dee25

Seems like a 433 to me.

Definitely a fascinating discussion. I was creeping though the Pogba thread on Redcafe earlier and as I skimmed through the comments it was like Deja Vu. It's like someone took this thread and transported it over there. These are a few interesting comments I came across. These were posted in 2011 when Pogba was 18. Hindsight really is 20/20 huh? Two things are obvious to me 1. Pogba's talent was clear for all to see but at 18 years I don't think he was so much more better than Chalobah is right now nor was he more further along in his development. From the sound of it, he was even struggling in the reserves and 2) when it comes to blooding in young players they'll always be doubters and naysayers no matter how talented the youth is.

Incredibly sad for us if we were to lose Mata and Arsenal gets Ozil.

What is he implying by that though? That Rooney doesn't intend on forcing a transfer?

Oh is that it? Because I'm seriously scratching my head here wondering what the hell is going on. The kid is 20 and has only played two preseason friendlies for us. Granted, he hasn't been the stand out player but how anyone can sit there and say (with so much certainty) that "he's vision is bad" is bewildering.

Have you seen City's website? It makes ours look like some kind of amateurish high school project. Their communication/social media strategy is fantastic. It was hours before a pic of Mourinho surfaced on the Chelsea official twitter, by then City's timeline was filled with many pics and videos of their players arriving to training. A lot of supporters have been waiting for this day for years, how hard is it tweet some damn pictures?

*sigh* and so it begins.....

Don't get me wrong, I think we're playing some lovely stuff....but, but we just don't look like scoring. And our crossing, seriously, mix it up a bit! Put in some cut-backs, overheads......it's just too easy to clear at times. Still traumatized from the West Ham game, hope Arsenal don't make a spirited comeback. Btw, so proud of our fans.

I understand the point being made that our priority in this transfer windsor should be a central midfielder to play next to Mikel ( or Luiz) and to a certain extent, I agree. However I do see room for another attacking midfielder but one that perhaps offers more versatility than what mata (or even moses )brings. From what I've seen Isco is not just an attacking midfielder that plays behind the striker, he's also very effective playing down the wings. Like Mata he has great vision for passes however unlike mata he's robust, has strength, pace, beats defenders, difficult to knock off the ball and helps out defensively as well. These are qualities that this squad really needs hence why Rafa continuously plays moses. However sometimes moses can have a great game, other times he's really poor and unfortunately he tends to have poor games against better oppositions. Whether it be Isco or someone else, I think we'll benefit highly from an attacking midfielder who can offer what moses brings but also a little bit more.

I don't know about throwing Ba straight into the starting lineup, might be asking too much of him considering he was just signed yesterday

.....and the lesson is what exactly? That one shouldn't root for their team to win? I'm so confused......

I can see what you mean when you say Benitez not being the right person for the job doesn't mean that Robbie was. But isn't that the point this poster is trying to make? That it's nonsensical to fire one manager who might be wrong for the position only to replace him with someone else, who by many accounts, also might be the wrong person for the position? Where exactly is the logic in appointing a replacement who (in bringing so much baggage.... his unpopularity with the fans, the poor spell at Inter, his reputation for possessing poor man management skills and getting into squabbles with upper management) might be even more of a risk than the previous manager? It's an appointment decision that borderlines on incompetence. Really, the board is just gambling. They're gambling with no clear plan or direction and as it is right now, the club is stumbling along blindly from one season to next with no development, consistency or guarantee of success.

Is the board actually encouraging a culture of short termism in this club? If the plan was to gain immediate results then why sign all these young, 21 year old, inexperienced players? Why not just bring in players who are the finished products? This is just so wrong on so many different levels......

Great point. When I read comments like “When some will understand that if Torres has been below expectations mentally, physically and statistically speaking in an team at least as bad as he has been, that'll be a massive step for mankind” ….it seems to me that certain posters on here have this notion that criticisms of Torres’ game can only be warranted or justified if everyone else in the team puts in flawless performances - if the defence becomes a super-human goal repelling force, or if the manager displays the most revolutionary and tactically-sound game-plans of the highest level of brilliance that it can even defy gravity by forcing the ball to levitate itself into the net…. everything else but Torres himself has to be "on-point" for us to then have legitimate concerns and merited criticisms of his performances on the pitch. Now I can understand arguments from those posters who claim that Torres is sometimes used as a scapegoat when the team loses a game, that I get but what I find very questionable are posters like @SeB who (having to carry the burden self-enlightenment) tries to excuse Torres’ poor performances by essentially normalizing it and pretending that such performances are a result of incompetent management or a flawed system. To me it’s the equivalent of saying “Yes, Bobby - since the past two years - has been failing every single one of his classes, but it's not like all the other kids are getting perfect grades, so no matter!” Let’s not kid ourselves, Torres’ performances are substandard, no matter how many ways you try to spin it, the fact of the matter is that his performances are below average (and at times, downright poor....... and make no mistake, Torres’ performances will still be substandard even if he suddenly starts playing for a super-human, flawless team. Just my two cents….

I hate to be that pessimistic poster, but really not feeling confident about this one. I've watched spurs' last few games and I think it'll take a pretty special performance from us to beat them; not because they're 'better' than us - they're not. But as other posters have mentioned, Spurs' strength is our weakness and under AVB they are becoming a frighteningly good counter attacking team. Plus, I think they just have a lot more to prove with this game than we do. Considering the baggage between both teams, I just can't see them allowing us to walk into their stadium and tika taka our way into their net. Dembele will easily be our main threat - he's very, VERY effective in winning back the ball and breaking up play. If we can somehow get past him (and his partner in crime, Sandro) then we got this.

If the club actually lets Ash walk away at the end of the year, then they would be taking two huge steps backwards in my opinion. It's not only his experience or immense work rate that would be a loss, like you said, Cole's an elite left back and to find a suitable replacement without chucking up a huge sum of money, would be very hard. When you factor in transfer costs, it seems to me that it would make more financial sense to just extend Cole's contract for another 2-3 yrs. As it stands right now, I think the two players we have for the left back position, is ideal - in Cole we have a "world class" player who is in the later stages of his career and might be more willing to, at times, take a spot on the bench and in Bertrand we have an up and coming youngster with great potential to develop into an elite player himself. To top it off, they seem to have a good relationship and Cole appears to be supportive towards Bertrand's development. It's just an ideal situation, the board shouldn't mess with it.

I'm really concerned about how much possession Norwich is having in the middle. Mikel and Lampard have to do better in breaking up play.

First time posting on this forum but I actually agree with you 100%. So glad someone else notices this. The 4-2-3-1 would be an effective formation if we had a strong and solid defensive midfielder. I'll be brutally honest - mikel should not be allowed anywhere near the double pivot, yes he put in a great game against bayern and yes he's improved significantly, but in the double pivot he's just not capable of holding the midfield. It was just far too easy for the opposition to get past him and this risked exposing the back four. Just look at when Essien played against MLS or PSG - the moment possession was lost he was on the ball, he created problems for the opposition. Mikel (bless him) just lacks this aggressiveness that's required to slow down a counter-attack. He's just far too passive, slow and really doesn't work all that hard. While his weaknesses might not have been too much of a problem when we played a 4-3-2-1 formation, however in double pivot he creates a huge gap between the defence and the forwards. If we're going to stick to the 4-2-3-1 formation then it is crucial that sign a quality defensive midfielder who has a good work rate, is prolific at winning the ball and can tackle well. My pick would be Etienne Capoue.