the ball back. If we held it up every time to retain possession we'd never get a shot off.

Anyway the main reason why IMO why we need someone with pace is because we've been poor in converting when we break quickly. We need someone who can finish and also make good decisions when to pass it when we do break. It was so frustrating to watch how many time we had those opportunities and see it squandered. Also of all our wingers we only have Sterling who has pace and we really could use someone else. I honestly think McNeil would have the same effect as playing Angelino as a winger.

 

[ctid1894]

When KDB puts in a low cross he always thinks it will get past the defender and not get blocked or he wouldn't even try. Just because it does from time to time he still needs to take that chance. That's why when it does get blocked we try to counter press to get the ball back. If we held it up every time to retain possession we'd never get a shot off.

Anyway the main reason why IMO why we need someone with pace is because we've been poor in converting when we break quickly. We need someone who can finish and also make good decisions when to pass it when we do break. It was so frustrating to watch how many time we had those opportunities and see it squandered. Also of all our wingers we only have Sterling who has pace and we really could use someone else. I honestly think McNeil would have the same effect as playing Angelino as a winger.

I don't understand the top paragraph, again I don't know what you think you've read but it's completely irrelevant to anything I've posted.

As for pace, I agree. However I think you're playing down McNeil's pace because you don't like his name. Like I said to another poster if you only watch one game watch the Burnley's trip to Anfield and how he destroyed TAA time and time again. I know TAA isn't the best defensively but other than Wanker Biscuit, there's not many good defensive minded fullbacks about.

 

[Larry Stranger]

I don't understand the top paragraph, again I don't know what you think you've read but it's completely irrelevant to anything I've posted.

As for pace, I agree. However I think you're playing down McNeil's pace because you don't like his name. Like I said to another poster if you only watch one game watch the Burnley's trip to Anfield and how he destroyed TAA time and time again. I know TAA isn't the best defensively but other than Wanker Biscuit, there's not many good defensive minded fullbacks about.

Sorry if I misunderstood. I was replying to this. "The only reason I said it's high risk is due to the chances of it being blocked and subsequently losing possession when it could easily be retained by passing backwards". So I used KDB as an example of putting in a cross instead of him trying to keep possession for possession sake.

You might thing McNeil is good enough. Okay I said he has good qualities. I'm not judging him on his name I just don't see him suiting us. Like I said I think Mahrez, Bernardo, Angelino or even Phil would do a similar job to him on the left so our opinions differ. Okay so he destroyed TAA. Not going to play pool every week who doesn't really play a low block. When defences double up on him and usher him inside we'll see. Even Sane and Sterling aren't always effective against a low block on their own. That's when KDB, Gundo or Dave try to play chipped balls over the top to try to breach the defence. It's the job of the winger to get behind to put in the cross. If you think McNeil can do that then fine. I'm looking at the system we play and players that suit it.

You know the qualities McNeil has would be okay for a left sided midfielder like doing what KDB does but on the opposite side. I don't know how good his ball skills and passing are, however, for the wingers I just want a different skill set. Like a said before I want someone who can also be like a forward and can finish on the break as well.

 

[ctid1894]

Sorry if I misunderstood. I was replying to this. "The only reason I said it's high risk is due to the chances of it being blocked and subsequently losing possession when it could easily be retained by passing backwards". So I used KDB as an example of putting in a cross instead of him trying to keep possession for possession sake.

You might thing McNeil is good enough. Okay I said he has good qualities. I'm not judging him on his name I just don't see him suiting us. Like I said I think Mahrez, Bernardo, Angelino or even Phil would do a similar job to him on the left so our opinions differ. Okay so he destroyed TAA. Not going to play pool every week who doesn't really play a low block. When defences double up on him and usher him inside we'll see. Even Sane and Sterling aren't always effective against a low block on their own. That's when KDB, Gundo or Dave try to play chipped balls over the top to try to breach the defence. It's the job of the winger to get behind to put in the cross. If you think McNeil can do that then fine. I'm looking at the system we play and players that suit it.

