Team for Saturday?

[GrahamC]

16 hours ago, HappyClapper said:

It’s amazing how good some players become when they’re not in the team.

Said after midweek with the exception of Conway (& possibly Scott) the ones who gained the most were the 3 who didn’t play, so O’Leary, Pring & James, though arguably Wells came on too late to do any damage to his reputation, either.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

If we maintain the current system , and deploying 2 (James & Scott ?)  mid pitch with one (AW ?) in behind 2 

Id consider somebody who hasn’t been mentioned for that RWB role - Joe Williams

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

I’d rather Massengo played there than Williams, you have to get up & back relentlessly at wing back & I don’t think he can.

@CyderHead92 Tanner is suspended, last game of a 3 match one.

You beat me to it.  Massengo actually played there once or twice under LJ, albeit for final periods of games as subs were made.  Don’t recall how he did.  But he has the ability to do both aspects of the role imho.

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, Sheltons Army said:

The wing backs should IMHO move up the pitch , largely ‘with the ball’

TAA is a classic example of a WB who doesn’t do that and is regularly , significantly ahead of the ball , and look at the holes he leaves

However Klopp accepts the trade off as TAA is exceptional in his attacking threat and thus Klopp wants him in the opponents half as much as poss 

His creativity and the threat he opposes attacking wise somewhat justifies , at least , that ‘trade off’ , 

Our wing backs simply don’t provide a great attacking or creative threat and , IMHO should be used conservatively , with concentration on solidity

Your correct that there is a trade off in skills and attributes. That's true of any position on the pitch - just look at the Bentley/O'Leary discussion!

For me the concern I have is less about the WB moving up the pitch with the ball and more about moving back down it. I think all our WB options are adept at moving forward (what they do with the ball once they are in the attacking their is a different matter). However specifically at RWB only Weimann, and Scott to a lesser extent, have shown me that they have the discipline to a) not advance when it's too dangerous and b) drop back quickly enough to assist the CBs when it inevitably goes to pot up front.

I don't doubt Williams' enthusiasm, but I do doubt his discipline and fitness through 90 minutes.

I appreciate your opinion on Williams, and perhaps of the mood was better then experimenting with Williams at RWB would be something I could agree with.

But right now I'm going with the proven professional reliability of Weimann.

[hinsleburg]

                    O Leary

           Vyner               Atkinson

Sykes           Williams                   Pring

              James             Scott

                       Weimann

             Wells            Conway

 

Williams as a 'front sweeper', can't remember what game it was last season or earlier this one but he had one of his best games for us in that position. Halfway between a CB and a CDM so can bring the ball out, press but also slot into a back 3/5. Interestingly, it's what I thought Naismith was bought into do but he seems to sweep behind the other defenders as opposed to in front....

Don't want to pick Sykes, would rather have Scott out there but can't afford to lose him in midfield, I want Weimann in the position he scored 20 goals in last season so by default leaves us with Sykes... Pring deserves a shot in his more comfortable postion after some excellent showings at CB, if Atkinson isn't fit then Pring slots into CB with a desperately out of form/poor (let you decide...) JD in front.

Think it gives us enough physicality, structure and pace to give it a go on Saturday. 

[Sheltons Army]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Your correct that there is a trade off in skills and attributes. That's true of any position on the pitch - just look at the Bentley/O'Leary discussion!

For me the concern I have is less about the WB moving up the pitch with the ball and more about moving back down it. I think all our WB options are adept at moving forward (what they do with the ball once they are in the attacking their is a different matter). However specifically at RWB only Weimann, and Scott to a lesser extent, have shown me that they have the discipline to a) not advance when it's too dangerous and b) drop back quickly enough to assist the CBs when it inevitably goes to pot up front.

I don't doubt Williams' enthusiasm, but I do doubt his discipline and fitness through 90 minutes.

I appreciate your opinion on Williams, and perhaps of the mood was better then experimenting with Williams at RWB would be something I could agree with.

But right now I'm going with the proven professional reliability of Weimann.

It’s a fair argument EA , especially discipline and fitness capability and I take on board yours and @GrahamCs view.

He would certainly need to be disciplined and possibly unambitious positionally 

It was an alternative , best left to the Coaching staff , who don’t seem to have considered it , which probably indicates they agree with you ! 

[Davefevs]

18 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

It’s a fair argument EA , especially discipline and fitness capability and I take on board yours and @GrahamCs view.

