Pulis defensive formation

[Sefton owl]

32 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

 

He was poo all game.

 

Ponderous, terrible first touch, passed the ball out of play under no pressure on at least 2 occasions, can't clear it properly

 

Same the other week too.

 

Rank awful defender

Are you referring to van aken? If so, I agree.

 

Lets face it, if we had Iorfa and Flint available, there’s no chance he would be starting.

 

Needs must unfortunately at this moment.

[cowl]

5 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Yes, a left back should be on the shopping list. Until then, if we’re going to play Van Aken there, then I’d be tempted to play Penney in the position Odubajo occupied, using Odubajo as a right side option. 
If the manager sees Reach in a more central role, where he did really well the other night, then Penney would give us natural width on the left. I actually think Penney has a better delivery than Reach, and he can drop back and assist Van Aken when needed. A new left back in January though, is essential

 

I think Penney only ‘potentially’ has a better delivery than Reach, but in his games for us at first team level we've yet to see it an acceptable enough number of times. As it is Reach's crossing, even when he's not playing that well, is much more consistent than Penney's.

 

Also, Odubajo did start the game against Preston as that right side option you describe.

 

In terms of the players' positions I think it's very hard to draw many conclusions from these first two games other than Pulis sees Paterson as a midfielder (he's also said as much), as well as Bannan playing further forward in the midfield (he's also spoken about this too). Beyond that, his picks are as much to do with the players unavailable as anything else, as we're just as likely to see Harris in the side again now he's available. And Odubajo and Reach have popped up in a number of positions just from these two games alone.

 

We've also switched formation a few times, and not just due to being reduced to 10 men.

 

It makes sense that Pulis should be trying a few things out, but at least with Pulis and his considerable managerial experience, the things he's trying are at least grounded in the sensible and pragmatic.

[prowl]

1 hour ago, cowl said:

 

I know you're not a fan, but it's quite simply not true that he was poor all game.

 

Still, it's indictment enough against any defender when they're making even one major error a game. That alone is not good enough. When Iorfa's back, he'll almost certainly be out the team, and quite possibly before then should Pulis opt to play just the 2 centre backs or maybe even think about dropping Shaw into a back 3.

Sometime a defender just gets done by a very good player rather than making a mistake.

[cowl]

1 minute ago, prowl said:

Sometime a defender just gets done by a very good player rather than making a mistake.

 

Obviously, but Ayew on Wednesday and van Aken's failure to get tighter wasn't one of those times though.

[prowl]

3 minutes ago, cowl said:

 

Obviously, but Ayew on Wednesday and van Aken's failure to get tighter wasn't one of those times though.

Ayew is way above Van Akens level, he sent him the wrong way and VA was slow to recover. VA is basically a half decent back up centre back being played as a full back.

 

We need to accept him for what he is. To expect perfection from him is unrealistic. If we had better he would be sat on the bench.  Our squad is what it is, we need better in a number of positions but for a variety of reasons we couldn't get better.

[cowl]

2 minutes ago, prowl said:

Ayew is way above Van Akens level, he sent him the wrong way and VA was slow to recover. VA is basically a half decent back up centre back being played as a full back.

 

We need to accept him for what he is. To expect perfection from him is unrealistic. If we had better he would be sat on the bench.  Our squad is what it is, we need better in a number of positions but for a variety of reasons we couldn't get better.

 

It's got nothing to do with our expectations of Van Aken.

 

And Ayew is merely an opponent. Another week and the opponent is different. But the job you need your defenders to do is the same. When a defender makes a mistake, well okay, that happens, when they make mistakes frequently it's not good at all and that player will quite possibly need replacing for someone else in the hope they won't make those mistakes.

[prowl]

Look at the number  of goals scored each week, each one is down to a defensive mistake by someone. If every defender was perfect no goals would be scored.

 

Van Aken isn't great but the manager thought he was the best option, he might have changed his mind now. There's no saying that his replacement will be any better. Once Iorfa is back and Dunkley is fit (if ever) I doubt VA will feature much.

[gurujuan]

Ayew’s goal was down to his individual ability. My only criticism of Van Aken is, he should have known he was looking to get it on his left foot. As that was Van Aken’s wrong foot, perhaps one of the right footers should have come across once the Dutchman had driven Ayew inside

[McRightSide]

34 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Ayew’s goal was down to his individual ability. My only criticism of Van Aken is, he should have known he was looking to get it on his left foot. As that was Van Aken’s wrong foot, perhaps one of the right footers should have come across once the Dutchman had driven Ayew inside

 

The problem is van Aken can't change direction fast enough.

 

It's a major issue that he has.

[prowl]

4 hours ago, McRightSide said:

 

The problem is van Aken can't change direction fast enough.

 

It's a major issue that he has.

It is a problem for a lot of tall defenders. They are great in the air but on the ground they aren't nimble. Flint is like that I think.

 

I don't think Van Aken is very good , better than before but still only a back up. It will be interesting if Pulis uses him again , maybe he will try to train him to avoid his weaknesses or he might just ship him out.

