The Diedhiou problem

[Londoner]

Now a week or so ago I stated on here that Famara, at this point in time, shouldn' be in our starting xi....and obviously I was shot down by the masses.

While there is no argument that he is a good player, who definately has a place in most championship starting xi.s, I firmly believe that ours isn' one of them.

We play fast moving attacking passing football with an emphasis on movement and pressing, something that Famara can do but not do particularly well.

I think LJ has made a mistake in dropping Paterson from the free role and putting in Diedhiou especially after the results we had....people will say diedhiou goals you can't ignore them.....well you can because look at the results.

In all honesty LJ talks a lot of footballing style and his "philosophy", well tbh I am amazed considering the research and price tag that we signed Diedhiou, as we already have an aggressve physical striker in Djuric....granted rarely always fit. I would have spent the same money on someone who would have the attributes more suited to our style of football.

LJ, time to go back to basics with the footballing phiolopahy that you have promoted....get back to passing slick pressing attacking football and don' accommdate someone on the basis of a price tag. 

 

[Maggersno1Fan]

But you ignore the FACT that the poor results have been down to Kent or Bryan or both on the left in the second half as they been caught wandering?

 

nothing to do with anything else but the left hand side in the second half recently, bar the Fulham game though was still the left hand side

[BRISTOL86]

You can count the players who have scored more goals per minute on the pitch in this league on one hand, and you want him out of the team?

[Londoner]

4 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

You can count the players who have scored more goals per minute on the pitch in this league on one hand, and you want him out of the team?

I do. I think he negatively effects our all round game. I like him, he gets goals but does be benefit our footballing philosophy that LJ goes on about? 

[Merrick's Marvels]

Paterson was ill and has now lost form.

Our other forward alternatives are either injured or not good enough.

But let's pick any one of them except a fit again Diedhiou who, before he got injured, was in excellent goalscoring form.

Other than that you make some good points. Or maybe not.

[Phileas Fogg]

Given your previous I feared the worst when opening this thread, and whilst I disagree with you I must admit it’s a well put together argument with some good points.

I think Diedhiou brings the best out of Reid. We look more potent with him in the side and I feel it’s simplistic to suggest he personally is responsible, even in part, for our poor form.

I don’t think he’s being accommodated. LJ’s first team (not including loans) would be; Fielding; Pisano, Flint/Wright, Baker, Bryan; Brownhill, Smith, Pack, O’Dowda; Reid, Diedhiou.

This is what we started the season with so one can assume it’s the team that best epitomises how LJ wants us to set up. If LJ thought we played better stylistically with Paterson and Reid, he’d have done that from the off. It worked against Man City away but we lacked pace and aggression in other games.

[Londoner]

3 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Paterson was ill and has now lost form.

Our other forward alternatives are either injured or not good enough.

But let's pick any one of them except a fit again Diedhiou who, before he got injured, was in excellent goalscoring form.

Other than that you make some good points. Or maybe not.

Pattrson wasn' off form....he was moved to left midfield where he lost his form.

[Maggersno1Fan]

1 minute ago, Londoner said:

I do. I think he negatively effects our all round game. I like him, he gets goals but does be benefit our footballing philosophy that LJ goes on about? 

The philosophy of passing in triangles :laugh:

 

 

[Pezo]

7 minutes ago, Londoner said:

Now a week or so ago I stated on here that Famara, at this point in time, shouldn' be in our starting xi....and obviously I was shot down by the masses.

While there is no argument that he is a good player, who definately has a place in most championship starting xi.s, I firmly believe that ours isn' one of them.

We play fast moving attacking passing football with an emphasis on movement and pressing, something that Famara can do but not do particularly well.

I think LJ has made a mistake in dropping Paterson from the free role and putting in Diedhiou especially after the results we had....people will say diedhiou goals you can't ignore them.....well you can because look at the results.

In all honesty LJ talks a lot of footballing style and his "philosophy", well tbh I am amazed considering the research and price tag that we signed Diedhiou, as we already have an aggressve physical striker in Djuric....granted rarely always fit. I would have spent the same money on someone who would have the attributes more suited to our style of football.

