Jump to content
IGNORED

Han-Noah Massengo - SIGNED - 4 Year Deal


Dolman_Stand

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, spudski said:

That's just my preference mate...I don't rate Palmer's all round game. He obviously has talent offensively but his defensive attributes are poor and lazy imo.

Play him with Famara in the side, and you'll get the first half of the Leeds game more often than not.

For me...Palmer needs a whole season of learning how to defend and help the team. Saturday reminded me of when we played with Tomlin. Players sitting deep not trusting some of the defensive duties of others.

At the moment Palmer is an impact sub when looking to open a game imo.

My fear if we play Palmer and Famara in the same starting 11 is that we will struggle.

Good post

11 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'd drop Diedhiou and work out a front 3 from there.

Don't think Pack-Brownhill axis will work either, not vs a lot of good sides who play a bona fide 3. IF this Nketiah deal comes in.

Top of head time but buzzing around as a front 3 could be something like Nketiah-Weimann-Palmer- or maybe even Nketiah central, with Weimann and Eliasson as wide forwards- a lot of choice!

One thing I definitely agree on personally speaking is Palmer-Diedhiou doesn't work. Thought so with Paterson-Diedhiou last season- they're just too different types of player, they do not compliment each other well. Palmer-Weimann or Palmer-Nketiah however- or even Palmer-Weimann and Nketiah 4-3-1-2, I dunno but Diedhiou as the lone striker with one feeding him or in a 4-2-3-1 is lacking something to me- certainly as a starter.

And another

10 hours ago, spudski said:

For the life of me, I really can't work out how Famara fits into our system of Play.

We knock it around, play out from the back, trying to create openings, keeping possession, drawing players...this can go on for long periods of a game...only for it to eventually be pinged wide, and a hopeful ball crossed in for Famara to try and get something on it.

What's the point of all the build up play? May as well play like Warnock if we resort to that.

We play far better without a Famara type. Three offensive players buzzing around the 18 yard box feeding off our build up play. You only had to see the difference as an example on Saturday when Taylor, Weimann and Eliasson did just that.

Moving...working hard, pressing and coming for the ball.

At the moment, imo, we have a defence and midfield playing one game and the frontline playing another.

It really is easy to see. 

Worst thing we ever did was bring Famara in and change our game plan offensively so drastically imo.

And another

9 hours ago, spudski said:

He really is holding us back...totally agree.

We see for eyes what's happening, so why does LJ play him?

Are stats showing something we don't see?

Famara made one shot off target all game on Sunday and made two touches in the box all game according to Wyscout stats.

The game breaks down pretty much every time the ball goes near him. If he wins a header it more often than not goes anywhere.

If a ball comes to him...he grapples with the defender. Holding on. He either goes to ground or the ball pings around off him, never fully in control, and eventually loses possession.

The negatives far outway the positives.

It's like watching an Octopus trying to fight it's way out of a paper bag when he's trying to win a ball.

And this has nothing to do with him being isolated.

Look at Bamford playing a similar role...totally different. He had Kalas all over him...did he play like Famara...no.

Famara makes it look like he's being manhandled more than any other player, and it simply isn't so.

Instead of backing into a player, he could learn a lot from Taylor. Who wins space easily so often.

Good post, apart from Bamford attached himself to Moore as much as possible and bullied him, yet Bamford is soft as shite.  Harsh on Moore, for as nice as he was on the ball at times, he failed the audition (imho) as a defender.

1 hour ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Weimann and Palmer - why not?!

As a fan of Palmer, he shouldn’t have started Sunday, nor should O’Dowda have.  Moore - might not have had much choice.  Palmer should have been eased into the side, and over time I could see a partnership with Weimann.  We’ve played a lot of pre-season minutes with Szmodics and Eliasson.  I’m not usually one to pick holes in a team pre-match, as anything can happen and we are not party to what goes on, but it screamed at me as a team that wasn’t picked on merit.

Fam maybe better suited away from home, but at home Weimann is much more suited to the way we ought to be playing.  I was hugely disappointed with our “team style” on Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

.  I was hugely disappointed with our “team style” on Sunday.

Me too, and putting aside the fact it was Leeds ( although that shouldn’t matter as teams will beat them, they are not invincible) we played very poorly with almost the same team as we had for much of last season. And the two newcomers weren’t particularly the problem, Moore especially made a positive contribution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, spudski said:

Because Taylor lost his man, made space and came for the ball.