He would certainly need to be disciplined and possibly unambitious positionally 

It was an alternative , best left to the Coaching staff , who don’t seem to have considered it , which probably indicates they agree with you ! 

The issue for Williams is having to make 50-60yd lung-busters throughout the game or should I call them hamstring-busters!

[ExiledAjax]

23 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

It’s a fair argument EA , especially discipline and fitness capability and I take on board yours and @GrahamCs view.

He would certainly need to be disciplined and possibly unambitious positionally 

It was an alternative , best left to the Coaching staff , who don’t seem to have considered it , which probably indicates they agree with you ! 

Always nice to have a civil discussion about positioning and players. My last word is simply that after this game I hope neither Williams not Weimann ever have to play RWB for us again.

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The issue for Williams is having to make 50-60yd lung-busters throughout the game or should I call them hamstring-busters!

Yes.

[Davefevs]

16 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Always nice to have a civil discussion about positioning and players. My last word is simply that after this game I hope neither Williams not Weimann ever have to play RWB for us again.

Yes.

Is that because you see Weimann as a goalscoring LWB

[ExiledAjax]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Is that because you see Weimann as a goalscoring LWB

Wasn't he technically playing WB when he scored that cracker against Cardiff? Could swear at least a couple of the 23 he scored last season were scored from WB.

Honestly if we could clone the bloke 10 times and play him in every position I think we'd be solidly mid table.

[GrahamC]

10 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Wasn't he technically playing WB when he scored that cracker against Cardiff? Could swear at least a couple of the 23 he scored last season were scored from WB.

Honestly if we could clone the bloke 10 times and play him in every position I think we'd be solidly mid table.

You don’t subscribe to the view previously articulated that he “just runs around” & is “almost stealing a living”, then?

[Sheltons Army]

41 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The issue for Williams is having to make 50-60yd lung-busters throughout the game or should I call them hamstring-busters!

Yes , probably the strongest argument against !

 

[bbew]

If we play 3 at the back we look suspect defending the flanks.

If we play 4 at the back, we get dominated in the middle of the park.

If we play very attacking we actually attack less as we cannot create little and the attackers do not get the ball.

If we play more defensive we defend worse as we invite pressure.

Do other clubs have such problems!?

Edited November 11, 2022 by bbew

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, bbew said:

If we play 3 at the back we look suspect defending the flanks.

If we play 4 at the back, we get dominated in the middle of the park.

If we play very attacking we actually attack less as we cannot create little and the attackers do not get the ball.

If we play more defensive we defend worse as we invite pressure.

Do other clubs have such problems!?

I think what you’re really trying to say is that we need to play 1-8-1

[1960maaan]

Our problems are injuries stacking up, well injuries and suspension. 
We have Klose, Atkinson and Vyner as CB options, I think Low will be left out.
We have Vyner and then MF's or strikers as options.
We have King, James, Williams, Scott, Massengo and Kadji, as MF options.

Maybe it's time to tweak the system.

Playing a back 4;
Vyner - Klose - Atkinson - Pring

James as a shield 

Scott and Williams CMF

With the usual Wiemann behind Wells & Conway.

The problem with this is Klose looks out of favour (or not trusted). You could move Pring inside, but DaSilva IMO is not a FB.
I have a feeling, short of Naismith or Kalas to suddenly do a Lazarus, we will do another "make do and mend". Scott WB, James & Williams MF & the 3 CB's being Vyner/klose/Atkinson.

[LondonBristolian]

13 hours ago, Chivs said:

By a country mile, Bentley is a better goalkeeper than O'Leary.

Overall, I think Bentley is a better goalkeeper. But he wasn't in form when he got dropped and I don't think any manager would command on a rule that everyone gets picked on merit except one player who gets picked irrespective of how he plays.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bentley got back in before the end of the season but I don't think there's anything wrong or embarrassing about that. So far, Bentley has lost the shirt because he was out of form and O'Leary has kept the shirt because he has played well since he came in. Regardless of who is "better", O'Leary has the shirt because he is putting better performances in at the moment. To be honest, that's how I feel team selections should work. 

[spudski]

21 minutes ago, bbew said:

If we play 3 at the back we look suspect defending the flanks.

If we play 4 at the back, we get dominated in the middle of the park.

If we play very attacking we actually attack less as we cannot create little and the attackers do not get the ball.