LJ, time to go back to basics with the footballing phiolopahy that you have promoted....get back to passing slick pressing attacking football and don' accommdate someone on the basis of a price tag. 

 

Can you remeber what we were like before he came back?

[Londoner]

3 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Given your previous I feared the worst when opening this thread, and whilst I disagree with you I must admit it’s a well put together argument with some good points.

I think Diedhiou brings the best out of Reid. We look more potent with him in the side and I feel it’s simplistic to suggest he personally is responsible, even in part, for our poor form.

I don’t think he’s being accommodated. LJ’s first team (not including loans) would be; Fielding; Pisano, Flint/Wright, Baker, Bryan; Brownhill, Smith, Pack, O’Dowda; Reid, Diedhiou.

This is what we started the season with so one can assume it’s the team that best epitomises how LJ wants us to set up. If LJ thought we played better stylistically with Paterson and Reid, he’d have done that from the off. It worked against Man City away but we lacked pace and aggression in other games.

I think it' dangerous to presume that what LJ wanted at the start of the season is the same now. I like him, I rate him, but the quality of our football.....and the results have got worse since his reintroduction.

Is he a scapegoat? No.

[Mr Popodopolous]

I have mixed views on Diedhiou.

He is productive and I rate him- on his ability alone I see him as an asset! 

However, our shape has changed...a possible question might be, does an enhanced goal-threat he provides, compensate for the midfield, the side, being made more open through the tweak in set-up? Of course, Kent's lack of defensive work hasn't helped either. Paterson behind Reid offers more protection and fluidity than Reid behind Diedhiou though.

[Guest]

Diedhou is exactly the type of striker for our system in my opinion. Someone who can take the ball with back to goal, hold off a defender and lay the ball off to Reid, Paterson et al, who can do all the dicking around, pretty stuff with the ball whilst he leads the charge to the box. And scores, often.

Our problem has been in the middle of the park and in defence for our recent run of bad form. It's not been up top (except perhaps those times FD was clearly done in on 50minutes and LJ left him out playing). 

[Phileas Fogg]

1 minute ago, Londoner said:

I think it' dangerous to presume that what LJ wanted at the start of the season is the same now. I like him, I rate him, but the quality of our football.....and the results have got worse since his reintroduction.

Is he a scapegoat? No.

I think it probably is, it has a balance to it. I think we’re a far better attacking side with Diedhiou. I bet also that Reid would say how excellent he is to play with.

Unrelated but I think his problem is a very visible one which will subconsciously make people think he’s a poor player. He’s clumsy. Poor touches, sometimes poor shots, missed opportunities - they all will negatively impact people’s perception of him whether they realise it or not.

I think he works well for us, he’s scored goals and brings the best out of Reid. In today’s market I think his price is good value.

[Londoner]

4 minutes ago, 29AR said:

Diedhou is exactly the type of striker for our system in my opinion. Someone who can take the ball with back to goal, hold off a defender and lay the ball off to Reid, Paterson et al, who can do all the dicking around, pretty stuff with the ball whilst he leads the charge to the box. And scores, often.

Our problem has been in the middle of the park and in defence for our recent run of bad form. It's not been up top (except perhaps those times FD was clearly done in on 50minutes and LJ left him out playing). 

The problem is you have Patterson wide which isn' his best position. Plus with a flat 4 in midfield far too rigid 

[BRISTOL86]

5 minutes ago, Londoner said:

I do. I think he negatively effects our all round game. I like him, he gets goals but does be benefit our footballing philosophy that LJ goes on about? 

You’re a results kind of guy, aren’t you? Nothing gets you results like putting the ball in the net; which hardly anyone in the league does more frequently than Diedhiou. I think he and Reid are a fantastic combination assuming we persist with a two striker approach. 

[Londoner]

4 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

You’re a results kind of guy, aren’t you? Nothing gets you results like putting the ball in the net; which hardly anyone in the league does more frequently than Diedhiou. I think he and Reid are a fantastic combination assuming we persist with a two striker approach. 

