Bannan and Lee

[jrh]

Seen a few negative comments about these two in the middle from the weekend and it's really frustrated me. 

 

We created more chances and were more entertaining to watch than most of the season and the two goals we conceded were calamatous errors from set pieces which had nothing to do with them. And yet this partnership gets scapegoated because they are both small players and not big defenders or tacklers. 

 

Lee was my man of the match. His forward runs are invaluable and also often make our crosses much more of a threat too because instead of just having Fletcher in the box, their defence suddenly has more to think about. I also lost count of the amount of times he nicked the ball in the middle and got us on the front foot. But because he's not a 'defensive' midfielder, people ignore that. 

 

As for Bannan, anyone with half a brain knows how good a player he is. 

 

As frustrating as Saturday was not to get the 3 points, there were lots of positives against one of the better sides in the division this year and Lee looking like his old self with Bannan in the middle was definitely one of them. 

[Beholder]

I thought it worked ok.

 

Also Lee will get better the more games he has.

 

I would like to see a mid 3 with Luongo. 

 

Would be fluid, attacking with all three fully prepared to track back. 

[HOOTIE AND THE SHIT TU]

I still think Loungo is an upgrade on Lee, and we must find him a place in the team

[jrh]

10 minutes ago, HOOTIE AND THE poo TU said:

I still think Loungo is an upgrade on Lee, and we must find him a place in the team

I like Luongo, the more he has played the better he has been however I do think Lee has better quality on the ball. Be great to have them both fit and playing. Having failed that, whoever is in the better form. 

[Sticky belly]

Love em both, but whenever i see the lineup and we have them two in a 2 man midfield i always fear the worse. When the ball turns over there are huge gaps in there for opponents to exploit as neither are defensive enough. We have to play with 3 in there so we don't get overrun imho. Luongo has to start for me too.

[Ellis Rimmer]

1 hour ago, jrh said:

Seen a few negative comments about these two in the middle from the weekend and it's really frustrated me. 

 

We created more chances and were more entertaining to watch than most of the season and the two goals we conceded were calamatous errors from set pieces which had nothing to do with them. And yet this partnership gets scapegoated because they are both small players and not big defenders or tacklers. 

 

Lee was my man of the match. His forward runs are invaluable and also often make our crosses much more of a threat too because instead of just having Fletcher in the box, their defence suddenly has more to think about. I also lost count of the amount of times he nicked the ball in the middle and got us on the front foot. But because he's not a 'defensive' midfielder, people ignore that. 

 

As for Bannan, anyone with half a brain knows how good a player he is. 

 

As frustrating as Saturday was not to get the 3 points, there were lots of positives against one of the better sides in the division this year and Lee looking like his old self with Bannan in the middle was definitely one of them. 

You watched a different match to me!

[Guest LittleG]

1 hour ago, jrh said:

Seen a few negative comments about these two in the middle from the weekend and it's really frustrated me. 

 

We created more chances and were more entertaining to watch than most of the season and the two goals we conceded were calamatous errors from set pieces which had nothing to do with them. And yet this partnership gets scapegoated because they are both small players and not big defenders or tacklers. 

 

Lee was my man of the match. His forward runs are invaluable and also often make our crosses much more of a threat too because instead of just having Fletcher in the box, their defence suddenly has more to think about. I also lost count of the amount of times he nicked the ball in the middle and got us on the front foot. But because he's not a 'defensive' midfielder, people ignore that. 

 

As for Bannan, anyone with half a brain knows how good a player he is. 

 

As frustrating as Saturday was not to get the 3 points, there were lots of positives against one of the better sides in the division this year and Lee looking like his old self with Bannan in the middle was definitely one of them. 

I know it's all about opinions and unfortunately my opinion is still that we need more physical presence in there. As for Lee himself, like most of the players he was OK, nothing special and the two forward runs that stand out most were in the first half when he was through into their box on the right but then seemed to not know what to do with the ball. Like the rest, he worked hard but that's about all.

[Dutch McLovin]

1 hour ago, jrh said:

Seen a few negative comments about these two in the middle from the weekend and it's really frustrated me. 

 

We created more chances and were more entertaining to watch than most of the season and the two goals we conceded were calamatous errors from set pieces which had nothing to do with them. And yet this partnership gets scapegoated because they are both small players and not big defenders or tacklers. 

 

Lee was my man of the match. His forward runs are invaluable and also often make our crosses much more of a threat too because instead of just having Fletcher in the box, their defence suddenly has more to think about. I also lost count of the amount of times he nicked the ball in the middle and got us on the front foot. But because he's not a 'defensive' midfielder, people ignore that. 

