Is it a case of Cahill or Fellaini?

[GrandOldTeam]

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??

Is he a midfielder or a supporting striker?

It really is the latter for me.

 

[TX Bill]

No problem at all having them BOTH in a 4-5-1 set up.

4-4-2 might pose a challenge but right now, I could easily see them playing together.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

No problem at all having them BOTH in a 4-5-1 set up.

4-4-2 might pose a challenge but right now, I could easily see them playing together.

Agreed.

For me theres two choices. 4-4-2 sacrificing Cahill with Saha and Yakubu upfront or 4-5-1 and sacrificing Yakubu or Saha to include Cahill as that supporting striker.

I really dont think we have any balance in midfield when Cahill is put in a flat 4 man midfield. He isn't a ball winner and he isn't the best passer of the ball. Hes renown for his ability in and around the box which is why for me, he is a second striker.

 

[ToxtethBlue]

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.

Alot of the time mate though he doesn't even play as a midfielder. He plays as high up the pitch as Wayne Rooney and I wouldn't say he drops as deep as Rooney either.

Rooney scores 18-20 goals from that position. Lampard plays as a midfielder, he controls games and scores goals alot more goals.

I don't think he's a bad player like others, he has him limits but he's certainly capable but he does need to offer more. He's perfectly capable of being more than a poacher.

I'd like to see more of him from open play, if he does that then he's a must in the side as he's a very effective player. If he's going to play as a striker then I'd like to see others given a go.

I want to see him playing like an attacking midfielder, not as a second striker/striker. But I could say that about alot of players, I want to see more from them.

 

[Neiler]

Ha ha is everyone gone chicken oriental, Cahill is imense, was i the only one watching the game yesterday did anyone else see the job he did on Bullard yesterday!

 

[Jamo Martinez]

The simple answer is, i watched them both yesterday, they both make the same runs, they are infact the same player. They both cant play, 1 of them has to GO!!!!

Im fairly sure we could find way to play them both tho, its just a matter of learning each others game and possibly adjusting runs. They will both score goals for fun!!

Think you're right but with one difference. I like Dutch toffee's formation in a 4-5-1 with Fellaini starting next to a holding midfielder. he's got a better passing range than Tim and will be harder to pick up arriving from deeper. Tim is just difficult to pick up even though defenders know abouy him, so should play in the more advanced position. imo

 

[Brownie]

Alot of the time mate though he doesn't even play as a midfielder. He plays as high up the pitch as Wayne Rooney and I wouldn't say he drops as deep as Rooney either.

Rooney scores 18-20 goals from that position. Lampard plays as a midfielder, he controls games and scores goals alot more goals.

I don't think he's a bad player like others, he has him limits but he's certainly capable but he does need to offer more. He's perfectly capable of being more than a poacher.

I'd like to see more of him from open play, if he does that then he's a must in the side as he's a very effective player. If he's going to play as a striker then I'd like to see others given a go.

I want to see him playing like an attacking midfielder, not as a second striker/striker. But I could say that about alot of players, I want to see more from them.

I agree, he can definitely improve his game. When he's on top form and we're playing well he does do a lot more tho, I think he's actually quite creative. He gets his head up and plays when he has the ball. We just need all our players to step it up a notch really.

I know I started it, but you can't really use Rooney as a comparison as second striker. He's another world-class player that cost a shitload of money. Outside the top players I can't really think of anyone that's better than Cahill, even in the second striker role. Just seems when we play crap everyone goes wait a minute, Cahill and Arteta, supposedly our best players, aren't actually amazing and aren't worth 15mil each. When they cost 2mil. We have NEVER signed anyone that good. This is just a general little jab by the way, directed at no one in particular.

 

[ToxtethBlue]

I agree, he can definitely improve his game. When he's on top form and we're playing well he does do a lot more tho, I think he's actually quite creative. He gets his head up and plays when he has the ball. We just need all our players to step it up a notch really.

