Zelalem And The Interpretation Of A Role

[Oleg_Mcnoleg 50]

Cracking read. Specifically on the benefits of a 'metronome' (while I admit to disliking these types of terms as it is 'food and drink' for people pretending to know what they are talking about, thinking they sound like they do, by using the terms. Although, not in the case of the author).

What I would say is that while I am sold on the benefits of the role itself I'm not all that sold on Zelalem being able to do it all that well. I feel that he gives the ball away far more than people are saying on here. I also think his passing isn't nearly incisive enough (a few 'hospital' balls which stop the flow). Last night for example I actually thought he made a number of errors. He isn't very 'street-wise' to tackles coming his way. He can learn obviously but in his case there is a lot to learn.

He's maybe a victim of the young superstar 'hype' that came with him. I have seen nothing at all to justify that. The 'litmus test' for me is always 'if he was playing in a Falkirk jersey, for example, would I notice him as a player?' The answer in Gideon's case for me is unfortunately - No.

And before anyone says 'but he's a metronome so you wouldn't notice him' - Mikel Arteta passed my 'litmus test' with flying colours when he arrived. Similar age (Mikel just turned 20 the month he arrive) but Arteta had far more in his locker than Zelalem has. He played with a shoulders back\head up authority than Zelalem doesn't really have. He was also very 'cute' at riding tackles and making cluggers look stupid. He also knew how to strike a ball when required (this should be a fundamental requirement for a player. Although in saying that I remember Derek Ferguson had to work really hard on that element of his game as it let him down often)

I wish the lad well and I will continue to cheer him on, but I don't see that potential that others see unfortunately. Its just one mans opinion and I would love to be proved wrong.

 

Sort of agree with you, though I'm maybe a wee bit more positively inclined towards GZ than you. The litmus test for me is whether a player is actually making a difference. It may well only be the sort of difference you see when the player's missing rather than through clear game-changing contributions, along the lines of 'have you noticed how much possession we concede when XX is missing' or 'have you noticed how few chances YY has when XX isn't playing'. GZ's young and learning and has made the sort of under-the-radar contributions that Rousseau argues. But maybe not consistently enough: there's a difference between 'under the radar' and 'forgettable'!

Of course, if he'd just stuck his foot through the ball when presented with the opportunity the other day, we might not even be having this discussion!

[Rousseau 10,819]

Messi scored a header v us and I've never once seen him shite out of contesting a header.

 

The magic hats view on the metronome seems to be in can't trust him in a big game. Or certainly that he should be benched for them all so far. That may change this weekend I suppose.

 

I know I'm not going to convince you. He's played in every game, when fit, apart from that one Hibs game. It's hardly a trend, so I don't accept that argument that Warburton doesn't trust him. He played him in the St. Johnstone game which is arguably bigger than the Hibs game.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

I know I'm not going to convince you. He's played in every game, when fit, apart from that one Hibs game. It's hardly a trend, so I don't accept that argument that Warburton doesn't trust him. He played him in the St. Johnstone game which is arguably bigger than the Hibs game.

He's not started v hibs Falkirk or any higher league team in the cup.

 

 

I know I'm not going to convince you. He's played in every game, when fit, apart from that one Hibs game. It's hardly a trend, so I don't accept that argument that Warburton doesn't trust him. He played him in the St. Johnstone game which is arguably bigger than the Hibs game.

[Rousseau 10,819]

Cracking read. Specifically on the benefits of a 'metronome' (while I admit to disliking these types of terms as it is 'food and drink' for people pretending to know what they are talking about, thinking they sound like they do, by using the terms. Although, not in the case of the author).

What I would say is that while I am sold on the benefits of the role itself I'm not all that sold on Zelalem being able to do it all that well. I feel that he gives the ball away far more than people are saying on here. I also think his passing isn't nearly incisive enough (a few 'hospital' balls which stop the flow). Last night for example I actually thought he made a number of errors. He isn't very 'street-wise' to tackles coming his way. He can learn obviously but in his case there is a lot to learn.

He's maybe a victim of the young superstar 'hype' that came with him. I have seen nothing at all to justify that. The 'litmus test' for me is always 'if he was playing in a Falkirk jersey, for example, would I notice him as a player?' The answer in Gideon's case for me is unfortunately - No.

And before anyone says 'but he's a metronome so you wouldn't notice him' - Mikel Arteta passed my 'litmus test' with flying colours when he arrived. Similar age (Mikel just turned 20 the month he arrive) but Arteta had far more in his locker than Zelalem has. He played with a shoulders back\head up authority than Zelalem doesn't really have. He was also very 'cute' at riding tackles and making cluggers look stupid. He also knew how to strike a ball when required (this should be a fundamental requirement for a player. Although in saying that I remember Derek Ferguson had to work really hard on that element of his game as it let him down often)

I wish the lad well and I will continue to cheer him on, but I don't see that potential that others see unfortunately. Its just one mans opinion and I would love to be proved wrong.

 

Thanks for that. I agree with Frankie: a point well made. GZ indeed makes a lot of mistakes -- I have never argued otherwise -- and isn't "street-wise", as you suggest, but he is only 19. We do have to put up with these mistakes at that age. I do, however, think that his overall contribution has been good and beneficial, even with those mistakes. I think he will go on to be a very good player -- unfortunately not with us. In an ideal world I'd like a player that can play a similar role, but with more experience.

