• 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

Jose Mourinho - SACKED

DubaiSpur said:
I have to say, we are two signings away from him having no excuses.

A CB who can sort out our horrible weaknesses from set pieces and show some leadership at the back - and a second striker to take the pressure off Harry.
Click to expand...
Why is everyone so fixated on a second striker?

Bale, Son and (at a pinch) Moura can all play there. All at a level at least as good as anyone willing to warm the bench for a guaranteed starter would be able to.

We have high quality cover for all of their positions too. I can't see why we'd use more of our wage bill on someone to twiddle their thumbs and wait for Kane to pick up an injury.
 
scaramanga said:
Why is everyone so fixated on a second striker?
Click to expand...

Because if we're going to play a front 3 as our standard formation, whether 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 and you want 2 players per position, we need 6 attackers. So Bale-Kane-Son as a first choice line, and then Bergwijn-??????-Lamela probably as the back-ups. Obviously to your point Son and Bale can play CF too, so it doesnt need to be a top drawer player, but someone like that Weghorst guy looks about right.

I'm wondering whether we'd also keep Moura if we play wing-backs and use him and Tanganga as back-ups to Doherty and therefore sell Aurier
 
scaramanga said:
Why is everyone so fixated on a second striker?

Bale, Son and (at a pinch) Moura can all play there. All at a level at least as good as anyone willing to warm the bench for a guaranteed starter would be able to.

We have high quality cover for all of their positions too. I can't see why we'd use more of our wage bill on someone to twiddle their thumbs and wait for Kane to pick up an injury.
Click to expand...
Because we said the same last season and we saw what happened when the injuries hit. Bake may change the dynamic a bit but we know he is a very injury prone player so may not be available when needed.
 
AdamB said:
Because if we're going to play a front 3 as our standard formation, whether 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 and you want 2 players per position, we need 6 attackers. So Bale-Kane-Son as a first choice line, and then Bergwijn-??????-Lamela probably as the back-ups. Obviously to your point Son and Bale can play CF too, so it doesnt need to be a top drawer player, but someone like that Weghorst guy looks about right.

I'm wondering whether we'd also keep Moura if we play wing-backs and use him and Tanganga as back-ups to Doherty and therefore sell Aurier
Click to expand...
No need for 2 in each position if they're interchangeable.

Bale, Son, Kane can all swap, Moura, Lamela and Bergwijn can all cover more than one position.

That's a significantly better solution than having two players rigidly fitting into each position.
 
scaramanga said:
No need for 2 in each position if they're interchangeable.

Bale, Son, Kane can all swap, Moura, Lamela and Bergwijn can all cover more than one position.

That's a significantly better solution than having two players rigidly fitting into each position.
Click to expand...

So you're still saying 2 per position! I agree about having versatility being helpful, but I dont think having two who can only play as CF is 'rigid'. You get the versatility from others.
 
scaramanga said:
No need for 2 in each position if they're interchangeable.

Bale, Son, Kane can all swap, Moura, Lamela and Bergwijn can all cover more than one position.

That's a significantly better solution than having two players rigidly fitting into each position.
Click to expand...
Cover is one thing on paper, Lamela doesn't realistically cover any of the front 3 positions adequately. The drop off in quality from Son, Kane, Bale and him is significant. That drop off isn't just in terms of quality is also in play style he can't play the role any of our proposed front three can. Pretty much likewise with Moura.

I would rather a situation where we assuming an injury or rosin of Kane is neccessary we can keep Son in the position he excels best in rather than moving him and weakening two areas of the side imo.
 
scaramanga said:
No need for 2 in each position if they're interchangeable.

Bale, Son, Kane can all swap, Moura, Lamela and Bergwijn can all cover more than one position.

That's a significantly better solution than having two players rigidly fitting into each position.
Click to expand...

Gosh what have you had for your Sunday dinner. Not like you to be logical ... Still got the articulation I see
 
Bishop said:
Because we said the same last season and we saw what happened when the injuries hit. Bake may change the dynamic a bit but we know he is a very injury prone player so may not be available when needed.
Click to expand...
Since then we've added Bale and Bergwijn - two more players covering 3 positions.

That's plenty for any non oil money cheats.
 