If we play more defensive we defend worse as we invite pressure.

Do other clubs have such problems!?

Four at the back doesn't mean we will get dominated in the middle.

It also doesn't mean we can't use 'flying' full backs. 

You just have to move according to situations on the pitch. 

I'd say we have the players at our disposal to play 433 in an affective manner and be less prone to conceding, without losing our effectiveness at creating scoring opportunities.

This link is very easy to understand. And is written in layman's terms that fans can understand, rather than in coaching manual mode.

It's worth a read.

 https://fieldinsider.com/4-3-3-formation/#:~:text=The 4-3-3 is a great formation if you,ball high up the pitch.

 

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, LondonBristolian said:

Overall, I think Bentley is a better goalkeeper. But he wasn't in form when he got dropped and I don't think any manager would command on a rule that everyone gets picked on merit except one player who gets picked irrespective of how he plays.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bentley got back in before the end of the season but I don't think there's anything wrong or embarrassing about that. So far, Bentley has lost the shirt because he was out of form and O'Leary has kept the shirt because he has played well since he came in. Regardless of who is "better", O'Leary has the shirt because he is putting better performances in at the moment. To be honest, that's how I feel team selections should work. 

I would’ve agreed with you 1 month ago.  But…I think the O’Leary we’ve seen since PNE on 12th Oct is a different keeper to the one we’ve seen previously.  But as you say we need to see longer term evidence that this isn’t one keeper out of form and one keeper in form, and the incline / decline back to their “normal levels”.  Max does look like he knows this is it for him, and so far he’s proved as much.  But a long season ahead.

[GrahamC]

36 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Our problems are injuries stacking up, well injuries and suspension. 
We have Klose, Atkinson and Vyner as CB options, I think Low will be left out.
We have Vyner and then MF's or strikers as options.
We have King, James, Williams, Scott, Massengo and Kadji, as MF options.

Maybe it's time to tweak the system.

Playing a back 4;
Vyner - Klose - Atkinson - Pring

James as a shield 

Scott and Williams CMF

With the usual Wiemann behind Wells & Conway.

The problem with this is Klose looks out of favour (or not trusted). You could move Pring inside, but DaSilva IMO is not a FB.
I have a feeling, short of Naismith or Kalas to suddenly do a Lazarus, we will do another "make do and mend". Scott WB, James & Williams MF & the 3 CB's being Vyner/klose/Atkinson.

I’ll be absolutely amazed if Klose is in the starting 11 tomorrow.

Pearson as much as named him post match as someone who didn’t help Low out when he struggled midweek, he also kept King on instead of him & moved him into the back 3, then the “players I can trust” comment yesterday.

Think he could be on his way in January, either back to Switzerland or by a mutual cancellation of the rest of his deal.

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

You don’t subscribe to the view previously articulated that he “just runs around” & is “almost stealing a living”, then?

Not quite no.

[1960maaan]

16 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

I’ll be absolutely amazed if Klose is in the starting 11 tomorrow.

Pearson as much as named him post match as someone who didn’t help Low out when he struggled midweek, he also kept King on instead of him & moved him into the back 3, then the “players I can trust” comment yesterday.

Think he could be on his way in January, either back to Switzerland or by a mutual cancellation of the rest of his deal.

I agree,  but we are very thin on the ground and a back 2/3 form King, Pring, Vyner , Atkinson and Low Vs Watford would be a worry .

We don't have a fit RB , so that would mean Atkinson & Pring with Vyner RB in a 4. Or we go Pring, Atkinson & Vyner and play someone out of position at WB. Nothing is ideal.

[Mendip City]

18 hours ago, Son of Fred said:

If fit zero chance Naismith or Kalas would be risked pre break ....

Would be insanity to do so.

Agree

unless, of course, you felt your job was on the line…

[The Fat Controller]

Any right backs ready to be promoted from the youth team?

[tin]

21 hours ago, Cityboy1954 said:

No im hoping Tanner is the answer at RB he likes a tackle and can get forward  williams not the player i thought we had an Dasilva struggles to get the ball above head height . Were in a mess back there at moment .

