Mcallister

[chipdawg]

He balanced the midfield, and that was about it. Definitely not reminiscent of Tinnion & Barnard down the left, and I suspect that his limitations at left midfield might get exposed by better opposition.

Very harsh. Against better opposition he will offer someting else on the left; defensive solidity. Unlikely to be the long term answer to anything, but if its better than the previous plan run with it

[CliftonCliff]

You must be a terrific judge of a footballer to make such a judgement after one game in that position with such confidence.

Remember that for vitrually all his City career McAllister has played at left back. He's had the occiasional foray as 'wing back' but thats not same role as a wide midfielder. Yesterday was his first game that I can remember in that position. He wouldn't be used to having someone behind him and his natural footballing instinct would be to get back to a defensive position. Thats probably why he didn't get forward as much as we would have liked.

I'm not saying that he's the answer to the left sided vacancy and I'm certain Johnson has been is looking to fill the void. However quality left sided players are not easy to find and we may have to get used to seeing McAllister in that wide position. With more games/experience/confidence he can only improve. Give the guy a chance.

Been offline since yesterday and only just read this. I can't quite see what it was that I said to merit the sarcasm and implicit hostility in your opening sentence, but that apart you seem to be both agreeing and disagreeing with me all at the same time. "Give the guy a chance"? Well, I did say that I thought he should continue to be considered an option in that position, so I have hardly dismissed him. If you check my posting record, you'll find that I have in the past been very respectful of McAllister's qualities as an orthodox full back (though his form has been patchy of late), and as I've said, I would certainly rather a natural left-sided player filled the void than a fish-out-of-water selection like some we have grown accustomed to seeing.

The subsequent posts from Chappers and WellRedPhil, who appear to share my view, have mentioned some of the reasons why JM might not be the answer long-term, so I won't waste time repeating them. What puzzles me a little is that you say yourself in your third paragraph that you're not saying he's the answer, so I can't really understand what it is that you're taking me to task over. Or is the point that you felt the need to take me to task over something, and what that something actually is was of secondary importance? If I've rattled your cage over some other issue, tell me what it is and perhaps we can straighten the matter out without taking cheap shots at one another. We all know how quickly things can go downhill once that starts.

[Nibor]

Good performance, and great effort. Fair play to him.

Probably not the answer long term for a few reasons:

- unable to cut or pass inside easily as he has no right foot

- not really going to beat a man with a trick

- not as much pace as I'd like in a wide man

- Nyatanga and Fontaine are both centre halves who can do a mediocre left back job, not left backs

I'd still think we have to bring in a left winger and some competition for the left back slot.

[Robbored]

Been offline since yesterday and only just read this. I can't quite see what it was that I said to merit the sarcasm and implicit hostility in your opening sentence, but that apart you seem to be both agreeing and disagreeing with me all at the same time. "Give the guy a chance"? Well, I did say that I thought he should continue to be considered an option in that position, so I have hardly dismissed him. If you check my posting record, you'll find that I have in the past been very respectful of McAllister's qualities as an orthodox full back (though his form has been patchy of late), and as I've said, I would certainly rather a natural left-sided player filled the void than a fish-out-of-water selection like some we have grown accustomed to seeing.

The subsequent posts from Chappers and WellRedPhil, who appear to share my view, have mentioned some of the reasons why JM might not be the answer long-term, so I won't waste time repeating them. What puzzles me a little is that you say yourself in your third paragraph that you're not saying he's the answer, so I can't really understand what it is that you're taking me to task over. Or is the point that you felt the need to take me to task over something, and what that something actually is was of secondary importance? If I've rattled your cage over some other issue, tell me what it is and perhaps we can straighten the matter out without taking cheap shots at one another. We all know how quickly things can go downhill once that starts.

No offence intended Cliff. Your post read to me that you were agreeing that JM has his limitations and that he might get exposed by better opposition and all that was achieved by him playing wide left was to balance the side. I took that to be a harsh conclusion after just one game.

What I should have done was placed and exclamation mark after my first sentence. !

[Robbored]

Good performance, and great effort. Fair play to him.

I'd still think we have to bring in a left winger and some competition for the left back slot.

I don't think anyone would disagree about the need for a left winger or disagree that JM isn't the long term answer wide left.

That said quality left sided players are hard to find and it maybe that despite looking for some time, one with the required ability just can't be found. We may have to get used to JM playing there if Johnson continues with 4-4-2. If that happens McAllister can only improve as he develops into the position more fully.

[Riaz]

I don't think anyone would disagree about the need for a left winger or disagree that JM isn't the long term answer wide left.

That said quality left sided players are hard to find and it maybe that despite looking for some time, one with the required ability just can't be found. We may have to get used to JM playing there if Johnson continues with 4-4-2. If that happens McAllister can only improve as he develops into the position more fully.

I agree

McAllister on the left side of midfield until we sign a winger to play there.... hopefully this month, but I wont be banking on it.

[CliftonCliff]

No offence intended Cliff. Your post read to me that you were agreeing that JM has his limitations and that he might get exposed by better opposition and all that was achieved by him playing wide left was to balance the side. I took that to be a harsh conclusion after just one game.

What I should have done was placed and exclamation mark after my first sentence. !

Thanks, Robbo. No offence intended, so absolutely none taken, no problem. Probably me over-reacting slightly, but the issue of personal spats lowering the tone has been much debated of late and I didn't want to let this develop in that direction if it could be avoided.

In that context, could I offer what I hope is a constructive suggestion? I now understand your intention, but you can perhaps see how it might have been taken the wrong way. Maybe something we could all bear in mind - and I include myself in this - is that a comment like your opening remark that I picked up on, even when meant in jest, is sometimes open to being misconstrued, because it critices, or appears to criticise, the poster rather than the post, and thereby (maybe unintentionally) introduces a personal element. Some people find this provocative. If you'd just said you think it's too soon to judge, I'd wouldn't have given it a second thought. A fine line, perhaps, but I thought it might be worth a mention in passing.

Anyway, don't want to split hairs. Subject closed, as far as I'm concerned. Thanks again for the response, though.

[CliftonCliff]

...and haveing posted the above, just read greenun's thread "are we arguing about arguing", which I would recommend to all. Amusing and thought-provoking at the same time.