Mikey Moore

[spurspinter1]

I don't think we weren't up for it. We seemed to work hard. We pressed well enough (though they usually just launched it at the first hint of being under pressure). We seemed to get stuck in in duels etc.

I think we got frustrated. Frustrated with their time wasting, rough challenges and the ref letting quite a bit go (it happens, we have to deal with it, not an excuse). And frustrated that we weren't able to play our game.

The players weren't able to use or deal with those frustrations in a useful manner.

Our main issue was not being able to play through their press. Get into positions from that where Moore and others could do their thing.

I don't think different formations or other players starting is or was the answer. A top level ball playing, deep playmaker type central midfielder could have been, but we don't have that player in our squad.

That can't be right, I'm sure I read on here that Biss and Bentancur are elite players...Elite at getting caught up in obscure off the pitch incidents perhaps but I'm not sure what else.

Agreed on your point though, if you want to accommodate players like Maddison Kulu and even Bergvall in CM you need an absolute master of their craft to make it work. The two who seem to be vying for the "6" position, which is probably a gross oversimplification of the role, are miles off it unless they're at their very best. Competition for Udogie is important but a first team signing there has got to take precedence.

 

[Jurgen the German]

On the topic of starting Moore I don't really see the issue. He was relatively speaking pretty decent, as I said earlier in this thread he would have been my man of the first half. I get that he didn't have a barnstormer, but people are talking as if the game would have caused him some harm. Why?

Hes going to play games where he does well, hes going to play games where he's brick and he wasn't even brick in this match. There's no point hiding from these moments, these moments are what are going to build his character and as I said he wasn't even bad in the first half, he was our brightest spark. So what's the issue exactly? Do we only want him to play games that are easy and games we can't lose? He'll never get any minutes in that case.

No, belief in youth is giving them minutes, letting them sink or swim and trying again with them when they fail. Do we want there to be a pathway to the first team or not? Because if at the first hint of Moore not being the direct reincarnation of Pele, people are speaking of starting flipping Werner or even Richy i'm baffled. It's like you don't actually believe in the quality of the youth and the process necessary to graduate them.

Like a 1-0 defeat to Palace is going to scar him and stunt his development. I don’t think he would have started if Son was available.

 

[Bishop]

Like a 1-0 defeat to Palace is going to scar him and stunt his development. I don’t think he would have started if Son was available.

If a 1-0 defeat to Palace is gonna scar him then he's fudged because we lose games like this one regularly and that's probably not changing this season.

 

[parklane1]

I had no real problem with him starting the game to be honest [ allthough i was surprised he did], we have to be REAL careful with young players as they can be up and down and there will always be some hairy arse defender on the opposite side wanting to leave a little behind on him.

The fact that did not impress as much as he did in the cup game was no real surprise to me and it could be seen as a posistive in some ways, because he will have been really high from the compliments he recieved after that cup game and it will show him that he will not always be as easy as it was that night.

Having worked with a lot of young players at that level every game is a learning curve and it usually takes different situations to improve their mindsets.

 

[Muttley]

I don't think we weren't up for it. We seemed to work hard. We pressed well enough (though they usually just launched it at the first hint of being under pressure). We seemed to get stuck in in duels etc.

Not sure I'm aligned with this, but admittedly didn't see the first half hour. By the time I joined the game the pattern was definitely that we were second best in the duels across the park. They looked sharper, more physical and definitely more composed.

It did improve slightly in the last quarter of the game as guys like Sarr were introduced.

 

[Muttley]

That can't be right, I'm sure I read on here that Biss and Bentancur are elite players...Elite at getting caught up in obscure off the pitch incidents perhaps but I'm not sure what else.

Agreed on your point though, if you want to accommodate players like Maddison Kulu and even Bergvall in CM you need an absolute master of their craft to make it work. The two who seem to be vying for the "6" position, which is probably a gross oversimplification of the role, are miles off it unless they're at their very best. Competition for Udogie is important but a first team signing there has got to take precedence.

