Short memories... Fellaini needs to be in the middle of the park.

[BlueToffee95]

Atm, Fellaini is in the form of his life playing in the #10 position. It depends who we prioritise buying in Jan - if we buy a physical, box-box CM/DM ala Capoue or Sissoko, I reckon Felli will be kept up top.

If we go for a deep-lying playmaker (e.g. a Beñat, Arteta version 1) then Felli will stay up top, but could alternate if needed. If however, we go for a traditional #10 (Isco - we can dream) then Felli will eventually move back, alternating depending on the quality of opposition.

I'm confident come jan that only Heitinga and (please!!!) Gueye might be gone, and we'll have at least another CM and somebody who can play anyway across the 3 behind Jelavić. Perhaps a back-up striker as well. (I'm not itk at all, just got a feeling we'll try to push on).

 

[ijjysmith]

We're not buying anyone in January.

 

[BlueToffee95]

We're not buying anyone in January.

Probably true...

You got a percentage?

 

[ijjysmith]

Probably true...

You got a percentage?

Ha!

Working on the calculations as we speak.

It's quite complex.

 

[Cotto]

If he was dropped back it would sure up the midfield AND defence.This would also allow Mirallas and Pienaar to stay on the wings and Naismith to play behind Jelavic.

Im having this as a real shout. Drop him back.... Less focus on the hoofball more space for Jelavic. Mirallas and Pienaar see Jelavic as the main target man and Naismith ghosts in from the "cahill role".

Im having it..... It wont happen though. Coz Moyes wont drop ozzie.

Would improve us defensively and attacking imo

 

[toffeejack]

I think overall i'd rather we had attacking fullbacks on both wings with Fellaini at CM than have Fellaini behind the striker and Hibbert playing every game.

is the right answer, this isn't the 90's where teams pick a dixon and winterburn at full backs. look at the top teams in the prem atm rafael and evra, ivanovic/azp... and cole, zabaleta/maicon and kolarov/clichy, sagna and santos/gibbs. None of them are actually that good at defending but their strengths (if you can call them that) are more offensive. teams like stoke who are mid table clobber have more defence minded defenders. This is based mainly on the quality of the centre backs and DM, of which we are pretty good in. we can afford to attack from both full backs imo, despite the lack of clean sheets which is mainly due to our GK imo.

I mean I'd play both Coleman and Fellaini up top, myself. But I'd be happy to see us play like we did against Fulham and Newcastle every day and that seems to be the kind of perfomances people are trying to move away from, where we're all out attacking but completely porous at the back and so don't win.

neither created much against us, just defensive mistakes cost us rather than being carved open being too attacking. hope coleman comes back soon and we can replicate that form, we'd learn with experience how to turn those draws to wins

 

[Cotto]

is the right answer, this isn't the 90's where teams pick a dixon and winterburn at full backs. look at the top teams in the prem atm rafael and evra, ivanovic/azp... and cole, zabaleta/maicon and kolarov/clichy, sagna and santos/gibbs. None of them are actually that good at defending but their strengths (if you can call them that) are more offensive. teams like stoke who are mid table clobber have more defence minded defenders. This is based mainly on the quality of the centre backs and DM, of which we are pretty good in. we can afford to attack from both full backs imo, despite the lack of clean sheets which is mainly due to our GK imo.



neither created much against us, just defensive mistakes cost us rather than being carved open being too attacking. hope coleman comes back soon and we can replicate that form, we'd learn with experience how to turn those draws to wins

All those full backs you mention arr twice as good defensively as Coleman.

Coleman is a liabilty and will never be good defensively

 

[meagher94]

All those full backs you mention arr twice as good defensively as Coleman.

Coleman is a liabilty and will never be good defensively

 

[pfim]

is the right answer, this isn't the 90's where teams pick a dixon and winterburn at full backs. look at the top teams in the prem atm rafael and evra, ivanovic/azp... and cole, zabaleta/maicon and kolarov/clichy, sagna and santos/gibbs. None of them are actually that good at defending but their strengths (if you can call them that) are more offensive. teams like stoke who are mid table clobber have more defence minded defenders. This is based mainly on the quality of the centre backs and DM, of which we are pretty good in. we can afford to attack from both full backs imo, despite the lack of clean sheets which is mainly due to our GK imo.

Ehh? Kolarov is the only one on that list that is a bad defender and it's very clear he's only there for his attacking. The rest are all good, if not great, defenders.

 

[Allezfan]

Rafael, Santos and Maicon are all worse at defending than Coleman.

 

[pfim]

I missed Santos. No way Maicon and Rafael are worse. As it relates to Coleman, doesn't matter, we'll never have to choose between Maicon and Coleman.

 

[Brennan]

Ehh? Kolarov is the only one on that list that is a bad defender and it's very clear he's only there for his attacking. The rest are all good, if not great, defenders.

Santos and Rafael are both crap.

 

[Essex Blue]

This is an appropriate article for this subject: http://www.eplindex.com/22943/fellaini-best-position-stats-analysis.html

I wouldn't mind seeing Fellaini next to Gibson, because everyone looks assured and accomplished when they have Gibson alongside them, and therefore I don't think Fellaini's defensive limitations would be as apparent as they have been in the past.

However, after all is said and done, I agree with Moyes decision to continually pay him as a striker, as I believe Fellaini is most effective in that role.

 

[Essex Blue]

Coleman is a liabilty and will never be good defensively

Agreed.

But whilst most people acknowledge his defensive weaknesses, I do not have a clue where people have got this idea that Coleman is some kind of accomplished attacking right back? His attacking 'prowess' is so overrated it is untrue.

 

[toffeejack]

Ehh? Kolarov is the only one on that list that is a bad defender and it's very clear he's only there for his attacking. The rest are all good, if not great, defenders.

fine, none of them are great defenders, my point was trying to be that they're all attack minded full backs who are better going forward that defending. evra's not a bad defender but he's had his moments.