Rousseau

43 minutes ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

No, think back to when our attacking fullbacks under Gerrard were at their best. When they went forward tav had jack to cover and Borna had Kamara. In recent seasons that cover hasn’t been there or has not worked.

 

The examples you cite may well have similar cover from midfield or wingers. I haven’t seen enough of them to comment. Although I’m sure city and leverkusen don’t play 4 at the back?

 

It’s about balance and I don’t think we have had it for a long time.

So it's the lack of cover and not that a FB gets '20 goals and assists'? 

You've changed your argument. 

I agree with this one. Most still moaned at having 3 DMs!

37 minutes ago, CammyF said:

Tav's average is 5 non-pen goals a season? Really? Is that league only? Seems really low. 

 

Anyway, why are we "talking down" Tavs goals and assist stats? Incredible numbers for a full-back no matter how one paints them. 

League only - easier to compare to others.

It has happened a few times for me over the past few days. 

There is an update coming soon, iirc. 

2 hours ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

Wonder if anyone has thought at any time having a team set out so that your right back can get 20 goals and assists a season might not be the right way to do it? 

That argument doesn't really hold up. 

If you think he's scoring too many goals for a FB - most of his goals are penalties. He scores 3 to 8 non-penalty goals per season (5 is the average), and that doesn't take into account free-kicks. 5 goals is not unusual for a FB in today's game. Frimpong hit 14 goals last season for Leverkusen (albeit at wingback)! TAA, Robertson, Estupinan, Gvardiol, Lewis, Alex Moreno all have higher goals per 90 than Tavernier. 

If you think he's assisting too much - Robertson and TAA have better assist numbers at Liverpool and that's from two FBs in the same side. There are 6 FBs that have a higher assist per 90 in the PL than Tavernier. 

I would assume those numbers are repeated throughout the top five leagues - are you suggesting the best teams and managers in the world are making a mistake? 

8 hours ago, RANGERRAB said:

Fleetwood got scudded by Fleetwood? 😳

He meant Hearts were beaten by Fleetwood. 

2 minutes ago, ian1964 said:

So have Rangers tbf!. Another poor performance which just increases my dread for the season ahead!.

I thought it was quite good - defense aside. 

Am I seeing things or has King been good at RB? 

I do like someone of Wright's profile as a #10: more of a forward that's tidy on the ball and can beat a man, rather than a pure creator; a second-striker. 

I've had a 'mare today:

Criticise Lawrence - Goal! 

Criticise Butland - bodied by @Frankie

Criticise Dessers - Goal! 

Just now, CammyF said:

Touch, touch, touch = goal 🙄😀

Well - my juju is up to speed for the upcoming season... 

That is such a Dessers goal.

King on for Tavernier. I don't mind a situational back-three - if that is what we're doing and it's not just King playing RB - if it allows us to get the LB high and wide. 

1 minute ago, CammyF said:

Butland at fault again? Seemed to dive over that one. 

Watch out, @Frankie's about... 

I thought it took a deflection.

This side beat Dynamo Kyiv, didn't they? 

1 minute ago, Frankie said:

It's pre-season - takes a few weeks for everyone to get up to speed with sharpness and goalkeepers aren't excluded from that.

This is really bringing out the GK in you... 

6 minutes ago, Frankie said:

Perhaps could have done better at opening goal but even then it's difficult to react to shots from ten yards or so when the ball is being switched from the other side of the park.

 

Tav, Davies, Jefte and Cortes ahead in the blame game...

I don't disagree, but I wasn't just thinking about this game. I feel like he's had a poor pre-season, but I suppose that's true for most. 

1 minute ago, CammyF said:

For all his faults, that's where you miss Lundstram. He 'sat' and allowed our full backs to push wider and further forward. 

That's another option that I forgot. 

I wonder if Barron could do that. 

2 minutes ago, CammyF said:

Having watched the end of last seaon and this pre-season Clement has narrowed our back 4. Since doing so, it blunted our attack and made us vulnerable defensively. 

 

I thought it was down to injuries but he appears to be persisting with it this pre-season. 

That's fair. I don't disagree with you. We were very poor defensively towards the end of last season. 

I just had an issue with you calling it an 'Inverted FB.'

I would like to see us deploy those high WBs as I think it would play to Tavernier and Jefte's strengths.

It needs a back-three, though - and using a back-four allows for one more attacker (Lawrence, in today's case).

Would we like to see Lawrence removed for a CB? Probably not. 

Butland's form is worrying. He's better than this. 

1 minute ago, CammyF said:

But the LB had to "invert" to mark the striker, leaving the scorer wide-open. FBs have obviously been told to stay narrow and its killing us. 

You can certainly blame him for being too narrow but that doesn't mean he's playing as an inverted FB: an inverted FB is a specific in-possession role. 

I think the issue is man-marking. Jefte should be marking the WB. Then again, that does create an overload for them in the middle. 

2 minutes ago, CammyF said:

If only we could defend 😀

 

Inverted full back again. 

 

Cease Mr Clement 🙄

It's not an inverted FB. 

It's just poor man-marking. 

Jefte is covering the striker, who should be covered by the CB, IMO, leaving Jefte for the WB. 

Love Tom Lawrence... 

Lawrence does nothing except that. 

I'm not complaining per se but we need more from a #10 in possession.