If Hutch is out....

[FreshOwl]

6 hours ago, Jack the Hat said:

Can't onomah play that position. I know he dislocated his elbow but surely 2 weeks should do it

Forget about Onomah, he’s done here and just another crock to add to the list 

[pazowl55]

7 hours ago, TrickyTrev said:

Bang on, Jones has had more decent game sin a Wednesday shirt than Pelupessey has.

 

If Hutch is injured I'd definitely be giving him the nod.

Not in a two with Bannan. Jones likes to play a pass and often tries to play Bannan like passes all over the pitch which never come off. He wants to create.

Partner him with Hutchinson fine. Even Pelupessy. But not with Bannan.

Edited March 18, 2019 by pazowl55

[meggoisgod]

I'd put hector in the middle with thorniley at centre half

[McRightSide]

There’s no guile to Pelupessy’s game which makes him really easy to read and circumvent. 

 

When he gets close then he usually makes a relatively meaningful contribution but it doesn’t happen often enough due to that lack of guile

 

He has some nice attributes, but is rarely able to get in a place to deploy them on a consistent basis. I remember saying very similar things about Lavery.

[WalthamOwl]

I really hope Hutch is fit after the international break. The thought of having to play Pessy is worrying. 

[DuttyTeabags]

Big Dave DCM you heard it here first

[Guest Ash76]

Hutch is clearly the better option but f*ck me players at all levels get caught out the wrong side every week.

 

If you're really looking for the someone to blame then watch Aarons role in their first goal, he's as culpable as JP

[RUMBELOWS91]

12 hours ago, gurujuan said:

I think he’d be useful in a midfield three, but none of our midfield players are quite right for a two. Hutchinson is an out and out ball winner, who is not particularly comfortable venturing forward, although he is being encouraged to do more of this by Bruce. Both Bannan and Pelupessy are too lightweight to give us the solidity we need , when operating as a two. This isn’t the 80s, where you had one player sitting, and the other creating. That set up would generally see you overrun in midfield these days. To operate a two in there, you have to have both players equally adapt at defending and attacking, a bit like Brighton had when they went up It’s not the norm these days though, and teams tend to overload the midfield

Hutchinson is perfect in a four of the rest of the team complements him. Not quite sure where this idea comes from you need two clones in a midfield four. You have to look at the whole team- there's no hard and fast rule what will and won't work.

[RUMBELOWS91]

12 hours ago, gurujuan said:

I think he’d be useful in a midfield three, but none of our midfield players are quite right for a two. Hutchinson is an out and out ball winner, who is not particularly comfortable venturing forward, although he is being encouraged to do more of this by Bruce. Both Bannan and Pelupessy are too lightweight to give us the solidity we need , when operating as a two. This isn’t the 80s, where you had one player sitting, and the other creating. That set up would generally see you overrun in midfield these days. To operate a two in there, you have to have both players equally adapt at defending and attacking, a bit like Brighton had when they went up It’s not the norm these days though, and teams tend to overload the midfield

Hutchinson is perfect in a four if the rest of the team complements him. Not quite sure where this idea comes from you need two clones in a midfield four. You have to look at the whole team- there's no hard and fast rule what will and won't work.

[RUMBELOWS91]

12 hours ago, gurujuan said:

I think he’d be useful in a midfield three, but none of our midfield players are quite right for a two. Hutchinson is an out and out ball winner, who is not particularly comfortable venturing forward, although he is being encouraged to do more of this by Bruce. Both Bannan and Pelupessy are too lightweight to give us the solidity we need , when operating as a two. This isn’t the 80s, where you had one player sitting, and the other creating. That set up would generally see you overrun in midfield these days. To operate a two in there, you have to have both players equally adapt at defending and attacking, a bit like Brighton had when they went up It’s not the norm these days though, and teams tend to overload the midfield

Hutchinson is perfect in a four if the rest of the team complements him. Not quite sure where this idea comes from you need two clones in a midfield four. You have to look at the whole team- there's no hard and fast rule what will and won't work.

[hirstys_achilles]

Give Pelupessy a chance. JL team formations and tactics proved to be difficult for seasoned pros to perform consistently well. Just look at Palmer and Lees improvement in a short space of time. Infact every player seems to be at a higher level under Bruce. Pelupessy has had a few good games for us. He without a doubt a trier and loves it at SWFC. Let Bruce work his magic on Pelupessy. He needs to get some games under his belt and then we can see what a new manager can do for his performances. This has to be a better option than changing a settled defence to accommodate Palmer moving to midfield. I think Pelupessy gets more stick than others of similar performance levels because he should be a much better performer than what he actually achieves.

 

What ever Bruce decides to do if Hutch is injured it will be SWFC best option and I have faith that Bruce will chose the best option. If that means Pelupessy getting a starting slot I will be getting behind him and cheering him on. Not slating him before he even plays !!!

[RUMBELOWS91]

44 minutes ago, Ash76 said:

Hutch is clearly the better option but f*ck me players at all levels get caught out the wrong side every week.

 

If you're really looking for the someone to blame then watch Aarons role in their first goal, he's as culpable as JP

No he wasn't. Watch Westwood after the goal- who's he pointing the finger at? He could clearly see it unfolding.

 

Let's be clear- I don't think anyone is basing their opinion on one goal though. Pulupessey is one of the most ineffective supposedly holding midfielders I've ever seen at this level for us- not half the player Semedo was, and he struggled at Champiinship level at times.