I am. And the results have been poor since he returned.

A flat 4 in midfield leaves us too rigid which negatively effects the fluidity of us going forward, and more predictable when defending.

It ain' just about Paterson and his form, it' about how having 2 up from limits our midfield

[Lrrr]

Doesn't really explain our form at the start of the season when he was scoring and we were doing well... As for Pato only being poor when moving to left wing being pretty much wrong, he's played well out wide for us plenty of times however he hasn't been the same player since his illness. 

[Cowshed]

2 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

You can count the players who have scored more goals per minute on the pitch in this league on one hand, and you want him out of the team?

Is it possible that this player affects maintaining possession and the patterns of play the team formerly used, leading to his goals point value being less than other players? 

[Phileas Fogg]

Only got access to my phone so can’t do the research myself but I think our average goals scored and would be higher in games where Diedhiou has played.

Thinking about it though - perhaps there is an argument to suggest the Leeds and Sunderland games (with us squandering leads) were impacted by Diedhiou. LJ kept him until the 80th and 90th minute in those games. He was obviously shattered and maybe a substitution to bring on another runner to assist more defensively would’ve been prudent. 

[BRISTOL86]

3 minutes ago, Londoner said:

I am. And the results have been poor since he returned.

A flat 4 in midfield leaves us too rigid which negatively effects the fluidity of us going forward, and more predictable when defending.

It ain' just about Paterson and his form, it' about how having 2 up from limits our midfield

 

2 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Is it possible that this player affects maintaining possession and the patterns of play the team formerly used, leading to his goals point value being less than other players? 

It’s a fair shout, but personally I wouldn’t say that his return to the team has anything to do with the lack of recent wins.  

Our form was declining long before he was reintroduced to the team. 

I think his presence causes defences a headache and his sheer physicality means they often have to get two on him, offering Bobby and the wide players more options.  

[Merrick's Marvels]

11 minutes ago, Londoner said:

Pattrson wasn' off form....he was moved to left midfield where he lost his form.

He's lost form - which you've just agreed - but not as a result of a change in position, in my view. We'll just have to disagree.

When Diedhiou returned at the end of January, I fail to see how an out of form Paterson - you agreed he's out of form - would suddenly be rejuvenated by moving his position.

I take your general point about pressing and movement but do not agree that a fit again goalscorer should have been left on the sidelines.   

[Mr Popodopolous]

Paterson is the most productive- though stats suggest marginally I must admit- in a role behind the striker.

I know HITC is clickbait in a lot of cases, but nonetheless this piece is quite relevant- if old. The following bits especially are pretty useful.

http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2015/09/15/jamie-paterson-suggest-that-he-was-used-out-of-position-at-notti/

 

Quote

 

Paterson feels that their lack of an attacking playmaker made it difficult for him to make an impact, as he was often having to play out on the wing, where he doesn't feel as comfortable. 

At Huddersfield, however, he was played behind the striker during his first match, which came against Cardiff City at the weekend, and he was pleased to be back in a role which he is familiar with. 

“As a youngster, I played as a number 10 and I feel that is my best position," he explained to the club's official website. "Obviously some teams don’t use that position and have accommodated me by letting me float in from the left, so I feel like I can play across those positions. I’m definitely not an out-and-out winger though; today’s position is my best, even though it’s the first time I’ve played there in a while.

 

 

 

Well yeah. Having him out on the wing- sure he can still play perfectly decently, but it's still a bit of a waste IMO.

If there was a way to accommodate Paterson behind Diedhiou and Reid, that could be really interesting I think- moving forward.

[Cowshed]

3 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

 

It’s a fair shout, but personally I wouldn’t say that his return to the team has anything to do with the lack of recent wins.  

Our form was declining long before he was reintroduced to the team. 

I think his presence causes defences a headache and his sheer physicality means they often have to get two on him, offering Bobby and the wide players more options.  

At present BCFC can score three goals and not win. 

Retains possession? He has a touch like a trampoline. His passing is poor. His movement? His work rate?  