On more than one occasion Moore gesteculated at Famara to come.

He had to go back to the goalkeeper and sideways.

Moore then went on two marauding runs forward when Famara didn't move. And was left with no option to pass to anyone else.

The reason players end up lumping it to Famara, is because other passes get blocked off to other players. Instead of losing possession in our own half or in a dangerous position, the lump the ball to him, in a hope he wins it, or if he doesn't it's in a less dangerous position.

Famaras movement to receive is poor. He sits high on the shoulder of the last player. Rarely moves off that player. Hence always being grappled.

Watch Weimann and Taylor's movement...Famara should be doing that as well.

He's one dimensional... doesn't fit our style and will hold us back.

If we play him and Palmer in the same set up, we'll do worse than last season imo.

He's stopping our progress big time.

Unfortunately it seems LJ and our coaching staff feel the need to play him.

He was clearly gesticulating at his midfield. Brownhill hid whilst we had possession all game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, J-mat said:

He was clearly gesticulating at his midfield. Brownhill hid whilst we had possession all game. 

You are wrong. He wasn't...I was watching intently. Aimed solely at Famara. My eye was drawn to their interaction most of the game.

He did it again to Taylor when he came on too...as Taylor was too slow to react.

Next time Moore had the ball, Taylor dropped off his man immediately and received the ball promptly from Moore.

Hunt also had a similar problem with Weimann early doors.

Weimann looking for a pass off the shoulder and forward, which was simply impossible to make as the pass was blocked by a defender.

Hunt got Weimann to make better angles inside and he got a better service eventually.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Good post

And another

And another

Good post, apart from Bamford attached himself to Moore as much as possible and bullied him, yet Bamford is soft as shite.  Harsh on Moore, for as nice as he was on the ball at times, he failed the audition (imho) as a defender.

As a fan of Palmer, he shouldn’t have started Sunday, nor should O’Dowda have.  Moore - might not have had much choice.  Palmer should have been eased into the side, and over time I could see a partnership with Weimann.  We’ve played a lot of pre-season minutes with Szmodics and Eliasson.  I’m not usually one to pick holes in a team pre-match, as anything can happen and we are not party to what goes on, but it screamed at me as a team that wasn’t picked on merit.

Fam maybe better suited away from home, but at home Weimann is much more suited to the way we ought to be playing.  I was hugely disappointed with our “team style” on Sunday.

Agree about Palmer Dave. Thought Moore did ok tbh. Bamford although light weight, caused more problems than Famara both physically and with movement. And scored a well taken goal.

Kalas was massively at fault for the first goal. Which then sent the tone of our defence... timid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Fiale said:

I know technical ability and reading the game can add a lot to a player but he is so slight. I don't know how physical the game is in France, but he is going to need to build some strength if he is going to stand a chance in the Championship.

French football is all about technique and playing the ball out from defence.

He will definitely need to adjust to the bullies in the Championship but I imagine that as a talented player all his life he would have had other players trying to nullify him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, spudski said:

You are wrong. He wasn't...I was watching intently. Aimed solely at Famara. My eye was drawn to their interaction most of the game.

He did it again to Taylor when he came on too...as Taylor was too slow to react.

Next time Moore had the ball, Taylor dropped off his man immediately and received the ball promptly from Moore.

Hunt also had a similar problem with Weimann early doors.

Weimann looking for a pass off the shoulder and forward, which was simply impossible to make as the pass was blocked by a defender.

Hunt got Weimann to make better angles inside and he got a better service eventually.

 

....which is a good example of Weimann mixing up his runs, drag your marker long, so that next time you can come short.  Last season (early Autumn) it was that type of running that when he came short in the inside right channel, that sucked the LB in and allowed Hunt to overlap.  Not all runs are made to receive the ball, as you know!

2 hours ago, spudski said:

Agree about Palmer Dave. Thought Moore did ok tbh. Bamford although light weight, caused more problems than Famara both physically and with movement. And scored a well taken goal.

Kalas was massively at fault for the first goal. Which then sent the tone of our defence... timid.