 

He's been here year and maybe had 4/5 good games. That's not good enough in my book and should (and let's hope we don't) we need a replacement for Hutch in these last 8 games we'd be better exploring all options before settling on a player who isn't up to the task.

 

 

[RUMBELOWS91]

2 minutes ago, hirstys_achilles said:

Give Pelupessy a chance. JL team formations and tactics proved to be difficult for seasoned pros to perform consistently well. Just look at Palmer and Lees improvement in a short space of time. Infact every player seems to be at a higher level under Bruce. Pelupessy has had a few good games for us. He without a doubt a trier and loves it at SWFC. Let Bruce work his magic on Pelupessy. He needs to get some games under his belt and then we can see what a new manager can do for his performances. This has to be a better option than changing a settled defence to accommodate Palmer moving to midfield. I think Pelupessy gets more stick than others of similar performance levels because he should be a much better performer than what he actually achieves.

 

What ever Bruce decides to do if Hutch is injured it will be SWFC best option and I have faith that Bruce will chose the best option. If that means Pelupessy getting a starting slot I will be getting behind him and cheering him on. Not slating him before he even plays !!!

How can you say he's being slated before he plays? He's been here over a year.

 

I hope next time he pulls on the shirt he has a stormer, but his form over the last year suggests that's about a 25/1 shot.

 

Maybe Bruce and his team can improve him over the summer if we keep him around, but if we really want a shot at making the top 6 this season he needs to be kept away from the starting 11.

 

[Guest Ash76]

20 minutes ago, RUMBELOWS91 said:

No he wasn't. Watch Westwood after the goal- who's he pointing the finger at? He could clearly see it unfolding.

 

Rather than watching Westwood why don’t you watch it again and watch Aaron’s. It clear Palmer has to come across and he should drop in for him. He starts to go, then stops before going again, by which time is too late 

[Guest Ash76]

Here you go from 8.10, watch again. You’ll see Joey has just pressed their defender and can’t get back in in time. Yoy’d All be moaning if he was say too deep. Anyway then watch Aaron’s, should have been alert to the danger when Palmer covers CB and drop in, he had the time but went then stopped. 

 

Stop the f*cking ostracising, he’s part of the squad 

 

 

[RUMBELOWS91]

8 minutes ago, Ash76 said:

Here you go from 8.10, watch again. You’ll see Joey has just pressed their defender and can’t get back in in time. Yoy’d All be moaning if he was say too deep. Anyway then watch Aaron’s, should have been alert to the danger when Palmer covers CB and drop in, he had the time but went then stopped. 

 

Stop the f*cking ostracising, he’s part of the squad 

 

 

You are such a delicate flower. Why do you get so confrontational so quickly?  It's a bit weird to be honest- sort of an internet based small man syndrome.

[Socialist_Owl]

4 hours ago, meggoisgod said:

I'd put hector in the middle with thorniley at centre half

Ooh, bold.

 

Better than retreading David Jones

[Guest Ash76]

29 minutes ago, RUMBELOWS91 said:

You are such a delicate flower. Why do you get so confrontational so quickly?  It's a bit weird to be honest- sort of an internet based small man syndrome.

 

If you find challenging your opinion as confrontational then maybe this is not the place for you.

 

Still not watched it have you? Or just as likely you have but won’t ackknowlwdge the point. Easier to save face

[RUMBELOWS91]

6 hours ago, Ash76 said:

 

 

Stop the f*cking ostracising, he’s part of the squad 

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Ash76 said:

 

If you find challenging your opinion as confrontational then maybe this is not the place for you.

 

Still not watched it have you? Or just as likely you have but won’t ackknowlwdge the point. Easier to save face

It's this bit that I find 'challenging'. As I said- instantly confrontational and an unnecessarily aggressive tone with the f-bomb chucked in for good measure too 

 

This from the same gentle soul who completely lost it a fortnight ago because he'd had to walk up Leppings Lane and didn't like the confrontational and aggressive environment.

 

You wouldn't dare speak to me like that in real life I'm sure- no way would you jump down someone's throat that like that for having a differing opinion on a (let's face it) pretty trivial matter. On here though, you think it's fair game.

 

So which are you?...

 

The gentle, protective, considerate citizen appalled at the behaviour of a few aggressive loud mouthed football supporters on Leppings Lane?

 

or...

 

The aggressive loud.mouthed football supporter sat behind a keyboard on Owlstalk?

 

It's you that needs to decide if this is the place for you or not if you turn to this kind of tone when you come across a differing opinion.

 

Back on topic for you or anyone else that wants to debate the point properly....

 

I saw that goal with my own eyes and instantly felt JP was culpable. I'll be honest though, my opinion of his 'abilities' is pretty low so I've already watched it back to see if I was being initially harsh. I wasn't- his job is to track the man who waltzes through our defence. He just lets him go and ends up in no man's land. This is our 'defensive screen'. He has literally no idea what's happening around him.

 

Westwood knows it, JP knows it. You can see it in their reactions.

 

 

[Guest Ash76]

9 hours ago, RUMBELOWS91 said:

You are such a delicate flower. Why do you get so confrontational so quickly?  It's a bit weird to be honest- sort of an internet based small man syndrome.

 

Oh mummy the nasty man used a swear word in the internet. It was used to display exasperation not aggression, yet you’ve the cheek to call me delicate.

 

Back on topic, he doesn’t let him go at all, he never had him in the first place.