Fellaini or Fernendes.....?

Who would you rather in the Everton midfield...


  • Total voters
    176
Status
Not open for further replies.
So what would happen if Fenandes came back?

I mean, Fellaini will no doubt be in the starting line-up.

Arteta clearly can't be dropped.

Which leaves three positions for regulars Osman, Piennar, Fernandes and Cahill.

If TB is correct and Fellaini is essentially playing the Cahill role, then Cahill has to go. Otherwise we could push Fellaini just behind Cahill, playing off Arteta with either Osman and Pienaar on the left and Manny on the right.

Seems a bit disjointed, though.

Perhaps we've no great need for Manuel now?

Could still take Pennant, though.

.......Saha/Victor/A.N. Other
.................Cahill
Pienaar Fellaini Arteta Osman/Pennant

Is that crap, TB?

With Arteta on form and looking good he (Manny) wouldn't be priority anymore, we already have a very good player in his position.

But If Moyes did bring him back I'd play him on the right (ahead of Osman) and interchange him with Arteta throughout games. You'd get a good balance and good variation. As much as I like Osman Manny is a better player.

Either that or play him alongside Arteta (in the middle) with Fellaini playing the Cahill role. It'd never happen though, we don't have any money.:(
 

Watching some old matches on EvertonTV...Fernandes' passing and Freekicks are great, works well with Arteta especially. But he wont come to Everton again - unless we get into the Champions League and play Valencia.

Im happy with Fellaini at the moment - if he can just get less yellow cards that would be great
 
Your pidgeon holeing to much and have taken on yourself to say that playing in the hole is a second striking role, i know you like to think of Cahill as a second striker to when he plays there but not for me. Personaly i dont think Fellaini is playing exactly in the hol, hes in between the two boxes mop[ping up turing over play and supporting attacks gettinginto the box, true his attacking game is more atuned then his defensive but hes box to box for me. We are begining to move out of the demarcatuion of roles as in defensive midfeilders, attacking midfeilders we have players in the centre who can do both now with Fellaini and Arteta. Fellaini is box to box IMO.

He is a "box to box" midfielder but he is not playing "box to box" in the current team. No chance. He's playing off Cahill and sometimes right up alongside him. Ofcourse he drops deep every once and a while, that's what second strikers do.

I see his future position as centre midfielder (box to box) but that is not the position he's playing in or he's impressed in. I have no doubts about that. He's impressed further forward, in the attacking third. As a second striker.

Fernandes on the other hand plays centre midfield for Valencia, basically as a deep lying play maker. As I said, woeful comparison by Sharpy.
 
He is a "box to box" midfielder but he is not playing "box to box" in the current team. No chance. He's playing off Cahill and sometimes right up alongside him. Ofcourse he drops deep every once and a while, that's what second strikers do.

I see his future position as centre midfielder (box to box) but that is not the position he's playing in or he's impressed in. I have no doubts about that. He's impressed further forward, in the attacking third. As a second striker.

Fernandes on the other hand plays centre midfield for Valencia, basically as a deep lying play maker. As I said, woeful comparison by Sharpy.

You can call him a second striker all day mate, hes doing well going forward but i cant for the life me see how he is playing as a second striker nor do i see any great change or adjustment in his game or position on the feild. Hes only scored one goal since our strikers have been out, if im right hes scored the majority of his others with a full compliment of strikers on the feild. Im struggleing a bit here. His card count would also indicate hes more all action all over the midfeild then your arguement would suggest.

Hes taking poscession of the back four playing it simple, turning over play, making himself available to other midfeilders in the centre while we are in pocesson, keeping/retaining/holding up play in the final two quaters and laying it off, when the ball is out on the flanks he gets in the box, he retains our pocession form defence, the whole way through the pitch and into attack. Hes a Box to Box midfeilder quite simply because hes involved in everything from defense to attack.

A fish is a fish is a fish.
 
Last edited:

Anyone who dismisses Manuel Fernandes ability needs to watch abit more Football.

Both are good players but technically Fernandes is a better player, most fans accept that.

Fellaini is a totally different player to Manny, so you can't compare really.

Fellaini has been playing as a striker basically with Cahill and only drops deep sometimes. He is not a box to box player in this 4-5-1 we play at all.

Some people need to watch Football outside of Everton.
 
Anyone who dismisses Manuel Fernandes ability needs to watch abit more Football.

Both are good players but technically Fernandes is a better player, most fans accept that.

Fellaini is a totally different player to Manny, so you can't compare really.

Fellaini has been playing as a striker basically with Cahill and only drops deep sometimes. He is not a box to box player in this 4-5-1 we play at all.

Some people need to watch Football outside of Everton.

