Does Cahill hold us back

[ToxtethBlue]

That's most likely going to be what Moyes goes with, apart from he'll have to have Neville in their somewhere. I have a few concerns. During the Philly game Coleman and Baines pulled wide for the ball, leaving big gaps between our fullbacks and centrebacks. I think that having two attacking fullbacks will leave us more exposed than normal. I also feel that we'll lose a big part of Coleman's attacking threat playing him at fullback because Moyes will be shouting at him from the touchline not to get too far forward.

It would also bother me that we'd have two such inexperienced players in Coleman and Barkley down the same flank.

If Arteta can't make things happen in central midfield, I have my doubts about Osman's ability to effect a game from there.

We're still stuck with having Cahill behind Saha, which means that Louis has to do all the donkey work and chasing by himself. Because Fellaini is the only defensively-minded midfielder, we'll either leave ourselves open to the counter or over-compensate and sit too deep.

Coleman won't get forward anymore than Neville does, he'll just be far more effective when he gets into those areas. He didn't have any problems against DC United, and it's not his fault that Distin and Jagielka where having problems with that long ball over the top. I'd put that down to rustiness, more than anything. You've put him there in your team, so I think we'll all agree he deserves a run there. If it doesn't work it doesn't work, but you've got to give it a go. It could also be argued that the likes of Osman/Arteta wouldn't have to run beyond the ball as much with attacking options outwide, leaving us less exposed.

As for Osman, he's had two proper runs there during his time here and we've gone on good runs on both occasions. He played CM during that 12 game unbeaten run during the 07-08 season and him moving into the middle during 09-10 saw us go on a decent rum, beating the likes of Sporting, Chelsea and Manchester Utd on the way. We didn't look exposed at all, he even played alongside Arteta in a two with Cahill just ahead. Creative players are perfectly capable defenders, as the likes of Xavi and co have proved. If not him, then Arteta and Rodwell would be fine, whatever floats your boat really. But someone who can lift the ball off the ground and make a better pass than a 5 yard pea roller to the player next to them.

Cahill and Saha isn't the best partnership but you'd expect them to be more effective with some proper width and creativity in the side. As I've said before, if I was to pick my first choice starting eleven then Cahill wouldn't be in it, but if your looking at the best way to fit him into one, I think something along those lines is the best option really.

 

[RFUS]

Seeing as all the cool kids are doing it:

Howard
Coleman Jags Distin Baines
Rodwell Fellaini
Arteta Bilyaletdinov Osman
Saha
​

or preferably:

Howard
Coleman Jags Distin Baines
Anichebe Osman Fellaini Arteta
Beckford Saha​

Not too sure about Anichebe in that one, though. It just highlights how weak we are at RM/RW.

I can't honestly find any good formation that involves Cahill without me thinking "so and so would be better there".

 

[Warrington Dan]

Seeing as all the cool kids are doing it:

Howard
Coleman Jags Distin Baines
Rodwell Fellaini
Arteta Bilyaletdinov Osman
Saha
​

Gives into peer pressure

 

[Jenko]

Howard
Neville Jagielka Distin Baines
Fellaini
Osman Rodwell Arteta Bily
Saha​

Maybe switch Osman/Arteta/Bily around. Cahill for Rodwell.

 

[Brownie]

Haven't we established that Arteta doesn't enjoy playing so deep and that he is far from his best in that position? Why is Saha on the left and Cahill upfront? Why is Anichebe in the side?

Your second version is a bit better but wouldn't you swap Osman and Rodwell? Why is Cahill the lone striker instead of Beckford?

Considering it was my idea, I'll answer. No we haven't established that Arteta doesn't like playing deep and doesn't perform well there. Saha is on the left and Cahill is up front so that we have players that can beat a man in wide positions. Anichebe is in the side because he's one of the few attacking players we have that has the capability to play out wide. Cahill is up front instead of Beckford because he's better than him.

It was your idea trying this formation mate, don't fret because people are experimenting with it.

 

[RFUS]

Howard
Neville Jagielka Distin Baines
Fellaini
Osman Rodwell Arteta Bily
Saha​

Maybe switch Osman/Arteta/Bily around. Cahill for Rodwell.

A 4-1-4-1 is a similar formation, but an intriguing one. Having Fellaini act as an old fashion sweeper/"FFS SMASH HIM LAD" kind of player is something I like. He's capable. Beyond capable.

 

[Jenko]

I think it'd work (with Fellaini) too, it's another Formation where Cahill doesn't fit in so I doubt Moyes will be playing it anytime soon.

