Jump to content
IGNORED

Massengo


DT The Optimist

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Not necessarily some guy on here - I heard the same conspiracy theory from a City fan who is not aware of otib at a bowls match recently.

It's been talked about a bit online away from Otib. It's not very plausible, Steve Lansdown is far too rule abiding for something like that. If it was true, I doubt Massengo would've been the only one we signed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J-mat said:

On the coaching stuff, I've done a few badges and spent the last 7 years working side by side with a lad who works for a Prem team at my grass roots club.

One of the "attacking principles" I learnt early was "width and depth". It's one of the main coaching points that Pep uses in terms of team shape too. Essentially if you can make the pitch as wide and as long as possible you move the opposition defence into more 1v1 situations and create gaps for third man runs. The most important thing is that the central players move off the ball to create passing options and move the ball forward gradually whilst the wider players make runs and movements until there is a defensive lapse. 

That's why I don't rate Brownhill as highly as other people seem to. He is a very good player on the ball, technically decent, but he hides behind defenders and doesn't show for the ball enough. It's a trait you see in lots of kids, hiding away from the ball so they don't have to take responsibility but still appearing to be busy and run around and call for the ball. It's a lack of bravery for me. 

 

 

He doesn't go diagonal so he can't create passing angles.

My eureka moment regarding width and depth was my simply having width and depth explained to me in geometrical and mathematical terms. Creating forty five degree angles across the pitch creates more mathematical opportunities - the receiving player if players move must have multiple passing opportunities. Players being flat in lines can't. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, J-mat said:

We've got a midfield three with Palmer, you're suggesting a narrow 4 or diamond, which leaves us exposed on the sides.

From the snippets I've seen I'd go with a back 4 that doesn't enclude Bailey. A midfield three of Nagy sitting with Massengo alongside Palmer giving Kasey license to make third man runs then have Elliasson (who is imo our best player) and Semenyo either side of Diedhiou, Weimman or Afobe depending on who is best at getting on the end of crosses. 

 

Nagy, Massengo and Palmer with two wingers to find and if Afobe plays a striker on the shoulder looks great going forward to me

 

Don't think Palmer is much cop defensively tbh. Nor is Eliasson, nor possibly is Semenyo though it's very early days in his case.

Given the energy of these players it can leave us exposed- 2 v 3 or more in the centre. Take Leeds for example, Phillips-Forshaw-Klich would have a field day in the centre IMO. Eliasson not so adept at wandering back inside, possible that Palmer would but again the defensive attributes at this stage...or assuming Eliasson comes back in to help cover defensively, that leaves an overload potential of 2 v 1 in that wide area- saw it in the goals on Tuesday, players having to scramble back as they started in a higher or wider position.

We could be exposed on the sides, but if the central players can funnel back in, filter back and condense the space then that makes crossing a difficult strategy for the opposition- watched the Birmingham highlights yesterday and noticed just that- can force potshots from range too, again another example of this. If both Semenyo and Eliasson pushed high and wide however

No doubt the third man runs would help us offensively- and this strategy could. Just feels a bit top heavy to me. Saw similar at QPR Tuesday?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

It's been talked about a bit online away from Otib. It's not very plausible, Steve Lansdown is far too rule abiding for something like that. If it was true, I doubt Massengo would've been the only one we signed.

It doesn't require anything official though. A heavy hint from Chelsea during other discussions that if they had been able to sign Massengo they would have been happy to loan him to us to get ENglish league experience,  but as they can't maybe we should try directly. This could be coupled with another heavy hint to the players agent as to what was in the air and then to the club itself regarding sell on fees etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Not necessarily some guy on here - I heard the same conspiracy theory from a City fan who is not aware of otib at a bowls match recently.

Nah that’s bollocks.

Cant see anything on the official site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

It doesn't require anything official though. A heavy hint from Chelsea during other discussions that if they had been able to sign Massengo they would have been happy to loan him to us to get ENglish league experience,  but as they can't maybe we should try directly. This could be coupled with another heavy hint to the players agent as to what was in the air and then to the club itself regarding sell on fees etc?

I haven't seen these hints, can you provide links?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

I mean verbal, I am not suggesting anything has been done, just a way to get around the rules.

Oh right ok, well yeah possibly. I just think a club headed by Steve Lansdown wouldn't take a huge risk like that. Seems incredibly far-fetched to me but everyone loves a conspiracy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Oh right ok, well yeah possibly. I just think a club headed by Steve Lansdown wouldn't take a huge risk like that. Seems incredibly far-fetched to me but everyone loves a conspiracy. 