I still see the 1st goal as a combination of poor comms between Dasilva and Moore, and then Kalas who was slow to react....I just can’t lay the whole blame at his feet.  A poor goal from a defensive unit point of view, and showing the immediate impact of not having Webster.  Watch it again Spud and look who’s marking Hernandez initially, and where he then runs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

....which is a good example of Weimann mixing up his runs, drag your marker long, so that next time you can come short.  Last season (early Autumn) it was that type of running that when he came short in the inside right channel, that sucked the LB in and allowed Hunt to overlap.  Not all runs are made to receive the ball, as you know!

I still see the 1st goal as a combination of poor comms between Dasilva and Moore, and then Kalas who was slow to react....I just can’t lay the whole blame at his feet.  A poor goal from a defensive unit point of view, and showing the immediate impact of not having Webster.  Watch it again Spud and look who’s marking Hernandez initially, and where he then runs.

For sure Dave, however in these instances on Sunday Weimann made the wrong decisions. Hunt was left with no option but to go backwards as all other passing options were blocked. Weimann was creating straight lines instead of angles at the time.

As for the lead up to the goal...I can see where you are coming from, however Kalas was very slow to react.

Again the hesitancy maybe down to playing alongside Moore and not Webster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, spudski said:

For sure Dave, however in these instances on Sunday Weimann made the wrong decisions. Hunt was left with no option but to go backwards as all other passing options were blocked. Weimann was creating straight lines instead of angles at the time.

fair enough, tv doesn’t always give the full picture

As for the lead up to the goal...I can see where you are coming from, however Kalas was very slow to react.

he was, but when a player comes from your blindside having not been “passed on” then you can see why.

Again the hesitancy maybe down to playing alongside Moore and not Webster.

yep, we didn’t look a defensive unit at all on Sunday.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Crackers Corner said:

 

He is scoring two or three,

For us, city,

Massengo

Hopefully a few more than that over his 4 year contract, but not many perhaps - we are told he has many qualities but not sure making the net bulge regularly is one of them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, reddogkev said:

Is Massengo City's potential best ever transfer signing?  Still can't believe City have signed such a talented, exciting player.

I was thinking back to the glory days of John Palmer and the rather more promising Paul Williams - who I seem to recall came from Bristol Manor Farm...

...I can't think of a time when we were signing such exciting players. It's great. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Fee has been confirmed by Gregor McGregorface via Dean Holden (I assume) as £2.7m.

Assuming it's true that Pack went for a deal worth up to £4m then that puts a slightly different perspective on things.

How the **** did we manage that? Bit of a difference to £8m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TBW said:

How the **** did we manage that? Bit of a difference to £8m.

I have a feeling that there’s a bit confusion somewhere. It’s probably £2.7m plus add-ons which can take it up to €8m. It is quite a bit different though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Fee has been confirmed by Gregor McGregorface via Dean Holden (I assume) as £2.7m.

Assuming it's true that Pack went for a deal worth up to £4m then that puts a slightly different perspective on things.

Wow!!! 

I assume this is £2.7m upfront going to £8m with potential addons? Much like Pack being £750k rising to £4m?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Because Mark Ashton is an absolute shagger?

I met, by chance, someone in the business of football negotiation a month or so ago...spoke very highly of Ashton's ability to get a good deal...seems like he got one!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Harry said:

Wow!!! 

I assume this is £2.7m upfront going to £8m with potential addons? Much like Pack being £750k rising to £4m?

Sorry, playing catch-up.  So possibly €3m initial fee (€8.0m total if he achieves all add-ons).  Is that about right?

Re Marlon - BBC saying £4m....is that £750k rising to £4m (e.g. promotion clause), or £750k up-front, rest in instalments?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Sorry, playing catch-up.  So possibly €3m initial fee (€8.0m total if he achieves all add-ons).  Is that about right?

Re Marlon - BBC saying £4m....is that £750k rising to £4m (e.g. promotion clause), or £750k up-front, rest in instalments?

Cardiff quoted as saying paying in instalments rather than add ons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Relieved we have only paid £2.7 million for Massengo because of LJ's worrying habit of signing players and then not playing them; Watkins (1 million), Engvall (1.6 million), Walsh (1 million). 

As they arnt good enough 

 

I agree. Watkins, Engvall, and Walsh aren't good enough. And that's what worries me. Lee Johnson spent 3.6 million on players that are not good enough. Which suggests to me that, some of the time at least, he has poor judgement in the transfer market. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...