Ha only just noticed that! I've voted for the wrong option then ^^
- Status
Ha only just noticed that! I've voted for the wrong option then ^^
RFUS
Anustart
Oh ffs. I voted yes when I meant no.
Well if there was a "sometimes" option I would have picked that, but I sided more towards no.
TheFinnFan
Finners
i dont even bother to vote. tim is ace
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
Someones been passing round the glue.
Matt Damon
Player Valuation: £60m
Also its interesting to see that NO appears to be neck and neck since the YES has been split into two options. So actually there's been almost a 2:1 supporting Cahill
It was a snidey poll. Dave K no doubt created it and blames Kenwright.
It was a snidey poll. Dave K no doubt created it and blames Kenwright.
Last edited:
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
I can't be arsed opening this up again, but didn't you say that nobody agreed with me that Cahill needed to be in the team? In your face. Ha.
Let's be unsentimental: it's fair to say that we looked much, much better playing 4-4-2 last season with Saha and Beckford up front. In that formation, with a fully fit squad, Tim isn't good enough to start in central midfield. If we play the 4-5-1 formation that worked a treat in 08, but saw us play pretty terribly for the first half of last season, then yeah, he probably starts.
ChicagoToffee
generally quite awesome.
Isn't a bit like the same argument as to whether Neville should be in the starting XI? Is Everton better with him or without him in the starting XI? Is Everton better offensively and defensively without Neville? Quite probably but who else is going to give Everton spine?
Cahill will always be a threat to score a goal and you've got to have that out there. Beckford and Saha can both ply them in with skill but neither are the lurking threat that is Cahill. Opposing defenses will account for Cahill more than any other player out there, especially from set pieces. His role isn't to facilitate - it's to be there when you need him.
He wears it on his chest and sells it every time out.
Cahill is a winner. Simples. You keep winners on the pitch whenever you can.
Cahill will always be a threat to score a goal and you've got to have that out there. Beckford and Saha can both ply them in with skill but neither are the lurking threat that is Cahill. Opposing defenses will account for Cahill more than any other player out there, especially from set pieces. His role isn't to facilitate - it's to be there when you need him.
He wears it on his chest and sells it every time out.
Cahill is a winner. Simples. You keep winners on the pitch whenever you can.
See I think Cahill should be played as a striker in a 4-4-2 formation- push him further up the field and get some crosses in the box- he would flourish from crosses from Baines/Coleman in a further forward position.
If we were holding onto a lead or under the cosh can get back and roll his sleeves up.
Cahill gives 110% and is a quality player. Play him I say
If we were holding onto a lead or under the cosh can get back and roll his sleeves up.
Cahill gives 110% and is a quality player. Play him I say
Ste Stocks
Player Valuation: £500k
Cahill epitomises everton, he IS everton personified.
Having said that, i believe he should play in midfield. properly in midfield, not in a 4-4-1-1 formation...
if anything our team should be coleman felli cahill arteta in mid wth bily or osman behind st
Having said that, i believe he should play in midfield. properly in midfield, not in a 4-4-1-1 formation...
if anything our team should be coleman felli cahill arteta in mid wth bily or osman behind st
RFUS
Anustart
I can't be arsed opening this up again, but didn't you say that nobody agreed with me that Cahill needed to be in the team? In your face. Ha.
I don't know mate.
I stand by that though. We don't need him like say, we need Baines.
But I'm not asking us to sell him or anything ffs. He is still a very valuable asset, but for me he doesn't warrant being the first name on the team sheet which I sense he is. The results without him last season speak volumes.
For the 43937274774727472727472734422^73rd time, I'm of course not saying the bad results were directly Cahill's fault. He does what he is asked. More than that, even. It's because he's the focal point of our attack when he plays and I feel in most games last season we suffered for it. We don't have any pace or penetration so we relied almost completely on hoping Baines could deliver a killer cross to Cahill in open play or from a set piece.
But when we didn't have him we had to do a bit more. Ossie was given a starring role and boy did he shine. Not to mention how good Becks and Saha were up front together in terms of a goals return. They were a lot more effective as a pair than Saha and Cahill or Beckford and Cahill. And I'm going to highlight the Saha/Cahill partnership, because people love to say how Cahill scored 9 goals in the first half of the season but how many did his strike partner score? I think it was 0. Whereas Becks and Saha together both banged them in. And then in the 4-2-3-1 everyone was chipping in with goals as it was a very open, attractive and unrestricted style of play, with the midfield 3 alternating their roles.
I digress however. It's a crap side of the argument to be on because I love Cahill to bits. In an ideal world Moyes would find a way to utilise players like Ossie and Cahill in the same side, and a way to get Cahills goals without sacrificing other people's.
billycopper
Player Valuation: £40m
Cahill is important to us, but I think we're too reliant on him. Moyes should be able to rotate other players in the hole or go with 4-4-2 without causing significant disruption. I feel that part of the problem is that the gaffer sticks with what has always worked for him, rather than putting trust in other players to step up to the plate. Given extra responsibility, Ossie really came into his own last year. It's up to Davey to create competition for places by picking players based on form. If Cahill's not scoring, then we arguably need to look at resting him for a while. He is one of our most consistent performers though, so I wouldn't leave him out without good reason.
- Status
