Paul-ee-oh why sat on the benchy?

[Boxer Blade]

Not questioning Lundstram, but you're comparing apples and oranges. Coutts is better than Baldock, so play him there. Coutts is better than O'Connell so play him there. See where this is going? Norwood and Coutts compete for the same position, just like Freeman and Baldock compete for the RWB position. Trying to shoehorn in players out of position tends to lead to problems.

Who's the orange and who's the Apple? I'm guessing lunny is the lemon?

 

[NotFallowfieldBlade]

Not questioning Lundstram, but you're comparing apples and oranges. Coutts is better than Baldock, so play him there. Coutts is better than O'Connell so play him there. See where this is going? Norwood and Coutts compete for the same position, just like Freeman and Baldock compete for the RWB position. Trying to shoehorn in players out of position tends to lead to problems.

Yes but coutts has played as an attacking midfielder a lot more , midfielders generally can play more positions , coutts should be playing instead of lundstram doesn’t matter what position

 

[snootyfenooty]

There's a lot of beating about the bush in this thread. Lundstram is rubbish, he's the worst player in the squad. If he'd stayed on the pitch United wouldn't have won that game. Which brings me on to playing Washington ahead of Sharp...

 

[LoughboroBlade]

I’ve heard he’s off to the MLS in the summer because he’s not starting enough games.

Sunderland are also interested.

Thanks for the memories Sha....Couttsy.

 

[coolhandluke]

As I wrote, Norwood has been an excellent signing. He needed to feel wanted, and the quality of his game was exactly what we missed since Coutts' injury. What Norwood's signing identified was exactly how difficult it is to sign a replacement for a key payer. Posters clamour for a goalscorer, as if they happen to be two a penny, so it is with someone like Coutts. He orchestrated our midfield, enabling Duffy and Fleck to contribute to our attacking play to an unusually high degree.

I'm not doubting Norwood's quality, I just think that Fleck is a better players when playing alongside Coutts. That's called chemistry, just as certain combinations work between the pairing of certain forwards, so the combination of Coutts, Duffy, and Fleck enabled the Blades to control opposing teams more often than not.

So who out of Coutts and Norwood plays when they're both fit ?

 

[Pinchy]

So who out of Coutts and Norwood plays when they're both fit ?

Both. I want our best players in the team. Let’s give two excellent players a chance to play together before deciding that they can’t...

 

[itsinyerblood]

So who out of Coutts and Norwood plays when they're both fit ?

Not my decision, all I said was that in my opinion Coutts inclusion seems to get the best out of Fleck.

No doubt Wilder has his reasons for the team he selects, so I'm happy to let CW make these decisions in the club's best interests.

 

[coolhandluke]

Both. I want our best players in the team. Let’s give two excellent players a chance to play together before deciding that they can’t...

I'm not so sure about that pinchy . More importantly though, I don't think Mr Wilder does either . I'd be more than happy to see it tried though even though I don't think it would have the desired effect .

 

[blade67]

Sorry for having an opinion.

Yes of course I was saying I'm a better manager than Wilder. Same as every person on here must think they are better managers than any football manager they have ever questioned.

In my view Coutts is better than Lundy. If you disagree then fine. I agree that Coutts is returning from serious injury, and that may be the reason he isnt being risked.

Have you ever disagreed with any decision Wilder has ever made?

I will never dare question the god that is lundy ever again.

personally, I'd like to see Coutts tried with Fleck and Ollie if Duffy needs a rest.

Not really sure what lundstram brings to the party apart from being 1/2 decent 5/6 choice in an injury crisis.

 

[Kevincarterversion2.0]

I think breaking his leg and having no pre-season might have something to do with it.

 

[coolhandluke]

Not my decision, all I said was that in my opinion Coutts inclusion seems to get the best out of Fleck.

No doubt Wilder has his reasons for the team he selects, so I'm happy to let CW make these decisions in the club's best interests.

I agree with the gist of what you're saying and it's not a bad conundrum for Wilder to have .

But I do feel Flecks ' relative ' loss of form has more to do with him being pushed into a more Duffyesque type position on the field of play . Whether or not that's more to do with specific instructions or Duffy being doubled up on by the opposition is something im not sure about .

 

[Pinchy]

I think breaking his leg and having no pre-season might have something to do with it.

He did what?...

 

[itsinyerblood]

I agree with the gist of what you're saying and it's not a bad conundrum for Wilder to have .

But I do feel Flecks ' relative ' loss of form has more to do with him being pushed into a more Duffyesque type position on the field of play . Whether or not that's more to do with specific instructions or Duffy being doubled up on by the opposition is something im not sure about .