[Anchorman 0]

Thanks for that. I agree with Frankie: a point well made. GZ indeed makes a lot of mistakes -- I have never argued otherwise -- and isn't "street-wise", as you suggest, but he is only 19. We do have to put up with these mistakes at that age. I do, however, think that his overall contribution has been good and beneficial, even with those mistakes. I think he will go on to be a very good player -- unfortunately not with us. In an ideal world I'd like a player that can play a similar role, but with more experience.

 

I think he is a victim of his own hype and billing before he arrived as a 'wonderkid' and that is maybe why the critical assessment bar is set so high for him in my mind. If I step back and look at it from a different angle (lets say he is a new kid just up through our ranks) then yes I would say "this boy has got bags of potential and I cant wait to see his progress". I've come at it from the 'wonderkid' angle and that is why I've made comparisons with a boy who did come to us at the same age i.e. Mikel Arteta, and who was further ahead in his progress IMHO.

Maybe that's why opinions are so divided on this - some assessing a young lad - pure and simple, while others (like me) are assessing a supposed 'wonderkid' or 'superstar in the making' because of the billing he came with.

[pete 2,499]

- He was also very 'cute' at riding tackles and making cluggers look stupid.

 

Zelalem is good with tackles as well. He just avoids them.

[Tannochsidebear 2,429]

The whole (very well written - thanks R) argument for Zelalem in this role falls down on its very principal. This metronome (hate these coaching manual phrases) position is supposedly to tictate tempo. The biggest fault in our game when we dont play well is our tempo. If GZ is in charge of tempo, then he has failed, spectacularly on some occasions.

 

I said in the match thread I thought the first 45 minutes last night was his best yet in a Rangers shirt. His "tempo" was much quicker, his movement and availability was much further up the park. I nodded with appreciation when he even got caught offside on one occasion as it shows he is trying to learn that he needs to bring more to the party. Unfortunately the half time whistle was his undoing last night. The Raith manager (should I know who he is?) sussed him out and moved his midfield further up the pitch and completely negated GZ's influence on the game in one easy motion. His passing fell to pieces, his confidence disappeared in an instant, and he went back to hiding and was not available for the short pass anymore, forcing us to hit the long diagonal more often in the second half, leading to the hook after an hour. After such a promising first half it was all over 15 minutes later with the slightest of tactical tweaks from the opponents.

 

His role may be an important one for some sides. His individual ability to perform this role is so raw and prone to error that he is going to have to work so so hard on his game to have any chance of succeeding. Perhaps with the salary mentioned on here earlier in the week of around £1Mpa he already thinks he has made it. If so it will be his downfall, and I do hope this is not the case. He needs to add a bit of muscle as he is wiped off the ball and seems to go in the huff if he is tackled hard. Dont they know who he is? He needs to improve his passing accuracy. It is nowhere near where it should be for the simplicity of his passing. The stats may indicate a successful pass if it goes to the player, but when the pass should have been in front of the player, to the side of the player or just simply hit harder or softer, the stats dont tell the whole truth. The eye of the supporter tells you his passing isnt good enough. His shooting when he finds himself in forward positions isnt good enough. Even if he wont find himself too far forward when playing at a higher level, he will always have to make his way into the box at times with us given the defensive shape of our opponents, and this needs a lot of work.

 

I have seen some progression in his game at times, but like a lot of kids, is very inconsistent. Arteta was on a different planet from GZ. Absolutely night and day although he was older, more experienced and had a much better team around him. So not a fair comparison I dont think.

 

If GZ ever plays 30 games in one season for Arsenal I will be utterly amazed. He has too many flaws in his game that would all need massive improvement to get to that level. Can he become a good pro, perhaps making the USA team, sure. But he wont ever be a regular first team pick for a rich, top club side IMO.

 

BTW the "metronome" must be the easiest position in football to play going on Rousseau's excellent analysis. It's not fair to be judged by the tackles you make, the headers you win, the assists or goals you score, the goals you prevent, the opposition breaks you stop. You simply need to make 5 yard sideways passes all day long and always be available to recycle the ball, at the right tempo. Piece of piss!!

[the gunslinger 3,366]

He started against St Johnstone so the manager clearly uses him where he feels the tactical need - as clearly explained in the article.

 

To complain about Zelalem not winning headers is like saying Foderingham needs to score more goals. I've seen the lad pull out of one or two challenges and that's annoying but hopefully something he can work on. Last night showed he's clearly trying to work on moving the ball a bit faster so the development work is going on.

 

 

Your right he did start v st johnston and was utterly horrendous.

 

He doesn't have to win them but can't shite out of them under any circumstances.

 

A guy I work with thinks Warburton won't play him at Ibrox because the crowd are on his back. I'm not so sure about that but he's certainly not a rated player with my colleagues.

Edited February 3, 2016 by the gunslinger

[trublusince1982 243]

some of the blame for his performance of late needs to go on the managers shoulders. He's playing him too far forward especially on tuesday, zelalem is better with the game in front of him

 

personally would use him as a deep playmaker rather than the point of the three

[the gunslinger 3,366]

But who would he pass the ball back to.