 

[billycopper]

Coleman won't get forward anymore than Neville does, he'll just be far more effective when he gets into those areas. He didn't have any problems against DC United, and it's not his fault that Distin and Jagielka where having problems with that long ball over the top. I'd put that down to rustiness, more than anything. You've put him there in your team, so I think we'll all agree he deserves a run there. If it doesn't work it doesn't work, but you've got to give it a go. It could also be argued that the likes of Osman/Arteta wouldn't have to run beyond the ball as much with attacking options outwide, leaving us less exposed.

As for Osman, he's had two proper runs there during his time here and we've gone on good runs on both occasions. He played CM during that 12 game unbeaten run during the 07-08 season and him moving into the middle during 09-10 saw us go on a decent rum, beating the likes of Sporting, Chelsea and Manchester Utd on the way. We didn't look exposed at all, he even played alongside Arteta in a two with Cahill just ahead. Creative players are perfectly capable defenders, as the likes of Xavi and co have proved. If not him, then Arteta and Rodwell would be fine, whatever floats your boat really. But someone who can lift the ball off the ground and make a better pass than a 5 yard pea roller to the player next to them.

Cahill and Saha isn't the best partnership but you'd expect them to be more effective with some proper width and creativity in the side. As I've said before, if I was to pick my first choice starting eleven then Cahill wouldn't be in it, but if your looking at the best way to fit him into one, I think something along those lines is the best option really.

Neville puts a diagonal ball in to the box pretty much as soon as he crosses the half way line. We need Coleman to be getting into the final third and into the box. Of course he has to be in the team somewhere and he does need to learn the fullback position, but I think we need to guard against being too open at the back. And, on the other hand, if Coleman doesn't get forward as much from right back, then we've lost one of our biggest threats going forward.

I'm happy to try Ossie in the middle. I don't think we'll see the same form from last season though because it's a deeper role and it involves more defending than the one in which he shone.

I'm trying to see where this extra creativity has come from. Coleman and Osman are both now further away from the opposition goal than they were last season and in has come Barkley, who's completely untested at this level.

 

[toffeestillidie]

Going by last season that's a lie. I can't believe I was sad enough to work all this out, but here you go:


With Cahill ------ Without Cahill
Played: 28 -------------- 10
Won: ---9 ----------------4
Drawn: 11 ----------------4
Lost: ---8 ----------------2

Points: -----------38 --- 16
Points per game: 1.35 -- 1.6

Scored: --34 ----------- 17
Conceded: 33 ----------- 12

Goals per game: ---1.2 ---- 1.7
Conceded per game: 1.18 --- 1.2


Some other things to note:

• Of the 9 games in which Cahill scored we only managed to win 3, but drew 4 and lost 2.
• The Sunderland 2-0 win has been attributed to the with Cahill table, although he only played the last 18 minutes of the game. By that point we were already 2-0 up and coasting.

I'm just going to highlight the key stats as that is a lot of info.

With Cahill we averaged 1.35 points and 1.2 goals per game.
Without Cahill we averaged 1.7 points and 1.6 points per game.


So proportionately speaking last season, we got more points without him and also scored more goals. To all those who love to say we can't live without his goals, the stats say differently. They say we can actually do even better.

Not to say we should get rid of him or anything. I just thing these stats back up the opinion that we should look to move away from the traditional 4-5-1/4-4-1-1 with Cahill, as it isn't as effective as it was. We need something new; a formation which works for players like Osman and Beckford. If that new formation can also work for Cahill, then that would be perfect, but it's a tough one for sure.

thanks for doing the nerd work, and i figured someone would make me eat my words with last seasons stats. our team played awful at the start of last season, so i think it shifts the stats a little bit and makes last season a sort of anomaly. I went back to 07/08 and got some stats myself, since I got off work early today and have nothing better to do:

07/08

With Cahill------------------Without Cahill
Played:18----------------------20
Points: 40----------------------25
Points/Game:2.22---------------1.25

08/09
With Cahill --------------------Without Cahill
Played: 30 ----------------------8
Points: 57 ----------------------5
Points/Game: 1.9 ----------------.625

09/10
With Cahill -------------------Without Cahill
Played: 33 --------------------- 5
Points: 51 --------------------- 7
Points/Game: 1.54 ------------1.4

Now, I suppose you could make the argument that using older stats inflates his contributions because he's not the player he was before, but from watching him play does anyone really think that last season, cahill dropped in quality while the team moved beyond him? for much of the first half i would say the opposite, its just that his goals weren't translating to points because of the overall ****eness of our team.

