Lamela

[PG Spurs]

Maybe, maybe. I thought Lennon had a poor game yesterday. He got into some great positions, but his passing was particularly ropey yesterday. I just think Lennon gives that option to play the inside ball and really stretch. If you have say Chadli on one side and Lamela on the other you have two players doing kind of the same thing.

In a sense it's a shame for Lamela that Eriksen was so good yesterday as I really thought there was a role there for Lamela. Maybe Eriksen, Lennon and Lamela could rotate positions throughout the game, much like Chelsea;s three. That could really be special if it came off.

Lennon didn't use the width much yesterday. He was playing in a more inside role, where we need more creativity, and that suits Lamela. I don't think he would have missed the blindingly obvious through-ball to Adebayor in the first half yesterday. Width is provided by Walker, and interchange between the player on the right (Lamela) and Eriksen. It's a fluid system that encourages creativity and the entertainment factor that Tim says he wants.

It's more like how Arsenal and City play, where they play creative players in the wider positions, rather than actual wingers. We still have options of Townsend and Lennon when we need to stretch the opposition.

 

[PG Spurs]

I really don't want to see a leftie playing on the right. It just makes it easier for the defence if the player cuts inside.

The fullbacks provide the width, and as long as there is movement and skill, we shouldn't be predictable. We're not playing in a fixed shape anymore, so I don't think it would be like AVB's idea of inverted wingers.

 

[raf18]

I really don't want to see a leftie playing on the right. It just makes it easier for the defence if the player cuts inside.

Tell that to Messi and Ronaldo. It's much more predictable if the player constantly runs down the wing and whips it in. It's also harder to get a decent shot off if you're right footed and playing on the right.

 

[hodsgod]

The fullbacks provide the width, and as long as there is movement and skill, we shouldn't be predictable. We're not playing in a fixed shape anymore, so I don't think it would be like AVB's idea of inverted wingers.

It's still an inverted winger though. They naturally cut inside narrow the play and compress the defence. Now I agree with the fact that full backs can provide width, but if you rely on it you will get picked off on the counter attack. It's exactly what happened against Wet Spam.

I am happy to see wingers swap for a while to change things up, but the best football tactics turn the defence, make them face their own goal. It's hell as a defender.

Inverted wingers, not for me thank you.

 

[hodsgod]

Tell that to Messi and Ronaldo. It's much more predictable if the player constantly runs down the wing and whips it in. It's also harder to get a decent shot off if you're right footed and playing on the right.

If you turn inside you play in front of the defence, and your shots are 20 yards out. You must have watched it fail under AVB in the most spectacular style.

By the way we don't have players of Messi and Ronaldo ability. When we did he could do the same things. We have Townsend and he can't do it. Special rules for special players.

 

[raf18]

If you turn inside you play in front of the defence, and your shots are 20 yards out. You must have watched it fail under AVB in the most spectacular style.

By the way we don't have players of Messi and Ronaldo ability. When we did he could do the same things. We have Townsend and he can't do it. Special rules for special players.

If you turn inside you have much more options to play a through ball. It's Townsend's own personal problem that he shoots instead of passes.

We have Lamela. He scored 15 goals coming inside from the right in Serie A last year. It is why I recommend Towsend on the left, Lamela on the right, Eriksen in the middle. Best of both worlds.

 

[hodsgod]

If you turn inside you have much more options to play a through ball. It's Townsend's own personal problem that he shoots instead of passes.

We have Lamela. He scored 15 goals coming inside from the right in Serie A last year. It is why I recommend Towsend on the left, Lamela on the right, Eriksen in the middle. Best of both worlds.

Forget last year, it's a different league he isn't playing there now. Lamela can't even get a game let alone recommend where he should play.

Seriously, when he starts playing and performing then we can see how good he is, up to now he is just a youtube legend, who has played in an inferior league.

AVB failed using the tactics you are recommending, we are playing infinitely better using the tactics I suggest. Do you really want to repeat the experiment again? I bloody don't, because it doesn't work.

 

[razzmaster]

Forget last year, it's a different league he isn't playing there now. Lamela can't even get a game let alone recommend where he should play.

Seriously, when he starts playing and performing then we can see how good he is, up to now he is just a youtube legend, who has played in an inferior league.

AVB failed using the tactics you are recommending, we are playing infinitely better using the tactics I suggest. Do you really want to repeat the experiment again? I bloody don't, because it doesn't work.

Playing with inverted wingers worked fine for Bayern last season. The reason AVB failed was due to being too cautious and poor team selections rather than a flawed system.

 

[dynamoSpurs]

Playing with inverted wingers worked fine for Bayern last season. The reason AVB failed was due to being too cautious and poor team selections rather than a flawed system.

they have good wingers .

