Kolarov over Clichy?

[pauljv92]

Now I've been this guys biggest critic at the start of the season, against superior opposition he looked like he couldn't cope, culminating in a truly disastrous performance against United in the FA cup, salvaged partially by a free kick.

But recently, in the last month, or maybe 2 months. He really has stepped up a gear, and I'm not deluded I know he's no world beater at left back but he is far far far superior at crossing and general attacking play than Clichy. Against Sunderland for example he produced 16 crosses in open play this weekend, only once has a player made more in a Premier League game this season and I know not all of them were great but he is a genuine threat down that left wing whereas Clichy simply isn't.

And I know some will say, well he's a defender, who cares which one is better at attacking?. I wouldn't argue against this, I know Clichys pace and positioning makes him a better defender than Kolarov, in my eyes anyway.

And for this reason I would play Clichy against top 6 opposition. But when we play 'weaker' teams, would It not make sense to put on a player capable of joining in an attack, putting in a cross, or scoring a freekick. When Clichy goes forward, he offers the rest of the team someone to pass to when they're under pressure and can help the attacks this way. But he rarely will put in a decent cross for the strikers.


So I ask you this Bluemoon, Kolarov against weaker teams, does it not make sense?

Alex is more of a attacking threat. Butttt. He was also the main cause for the third goal when we were practically 2 on 2. He didn't bother blocking Bendtner's cross. Was a travesty that. I just watched the match again so I was very disappointed with that. He has to play as a LAM. Cant be a leftback for me. Milner would be a better leftback.

 

[Colins Bellend]

Now I've been this guys biggest critic at the start of the season, against superior opposition he looked like he couldn't cope, culminating in a truly disastrous performance against United in the FA cup, salvaged partially by a free kick.

But recently, in the last month, or maybe 2 months. He really has stepped up a gear, and I'm not deluded I know he's no world beater at left back but he is far far far superior at crossing and general attacking play than Clichy. Against Sunderland for example he produced 16 crosses in open play this weekend, only once has a player made more in a Premier League game this season and I know not all of them were great but he is a genuine threat down that left wing whereas Clichy simply isn't.

And I know some will say, well he's a defender, who cares which one is better at attacking?. I wouldn't argue against this, I know Clichys pace and positioning makes him a better defender than Kolarov, in my eyes anyway.

And for this reason I would play Clichy against top 6 opposition. But when we play 'weaker' teams, would It not make sense to put on a player capable of joining in an attack, putting in a cross, or scoring a freekick. When Clichy goes forward, he offers the rest of the team someone to pass to when they're under pressure and can help the attacks this way. But he rarely will put in a decent cross for the strikers.


So I ask you this Bluemoon, Kolarov against weaker teams, does it not make sense?

Yes you are

 

[babyape]

Kolarov should be played as a wide left midfielder.
Play 3-5-2 if he's in the side, revert to a 4-4-2 with Clichy at full back if we need to tighten the game up.

My only worry with this is he can't beat a man and get to the line to whip in a cross. He tends to kick it into the defender, then run into him when he attempts it. His crossing is quality, but think he'd be a waste in a midfield role. And at left back, Clichy all day, much better defender and rapid.

Wide players should be able run at defenders and scare the shit out of them.... a la SWP back in the day...

 

[pauljv92]

Kolarov should be played as a wide left midfielder.
Play 3-5-2 if he's in the side, revert to a 4-4-2 with Clichy at full back if we need to tighten the game up.

My only worry with this is he can't beat a man and get to the line to whip in a cross. He tends to kick it into the defender, then run into him when he attempts it. His crossing is quality, but think he'd be a waste in a midfield role. And at left back, Clichy all day, much better defender and rapid.

Wide players should be able run at defenders and scare the shit out of them.... a la SWP back in the day...

Thats why we should play pizarro and yaya whenever he plays. Him and especially pizarro are the perfect combination.

 

[trevorriley]

clichy, has ben very good all season. Kolarov has a good couple of games now and again ... Gael is the man...

 

[Colins Bellend]

Kolarov should be played as a wide left midfielder.
Play 3-5-2 if he's in the side, revert to a 4-4-2 with Clichy at full back if we need to tighten the game up.

My only worry with this is he can't beat a man and get to the line to whip in a cross. He tends to kick it into the defender, then run into him when he attempts it. His crossing is quality, but think he'd be a waste in a midfield role. And at left back, Clichy all day, much better defender and rapid.

Wide players should be able run at defenders and scare the shit out of them.... a la SWP back in the day...

Thats why we should play pizarro and yaya whenever he plays. Him and especially pizarro are the perfect combination.

You mean slow

 

[Dirty Harry]

Kolarov should be played as a wide left midfielder.
Play 3-5-2 if he's in the side, revert to a 4-4-2 with Clichy at full back if we need to tighten the game up.

I can see where you're coming from here, as I see it, part of Kolarovs problem is receiving the ball in too deep a position and from there he usually has a man to beat to get a cross in (and he doesn't have the greatest pace), everything's rushed so to speak, our aim should be to free him in a more advanced role with a bit more time and I'm sure we'd see a far better outcome.

Defensively though Clichy is a better shout.

 

[pauljv92]

My only worry with this is he can't beat a man and get to the line to whip in a cross. He tends to kick it into the defender, then run into him when he attempts it. His crossing is quality, but think he'd be a waste in a midfield role. And at left back, Clichy all day, much better defender and rapid.

Wide players should be able run at defenders and scare the shit out of them.... a la SWP back in the day...

Thats why we should play pizarro and yaya whenever he plays. Him and especially pizarro are the perfect combination.

You mean slow

Lol what do you mean? With pizarro the ball can be in our half to the wings and then to a kolarov cross within a matter of seconds.

 

[Bellyeye]

I'm not sure Kolarov has improved, and think he's been pretty consistent at what he does. Its just that the rest of the team arent playing so well.

 

[lancs blue]

In the absence of any other decent crossers of the ball (don't mention AJ, my laughter will disturb the neighbours) I'd play Kolarov for at least part of every match now, especially if Balo and Dzeko are playing as they need a decent service from wide areas, particularly as the defence-splitting passes through the middle have dried up recently.

Those who criticise Balotelli and Dzeko should note that all three goals against Sunderland had fuck all to do with our midfield. Dzeko won the pen through his own skill, Balo created his own space to drive in the second and even the third was down to a half cleared cross landing at Kolarov's feet. Not an ounce of midfield creativity visible.

Incorrect! No wonder the current best player at City gets no love. Even when he does a thing like get a recordable statistic, folks erase it from memory.

I'll have to watch the 3rd goal again in that case but my point about the lack of creativity through the middle recently still stands but it's the strikers who seem to cop for all the flak.