Is it a case of Cahill or Fellaini?

[Cal]

If it did come down to it, Cahill every time without a doubt.

 

[Momo_nr.1]

In a 4-5-1, I agree with your point. However in a 4-4-2, it's a case of Fellaini or Osman or Cahill. We definately need a more deep lying midfielder playing in a 4-4-2 formation. So it's a case of Rodwell/Castillo or a new more defensive minded midfielder to be brought in. Don't think a 4-4-2, with whatever central midfield pairing, containing Fellaini/Osman/Cahill will work. There's not enough protection for the back four looking at the qualities of the three players mentioned. Think Fellaini/and that Portuguese fella (can't think of his name) would be perfect for a 4-4-2.

Agree (except for the portuguese thing ) if you play one striker, you can put cahill and fellaini behind, and osman or a better holding midfielder behind them... but indeed when you play 2 strikers it's either momo or cahill imo

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Fellaini would be the choice for me in a 4-4-2 with two strikers upfront. Cahill isn't good enough off the ball in the centre of a 4 man midfield.

I havn't been all that impressed with Cahill this year. If you take the goals out of his game he offers very little. I'm beginning to think he was one of the players Moyes said needs to step up a level and hasn't, along with people like Lescott. He'll have the spot to himself for the next match, lets hope he takes it.

Agreed. Although I would replace "very little" with "nothing".

 

[TsarDiniyar]

Fellaini has settled into the side now and seems set on becoming a crowd favourite. Cahill by contrast has struggled this season and the game passed him by yesterday.

Is it time to pick one or the other in the side?

every game passes him by

 

[TsarDiniyar]

Beginning to sound a bit like Lampard and Gerrard for England. I havn't been all that impressed with Cahill this year. If you take the goals out of his game he offers very little. I'm beginning to think he was one of the players Moyes said needs to step up a level and hasn't, along with people like Lescott. He'll have the spot to himself for the next match, lets hope he takes it.

finally someone has made the point i have been making for 2 years

they need to implement a rule where you can make subs for a corner, get him on for a corner then take him straight back off afterwards, as its only set plays that you realise he's on the pitch. Corners and getting in trouble.

 

[Goat]

Poor Tim, when did he come a wiping boy?

 

[Dutch Toffee]

Here we go for a discussion I've had and heard countless times on Bluekipper. "If we take the goals from Cahill, he offers very little". Maybe you're right in making that assesment, but his goalscoring ability is the focal point of his game. If you take away the technique of Pienaar, Osman and Arteta they're nothing players. If you take away the goals from Saha and Yakubu, they'll be worthless. If you gave Tim Howard, Richard Wright hands, we'd never finished fifth last year.

I agree, in a 4-4-2, Cahill isn't the perfect midfielder to have, but in a 4-5-1, he'll always be my first name on the teamsheet, if fit. He's been Everton's talisman for the last few years.

 

[TsarDiniyar]

in fellaini moyes has found someone who does cahills job, but gets involved as well, his passing is much better than cahills. Cahill should be sat on the bench for me, i'm not a fan of his.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I guess the problem is the people that fill his role in those above us. Scholes in his pomp, Gerrard, Lampard, maybe even Fabregas. They get the goals that Cahill gets but also offer much more as well. Cahill has been superb for us, there's no doubting that but I'm just wondering if he has the skills to take us that little bit further. It probably doesn't help that he's played just 50% of the league games in the past two seasons.

Of course if he'd have netted his header this thread would probably not have been started, I just can't help feel right now that he's a player who hits form when the rest of the team do, rather than a player who can drag the rest of the team up to his standard.

 

[Dutch Toffee]

in fellaini moyes has found someone who does cahills job, but gets involved as well, his passing is much better than cahills. Cahill should be sat on the bench for me, i'm not a fan of his.

Fair enough, it's your opinion and I'll respect that. For me though, Cahill is still a very important member of our squad. As said in a 4-4-2, Fellaini is probably the better equiped, but in a 4-5-1 he has proven time and time again he's just awesome.

I guess the problem is the people that fill his role in those above us. Scholes in his pomp, Gerrard, Lampard, maybe even Fabregas. They get the goals that Cahill gets but also offer much more as well. Cahill has been superb for us, there's no doubting that but I'm just wondering if he has the skills to take us that little bit further. It probably doesn't help that he's played just 50% of the league games in the past two seasons.

Of course if he'd have netted his header this thread would probably not have been started, I just can't help feel right now that he's a player who hits form when the rest of the team do, rather than a player who can drag the rest of the team up to his standard.

Over the past few years, Cahill always made an impact, coming back from either an injury, or a suspension. The amount of times he scored (often important goals) on his come-back are countless. Didn't happen for him yesterday though and he wasn't probably fully fit. Think it's a shame he gets so much criticism on the back of yesterdays performance, as he doesn't deserve that. Personally, love Timmy to bits. Favourite all-time Everton player for me.