You know the qualities McNeil has would be okay for a left sided midfielder like doing what KDB does but on the opposite side. I don't know how good his ball skills and passing are, however, for the wingers I just want a different skill set. Like a said before I want someone who can also be like a forward and can finish on the break as well.

I'm utterly confused.

You say you want a different skillset; a winger with pace who can get in behind on the break and finish on the break. Before that in the paragraph above you state McNeil only destroyed TAA because Liverpool played a high line.

Previously you've said Bernardo and Mahrez have an ideal skillset for playing against a low block. You also say when we play against a low block and KDB, Silva and Gundogan are chipping balls over the defence, and you expect a winger to get in behind. That's the complete opposite of what Bernardo and Mahrez do.

You also state McNeil would be okay doing from left sided midfielder what KDB does from the opposite side, who you also admit gets in behind to provide low crosses, yet you question McNeil's abilities for creating chances against a low block; the one area were KDB's delivery is absolutely critical to everything we do.

There's 3 weird contradictions; my apologies if I'm getting you mixed up with a different poster but that doesn't make sense. It looks like you just want to criticise everything about McNeil and say you want a different skillset which you absolutely have a right to do, it's your opinion but then go out of your way to praise other City players who have similar skills playing against a low block, I'm confused.

 

[Larry Stranger]

I'm utterly confused.

You say you want a different skillset; a winger with pace who can get in behind on the break and finish on the break. Before that in the paragraph above you state McNeil only destroyed TAA because Liverpool played a high line.

Previously you've said Bernardo and Mahrez have an ideal skillset for playing against a low block. You also say when we play against a low block and KDB, Silva and Gundogan are chipping balls over the defence, and you expect a winger to get in behind. That's the complete opposite of what Bernardo and Mahrez do.

You also state McNeil would be okay doing from left sided midfielder what KDB does from the opposite side, who you also admit gets in behind to provide low crosses, yet you question McNeil's abilities for creating chances against a low block; the one area were KDB's delivery is absolutely critical to everything we do.

There's 3 weird contradictions; my apologies if I'm getting you mixed up with a different poster but that doesn't make sense. It looks like you just want to criticise everything about McNeil and say you want a different skillset which you absolutely have a right to do, it's your opinion but then go out of your way to praise other City players who have similar skills playing against a low block, I'm confused.

No problem mate.

What it comes down to is we play a totally different style to Burnley. No denying that. So even the way we counter attack differs. The times when we do counter we counter quickly with numbers. One way is when the opposition has a set piece. The ball gets knocked down, Silva plays a little ball to KDB and the front line is off in a hurry. This is by design. KDB leading the break with Sterling, Sane and Jesus was IMO the most terrifying for defences. That's why I want someone who can finish those chances off. The other way we counter is when we already scored a goal. The opposition comes forward and opens us an we counter again with pace.

So when McNeil so called destroyed TAA how did he do it? Was it a lightning quick counter going right down their throat? I didn't watch the game, but I figure it was more that the ball got turned over, Burnley were trying to counter, but Liverpool was still getting into shape to defend so he was taking TAA on the wing while there were still the Liverpool center backs in position. It's different from how we counter.

There's lots of time when the ball turns over to us we don't just try to counter like how Burnley would. We keep possession, play back to the keeper, play out from the back. Opposition most times get back into a defensive shape. This is what happens majority of the game and why most times teams are in a low block. But we do counter a specific way like I said.

Bernardo and Mahrez are different wingers. I don't even consider them wingers. They cut in from the right because they lack pace for one. They aren't used the same way as Sane and Sterling who get the chipped balls in getting behind the defence. Since they lack pace to get around the fullback (if they played on the left) they cut inside from the right. There is more space for them to operate cutting in then (if playing on the left) running into the byline. Their options are linking up with De Bruyne or Walker/Cancelo or getting a shot off for themselves.

Kev gets behind the defence from the midfield and not from a winger perspective. The ball gets played on the wing to Mahrez or Bernardo who occupies the fullback (the quicker defender) and they play Kev into space most times because the opposition midfielder falls asleep and doesn't track his runs. However, like I said before they are learning to track his runs too. If he doesn't go to the byline he sends in the cross from a deeper position.