There is no way we would have bought a player "for" Chelsea. We may well have some sort of verbal agreement with them regarding the future between both clubs and players though (I expect many do). If this Massengo has a blinder here and clubs come in for him, it would be funny if he went to Chelsea just to get conspiracy theories really talking! One bloke made it up on here - and it could even end up making it into the papers (as they are that desperate).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Robbored said:

Not necessarily some guy on here - I heard the same conspiracy theory from a City fan who is not aware of otib at a bowls match recently.

Who has probably heard it 10th or 11th hand from something started on here. It's surprising how quickly something is picked up upon, and then becomes fact pretty quickly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, wood_red said:

 and it could even end up making it into the papers (as they are that desperate).

Anything is possible. When I lived in Australia I spent a number of years in Katherine in the Northern Territory. Whilst there I was a member of the local Apex Club (similar to Round Table etc) where I was in charge of producing the fortnightly Dinner Notice to members which was basically a newsletter advising dinner dates, club news and events. In order to bulk out the publication I used to put in various articles for a bit of a laugh. In one I wrote that "due to the severe drought being experienced the Katherine Town Council has advised that lanes 9 & 10 of the public swimming pool would be closed until further notice".  About a week later a mate called and suggested that I go and buy a copy of The Sydney Morning Herald. Sure enough on page 5 was the exact same story !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

It's been talked about a bit online away from Otib. It's not very plausible, Steve Lansdown is far too rule abiding for something like that. If it was true, I doubt Massengo would've been the only one we signed.

SL may well not been aware of any ‘understanding’ between City and Chelsea.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Robbored said:

SL may well not been aware of any ‘understanding’ between City and Chelsea.....

You've been listening to too much unsubstantiated, rumoured conspiracy theory bull that isn't on the official site - worst thing is you seem to actually believe it. I am sure MA and LJ would happily just go behind SL back and setup some shady deal that could come back to really hurt the club!!!

Anyone suggests a rumour of any other player being rumoured with a move here, and you shoot them down in an instant!

You really couldn't make it up........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wood_red said:

You've been listening to too much unsubstantiated, rumoured conspiracy theory bull that isn't on the official site - worst thing is you seem to actually believe it. I am sure MA and LJ would happily just go behind SL back and setup some shady deal that could come back to really hurt the club!!!

Anyone suggests a rumour of any other player being rumoured with a move here, and you shoot them down in an instant!

You really couldn't make it up........

It’s a conspiracy theory and like most conspiracy theories it has some elements that are completely feasible. 

I’m not saying that it true or untrue but we as fans are never going know one way of or the other.

LJ is the speaker at Senior Reds later today, I might well ask him.........:cool2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, wood_red said:

You've been listening to too much unsubstantiated, rumoured conspiracy theory bull that isn't on the official site - worst thing is you seem to actually believe it. I am sure MA and LJ would happily just go behind SL back and setup some shady deal that could come back to really hurt the club!!!

Anyone suggests a rumour of any other player being rumoured with a move here, and you shoot them down in an instant!

You really couldn't make it up........

My point was that lots of things get said in unofficial conversations that can lead to additional possibilities. Didn't LJ tell Korey Smith to come here when he was leaving Oldham? Did he have a feeling that he would become his manager again or were there whispers of the possibility even then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was prepared to think that the Chelsea theory had some credibility when we were told that the price was £8 million, for a virtually unknown...we just don't do that sort of thing. Now we've heard that the price is closer to £2.5 million with add ons, it seems much more likely that we have invested some of our spare money, which we can easily afford, in an extremely promising talent. This is in line with the clubs policy to buy low and sell high and I applaud our scouting staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Robbored said:

It’s a conspiracy theory and like most conspiracy theories it has some elements that are completely feasible. 

 

'It’s a rumour and like most rumours it has some elements that are completely feasible.'

Right......so maybe you'll leave the transfer forum and its topic alone now eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Don't think Palmer is much cop defensively tbh. Nor is Eliasson, nor possibly is Semenyo though it's very early days in his case.

Given the energy of these players it can leave us exposed- 2 v 3 or more in the centre. Take Leeds for example, Phillips-Forshaw-Klich would have a field day in the centre IMO. Eliasson not so adept at wandering back inside, possible that Palmer would but again the defensive attributes at this stage...or assuming Eliasson comes back in to help cover defensively, that leaves an overload potential of 2 v 1 in that wide area- saw it in the goals on Tuesday, players having to scramble back as they started in a higher or wider position.