 

As for Bannan, anyone with half a brain knows how good a player he is. 

 

As frustrating as Saturday was not to get the 3 points, there were lots of positives against one of the better sides in the division this year and Lee looking like his old self with Bannan in the middle was definitely one of them. 

Lee was good Saturday and showed signs of his former self which were so valuable to us. That said, Bannan and Lee didn't work 4 years ago when they were in there prime and playing well. It wont work now.

 

When Sam Hutchinson doesn't play we miss him drastically. Myself I would still play Bannan out wide in a 442 think its his best position.

[Mike Hunt]

6 minutes ago, LittleG said:

I know it's all about opinions and unfortunately my opinion is still that we need more physical presence in there. As for Lee himself, like most of the players he was OK, nothing special and the two forward runs that stand out most were in the first half when he was through into their box on the right but then seemed to not know what to do with the ball. Like the rest, he worked hard but that's about all.

I don't think the op was suggesting we don't need a physical presence but Hutch was not available and Joey is not up to the mark 

 

When I saw the lineup I thought we would get over run but Lee and Bannan were great and did very well .

 

Swansea got tighter on Bannan after the break as most teams do recognising him as our playmaker 

 

Didn't do us any favours when Dave was subbed because he was coming very deep for the ball and they couldn't handle him , after that they took control of the midfield 

[0114]

9 minutes ago, Dutch McLovin said:

Lee was good Saturday and showed signs of his former self which were so valuable to us. That said, Bannan and Lee didn't work 4 years ago when they were in there prime and playing well. It wont work now.

 

When Sam Hutchinson doesn't play we miss him drastically. Myself I would still play Bannan out wide in a 442 think its his best position.

100% agree on the Bannan being a LM. We lose physicality in the middle and also ends up with him being too deep. We saw the best of Bannan from 2015-2017 playing on the left and drifting in.

[Striggy]

12 minutes ago, Dutch McLovin said:

Lee was good Saturday and showed signs of his former self which were so valuable to us. That said, Bannan and Lee didn't work 4 years ago when they were in there prime and playing well. It wont work now.

 

When Sam Hutchinson doesn't play we miss him drastically. Myself I would still play Bannan out wide in a 442 think its his best position.

 Always puzzles me this. Bannan and Lee were good enough to get us to a PO Final and Semi Final, the team as a whole did not get us over the line alas. People always saying that the "failures" from then are still playing now so we will only get worse giving no thought to the fact that players can learn from these experiences and continue to develop and get better.

[AndersonOWL]

1 hour ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

You watched a different match to me!

I agree when they attacked the midfield didn't exist. I think murphy created majority of the chances not lee and bannan

[AndersonOWL]

 

21 minutes ago, 1993swfc said:

100% agree on the Bannan being a LM. We lose physicality in the middle and also ends up with him being too deep. We saw the best of Bannan from 2015-2017 playing on the left and drifting in.

 

People forget that it was Lee and lopez in the middle and bannan drifting left. I remember thinking around that time the the bannan lee and hutch never seemed to click fully.

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by AndersonOWL

[Jaydubz]

Lee was poor on Saturday, its that simple. Not the player he used to be. Squad player at best now!

[Mr Hooper]

1 minute ago, Jaydubz said:

Lee was poor on Saturday, its that simple. Not the player he used to be. Squad player at best now!

 

A little harsh, and maybe somewhat uneducated.

 

He wasn't great on Saturday, but he still looked OK. He was out for over a year, realistically he'll need to be playing football as long as he was out before he's back to the player he was. We won't start seeing the best of Lee until the later stages on this season IMO.

[Dutch McLovin]

34 minutes ago, Striggy said:

 Always puzzles me this. Bannan and Lee were good enough to get us to a PO Final and Semi Final, the team as a whole did not get us over the line alas. People always saying that the "failures" from then are still playing now so we will only get worse giving no thought to the fact that players can learn from these experiences and continue to develop and get better.

This isn't correct, when we got to the PO final it was Lee and Hutch in CM, Bannan was out wide.

 

It was the following season where we played Bannan and Lee started as our 2 CM players (as Hutch wa sfirst choice CH) and we went south, it was only approaching xmas where carlos finally gave in and moved Hutch back into the CM role and then we picked up. From then on we mostly played with the same Midfield 4 (Wallace, Lee Hutch Bannan) as the first season and Reach was deployed as left back.

 

I agree as a team we failed to get over the line.

[frastheowl]

2 hours ago, jrh said:

Seen a few negative comments about these two in the middle from the weekend and it's really frustrated me. 