Wasnt he an everton player before he did the dirty on us?
 

You can call him a second striker all day mate, hes doing well going forward but i cant for the life me see how he is playing as a second striker nor do i see any great change or adjustment in his game or position on the feild. Hes only scored one goal since our strikers have been out, if im right hes scored the majority of his others with a full compliment of strikers on the feild. Im struggleing a bit here. His card count would also indicate hes more all action all over the midfeild then your arguement would suggest.

Hes taking poscession of the back four playing it simple, turning over play, making himself available to other midfeilders in the centre while we are in pocesson, keeping/retaining/holding up play in the final two quaters and laying it off, when the ball is out on the flanks he gets in the box, he retains our pocession form defence, the whole way through the pitch and into attack. Hes a Box to Box midfeilder quite simply because hes involved in everything from defense to attack.

A fish is a fish is a fish.

I can call him a second striker all day, because that's where he's playing. He's playing the role very well, fair play to him. He looks far better than than he did in the middle.

The last time Fellaini played as a box to box midfielder was against Aston Villa, which was six games ago. Since then he's played behind Cahill and has looked superb, the best we've seen him.

His early goals did come in central midfield, he's perfectly capable of scoring goals and will do whether he's playing centre back, centre mid or upfront. In terms of all round performances though that was not the case, he looked out of his depth at times and alot of people used him as a scapegoat and critisised him. He wasn't playing well but it was unfair on the lad.

He's hasn't been anywhere near the back four for around five to six games, Arteta and Neville are the players who are playing in that area of the pitch and doing that job, not Fellaini. Fellaini is recieving the ball in the final third most of the time and usually he has his back to goal. He's holding the ball up and linking things together.

When Jagielka or Lescott have the ball Fellaini is up alongside the opposition players centre backs, playing as our target man and looking for the knockdowns. He's not in the middle of the park winning headers, Neville and Arteta are.

He is a "box to box" midfielder (naturally), I haven't said he isn't to be honest. His future probably does lie in that position, alonside Arteta or another player but he's not playing that role at the moment, not a chance. What is he involved in defensively? Seriously, he's offered nothing defensively bar clearing a few opposition set pieces.

It's just like calling Wayne Rooney a box to box midfielder because occasionly he drops to the half way line and links things together. He's far from it.
 
I can call him a second striker all day, because that's where he's playing. He's playing the role very well, fair play to him. He looks far better than than he did in the middle.

The last time Fellaini played as a box to box midfielder was against Aston Villa, which was six games ago. Since then he's played behind Cahill and has looked superb, the best we've seen him.

His early goals did come in central midfield, he's perfectly capable of scoring goals and will do whether he's playing centre back, centre mid or upfront. In terms of all round performances though that was not the case, he looked out of his depth at times and alot of people used him as a scapegoat and critisised him. He wasn't playing well but it was unfair on the lad.

He's hasn't been anywhere near the back four for around five to six games, Arteta and Neville are the players who are playing in that area of the pitch and doing that job, not Fellaini. Fellaini is recieving the ball in the final third most of the time and usually he has his back to goal. He's holding the ball up and linking things together.

When Jagielka or Lescott have the ball Fellaini is up alongside the opposition players centre backs, playing as our target man and looking for the knockdowns. He's not in the middle of the park winning headers, Neville and Arteta are.

He is a "box to box" midfielder (naturally), I haven't said he isn't to be honest. His future probably does lie in that position, alonside Arteta or another player but he's not playing that role at the moment, not a chance. What is he involved in defensively? Seriously, he's offered nothing defensively bar clearing a few opposition set pieces.

It's just like calling Wayne Rooney a box to box midfielder because occasionly he drops to the half way line and links things together. He's far from it.

Well what can i say mate i think your wrong! Whats your definition of a second striker, and is it your own definition?
 
Fellaini for me, simply because Manny had a great first loan spell at the club but failed to re-ignite the form he shown on his return. A third return would possibly be a repeat of the former.
 
Well what can i say mate i think your wrong! Whats your definition of a second striker, and is it your own definition?

I think your both right, in a way, Fellaini is meant to be a natural box-to-box midfielder, but he cant tackle for [Poor language removed]. As Toccy says i havent seen him track back for the last few weeks, his role has been to support Cahill in a second striker role. Its where he has shone. Neville and Arteta have been on Def duty.

But i think he has played as a box2box midfielder, when he first came he did play fairly deep and joined in with attacks.
 
Well what can i say mate i think your wrong! Whats your definition of a second striker, and is it your own definition?

Someone who supports the front man and plays just off him. There are many different styles of second strikers. There isn't one exact way how to play the role, it can be played in many different ways depending on what type of player you are.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top