I like Tanner but he’s banned tomorrow, so he ain’t an option. I agree Williams hasn’t lived up to expectations, but he’s still a good option as proved at WBA. Also agree on Dasilva but we have no other choice if Klose’s out of form and Kalas is injured; Pring therefore has to play in back three (I think his best position is LW or further up the pitch) 

Edited November 11, 2022 by tin

[Cityboy1954]

2 minutes ago, tin said:

I like Tanner but he’s banned tomorrow, so he ain’t an option. I agree Williams hasn’t lived up to expectations, but he’s still a good option as proved at WBA. Also agree on Dasilva but we have no other choice if Klose out of form and Kalas is injured; Pring has to play in back three (I think his best position is LW or further up the pitch) 

Agreed

[italian dave]

On 10/11/2022 at 16:59, HappyClapper said:

It’s amazing how good some players become when they’re not in the team.

Probably a reflection of how badly other players perform when they are in the team.

[italian dave]

On 10/11/2022 at 19:17, Chivs said:

I'm of the old-fashioned opinion that the manager should pick his best team.  Do you not recall the last time Pearson kept picking O'Leary until he went back to Bentley?

Embarrassing.

I've certainly decided that Pearson should go, like many Bristol City fans who don't wear rose-tinted glasses.  The rest of your post is unfair and unfounded.

If he picks

Bentley

Vyner Klose Atkinson

Semenyo Massengo Scott Pring

Weimann

Conway Wells

 

then I will not criticise him even if we lose 0-4.

I’m not getting into the “embarrassing” comments, cos that’s your view and fair enough.

But I’ve got a question and a couple of comments.

Were you at Middlesbrough?
Because if you were, and you think Pearson should be picking his best team, then I honestly don’t understand how you can drop O’Leary. He was in the form of his life then. 

And because with that side you either have inside information that Watford aren’t going to play anyone down their left side at all, or your objective is a 10-9 win! 

However: agree we need to keep the Conway Wells partnership up front. That works, and I don’t understand why we keep changing it. Pring left side agree too - tho I suspect he’ll be in the back 3 if that’s how we set up. And yes Id like to see Massengo’s energy in a midfield 3 but I don’t think we will. 

[Davefevs]

My side, assumes Atkinson fit, not necessarily what Nige will do:

O’Leary

Vyner Atkinson Pring

Weimann Scott James Williams Semenyo 

Wells Conway

i think it gets our best available players on the pitch.  Semenyo over Dasilva (despite Semenyo’s poor showing on Tuesday, Dasilva was no better btw), and also has a bit of power and pace to it.  If Sarr plays and swaps wings I’d play Semenyo on his side.

Zak - don’t play narrow.

If Atkinson isn’t fit, then I think we might see the “front sweeper” - either King or Williams. If it’s Williams, then King comes into the midfield.

Its not easy typing in a straight jacket!!!

[italian dave]

10 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

My side, assumes Atkinson fit, not necessarily what Nige will do:

O’Leary

Vyner Atkinson Pring

Weimann Scott James Williams Semenyo 

Wells Conway

i think it gets our best available players on the pitch.  Semenyo over Dasilva (despite Semenyo’s poor showing on Tuesday, Dasilva was no better btw), and also has a bit of power and pace to it.  If Sarr plays and swaps wings I’d play Semenyo on his side.

Zak - don’t play narrow.

If Atkinson isn’t fit, then I think we might see the “front sweeper” - either King or Williams. If it’s Williams, then King comes into the midfield.

Its not easy typing in a straight jacket!!!

That’s what my money would be on Dave.

Weimann right made things a lot better for the final 15 mins first half last week. I still can’t work out why we switched him back to the left for the second half.

King seems to be the ‘emergency’ CB when necessary. 

So, who does that leave for the subs bench?!

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, italian dave said:

That’s what my money would be on Dave.

Weimann right made things a lot better for the final 15 mins first half last week. I still can’t work out why we switched him back to the left for the second half.

King seems to be the ‘emergency’ CB when necessary. 

So, who does that leave for the subs bench?!

Good Q!

Bentley

Sykes

Dasilva

Massengo

King

Martin

Bell

(I wouldn’t include Low nor Kadji, and Klose’s age may well’ve caught up with him). Woukd be helpful if Kalas was available.

[marmite]

I really think we might see Lo

w again today. He was badly isolated and exposed by Sykes and Klose midweek and all 3 were rightly subbed. It may not gave been good for his confidence on Tuesday but it would be a massive boost to his confidence today if Nige put him back in. The comments about trusting players were not imo aimed at Low but more at the players around him.

Tough selection job for Nige today but it's what he's well paid for.