 

[ToxtethBlue]

The problem with Cahill is he doesn't offer enough. He gets 10 goals a season, could Saha score more than that? Yes he could. He has done over the years given a run of games.

At times the 4-5-1 is nothing like a 4-5-1, yesterday Cahill was basically playing as a striker. He very rarely dropped into midfield. He didn't offer any link up play, he can't run in behind and he's not very good at winning flick ons despite what people say.

Alot of the time we just put him up there and hope he nicks a goal. Again whilst he can score goals he doesn't score as many as your normal strikers. Given a run of games I'm sure Saha and possibly Vaughan would score more than 10 a season.

Someone like Saha/Vaughan/Anichebe would've been more useful because they do bring alot more to the plate in terms of pace, power and link up play.

I like Cahill when he does play behind Yakubu and supports the midfield, the Portsmouth game last season was a perfect example. He played the role to perfection, exactly like Gerrard does it for Liverpool. He mixes it up, he drops deep, he was getting involved and he was supporting well.

Alot of the time I'm seeing him basically playing as a striker and I don't like it, if that's the case then we may aswell use a REAL striker instead.

If he's used correctly he can be a very good player, he is a very good player but not in this striker role like he played on Saturday. If he's going to play like that then he shouldn't be on the pitch. I'm starting to see that more and more nowadays.

 

[Brownie]

Come on boys, this is ridiculous. I know what you mean TB about playing him as a striker, but other than that, I see no justifiable criticism in the entire thread. His goalscoring ratio from midfield is almost identical to Frank Lampard; only Ronaldo's is better (and he's a joke btw). Clearly he is absolutely nowhere near those players in terms of allround contribution, but they are two of the best players in the world in any position. His record is better than Gerrard and Fabregas's, though again they offer more in addition to goals, but likewise are also top, top players. He is never going to be that good.

I hate the way people miss out on what he DOES contribute as well as goals though. He's good at closing down and working hard, he puts himself about a lot. He's vocal and one of our most determined players. He's decent at passing (I'll argue that one all day if you disagree) and he finds good places to receive the ball in the midfield. His holdup play is decent and he's good in the air. He makes things happen around the box, even if he doesn't score. His movement is very, very good. He tries little bits of skill and touches that even if they don't come off, often lead to goals. All in all, he is just a very good attacking midfielder. There aren't that many around, and we have one of the best ones.

 

[Dutch Toffee]

Come on boys, this is ridiculous. I know what you mean TB about playing him as a striker, but other than that, I see no justifiable criticism in the entire thread. His goalscoring ratio from midfield is almost identical to Frank Lampard; only Ronaldo's is better (and he's a joke btw). Clearly he is absolutely nowhere near those players in terms of allround contribution, but they are two of the best players in the world in any position. His record is better than Gerrard and Fabregas's, though again they offer more in addition to goals, but likewise are also top, top players. He is never going to be that good.

I hate the way people miss out on what he DOES contribute as well as goals though. He's good at closing down and working hard, he puts himself about a lot. He's vocal and one of our most determined players. He's decent at passing (I'll argue that one all day if you disagree) and he finds good places to receive the ball in the midfield. His holdup play is decent and he's good in the air. He makes things happen around the box, even if he doesn't score. His movement is very, very good. He tries little bits of skill and touches that even if they don't come off, often lead to goals. All in all, he is just a very good attacking midfielder. There aren't that many around, and we have one of the best ones.

I'm gonna give you a positive rep for that.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

Come on boys, this is ridiculous. I know what you mean TB about playing him as a striker, but other than that, I see no justifiable criticism in the entire thread. His goalscoring ratio from midfield is almost identical to Frank Lampard; only Ronaldo's is better (and he's a joke btw). Clearly he is absolutely nowhere near those players in terms of allround contribution, but they are two of the best players in the world in any position. His record is better than Gerrard and Fabregas's, though again they offer more in addition to goals, but likewise are also top, top players. He is never going to be that good.

I hate the way people miss out on what he DOES contribute as well as goals though. He's good at closing down and working hard, he puts himself about a lot. He's vocal and one of our most determined players. He's decent at passing (I'll argue that one all day if you disagree) and he finds good places to receive the ball in the midfield. His holdup play is decent and he's good in the air. He makes things happen around the box, even if he doesn't score. His movement is very, very good. He tries little bits of skill and touches that even if they don't come off, often lead to goals. All in all, he is just a very good attacking midfielder. There aren't that many around, and we have one of the best ones.

His mere presence in the team seems to give the players and fans a boost which cannot be understated because they know he can turn things round for us.

 

[pommie]

if cahill is in the side just to get a goal well so be it ... he does it bloody well why sell an attacking midfielder who gets 10 goals a season to another premiership club??