Is the problem that we have never once under Ange had a period where a midfield partnership could really develop an understanding? Sometimes you don't need elite individuals, you need elite partnerships. When you look at some of the best number 6's, they always could depend on their 8's to make them look better.

I'm pretty certain that neither Kulu or Madds are helping the cause of Biss and Bents. I'm pretty certain that changing personnel won't change that unless we see more defensive responsibility from them.

 

[spurspinter1]

Is the problem that we have never once under Ange had a period where a midfield partnership could really develop an understanding? Sometimes you don't need elite individuals, you need elite partnerships. When you look at some of the best number 6's, they always could depend on their 8's to make them look better.

I'm pretty certain that neither Kulu or Madds are helping the cause of Biss and Bents. I'm pretty certain that changing personnel won't change that unless we see more defensive responsibility from them.

Could be, it's difficult to compare as it's a bit easier to see partnerships develop with a midfield pairing back in the days of having a defined two in CM. I'm not necessarily sure what players are meant to be doing what currently but that genuinely isn't a dig at Ange - It's more a dig at myself being able to understand a 4-4-2 with one passer and one destroyer, simpler times under Redknapp.

Agreed that Kulu + Maddison will be putting more pressure on whichever of Biss / Bentancur plays, neither are the type to rise to that kind of challenge imo. The lack of consistency is plain and clear and that doesn't improve by taking on the workload of others, I'm definitely on the "being Sarr back in to the starting lineup" boat to bring back some balance and control.

 

[braineclipse]

Not sure I'm aligned with this, but admittedly didn't see the first half hour. By the time I joined the game the pattern was definitely that we were second best in the duels across the park. They looked sharper, more physical and definitely more composed.

It did improve slightly in the last quarter of the game as guys like Sarr were introduced.

Perhaps we see it similarly. We did lose more 50/50 duels than we should have I think. But to me the duels that were particularly out concern were those where we initially had the ball and it ended up with a duel where we lost possession. Definitely agree on the lack of composure. Our main problem for me was what we did on the ball when they pressed high. But I think the effort from our lads was fine enough.

 

[braineclipse]

Like a 1-0 defeat to Palace is going to scar him and stunt his development. I don’t think he would have started if Son was available.

If a 1-0 defeat to Palace is gonna scar him then he's fudged because we lose games like this one regularly and that's probably not changing this season.

Who are these people saying that the Palace game would scar him or stunt his development?

 

[Bishop]

Who are these people saying that the Palace game would scar him or stunt his development?

I've seen people say maybe we shouldn't have started given his age and the result, I can only assume they think that him playing and not overly excelling is somehow a negative to his development.

 

[DubSpur]

I've seen people say maybe we shouldn't have started given his age and the result, I can only assume they think that him playing and not overly excelling is somehow a negative to his development.

No, the concern is throwing him in too soon while he is still developing and burning him out. I'd rather see him eased in to get used to the pace and physicality of the PL, it's a big step up. It's not to do with whether he played well or not as he will have good and bad games while at that age.

 

[Jurgen the German]

No, the concern is throwing him in too soon while he is still developing and burning him out. I'd rather see him eased in to get used to the pace and physicality of the PL, it's a big step up. It's not to do with whether he played well or not as he will have good and bad games while at that age.

It was his first PL start of the season and he’s been getting subbed in the EL games so it’s not like there’s any danger of burnout in October. I think he’s been managed just fine so far.

 

[Bishop]

No, the concern is throwing him in too soon while he is still developing and burning him out. I'd rather see him eased in to get used to the pace and physicality of the PL, it's a big step up. It's not to do with whether he played well or not as he will have good and bad games while at that age.

You've just said the same thing, you think playing him at this stage was a negative to his development. This is what I said also, I just don't agree that it is a problem.

