Two CDMs at home against the lesser teams?

[BlueToff]

This is definitely the case. I also think McCarthy has to be let off the hook a bit more against poorer teams and he can get forward and make things happen. IT is very important for us Tactically as one of the big problems with have is if Lukaku gets isolated. We need to get midfielders runners close to him. McCarthy is the best at this. It then allows Barkley to have a free role and drop a bit deeper to find space as and begin to dictate the flow of the game.

Against poor teams (or indeed all teams) our objectives need to be;
1) Get Barkley on the ball as much as possible
2) Get support to Lukaku.

Having McCarthy and Barry works but sometimes it's about how we use each of them.

Totally agree. Also, Stones is pretty much becoming our deep-lying playmaker now (against sides we'd be expected to beat). It's a joy to watch, and also allows McCarthy to burst forward and Barkley to drop deeper as Stones pretty much fills McCarthy's vacated position.

Barry gets forward by nice little interchanges down the left, which works well at the moment and will be really affective once Baines is fit.

 

[Saint Domingo]

I am loath to repeat a previous argument, but...

You kind of constantly beat this drum of needing variation in the middle of the park yet never seem to concede other, pertinent factors.

Taking vs Arsenal. John Stones had an absolute nightmare for the Giroud goal. He let Giroud get on the blind-side of Jagiela and score. Their second goal, John Stones trying to polay his way out of the back in the moments post-Arsenal opener. He loses it, fouls the arsenal player and they score again.

Vs Utd. Howard Kendall died on the morning of the game. The crowd was flat, the players were flat.

What, to me, is strange that you use these examples (and others) as ways of hammering home your opinion that Barry and McCarthy shouldnt start in every game regardless. What's true is that they didnt have a good game against Arsenal, but neither did John Stones yet his brain-farts go unmentioned, either intentionally or unintentionally. There are far more things at play than just the performance of our two midfield players.

Gareth Barry is a must-start player based on the current squad we have. He is the only player that can play that holding midfield role to a high enough level on a consistent basis. We've had the Gibson argument - he's not fit often enough. It's a shame, definitely.

So next to Barry we've got a choice between McCarthy, Besic, Barkley, Cleverley. To me, this player needs to be able to sit in at times and defend smartly but also have the ability to get the ball back as quickly and as high as possible when we are on top and the ball is turned over. Is there really an argument that McCarthy isn't the best player we have for that role? With the ball, he has needed to improve and with coaching and experience he seems to be doing just that. Kone's second vs Sunderland and Barkley's first yesterday are both examples of him not sat on top of the CB's waiting for an opponent to break, but instead getting forward and supporting the attacks.

I've not seen any evidence that Cleverley has this dual-ability in his locker, nor Besic and certainly not Barkley.

My point is, and i'm happy to be proven wrong, is that Barry and McCarthy are the best partnership regardless of opposition. The onus has been on Martinez to improve McCarthy, get him more adventurous whilst maintaining what he's good at - winning the ball back. He's showing very good signs and thus they should continue to play rather than realising what is a fantasy that Barkley and Besic are ready for that role, Gibson will ever be fit enough more consistently and Cleverley is that type of player.

Of course there are other factors, the main one being the clown in goal. Our cwntral defence does make mistakes as well but I don't believe rotating them is necessary or adds anything. Their job is the same in each game perhaps in some games they do more bringing out of the ball than actual defending but arguably they do the same every game. In defence and bringing the ball out Stones and Mori/Jags are the best at both skills so any rotation is a downgrade.

The midfield though is a role that changes hugely depending on the opposition. If you're playing Swansea, City, or West Brom home or away the task at hand varies massively. I could buy your argument if Barry and McCarthy truly were the best at everything you say in the squad but I don't believe that. Gibson has a far far better passing range and is now fit. Cleverley has shown he can create and work back, I don't see McCarthy as one of our better attacking players. Besic played well last season then was dropped. Barkley is good enough to easily play in there.

Using your logic what happens when either player is injured or retires? It seems as though Martinez would have to buy if they truly are irreplaceable. Yet he's bought Besic and Cleverley, why would he do that if they didn't fit what he wanted?

If this was Keane and Scholes we were talking about then fair enough but even Van Gaal is rotating Carrick Herrera Schneiderlin and Schweinsteiger. Arguably all four of these players are better than our two yet you think Barry and McCarthy are so good to be beyond rotation?

You'll probably argue that Martinez's system demands these players but people have already said he's changed it this season, plus our record without Barry is actually pretty good so I just don't buy this myth that they are indispensable and above rotation.

