• 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

Huddlestone

I thought he was quite a lot better than Sandro was today. He is obviously still some way off his best form, but he coped okay in my opinion. The lack of quickess and mobility that is always talked about wasn't that much of a problem. It is not as if they ran rings around him. Yes, we did struggle to get close enough to Chelsea's midfielders at times, but that was the case for Sandro and other players too. When he gets some games under his belt, both his fitness and technical ability will improve. His passiing isn't quite there yet either, but that will undoubtedly come.
 
Thudd didn't have a particularly good day today. He didn't help enough in the midfield, a couple of decent classic passes, but overall he is way below par at the moment.


Would not want to start him again until he has gained some more match time, because i am hoping all he is lacking is match fitness.
 
He was ok today, but no more. Miles and miles behind all of Chelsea's midfielders in every way. Not good enough for a top half of the table side.

Possibly not good enough for a PL . He would nor be a regular in any of the top 12 to 14.
 
We were a lot better with Huddlestone on the pitch than off. To sub him off for a ball-winning midfielder after they have just equalised was beyond stupid.
 
NaijaSpurs said:
I missed the part where I mentioned his name? Have a nice evening
Click to expand...
Nice swerve but it doesn't address the point. Okay so he's never going to be as mobile and fluid as the likes of Mata and Dembele, even so he still oozed quality on the ball today and looked the only player in the centre of the park capable of changing the game in our favour.

He's still coming back from a serious spell so it's too early to write him off. Hopefully his mobility, such as it ever was, will gradually improve over the next couple of months and he'll get back to something like the sparkling level of performances he enjoyed prior to his debilitating lay-off.
 
colin fishwick said:
Possibly not good enough for a PL . He would nor be a regular in any of the top 12 to 14.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Tom Huddlestone could play for the best team in the country IF they played a game that suited him. He's not going to fit into a high tempo team, and was always going to struggle against a midfield like Chelsea's.

But I am so pleased he did not go to Stoke, would have offered another dimension to their long ball game (long accurate balls for a start) and with two or three thugs around him wouldn't have to do all the donkey work.
 
Both Hudd and Ade are not match fit. I thought his passing today was excellent but he was worn out after 50 minutes.
 
colin fishwick said:
He was ok today, but no more. Miles and miles behind all of Chelsea's midfielders in every way. Not good enough for a top half of the table side.

Possibly not good enough for a PL . He would nor be a regular in any of the top 12 to 14.
Click to expand...

Nearly 200 games for the club and we still talk about his potential, a vastly overated player and one who will never make the top player many have been saying he would.
 
NaijaSpurs said:
I like Hudd and still think he is the best passer we have, alas now I am beginning to agree with the view that he may not be mobile enough to have a long term future with us beyond this season or at most the next. I thought he struggled today, especially when they had the ball
Click to expand...

There were a few occasions yesterday where he mopped up in defence doing what Sandro usually does so well, whilst Sandro was looking like a rabbit in headlights.

None of our team got near to Chelsea's midfield yesterday with good reason - there probably aren't many in the world that can when those forward 3 of theirs are on form.
 
chicken_badge said:
I disagree. Tom Huddlestone could play for the best team in the country IF they played a game that suited him. He's not going to fit into a high tempo team, and was always going to struggle against a midfield like Chelsea's.

But I am so pleased he did not go to Stoke, would have offered another dimension to their long ball game (long accurate balls for a start) and with two or three thugs around him wouldn't have to do all the donkey work.
Click to expand...

I don't even think Tom Huddlestone's mum thinks he could play fro the best team in the country.

Just not enough to his game. - the sum of his parts does not add up to enough

Too slow and cumbersome to be a DM, not creative enough to be an attacking one. Chelsea's three were so far ahead of him in technical abilty it was scary.

Whenever he was under any sort of pressure he always had to play the safe pass, either square or backwards. Even when not under pressure he nearly always plays a safe simple pass.

Hazzard in six weeks nearly has as many assists as Huddlestome has in his PL career of six years. Could he really get into Chelsea's team?

Would they be that crazy? I think they would be a betting inquiry if he was picked in front of any of their midfielders.

He would not get near Arsenal's , he could never play quick one tough football.
 
NaijaSpurs said:
Nah, against quality teams he becomes a passenger when we do not have the ball.
Click to expand...

What like Sigg and Dempsey? I'd rather play Hudd than those two passengers.

Hudd is an excellent player and whilst he struggled yesterday so did Sandra, Sigg and Dempsey
 
N10 Yiddo said:
We were a lot better with Huddlestone on the pitch than off. To sub him off for a ball-winning midfielder after they have just equalised was beyond stupid.
Click to expand...

When verts was whinging on the halfway line, Tom was the covering player. He was knackered. We'd been trying to get Livermore warmed up. The only GOOD thing about Tom not getting near his man as the ball came across for their equalizer, was that if he had, chances are he'd have been late, got a second yellow and we'd have played with 10 men for the rest of the match.

If AVB made any mistake yesterday second-half, it was in not bringing on Ade, Townsend and Livermore when we were 2-1 up. That might've been the difference...
 
I thought he was really good personally, several times he picked up the ball just outside our area and shielded it well and brought it into space then pinged a few nice passes.

Dont think he was overrun more than anyone else, their midifield was very fluid and had a lot of movement from deep, at times the players higher up need to also take some responsibility and track the runners.
 
parklane1 said:
Nearly 200 games for the club and we still talk about his potential, a vastly overated player and one who will never make the top player many have been saying he would.
Click to expand...


you might, i don't.

i'd talk about what he can do rather than what he can't, look at his qualities rather than his deficiencies and from that I conclude that he has been and will be a big part of this team.
 
Huddlestone was KEY to us getting fourth for the first time in Premier League history. Him and Modric were awesome at the back end of the season and him and Palacios were crucial in the first half when Modric was out with a broken leg. His ability to spot Lennon and/or Bale early and release them with his brilliant passing ability helped us a lot and I feel we miss that in the middle of the park.
 
thfcsteff said:
When verts was whinging on the halfway line, Tom was the covering player. He was knackered. We'd been trying to get Livermore warmed up. The only GOOD thing about Tom not getting near his man as the ball came across for their equalizer, was that if he had, chances are he'd have been late, got a second yellow and we'd have played with 10 men for the rest of the match.

If AVB made any mistake yesterday second-half, it was in not bringing on Ade, Townsend and Livermore when we were 2-1 up. That might've been the difference...
Click to expand...

I think AVB fudged up a bit on his team selection. Two reasons - if Bale is not playing you put someone in in his position i.e. Townsend but not Sig/Thudd. Secondly I dont believe that Dempsey and Sig can play in the same team (especially at present) yesterday felt like playing with nine in the first and ten in the second (Sig was marginally better).

Verts whinged a fair bit yesterday and alot of his groans were aimed at Sig - they just didnt and couldnt play together.
 
Hotshot-Tottenham said:
you might, i don't.

i'd talk about what he can do rather than what he can't, look at his qualities rather than his deficiencies and from that I conclude that he has been and will be a big part of this team.
Click to expand...


Well he can not tackle, he can not head a ball, he lets opposing players run in behind him, he can not get close enough to close players down. He make the occasional hollywood pass but that is not enough to warrant the hype that has surrounded him for the last 7 years.


it will be intersting to see what clubs come in for him once AVB decides to get rid of him, i very much doubt that any of the clubs near the top will, he is not good enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back