We could be exposed on the sides, but if the central players can funnel back in, filter back and condense the space then that makes crossing a difficult strategy for the opposition- watched the Birmingham highlights yesterday and noticed just that- can force potshots from range too, again another example of this. If both Semenyo and Eliasson pushed high and wide however

No doubt the third man runs would help us offensively- and this strategy could. Just feels a bit top heavy to me. Saw similar at QPR Tuesday?

From what I've read of Pereira, he is a superior defender to Hunt, which will help us play a 4. Much as I was a huge fan of Pack, Nagy appears to be a superior player in the defensive phase, which again facilitates a back 4 by offering protection and providing Palmer and whoever partners him can get into defensive positions quickly, their ability to actually defend isn't really relevant. Their job is block passing options for the opposition. Wingers job is to track opposition full backs and CF is to put a bit of pressure on the pivot player of the opposition if they play with one.

 

As I say, playing with no width at all is madness to me, especially as I consider Eliasson to be our best attacking player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Robbored said:

It’s a conspiracy theory and like most conspiracy theories it has some elements that are completely feasible. 

I’m not saying that it true or untrue but we as fans are never going know one way of or the other.

LJ is the speaker at Senior Reds later today, I might well ask him.........:cool2:

I expect you to ask him now you've said that! 

Let us know what he says

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Don't think Palmer is much cop defensively tbh. Nor is Eliasson, nor possibly is Semenyo though it's very early days in his case.

Given the energy of these players it can leave us exposed- 2 v 3 or more in the centre. Take Leeds for example, Phillips-Forshaw-Klich would have a field day in the centre IMO. Eliasson not so adept at wandering back inside, possible that Palmer would but again the defensive attributes at this stage...or assuming Eliasson comes back in to help cover defensively, that leaves an overload potential of 2 v 1 in that wide area- saw it in the goals on Tuesday, players having to scramble back as they started in a higher or wider position.

We could be exposed on the sides, but if the central players can funnel back in, filter back and condense the space then that makes crossing a difficult strategy for the opposition- watched the Birmingham highlights yesterday and noticed just that- can force potshots from range too, again another example of this. If both Semenyo and Eliasson pushed high and wide however

No doubt the third man runs would help us offensively- and this strategy could. Just feels a bit top heavy to me. Saw similar at QPR Tuesday?

But Klich isn't much cop defensively either. That's how it works with a 3 man midfield, different players bring different things. I'm not saying Leeds trio isn't better than ours, but you need balance your midfield. Palmer, Nagy, Massengo seems like a balanced midfield to me, perhaps play Brownhill for Palmer if you need more tackling, though Palmer has been noticeably more physical in my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, chipdawg said:

Palmer, Nagy, Massengo seems like a balanced midfield

I think this midfield has great potential. Nagy plays the deeper role, Massengo pushes 10 yards further forward than he did on Tuesday and Palmer sits at AMC. stick Eliasson and Semenyo on as wide attackers and then run Afobe or Fam through the centre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, chipdawg said:

But Klich isn't much cop defensively either. That's how it works with a 3 man midfield, different players bring different things. I'm not saying Leeds trio isn't better than ours, but you need balance your midfield. Palmer, Nagy, Massengo seems like a balanced midfield to me, perhaps play Brownhill for Palmer if you need more tackling, though Palmer has been noticeably more physical in my opinion

The posters point maybe (?) not necessarily about tackling it can be about defensive balance and filling zones blocking options. Palmer unbalances shape, its a easy criticism of this player to make because he does it so frequently.  Leeds were better there. Leeds played easily through where Palmer wasn't.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

The posters point maybe (?) not necessarily about tackling it can be about defensive balance and filling zones blocking options. Palmer unbalances shape, its a easy criticism of this player to make because he does it so frequently.  Leeds were better there. Leeds played easily through where Palmer wasn't.

 

But something Johnson praised him for against Birmingham, so perhaps he is learning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Port Said Red said:

But something Johnson praised him for against Birmingham, so perhaps he is learning?

Perhaps he will find some legs each game. If he does not and is included in the team with Famara who also does not display an aptitude for the defensive 50% element of football the team cannot defend collectively, team mates will have to go beyond perhaps, they will have to do the running. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Robbored said:

Not necessarily some guy on here - I heard the same conspiracy theory from a City fan who is not aware of otib at a bowls match recently.

Well knowing, as I do, the standard of banter and authentic in-depth anaylsis, let alone the networking at Bowls matches.........finally we have conclusive proof of the "Chelsea Connection" ?

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...