 

We created more chances and were more entertaining to watch than most of the season and the two goals we conceded were calamatous errors from set pieces which had nothing to do with them. And yet this partnership gets scapegoated because they are both small players and not big defenders or tacklers. 

 

Lee was my man of the match. His forward runs are invaluable and also often make our crosses much more of a threat too because instead of just having Fletcher in the box, their defence suddenly has more to think about. I also lost count of the amount of times he nicked the ball in the middle and got us on the front foot. But because he's not a 'defensive' midfielder, people ignore that. 

 

As for Bannan, anyone with half a brain knows how good a player he is. 

 

As frustrating as Saturday was not to get the 3 points, there were lots of positives against one of the better sides in the division this year and Lee looking like his old self with Bannan in the middle was definitely one of them. 

 

As with every single team selection, isolating individual players or pairings only tells a fraction of the whole story. 

 

Did Bannan and Lee perform well on Saturday? I didn't think they did. Lee was the better of the two, but performance wise, both fell well below of what we expect from them. 

 

That said, the task Bannan and Lee was faced with, was a tough one. Monk went for an extremely attacking side. Not only did he ditch the midfield trio he's tended to prefer, but he also went with two out and out offensive minded wingers. It really was a throw back to an old fashioned 4-4-2 selection...two out and out strikers, and two wide players instructed to get chalk on their boots.

 

The issues with that? When you come up against a midfield trio as comfortable on the ball and composed as Swansea's, the midfield duo is going to really have their work cut. In modern day football, 4-4-2 systems tend to drag an extra body into midfield, either from the front two (a No. 10 or False Nine) or more commonly, a wide player (or two) sitting very narrow. We usually play Reach in a 4-4-2, and he's the one who naturally comes narrow to help out in the central areas.

 

Bannan and Lee didn't have that help on Saturday, and in reality, were constantly chasing shadows from a defensive point of view. It was no coincidence that our worst defensive display, in terms of xG, happened on Saturday. Monk went with a plan to try and outscore Swansea, and to be fair, his plan should have come into fruition, if it was for an utterly awful display by our goalkeeper. 

 

Furthermore, the fact we played with two target men and two advanced wingers, meant we bypassed the midfield a lot of the time. We only completed 70 passes in the defensive third on Saturday, which emphasises just how direct we played. Bannan wasn't try to drop and link up play on Saturday, he was tasked with restoring and recycling possession when the ball was turned over in our attacking third. It's not Bannan's game, and that's why he wasn't as productive as usual. 

 

But, on the whole, the system allowed us to create our highest xG of the season so far, and so, what's more important? Our best player having a good game, or the team functioning more efficiently on the whole? Of course, the holy grail, is Bannan performing to a high standard AND the team functioning highly efficiently. 

[Jaydubz]

27 minutes ago, Mr Hooper said:

 

A little harsh, and maybe somewhat uneducated.

 

He wasn't great on Saturday, but he still looked OK. He was out for over a year, realistically he'll need to be playing football as long as he was out before he's back to the player he was. We won't start seeing the best of Lee until the later stages on this season IMO.

 

Uneducated??? Mug!

 

We wont see the best of Lee again. He was out injured. Got 7 months left on his contract. Hes finished.

 

[frastheowl]

2 hours ago, HOOTIE AND THE poo TU said:

I still think Loungo is an upgrade on Lee, and we must find him a place in the team

 

I haven't see any evidence of that so far. 

 

But I'm judging him against the Kieran Lee from a couple of years ago. And at that time, for me, there wasn't a better box to box midfielder in the division.

 

Luongo isn't as technically adept as Lee, nor does he have the game intelligence Lee possesses. That said, Luongo perhaps gives a bit more bite, and he certainly seems to have more of an eye for goal than Lee. 

 

Similar players, with different strengths and traits. Not sure they could play in the same team together, but they are certainly good alternatives for each other.

[Mike Hunt]

2 minutes ago, frastheowl said:

 

I haven't see any evidence of that so far. 

 

But I'm judging him against the Kieran Lee from a couple of years ago. And at that time, for me, there wasn't a better box to box midfielder in the division.

 

Luongo isn't as technically adept as Lee, nor does he have the game intelligence Lee possesses. That said, Luongo perhaps gives a bit more bite, and he certainly seems to have more of an eye for goal than Lee. 

 

Similar players, with different strengths and traits. Not sure they could play in the same team together, but they are certainly good alternatives for each other.

 

Not had a look at the stats but I would wager that KL has scored more in a season than Massimo has , although he has started well for us and long may it continue .