Edit:

And more specifically to your point re burnout, do you think this one game is going to burn him out? How does that happen? He would need to play a run of games which he hasn't for it to be a concern. So I'd understand questioning burnout in 5-7 games times if he has started all of them but not after his first PL start.

 

[braineclipse]

I've seen people say maybe we shouldn't have started given his age and the result, I can only assume they think that him playing and not overly excelling is somehow a negative to his development.

That may be the only thing you can assume. It's certainly not the only thing that can be assumed. And perhaps instead of assuming what people think ask or answer based on what people actually say?

 

[DubSpur]

You've just said the same thing, you think playing him at this stage was a negative to his development. This is what I said also, I just don't agree that it is a problem.

Edit:

And more specifically to your point re burnout, do you think this one game is going to burn him out? How does that happen? He would need to play a run of games which he hasn't for it to be a concern. So I'd understand questioning burnout in 5-7 games times if he has started all of them but not after his first PL start.

No, you previously said given the result. The result or his performance has nothing got to do with it. I'd rather he continues to get time at the end of games when there's no pressure and he gets used to the pace of the league, that's a big difference to starting a game.

Burnout is looking at players that started in the PL young and their careers ended or dropped off early, I'm not talking about being tired from a run of games and needing resting.

 

[Lemonade Money]

No, you previously said given the result. The result or his performance has nothing got to do with it. I'd rather he continues to get time at the end of games when there's no pressure and he gets used to the pace of the league, that's a big difference to starting a game.

Burnout is looking at players that started in the PL young and their careers ended or dropped off early, I'm not talking about being tired from a run of games and needing resting.

It's a mental thing. If they start too soon, they can get overrun, and start to wonder if they're good enough. If the team are losing games, they can question whether it's because of them. It's about letting them acclimatise to this level, so that it feels normal, and then they can express themselves.

 

[Bishop]

No, you previously said given the result. The result or his performance has nothing got to do with it. I'd rather he continues to get time at the end of games when there's no pressure and he gets used to the pace of the league, that's a big difference to starting a game.

Burnout is looking at players that started in the PL young and their careers ended or dropped off early, I'm not talking about being tired from a run of games and needing resting.

But those players burned out due to the number of games they played over a consistent period, the injuries they accumulated over those periods and many times being rushed back too soon. Their issue was not starting a singular PL game against a physical side like Palace.

If Moore starts the next 5-7 games then by all means begin to have concerns about future burnout, but a singular match is not the concern.

 

[Bishop]

It's a mental thing. If they start too soon, they can get overrun, and start to wonder if they're good enough. If the team are losing games, they can question whether it's because of them. It's about letting them acclimatise to this level, so that it feels normal, and then they can express themselves.

This isn't to do with age. There are just as many players start young who do well as those that don't. As well as just as many who don't get a chance until their early 20s who also get overrun and fade away.

You're not talking about an age related burnout but instead a mental suitable based one and that isn't determined primarily by age.

 

[Raziel]

This isn't to do with age. There are just as many players start young who do well as those that don't. As well as just as many who don't get a chance until their early 20s who also get overrun and fade away.

You're not talking about an age related burnout but instead a mental suitable based one and that isn't determined primarily by age.

Players mature both physically & mentally at different ages

On the physical side, too many games/injuries during growth periods can fudge them for life

Be an interesting exercise of how many 16/17 years olds that broke into top level football went on to have a career into their 30's vs. those that broke into game in early 20's (really don't know answer)

 

[RunTMC]

Moore or Werner? I would have gone for Moore today, and I would the next game also. Werner is one thing consistently and that is the word ineffective. I'm happy enough trying the unknown who may reward you with something over the known that you know will fail and Werner has failed, he failed last season and he's failing this season.

I disagree with this part of your post. That would be 3 starts in less than a week. That’s too much to put on a 17 year old with little experience, with the previous game being so physical and intense.

The funny thing is that if he hadn’t started one of our previous 2 games, I would start him today against City, I think he would do well against them.