Wilder has the luxury of watching players on a regular basis, and then there's always Knill's opinion that will add to CW's view of who plays. For anyone who's seen the videos of who Wilder chases when it comes to transfers, I'd imagine that the same thorough process is at work when it comes to team selection.

There can be many reasons why players appear to drop a level, even if it's temporary. All I know is that in Coutts, Duffy, and Fleck we possessed one of the great midfield's I've seen. Injury to Coutts disrupted that chemistry, but until this happened the three players already mentioned were playing to the same high standards that we'd grown accustomed to.

 

[Dellas Cowboys]

Not questioning Lundstram, but you're comparing apples and oranges. Coutts is better than Baldock, so play him there. Coutts is better than O'Connell so play him there. See where this is going? Norwood and Coutts compete for the same position, just like Freeman and Baldock compete for the RWB position. Trying to shoehorn in players out of position tends to lead to problems.

I'm liking your idea. Moore is good and we could play him as well as Henderson as a wing back.

 

[coolhandluke]

Wilder has the luxury of watching players on a regular basis, and then there's always Knill's opinion that will add to CW's view of who plays. For anyone who's seen the videos of who Wilder chases when it comes to transfers, I'd imagine that the same thorough process is at work when it comes to team selection.

There can be many reasons why players appear to drop a level, even if it's temporary. All I know is that in Coutts, Duffy, and Fleck we possessed one of the great midfield's I've seen. Injury to Coutts disrupted that chemistry, but until this happened the three players already mentioned were playing to the same high standards that we'd grown accustomed to.

True . But we're a year on from there and Duffys showing the signs more clearly than ever that he's in the twilight of his career . Will we ever see the the same form from the ' holy trinity ' again ? Probably not and that's a crying shame because when all 3 were on song they really were something special . I just get the feeling that IF, and it's a big IF, we get the replacement for Duffy I think we all now privately concede we need, Fleck will go to a different level again .

 

[Deadbat]

I'm not so sure about that pinchy . More importantly though, I don't think Mr Wilder does either . I'd be more than happy to see it tried though even though I don't think it would have the desired effect .

They tried it at Forest and weirdly we had no control of the game or midfield at all. Coutts played ahead of Norwood in more of a right side midfielder. Adkins played him in this role or more as a winger too and it never worked.

I think if it was me and we tried them together I'd put Coutts as the base/quarter back and Norwood further forward with Fleck the most advanced. I'd like them to try this with Duffy too. So almost like a diamond and just one up top. Sounds madness but think we would dominate midfield. Not score like but summat different!

 

[Ginger Gnome]

I don't think there's anything wrong in playing Lundstram if we're using the tactics of the first half yesterday or Brentford. The surrender possession, counter attack with Washington plan is a deliberate alternative to the usual Duffy-based possession-heavy tactics, and just slotting Coutts in there is just putting him in harms-way for a kicking, while Lundstram can cover more ground.

There's obviously no question of who the better player is, or if there's some other tactic we could use to get Coutts in the side, but for how we set up in the last couple of away games, Lundstram was the right choice to start.

 

[Sean Thornton]

They tried it at Forest and weirdly we had no control of the game or midfield at all. Coutts played ahead of Norwood in more of a right side midfielder. Adkins played him in this role or more as a winger too and it never worked.

I think if it was me and we tried them together I'd put Coutts as the base/quarter back and Norwood further forward with Fleck the most advanced. I'd like them to try this with Duffy too. So almost like a diamond and just one up top. Sounds madness but think we would dominate midfield. Not score like but summat different!

Sorry but this is association football. We don't and never have had a quarter back position, no matter how much pundits like to use the phrase.

 

[GreasyChipBeattie]

Shit thread, cracking title

 

[Rodley]

We weren't our normal selves first half, but we weren't intending to be. If we'd set up in our normal way and they'd done a Wednesday, parking the bus and we couldn't get in behind them, people would've moaned.

What we did was set up in two contrasting ways, designed to disrupt them and give us space to exploit behind them. Changing it second half, not directly at the kick off on 46th min from what i saw, again disrupted them.

Really good insight that. Can see Wilder going with a disruptive tactical change in the 46th minute. What a manager!

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Surely they can play together and better than Lundstrum played?

Ah no! Certain pairs of players cannot play together. I’ve read it on here before. They react badly to each other and cancel each other out. That’s the problem. It’s like a chemical thing. They just don’t mix.

Truth is, Coutts is nowhere near his best yet. Will take time.

 

[Sheff de party]

Ffs. Yeah we must play someone/anyone rather than that cunt lunny, even someone unfit and returning from serious injury whose not up to speed yet.
Also. Why are you questioning Wilders judgement? Are you a better manager or summat?