 

[mkrudden]

Of course there are other factors, the main one being the clown in goal. Our cwntral defence does make mistakes as well but I don't believe rotating them is necessary or adds anything. Their job is the same in each game perhaps in some games they do more bringing out of the ball than actual defending but arguably they do the same every game. In defence and bringing the ball out Stones and Mori/Jags are the best at both skills so any rotation is a downgrade.

The midfield though is a role that changes hugely depending on the opposition. If you're playing Swansea, City, or West Brom home or away the task at hand varies massively. I could buy your argument if Barry and McCarthy truly were the best at everything you say in the squad but I don't believe that. Gibson has a far far better passing range and is now fit. Cleverley has shown he can create and work back, I don't see McCarthy as one of our better attacking players. Besic played well last season then was dropped. Barkley is good enough to easily play in there.

Using your logic what happens when either player is injured or retires? It seems as though Martinez would have to buy if they truly are irreplaceable. Yet he's bought Besic and Cleverley, why would he do that if they didn't fit what he wanted?

If this was Keane and Scholes we were talking about then fair enough but even Van Gaal is rotating Carrick Herrera Schneiderlin and Schweinsteiger. Arguably all four of these players are better than our two yet you think Barry and McCarthy are so good to be beyond rotation?

You'll probably argue that Martinez's system demands these players but people have already said he's changed it this season, plus our record without Barry is actually pretty good so I just don't buy this myth that they are indispensable and above rotation.

Well if there's an injury then the next in the pecking order comes in, surely? I think it's pretty clear i'm not advocating playing with 10 men if Barry or McCarthy get injured. The point is that I, others and seemingly Martinez believe that removing Mc or Barry would weaken our team because the others can't fulfil the task at hand - regardless of opposition - like these two can.

Our cwntral defence does make mistakes as well but I don't believe rotating them is necessary or adds anything. Their job is the same in each game perhaps in some games they do more bringing out of the ball than actual defending but arguably they do the same every game. In defence and bringing the ball out Stones and Mori/Jags are the best at both skills so any rotation is a downgrade.

This bit here is the defining point in this whole argument, your inconsistency.

On one hand you are saying that the defenders jobs are more or less the same in every game with the small 'exception' of the frequency and freedom of Stones bringing the ball out. You argue that rotation would be counter-productive.

Yet on the other you don't seem to use the same logic when discussing our two midfielders. I'd say their job is absolutely the same, regardless of opposition but the way in which they achieve it needs to be varied. They need to win the wall back, either by sitting deep or pressing high (Vs Arsenal v Vs Sunderland/Villa), and they need to start/or support the attacks. Barry is undoubtedly the man who needs to be starting the attacks and McCarthy is now getting forward with more frequency and more intent.

It's for Besic to prove he's up to the task of being the next in ine (ie prove he can do the above). Barkley isnt going to be considered there whilst he is playing so well further forward, and Cleverley isn't and has never been that sort of player. Throw in the crock Gibson, who by the way seems to have your total support despite being injured consistently for years now and you've got not a single player who can add something to the midfield that Barry and McCarthy can't achieve as a pair. I'm all for investment into more players, better players, but in there here and now I struggle to see how anyone else internally could improve on what we have.

Obviously this is all football, it isn't a personal attack on you. I just think you lack consistency in the logic you use when giving your opinion on this particular topic.

 

[Eggs]

...we've scored 10 and conceded 2 in our last two home games with 2 defensive midfielders. I don't think it really matters. What matters more is to play with tempo and creativity. When we do that we are a very decent team.

 

[Big Fat Sam]

Get a top class goalie in by offloading the likes of Naismith, McGeady and Gibson (10m right there), replace Barry next season, keep the rest of them and we really will be a force to be reckoned with.

 

[Big Fat Sam]

Reminds me of how Barca play with Busquets dropping into defence and their full-backs being wingers.

Barry Basically Be Busquets, Bro.

 

[davids]

I don't think it makes any difference either... My point is that with the players they've got (the ones who won the league last season) you can't rule them out of going on a run and finishing in Europe this season. Stoke and West Brom however seem unlikely so I would say they are lesser teams than we are... Do you not agree we're better than Stoke and West Brom?

As we stand yes obviously,but as me again if Rom,Del and Stones pick up injuries that keep them out for 5/6 weeks.