AdamB said:
So you're still saying 2 per position! I agree about having versatility being helpful, but I dont think having two who can only play as CF is 'rigid'. You get the versatility from others.
Click to expand...
A player who can only play centre forward is a big expense if we want them to be good enough to deputise for Kane.

If they're cover for CF and a wing forward then they're no different to what we have.
 
Bishop said:
Cover is one thing on paper, Lamela doesn't realistically cover any of the front 3 positions adequately. The drop off in quality from Son, Kane, Bale and him is significant. That drop off isn't just in terms of quality is also in play style he can't play the role any of our proposed front three can. Pretty much likewise with Moura.

I would rather a situation where we assuming an injury or rosin of Kane is neccessary we can keep Son in the position he excels best in rather than moving him and weakening two areas of the side imo.
Click to expand...
Lamela is better than most clubs have as first choice either wide or deeper in the middle with the other two pushing forward (like Kane did today).

If we want someone to sit around waiting for injuries to get a start in one position then they're either lacking talent or application. We're not nearly rich enough to convince someone that good otherwise.
 
scaramanga said:
Why is everyone so fixated on a second striker?
Click to expand...

A) Mourinho has said many, many times that he wants one, and feels Bale, Son and Lucas are absolutely insufficient for that role.

B) This experiment playing Son and Lucas up front was an enormous struggle for Poch to pull off, and he had Llorente as a backup if it didn't work. Expecting Mourinho to pull it off without even that backup striker is just unreasonable.

I think, out of Bale, Son and Lucas, none would be able to lead the line in the way we need.
 
DubaiSpur said:
A) Mourinho has said many, many times that he wants one, and feels Bale, Son and Lucas are absolutely insufficient for that role.

B) This experiment playing Son and Lucas up front was an enormous struggle for Poch to pull off, and he had Llorente as a backup if it didn't work. Expecting Mourinho to pull it off without even that backup striker is just unreasonable.

I think, out of Bale, Son and Lucas, none would be able to lead the line in the way we need.
Click to expand...
If he's still in form, Bale is the best non-Harry Kane CF in the league. And it's not even his position.
 
DubaiSpur said:
A) Mourinho has said many, many times that he wants one, and feels Bale, Son and Lucas are absolutely insufficient for that role.

B) This experiment playing Son and Lucas up front was an enormous struggle for Poch to pull off, and he had Llorente as a backup if it didn't work. Expecting Mourinho to pull it off without even that backup striker is just unreasonable.

I think, out of Bale, Son and Lucas, none would be able to lead the line in the way we need.
Click to expand...
He has never mentioned bale in that conversation
Bale wasn’t here when when he raised it
 
scaramanga said:
Why is everyone so fixated on a second striker?

Bale, Son and (at a pinch) Moura can all play there. All at a level at least as good as anyone willing to warm the bench for a guaranteed starter would be able to.

We have high quality cover for all of their positions too. I can't see why we'd use more of our wage bill on someone to twiddle their thumbs and wait for Kane to pick up an injury.
Click to expand...

Because as great as Son and Bale are, if Kane is injured and Son/Bale play up front we are weaker in two positions:

1. Son/Bale = not as good as Kane
2. Lamela/Moura/Bergwijn = not as good as Son or Bale.

Bit early to judge Bergwijn but Lamela or Moura wouldn’t get into Chelsea, Liverpool or Emirates Marketing Project first 11.

And we’ve been burnt so many times in the past with injuries to strikers. I really don’t think it’s being extravagant having two in the entire squad.
 
Jurgen the German said:
Because as great as Son and Bale are, if Kane is injured and Son/Bale play up front we are weaker in two positions:

1. Son/Bale = not as good as Kane
2. Lamela/Moura/Bergwijn = not as good as Son or Bale.

Bit early to judge Bergwijn but Lamela or Moura wouldn’t get into Chelsea, Liverpool or Emirates Marketing Project first 11.

And we’ve been burnt so many times in the past with injuries to strikers. I really don’t think it’s being extravagant having two in the entire squad.
Click to expand...

They wouldn't but Giroud, Abraham, Origi, Jota, Jesus or Torres wouldn't get in ours either. Our attacking options, including the backups, are as good as anyone's. However, I do agree that a proper CF would be a good addition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back