[Guest Kagoshimaowl]

12 hours ago, Watto said:

Apparently he likes playing a centre half at left back or right back , hence van aken playing at left back.

Speaking to a West Brom fan at work who says he did it with them and with Stoke , he like tall players in those positions by all accounts , surely tough van aken is not suited to playing there.

He sure does. Converted Eric Peters from cb into an excellent left back. Unfortunately van Aken is just crap.

[CircleSeven]

For a change I’m not going to speculate but am really looking forward to seeing who Tony plays where when he has everyone available (including Dunkley). 
 

Tall fullback is no bad thing as long as they have a bit of pace. Van Aken isn’t that man. Poops his pants when he starts to go forward with the ball. He can pass it though which is no bad thing. 

Van Aken is better than he was but is cover really and third choice/ will probably go at the end of his contract. 
 

Don’t want to dwell on the Ayew goal but the gulf in quality between Ayew and Van Aken was shown up in those few moments that’s for sure!

 

 

[torryowl]

the goalkeepers are crap .......palmers a liability ......van aken is a wuss........lees can only play well if he's got loovens telling him what to do ...... pelupessy is the worst defensive mid fielder since fred mcivor .....does makes you wonder how we've only conceded 12 goals in 13 games .

[malek]

11 hours ago, cowl said:

 

I think Penney only ‘potentially’ has a better delivery than Reach, but in his games for us at first team level we've yet to see it an acceptable enough number of times. As it is Reach's crossing, even when he's not playing that well, is much more consistent than Penney's.

 

Great choice of words and there is nothing surprising there considering that (quoting Wikipedia) reach played 178 and Penney 18 games for us.

 

I believe that Penney showed more than enough to deserve run of games at LB position, especially considering that he is only LB at the club.  

[cowl]

40 minutes ago, malek said:

Great choice of words and there is nothing surprising there considering that (quoting Wikipedia) reach played 178 and Penney 18 games for us.

 

I believe that Penney showed more than enough to deserve run of games at LB position, especially considering that he is only LB at the club.  

 

There's been a change of manager so there's everything to play for, but surely the fact he's the only LB at the club and yet he's still being overlooked for a starting spot doesn't in itself speak too well of Pulis' initial impression of him.

 

All Penney can do for now is impress in training I suppose and should he get an opportunity with the first team then he absolutely must take it. He didn't take it last time and with him being out of contract at the end of the season, I hope he realizes just how much that's damaged his chances of furthering his career with the club, so much so that hopefully next time he's got the right focus.

[Blatter]

13 hours ago, cowl said:

I thought the formation against Swansea with 3 at the back worked pretty well.

 

Börner looked comfortable in the centre of them, as did Lees on the right.

 

Van Aken looked mostly fine too for 89 minutes. But he's guilty still of that one big error every game within that 1 other minute. Against Swansea it was costly, against Preston he got away with it, and against Luton he didn't get away with it and was sent off.

 

If he plays on Saturday it'll only be because there's no-one else to take his place.

Oh dear.

Did you watch it.

Van Aken didn’t play for 89 minutes he was rightly hooked after Swansea’s goal.

Neither did we play with a back three.
We lined up with a 4man defence of Palmer, Lees, Borner and Van Aken.

A five man midfield and Rhodes up front.

 

 

[cowl]

4 minutes ago, Blatter said:

Oh dear.

Did you watch it.

Van Aken didn’t play for 89 minutes he was rightly hooked after Swansea’s goal.

Neither did we play with a back three.
We lined up with a 4man defence of Palmer, Lees, Borner and Van Aken.

A five man midfield and Rhodes up front.

 

Oh dear??? 

 

Are you okay? You seem offended because we have a disagreement about the the formation, which might I add changed more than once throughout the game. Who gets offended by such a thing?

 

And the point I was making about van Aken obviously wasn't the amount of time he spent on the pitch, but that all but one moment (for their goal) that he spent on the pitch was fine.

[Blatter]

10 hours ago, cowl said:

 

Oh dear??? 

 

Are you okay? You seem offended because we have a disagreement about the the formation, which might I add changed more than once throughout the game. Who gets offended by such a thing?

 

And the point I was making about van Aken obviously wasn't the amount of time he spent on the pitch, but that all but one moment (for their goal) that he spent on the pitch was fine.

Sorry, I must have misunderstood your 89 minute comment about Van Aken.

[2soon]

Twelve goals conceded in thirteen matches, of which three came in the horror show what was Rotherham, suggests the defence isn't too bad.

 

With JVA playing I think it's six conceded in eight games.

[brian joicey]

17 hours ago, prowl said:

It is a problem for a lot of tall defenders. They are great in the air but on the ground they aren't nimble.**** Flint is like that I think.*****

 

I don't think Van Aken is very good , better than before but still only a back up. It will be interesting if Pulis uses him again , maybe he will try to train him to avoid his weaknesses or he might just ship him out.

anyone remember keiran lee's late winner V bristol city in that amazing comeback match (who can forget it?) , he did exactly the same to Flint as ayew did to van aaken