Jump to content
IGNORED

Hill Is No Good At Left Back


dziekanowski

Recommended Posts

I agree because we played matty at centre back when he started but since butler has been here he plays at left back where it is a weak area if he plays there. Still if he is being told to play at left back i think someone at the club should encourage him to go forward and beat players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a 433 a full back is almost completely defensive so h is good at this, in a 442 where full backs arte expected to overlap Hill has more problems with crossing etc.. so Woodman should be prefered, Bell is siply not good enough at defending to play in a 433!!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woodman doesn't exactly inspire me with confidence at the moment.

Hill is a much better defender than Woody and yesterday he played against a very good winger in Wade Elliot.

Hill is quicker and stronger than Woody and he didn't do bad job yesterday. He kept showing Elliot inside which was good because Elliot wasted several oppurtunities when coming in on his left foot.

I'm of the opinion that if Woodman would have yesterday he would have struggled big-time with the pace of Elliot.

I agree that when Bell is back he should play with Hill in the middle but for now Hill is the best option at left back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt Hill should stay as left back as Woodman is too light weight. Woodman is technically the better player by a mile but seems a pale shadow of the player he was when he had his run of games early last season. Remember Hill played most of last season as a left back and with Coles & Butler formed the tightest defence in the league. Not convinced yet about Jamie Smith who goal aside was shocking yesterday and will leave us playing with 10 men if he continues like he did yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Matt Hill debate again!! I've said it before and I'm afraid I still believe that he simply isn't good enough. Wholehearted/committed/die for the cause, yes but good enough, no. Matt Hill comes across as City through and through but he simply isn't up to it. His distribution is appalling for a left back and in the modern game the full back must be able to overlap and create an attacking option. Matt Hill is too small to play in the centre of defence where - as I've said in another post - we need a Matt Elliott type player, hard nosed old fashioned centre half, alongside Coles. I'm very rarely negative about our players but I think Matt Hill's level is probably somewhere like Exeter or Forest Green.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Matt Hill debate again!! I've said it before and I'm afraid I still believe that he simply isn't good enough. Wholehearted/committed/die for the cause, yes but good enough, no. Matt Hill comes across as City through and through but he simply isn't up to it. His distribution is appalling for a left back and in the modern game the full back must be able to overlap and create an attacking option. Matt Hill is too small to play in the centre of defence where - as I've said in another post - we need a Matt Elliott type player, hard nosed old fashioned centre half, alongside Coles. I'm very rarely negative about our players but I think Matt Hill's level is probably somewhere like Exeter or Forest Green.

I agree; There seems to be an element of 'the emperor's new clothes' about MH. Don't get me wrong, he is a solid defender, is better in the air than a man of his stature should be and is a decent enough pro. However, he needs to be because his distribution is truly appalling, and more often than not results in giving the ball back to the opposition, which is what I believe separates mid-table wannabees from promotion contenders.

He also looks the most nervous of all our players on the ball (i.e. he know's his passing is awful). I'm not doubting that he gives 100%, but we've had plenty of whole-hearted-but-ultimately-not-good-enough players in the past (anyone remember Liam Robinson? A poor mans Forlan!) who have come and gone, and I for one wouldnt be too disheartened if he moved on. In anycase,he certainly shouldnt be played left back.

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...