It is a discussion forum you know. And not saying this is one, but even managers as good as Wilder make mistakes.

 

[Snowman]

Lundstram did what he was told to do yesterday, and played alright for me (at least as well as the team as a whole, who were quite cautious in the first half) so it's a bit harsh on him.

Lundstram is a unit, and despite the curse of Lundstram that people think we have (even though he's started 2 and we've won them both recently) he's not a bad player when he's not having to impersonate Fleck or Coutts.

Coutts isn't quite there yet, but if he was I don't think Wilder would have started him there. Bash maybe would play there as SouthEssexBlade says, but Cranie hasn't got the game time either so we need Bash at RB.

Much as I am not a Lundstram fan, he is now playing in a role that I advocated he would be successful at. We don't play 442 where he would work effectively, but in our recent incarnation as an away team playing a holding game, he fulfils an important role.
GLTTL.

 

[SHOREHAMST.com]

There’s no doubting that Norwood adds something to our midfield but I also think something is missing with him as the “main man”. I honestly think he passes too much. The good stuff he does looks very nice on the eye but it’s his lack of desire to want to carry the ball, driving us forward.

He literally can’t wait to get rid of the ball but then wants it straight back. I get that’s his style - pass, move. It’s just frustrating to watch at times because he’s either reluctant or doesn’t see when space opens up in front of him, often favouring that extra pass when it’s not needed.

 

[Guesty]

I agree with the gist of what you're saying and it's not a bad conundrum for Wilder to have .

But I do feel Flecks ' relative ' loss of form has more to do with him being pushed into a more Duffyesque type position on the field of play . Whether or not that's more to do with specific instructions or Duffy being doubled up on by the opposition is something im not sure about .

I guess part of the reason Fleck is playing further forward is that Norwood plays deep. Very deep. And when pressured, his instinct is to drop even deeper. Against Birmingham he was practically picking the ball up on his own penalty spot. Coutts played deep too, of course, but I imagine his 'average position' was far further forward than Norwood's is.

 

[Houston_Blade]

What role was lundstrum playing yesterday?

This is a good question (well it would be if you spelt his name right). Lundstram didn't do a deal in the first half but I do agree with others that I'd rather not just use Coutts for the sake of using him, he needs to be played in his correct position. At the moment Norwood is doing that job pretty well. It might be counter-productive to have Coutts as a square peg in a round hole as he won't gain confidence from playing out of position and being asked to do the things he isn't good at.

Lundstram is the option we go to when we aren't that bothered about getting hold of the midfield and taking the game to the opponents. The Sky pundits called it correctly in that we effectively conceded the first half against Reading, fortunately they were shit and did nothing with the ball when they had it so it didn't hurt us. 2nd half it was back to normal and the trio of Fleck, Norwood and Duffy worked well. The game I'd have had Coutts on was the Rotherham game, when Norwood had a bit of a stinker, Coutts might have calmed us down a bit.

 

[SwissBlade]

Really good insight that. Can see Wilder going with a disruptive tactical change in the 46th minute. What a manager!

Ha ha I mean that first half we employed the disruptive tactic and we also employed it for the first few mins in the second half, not just the 46th minute

 

[Inter_blade83]

I'm confused as to why you think I would think playing a right back in centre midfield would be the same as playing a centre midfielder in centre midfield?

What position was lundy playing? Number 10 like Duffy? Genuine question. Is Lundy a number 10 Duffy replacement?

Was Fleck trying to be Duffy in the first half? Again genuine question.

Will Coutts never fit in with Norwood in the team?

I thought wilder went with three more solid like he did with Brentford away. Play more counter attack.

However, when he noticed reading were gash he made the switch.

Good management.

 

[IdLiketoRogerMoore]

Simply, we don't have enough good players to be leaving players like Coutts on the bench long term.

We've seen in the last few games the emergence of the system that will see him and Fleck flanking Norwood. Rightly so, Lundstram is having first crack in that role, but come the New Year Coutts will be starting in that role. I have no doubt.

With Washington showing the potential of that system when you have a mobile Number 9 who's prepared to make athletic runs in the channels, I think we're another athletic striker away from the next phase of evolution of 'Tufty Ball'.

I'm loving watching Tufty evolve as a coach this season. It's fascinating to watch the intricacies of his ideas and them taking shape.

 

[John Street West Terrace]

Coutts / Norwood play at back of midfield 3 as link between centre halves and Fleck / Duffy / Lunny .. I don’t think Coutts would fit in in front of Norwood..very similar players .. still it’ll keep Norwood on his toes as you have a very good replacement