 

[Ribble]

If you turn inside you play in front of the defence, and your shots are 20 yards out. You must have watched it fail under AVB in the most spectacular style.

That entirely depends on how it's done and where the defence is in relation to the player. If you come inside, burst through the channel between FB and CB then you're in on goal with a 1-on-1 v the 'keeper. However what that needs is endeavour from other players to draw the opposition and make that space appear. That is where we were/are to an extent going wrong - players standing like statues waiting for the ball to come, rather than making runs and getting into space.


What's even worse, though, is that it's a problem that's been affecting us for years now, well before AVB arrived.

 

[Ironskullll]

The fullbacks provide the width, and as long as there is movement and skill, we shouldn't be predictable. We're not playing in a fixed shape anymore, so I don't think it would be like AVB's idea of inverted wingers.

Interesting to hear Chris Waddle on the radio over the weekend, stating that he much prefers inverted wingers. Says that they see more of the game; read the game better as opposed to hurtling blindly down the wing until there's no option left but to try a cross regardless of whether it's on or not. Wasn't arguing against width but seemed to be agreeing with you about fullbacks.

 

[JerryGarcia]

It's odd that so many have developed a phobia of inverted wingers from AVB's time here, It makes no logical sense but neither do most other phobias I would guess.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Maybe, maybe. I thought Lennon had a poor game yesterday. He got into some great positions, but his passing was particularly ropey yesterday. I just think Lennon gives that option to play the inside ball and really stretch. If you have say Chadli on one side and Lamela on the other you have two players doing kind of the same thing.

In a sense it's a shame for Lamela that Eriksen was so good yesterday as I really thought there was a role there for Lamela. Maybe Eriksen, Lennon and Lamela could rotate positions throughout the game, much like Chelsea;s three. That could really be special if it came off.

The full backs could and should really be providing that service.

 

[danielneeds]

Maybe, maybe. I thought Lennon had a poor game yesterday. He got into some great positions, but his passing was particularly ropey yesterday. I just think Lennon gives that option to play the inside ball and really stretch. If you have say Chadli on one side and Lamela on the other you have two players doing kind of the same thing.

In a sense it's a shame for Lamela that Eriksen was so good yesterday as I really thought there was a role there for Lamela. Maybe Eriksen, Lennon and Lamela could rotate positions throughout the game, much like Chelsea;s three. That could really be special if it came off.

What about Lamela doing the Chadli role on the right and Townsend stretching from the left?

 

[Kiedis]

I reckon Lamela will get his chance when (as Sherwood has stated) he'll be able to do himself justice. Lennon in an experienced player that knows this league. He's a safe bet for the coaches, since you know you'll always get a 6 out 10 performance and he puts in more than his share of defensive work. Also, he's the type of player that defences have to adjust to even when he's not playing too well.

He's the safe option in this period when the team has been trying to find their feet. There's no doubt that Lamela has the biggest potetial of the two, and his time will come.

 

[PG Spurs]

Interesting to hear Chris Waddle on the radio over the weekend, stating that he much prefers inverted wingers. Says that they see more of the game; read the game better as opposed to hurtling blindly down the wing until there's no option left but to try a cross regardless of whether it's on or not. Wasn't arguing against width but seemed to be agreeing with you about fullbacks.

You'd think he'd know.

Most of City's crosses come from their fullbacks. The wide player drags in the fullback to create the space. Plus, the best crosser in our team is Eriksen, and he doesn't play right wing.

 

[Kendall]

What about Lamela doing the Chadli role on the right and Townsend stretching from the left?

Maybe. I'd be apprehensive about dropping Lennon at the moment though really. But it's an option.

 

[michaelden]

What about Lamela doing the Chadli role on the right and Townsend stretching from the left?

Why Townsend? He is so wasteful & ineffective. He dazzles but is ineffective. Don't confuse his raw talent with his effectiveness. He has talent but is not effective enough. Too many hit & hopes, and poor last passes.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Why Townsend? He is so wasteful & ineffective. He dazzles but is ineffective. Don't confuse his raw talent with his effectiveness. He has talent but is not effective enough. Too many hit & hopes, and poor last passes.

Reading between the lines, I'm guessing you think Townsend is a little ineffective ?

 

[Spurs_Bear]

Why Townsend? He is so wasteful & ineffective. He dazzles but is ineffective. Don't confuse his raw talent with his effectiveness. He has talent but is not effective enough. Too many hit & hopes, and poor last passes.

OVERLOAD...!!!

I think he may become more effective in a more open, faster tempo where his teammates are moving at a similar speed to him rather than what we saw earlier in the season.