But honestly apart from last year the comparison was night and day, and last season the difference was extremely slight, and coincided with a resurgence in form from our team that i think went well beyond a formation change. i would argue that across a season, he's still next to indispensable.

 

[RFUS]

thanks for doing the nerd work, and i figured someone would make me eat my words with last seasons stats. our team played awful at the start of last season, so i think it shifts the stats a little bit and makes last season a sort of anomaly. I went back to 07/08 and got some stats myself, since I got off work early today and have nothing better to do:

07/08

With Cahill------------------Without Cahill
Played:18----------------------20
Points: 40----------------------21
Points/Game:2.22---------------1.05

08/09
With Cahill --------------------Without Cahill
Played: 30 ----------------------8
Points: 57 ----------------------5
Points/Game: 1.9 ----------------.625

09/10
With Cahill -------------------Without Cahill
Played: 33 --------------------- 5
Points: 51 --------------------- 4
Points/Game: 1.54 ------------.8

Now, I suppose you could make the argument that using older stats inflates his contributions because he's not the player he was before, but from watching him play does anyone really think that last season, cahill dropped in quality while the team moved beyond him? for much of the first half i would say the opposite, its just that his goals weren't translating to points because of the overall ****eness of our team.

But honestly apart from last year the comparison was night and day, and last season the difference was extremely slight, and coincided with a resurgence in form from our team that i think went well beyond a formation change. i would argue that across a season, he's still next to indispensable.

Cheers for all the work mate.

I have one very simple response, however.

He is still the same player. He is good as he ever was. But teams have sussed us now. What worked in 2008 or 2009 did not work in 2010 and does not work in 2011.

And without a new, quality, different addition to the squad, it won't work again this year. Playing like this we are embarrassingly easy to defend against. The 0-0s against Wigan and the 1-0 defeats to Newcastle, Blackburn and the like should really make this more obvious than it is to some.

 

[billycopper]

Considering it was my idea, I'll answer. No we haven't established that Arteta doesn't like playing deep and doesn't perform well there. Saha is on the left and Cahill is up front so that we have players that can beat a man in wide positions. Anichebe is in the side because he's one of the few attacking players we have that has the capability to play out wide. Cahill is up front instead of Beckford because he's better than him.

It was your idea trying this formation mate, don't fret because people are experimenting with it.

He played there for 3/4 of last season and had his worst run of form in an Everton shirt. He gets switched out to the left and suddenly he comes alive.

Saha is 33 and doesn't like running if he doesn't have to. Don't you think he'd question why, at that stage of his career, he's being asked to play in an alien position that takes him away from the penalty area?

Anichebe might be capable of playing wide, but that doesn't mean he's any good at it. He provided only 1 assist last season and hasn't scored in over 2 years. He's done nothing to warrant a starting place.

The role of the lone striker is to chase down lost causes and stretch the opposition on the break. Cahill has no pace or mobility. If the opposition push out, we'd have no options to get in behind them and spring their offside trap.

I don't mind people trying new things. In fact I encourage it. We have to be able to break things down and look at the pros and cons though.

 

[RFUS]

Despite some of these opinions making we want to gouge out my eyes, this is actually one of the biggest and best footballing debates I've seen on here in ages.

The kicker is though that you just know Moyes is going to start with Cahill and Saha in a 4-5-1/4-4-1-1 when we plays Spurs. That isn't even up for debate.

 

[billycopper]

Howard
Neville Jagielka Distin Baines
Fellaini
Osman Rodwell Arteta Bily
Saha​

Maybe switch Osman/Arteta/Bily around. Cahill for Rodwell.

The consensus seems to be that Osman can't play out wide. Coleman certainly poses a more direct threat.
The game very often passes Rodwell by. Why is he in the side ahead of Cahill, one of our most consistent goalscorers?
Bily struggles out wide too. Arteta has shown more promise on the left than anyone.

 

[Silas]

Despite some of these opinions making we want to gouge out my eyes, this is actually one of the biggest and best footballing debates I've seen on here in ages.

The kicker is though that you just know Moyes is going to start with Cahill and Saha in a 4-5-1/4-4-1-1 when we plays Spurs. That isn't even up for debate.

Unless Saha or Cahill are injured it's a given.

 

[RFUS]

Unless Saha or Cahill are injured it's a given.

Even if Cahill's injured I expect him to start, to be honest.