 

[Blue Cheese]

When they play well - yes

When they play shabite - no

simple GOT logic

 

[Saint Domingo]

Well if there's an injury then the next in the pecking order comes in, surely? I think it's pretty clear i'm not advocating playing with 10 men if Barry or McCarthy get injured. The point is that I, others and seemingly Martinez believe that removing Mc or Barry would weaken our team because the others can't fulfil the task at hand - regardless of opposition - like these two can.



This bit here is the defining point in this whole argument, your inconsistency.

On one hand you are saying that the defenders jobs are more or less the same in every game with the small 'exception' of the frequency and freedom of Stones bringing the ball out. You argue that rotation would be counter-productive.

Yet on the other you don't seem to use the same logic when discussing our two midfielders. I'd say their job is absolutely the same, regardless of opposition but the way in which they achieve it needs to be varied. They need to win the wall back, either by sitting deep or pressing high (Vs Arsenal v Vs Sunderland/Villa), and they need to start/or support the attacks. Barry is undoubtedly the man who needs to be starting the attacks and McCarthy is now getting forward with more frequency and more intent.

It's for Besic to prove he's up to the task of being the next in ine (ie prove he can do the above). Barkley isnt going to be considered there whilst he is playing so well further forward, and Cleverley isn't and has never been that sort of player. Throw in the crock Gibson, who by the way seems to have your total support despite being injured consistently for years now and you've got not a single player who can add something to the midfield that Barry and McCarthy can't achieve as a pair. I'm all for investment into more players, better players, but in there here and now I struggle to see how anyone else internally could improve on what we have.

Obviously this is all football, it isn't a personal attack on you. I just think you lack consistency in the logic you use when giving your opinion on this particular topic.

We'll have to agree to disagree as we are poles apart. You've written off nearly all our midfield replacements as not up to the job but Cleverley has played there for league title winning teams, Besic for the national side and very well for us. I keep faith in Gibson because although injured a lot when fit he has always performed well for us.

I think we have the squad to rotate as the midfield two aren't good enough to account for every tactical variation. You disagree, that's fine.

Perhaps I should have been clearer with my centreback comparison, perhaps it's better to say that Stones is good enough to be beyond rotation. If he's looking to break a team down he's our best centreback for it, if he's got to sit in and weather a storm, he's our best CB for it. Mori or Jags are also probably second best at these two things so there's no tactical need for Browning or Galloway to ever be rotated in. If say Stones was atrocious on the ball but great defensively you might play him for City away but not for Villa st home when a player better on the ball might come in.

Barry is probably our best midfielder for sitting deep when we're under pressure and starting counter attacks off, but I don't think he's our best when the game requires you to break down a parked bus. The same for McCarthy. There's games where we are crying out for more invention in central mid. WBA is the perfect example. 2-0 down and one of the worst performances this season. Martinez brings on Gibson and he changed the whole game and we get three points. 1-1 v a terrible Liverpool side offering zero threat and we stay as is and barely threaten them, we drop 2 points at home. Why not rotate? Barry and McCarthy aren't a bad pairing but they don't suit every game in my opinion.

 

[Dymak]

If we really want to progress to the next level, then the midfielder that is given license to break forward needs to offer far more than what McCarthy does. Otherwise we will continue to compete for 6th, 7th or 8th place along with Crystal Palace and Southampton.

 

[andy4efc]

Not quite two DMs though is it when McCarthy is closing down in the opposition half and bombing on much more.

 

[Eggs]

If we really want to progress to the next level, then the midfielder that is given license to break forward needs to offer far more than what McCarthy does. Otherwise we will continue to compete for 6th, 7th or 8th place along with Crystal Palace and Southampton.

....McCarthys pass to Deulofeu in the lead up to one of the goals on Saturday was brilliant.

 

[Dymak]

....McCarthys pass to Deulofeu in the lead up to one of the goals on Saturday was brilliant.

Yep, more of that is needed, more often, and against good teams, not just clubs that are on a fast track ticket to League One. I don't think McCarthy can offer that, but I would love to be proven wrong.

 

[Eggs]

Yep, more of that is needed, more often, and against good teams, not just clubs that are on a fast track ticket to League One. I don't think McCarthy can offer that, but I would love to be proven wrong.

....he certainly doesn't do it enough but he might have that dimension to his game.

 

[Dymak]

....he certainly doesn't do it enough but he might have that dimension to his game.

I think that would involve him showing something that he has yet to develop at the age of 25 and with six years of top flight professional football under his belt. It’s about quality as well. We need a bona fide attacking central midfielder in that position if we really want to compete with the best teams in the league, not a secondment from defensive midfield.