• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Emerson Royal

Jurgen the German said:
Seen articles in the Atlantic questioning Conte for picking him every week. So it’s not just know nothing fans who are asking questions. I maintain we would be no worse off defensively with Doc and we’d be exponentially better going forward. Kane doesn’t even bother passing to him I’ve noticed and the opposition give him all the space he wants as they know he won’t deliver a telling cross more often than not. I don’t condone booing him but I also don’t see Conte getting the message any other way that fans are unhappy with Royal.
Click to expand...

I think Doherty is the better attacker overall, but I think it's useful to remember how and why Doherty has been successful for us. He's mainly a good combination player. Sees space well, makes good runs, combines well with others around him. He's not really going to be taking players on or delivering consistently good crosses.

We've seen Doherty without useful players to link up with and combine with under Mourinho. It was not good. Him and Kulusevski have a very good relationship. Others very much unproven and I'm not convinced he would do much better than Emerson.

I think perhaps the preference for Emerson has been because the circumstances often haven't been good for Doherty. And even though Emerson usually struggles too with making things happen on his own he gets the nod with athleticism combined with defensive ability.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I can’t believe you’re genuinely happy with his output in games. It’s not like he is the only RWB we have on our books. You’ll most likely come back with the “Conte is happy with him” line but managers do get things wrong, even the best managers in the game.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is happy with his output. I honestly don't think Conte is either. He's very little like the wing backs Conte has been successful with in the past.
 
braineclipse said:
I think Doherty is the better attacker overall, but I think it's useful to remember how and why Doherty has been successful for us. He's mainly a good combination player. Sees space well, makes good runs, combines well with others around him. He's not really going to be taking players on or delivering consistently good crosses.

We've seen Doherty without useful players to link up with and combine with under Mourinho. It was not good. Him and Kulusevski have a very good relationship. Others very much unproven and I'm not convinced he would do much better than Emerson.

I think perhaps the preference for Emerson has been because the circumstances often haven't been good for Doherty. And even though Emerson usually struggles too with making things happen on his own he gets the nod with athleticism combined with defensive ability.
Click to expand...

I don’t think Royal is much better defensively than Doc. It’s negligible and it doesn’t make up for his lack of end product at the other end.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I don’t think Royal is much better defensively than Doc. It’s negligible and it doesn’t make up for his lack of end product at the other end.
Click to expand...

My point is that I think that end product from Doherty depends on him having the right players around him. If he doesn't his actual ability to cross the ball and run past players isn't really significantly better than Royal's imo.

If anything I actually think Royal is more likely to beat a man one vs. one.

Or to put in another way. Doherty and Kulusevski came on at the same time against Liverpool. One way of seeing that is that both were brought on because they're better in attack than the players they replaced. Another way is that finally we had Kulusevski back and he makes the circumstances for Doherty to succeed, so then Doherty gets to play.
 
We'll never know for sure, but I would not have been surprised if Doherty had played a lot more had Kulusevski been fit over the last couple of months.

At Wolves too Doherty had Traore hugging the touchline, so Doherty could make underlapping runs and combine with their more technical players.

That role is one Doherty it's very good at and he can be very effective. As a more traditional wing back, running down the line, looking to cross or take players on not so much. Again, we saw this under Mourinho. People talk about playing him as a wing back as if that changes how he played. I think it was the introduction of Kulusevski that me made Doherty flourish last season.
 
braineclipse said:
We'll never know for sure, but I would not have been surprised if Doherty had played a lot more had Kulusevski been fit over the last couple of months.

At Wolves too Doherty had Traore hugging the touchline, so Doherty could make underlapping runs and combine with their more technical players.