I know I started it, but you can't really use Rooney as a comparison as second striker. He's another world-class player that cost a shitload of money. Outside the top players I can't really think of anyone that's better than Cahill, even in the second striker role. Just seems when we play crap everyone goes wait a minute, Cahill and Arteta, supposedly our best players, aren't actually amazing and aren't worth 15mil each. When they cost 2mil. We have NEVER signed anyone that good. This is just a general little jab by the way, directed at no one in particular.

I agree, one thing I'd like to see him do is drop deep and run with the ball. He's quite good at driving forward with it when he wants to be. Just a more rounded performance for me really, I know very well he's a very useful player.

But saying this you've got to be fair to him, he's still finding his feet. He's probably lacking sharpness and a player like Tim needs that, it's what his games all about.

 

[sotnas]

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.

Agree, but the best man to be upfront is Saha. Yakubu is a finisher, no doubt...but I doubt he could be useful playing with his back against the goal, holding and feeding the midfielders running from behind.

 

[Great Dane]

If Arsenal can play with 4 attacking players in their midfield, why shouldn't we be able to play with two.

It all comes down to the players getting familiar with each other. You could see it when Fellaini was first brought into the side, and this came just as Cahill started his suspension, so let them get some games to familiarize themselves with their different kinds of play.

Regarding our midfield I would still let Vic start on the right and push Arteta back in the holding midfielder slot, with Fellaini sitting just in front of him. With Arteta, Fellaini and Cahill we will have that strong center that I think we have neglected for years. Piennar and Vic will hold their own on the flanks and offer something completely different - so switching sides during the game would really mean something.

 

[TsarDiniyar]

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.

I agree, ossie won more headers than him yesterday.

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 goalscoring ratio maybe, but whats his assist ratio or even number of passes/tackles per game like? I bet they're lower than Andy Van's. He needs to get stuck, it seems to me like Moyes has told him to support Yak, so he's seen that an excuse to loiter about up front and forget the rest of his duties.

He isn't, he's good at scoring from set pieces, otherwise he really is pretty useless, if he gets stuck in he gives the ball away, commits a foul or usually gets sent off.

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.

That is a fact, albeit one I dont understand.

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??

Because he's playing up front, put a striker there who will socre 20 goals a season in his place. He's an attacking midfielder, which means he has the responsibilities of a midfielder as well as a striker but he doesn't do them.

Already Fellaini has looked just as much as, if not an even bigger threat in the box, but his all round midfield jobs are done well, granted he's still a little bit slow and got caught out a couple of times, but its going to take him time to adapt to the pace of the game. He hit the post yesterday, won a few of knockdowns in the box, all from a central midfield role, much deeper than cahill.

 

[Momo_nr.1]

If Arsenal can play with 4 attacking players in their midfield, why shouldn't we be able to play with two.

It all comes down to the players getting familiar with each other. You could see it when Fellaini was first brought into the side, and this came just as Cahill started his suspension, so let them get some games to familiarize themselves with their different kinds of play.

Regarding our midfield I would still let Vic start on the right and push Arteta back in the holding midfielder slot, with Fellaini sitting just in front of him. With Arteta, Fellaini and Cahill we will have that strong center that I think we have neglected for years. Piennar and Vic will hold their own on the flanks and offer something completely different - so switching sides during the game would really mean something.

It worked with Arsenal last year when they had Hleb who could attack as well as recover, but I think the fact they're playing that many attacking midfielders is their biggest weakness this season and one of the main reasons why they're conceding that easily...

I also don't think the holding midfielder role suits Arteta, but haven't seen him play there so that's not really a founded opinion... but in your strategy you could replace him with Osman, if I read the opinions about him on this forum regarding the last games he's able to play that role...

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The only way you can play without a real holding player is if you're exceptional on the ball. The likes of Barca and Arsenal can get away with it because they have the ball for such long periods of the game. We don't. Ordinarily the opposition has more of the ball than we do.

Add in the fact that both Barca and Arsenal usually play a slow build up game with lots of passing. So if they do lose the ball they're not so vulnerable to the counter attack because the build up play has enabled good positions to be taken.

I'm not adverse to Arteta playing a deep role, that is the role he played at Rangers and PSG after all, but he needs a battler alongside him. At Rangers he had Gattuso and it worked well. It would be nice if Castillo could do the job.