Bristol City have altered the way they have played to accommodate him. 

 

[Midred]

It was.said earlier the Famara and Diony played together in France. Any idea what system they played and does there seem to be any understanding between them? Diony and Kent are now having to be accommodated in the team whilst on loan, could this be to the detriment of our game? (It also highlights the settling in period of any team that buys/loans players in January. Not many players irrespective of their ability/value are going to fit straight in).

[BRISTOL86]

44 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

At present BCFC can score three goals and not win. 

Retains possession? He has a touch like a trampoline. His passing is poor. His movement? His work rate?  

Bristol City have altered the way they have played to accommodate him. 

 

Ans that's Diedhious fault? Didn't he score 2 of the goals? By that logic wed have lost that game 3-1, unless you're saying his being in the team cost us those goals?

[One BCFC]

I agree with the OP I do not think he suits our style of play, not only that he does not press defences and I find him quite lazy actually. Not denying he is a good player, who scores goals but I feel we were better with Reid as a false 9.

[Cowshed]

17 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

Ans that's Diedhious fault? Didn't he score 2 of the goals? By that logic wed have lost that game 3-1, unless you're saying his being in the team cost us those goals?

Yes. His place in the team could affect negatively the teams ability to defend a lead, or to gain one. Yes the punting upfield costs goals. 

His mere prescience in the team means it alters its play. A point raised in this thread before I did was his touch. Assured it is not. This will affect patterns of play. Interplay between Reid - Bryan etc into Diedhiou will alter. The team will play longer and lose more possession. This leads to more possession to defend.

The much heralded Bristol City press. Players will have to press more due to the lost possession of longer play, the team will press differently because of his limitations. Forwards in Bristol City shape out of possession are frequently first defenders ... And on this goes.

 

 

 

 

 

[BRISTOL86]

15 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Yes. His place in the team could affect negatively the teams ability to defend a lead, or to gain one. Yes the punting upfield costs goals. 

His mere prescience in the team means it alters its play. A point raised in this thread before I did was his touch. Assured it is not. This will affect patterns of play. Interplay between Reid - Bryan etc into Diedhiou will alter. The team will play longer and lose more possession. This leads to more possession to defend.

The much heralded Bristol City press. Players will have to press more due to the lost possession of longer play, the team will press differently because of his limitations. Forwards in Bristol City shape out of possession are frequently first defenders ... And on this goes.

 

 

 

 

 

I can't see any evidence to suggest that any of our goals conceded vs Sunderland would have been prevented with Diedhiou on the bench. 

Obviously the team will never play identically with one set of personnel vs another, but I think it's extremely harsh on Fam to suggest that our capitulation against Sunderland had anything to do with his inclusion.

[Cowshed]

6 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I can't see any evidence to suggest that any of our goals conceded vs Sunderland would have been prevented with Diedhiou on the bench. 

Obviously the team will never play identically with one set of personnel vs another, but I think it's extremely harsh on Fam to suggest that our capitulation against Sunderland had anything to do with his inclusion.

You are not with respect looking at the points raised in the thread. 

This players inclusion significantly alters the way Bristol City plays. It is not like for like.

In post 26 he is described as lazy which would mean others have to do his running, he certainly does not press in the same manner as Reid and Patterson from the front. This means he team is more vulnerable. 

The team has to run more for him. Fatigue = Vulnerable.

If BCFC are to play to him the team has to alter to accommodate him. I would question is he really that good.

 

[BRISTOL86]

8 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

You are not with respect looking at the points raised in the thread. 

This players inclusion significantly alters the way Bristol City plays. It is not like for like.

In post 26 he is described as lazy which would mean others have to do his running, he certainly does not press in the same manner as Reid and Patterson from the front. This means he team is more vulnerable. 

The team has to run more for him. Fatigue = Vulnerable.

If BCFC are to play to him the team has to alter to accommodate him. I would question is he really that good.

 

Alters yes, but whether that's for the better or worse is highly subjective, and saying 'we've been bad since he's been back' is a long, long way from the full picture.