That role is one Doherty it's very good at and he can be very effective. As a more traditional wing back, running down the line, looking to cross or take players on not so much. Again, we saw this under Mourinho. People talk about playing him as a wing back as if that changes how he played. I think it was the introduction of Kulusevski that me made Doherty flourish last season.
Click to expand...
Doherty and Kulu works because they both play with a level of intelligence in their movement
No one is going to climb Doherty is WC or has amazing skills but his running off the ball is as good as anyones. That suits Kulus game too
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Doherty and Kulu works because they both play with a level of intelligence in their movement
No one is going to climb Doherty is WC or has amazing skills but his running off the ball is as good as anyones. That suits Kulus game too
Click to expand...

And doesn't really suit any of our other right sided attacking options unless perhaps we tried starting Gil.

I at least think that may be part of the reason why Emerson has been preferred.
 
braineclipse said:
Or to put in another way. Doherty and Kulusevski came on at the same time against Liverpool. One way of seeing that is that both were brought on because they're better in attack than the players they replaced. Another way is that finally we had Kulusevski back and he makes the circumstances for Doherty to succeed, so then Doherty gets to play.
Click to expand...

But then is the point not that Kulu gets the ball where he wants it because Doherty is better t picking out options so its a two way compliment rather than siply to say "Doherty is only better with better players round him" which is frankly not true.
 
Grays_1890 said:
But then is the point not that Kulu gets the ball where he wants it because Doherty is better t picking out options so its a two way compliment rather than siply to say "Doherty is only better with better players round him" which is frankly not true.
Click to expand...

To some extent. But I think Kulusevski is rather versatile and less dependent on the style of play of those around him. May be wrong on that of course, but he seems to do well no matter who we play around him.

Not just "better players", but players that fit well with his style of play. Someone that's comfortable playing wide, that will stick wide early in attacks at least. I wouldn't say Adama Traore is a great player, but he was a good fit for Doherty. Our current right sided attacking options other than Kulusevski, not so much.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I'm certainly guilty of an exasperated groan or comment/shout when Royal fails to put in a cross or puts in a cross that sails over every player in the box, or one that goes straight out of play. Replicate that around the ground, and that's a lot of exasperated groans and shouts which I am sure he will pick up on. But I don't see what is to be gained by actually booing a player. I get the frustrations felt, but I can't see it as anything other than counter-productive.
With half-time/full time booing - whilst it is not something I do or advocate - it is at least aimed at the team collective rather than singling out one individual
Click to expand...

Would agree with you on this, i am not a booer at half time or full time but i understand ( to a extent) why some fans do so. However ( and i will probably tinkle some of for saying this) ANY fan that boos their own players is a macaron and i will never understand why they resort to such morinic actions.
 
parklane1 said:
Would agree with you on this, i am not a booer at half time or full time but i understand ( to a extent) why some fans do so. However ( and i will probably tinkle some of for saying this) ANY fan that boos their own players is a macaron and i will never understand why they resort to such morinic actions.
Click to expand...
It’s because they are macarons. It’s what macarons do.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I can’t believe you’re genuinely happy with his output in games. It’s not like he is the only RWB we have on our books. You’ll most likely come back with the “Conte is happy with him” line but managers do get things wrong, even the best managers in the game.
Click to expand...

I’m not happy with anybody’s output, but I trust Conte.
 
braineclipse said:
My point is that I think that end product from Doherty depends on him having the right players around him. If he doesn't his actual ability to cross the ball and run past players isn't really significantly better than Royal's imo.

If anything I actually think Royal is more likely to beat a man one vs. one.

Or to put in another way. Doherty and Kulusevski came on at the same time against Liverpool. One way of seeing that is that both were brought on because they're better in attack than the players they replaced. Another way is that finally we had Kulusevski back and he makes the circumstances for Doherty to succeed, so then Doherty gets to play.
Click to expand...

Kane looks up and sees Royal and avoids passing to him. I’d agree Doc doesn’t excel at beating his man but his final ball is better than Royal’s, he links up the play better and is better on the ball.
 
I look at Royal and think nah. Does anyone get excited when he was on the ball? It‘s the same feeling i used to get whenever we got a corner in Eriksens last couple of seasons with us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back