Samir or Lundstram? Or neither?

[blader]

Basham in midfield and Boldock at right back when fit

Got to be

 

[LJBlade]

Got to be

Because Basham is the ball playig midfielder we’re apparently now missing?

 

[thehet]

Got to be

Negative. We need someone to take the ball off the defence otherwise they pass it sideways like England do. Coutts was excellent at it. Basham would not be. Lundstram can do it but needs a run of games to get it going. Basham should only go in midfield when we have 3 in there like at the Pigs.

 

[Snowman]

I knew it would have been his fault somehow. You must have watched a different game to me. Watch the build up to our second goal and tell me how he ‘almost got there’.

Sorry, we all see things differently. I was actually looking at him from the point of view of his defensive capabilities. I will, as you suggest look at the second goal again. I was actually on the south stand concourse watching that on the television when it went in so I probably missed the build up being in the bog.

 

[blader]

Because Basham is the ball playig midfielder we’re apparently now missing?

No he isn't. But no one is.

However, I don't believe we would concede 5 at home with Basham in front of the defence

On top of this, it brings Baldock back who is, by far, a better wingback than Basham is.

Makes perfect sense to do this, in my opinion.

 

[s4-blade]

Lundstram was excellent.

Don’t even bother replying with your agendas.

 

[LJBlade]

No he isn't. But no one is.

However, I don't believe we would concede 5 at home with Basham in front of the defence

On top of this, it brings Baldock back who is, by far, a better wingback than Basham is.

Makes perfect sense to do this, in my opinion.

Ah so it was all Lundstram’s fault that we conceded 5? Did he tell CCV to pass it to their striker for the first and to not mark his man for the 3rd?

 

[NotFallowfieldBlade]

Lundstram was excellent.

Don’t even bother replying with your agendas.

Surely you cant be serious , nothing against lundstram no agenda but he is slow on the ball and cannot drive with the ball from deep. Just because he is the same size as coutts doesnt mean he should replace him.

We've got to play carruthers in that position he did it for mk dons and looks class on the ball as he showed tonight.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Ah so it was all Lundstram’s fault that we conceded 5? Did he tell CCV to pass it to their striker for the first and to not mark his man for the 3rd?

This is a marmite debate, Lundstram is no Coutts we all know that, he does some things well but what's missing is tempo with his passing, he simply can't do that.

Drop Duffy to deep midfield, he's the best passer we have outside of Coutts & Fleck and play Brooks in his role.

 

[blader]

Ah so it was all Lundstram’s fault that we conceded 5? Did he tell CCV to pass it to their striker for the first and to not mark his man for the 3rd?

Erm, what does that have to do with any of my post? Are you just trying to pick an argument because we lost?

Very odd reply.

 

[Hodgesleftpeg]

Lundstram was excellent.

Don’t even bother replying with your agendas.

I'm with you on that..

His challenge, when they were clear, to help set up Leon's 2nd goal was .superb.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Lundstram MIGHT be the answer, but not playing the way Coutts used to.

This was my fear - getting Lundstram to play that Coutts role - sorry, it's an impossible task.

To play Lundstram we have to change our style slightly to accommodate.

Not sure Sami is the answer either - but asking Lundstram to try and do what he did tonight is plain daft - no matter how many games he gets.

UTB

 

[LJBlade]

This is a marmite debate, Lundstram is no Coutts we all know that, he does some things well but what's missing is tempo with his passing, he simply can't do that.

Drop Duffy to deep midfield, he's the best passer we have outside of Coutts & Fleck and play Brooks in his role.

You can’t just play Duffy at defensive midfield because he’s good at passing the ball. He has little defensive capabilities, plus we’d be losing his attacking influence

 

[LJBlade]

Erm, what does that have to do with any of my post? Are you just trying to pick an argument because we lost?

Very odd reply.

You said that we wouldn’t have conceded 5 if Basham has played in front of the defence, insinuating that we had conceded 5 because Lundstram was there. As per my last comment, how do you think he should have stopped the 1st and 3rd goals?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

You can’t just play Duffy at defensive midfield because he’s good at passing the ball. He has little defensive capabilities, plus we’d be losing his attacking influence

Why not? Iv'e seen him track back 60 yards and make top tackles and he can pass at tempo and dictate the pace, Lundy cannot do this. The attacking side can come from Carruthers or Brooks.

 

[blader]

You said that we wouldn’t have conceded 5 if Basham has played in front of the defence, insinuating that we had conceded 5 because Lundstram was there. As per my last comment, how do you think he should have stopped the 1st and 3rd goals?

If you isolate occasions on goals and go 'how is that Lundstram's fault?' Then you are naive.

No one would ever say that. Errors happen. However, would Fulham have been able to control the ball so much by having Bash in midfield? Would we have created more with Baldock at RWB rather than Basham?

The truth is, we don't know. However, I don't think it's a ridiculous suggestion to move Bash inside and have Baldock back at RWB so I don't see why you're so against it? IT seems to have really touched a nerve and I'm not sure why!

I haven't said Lunstram was shit or anything negative about him at all. I do, however, agree with the post about the proposed changes to the team. If you don't, fine, but I do suspect youve overreacted somewhat!

 

[LJBlade]

Why not? Iv'e seen him track back 60 yards and make top tackles and he can pass at tempo and dictate the pace, Lundy cannot do this. The attacking side can come from Carruthers or Brooks.

So tracking back occasionally is the same as playing the entire game in a defensive position?

 

[McGrath]

I thought Lundstram did well. Apart from a few Hollywood passes that didn't come off in the first half.

He's not going to do what Coutts did, but then and again Lundstram made some thumping tackles and one some headers that Coutts wouldn't have made.

There's stuff that over time he might start doing like keeping it simple and being more available in the final 3rd, but that's gonna take some coaching

 

[Adiroy]

Think the only player on the books who could copy the coutts role would be lundstram, tried to fill it today.. coming back and taking it off the defenders and trying to spread it out! A few games under his belt could do him some good aswell! Also like said above... that tackle!

Samir is too attacking for me, the type of player what could replace duffy when injured/late on. Drifts by players and looks good on the ball, just dont think hes the type of player to come back and try and take control of it all.

 

[LJBlade]

If you isolate occasions on goals and go 'how is that Lundstram's fault?' Then you are naive.

No one would ever say that. Errors happen. However, would Fulham have been able to control the ball so much by having Bash in midfield? Would we have created more with Baldock at RWB rather than Basham?

The truth is, we don't know. However, I don't think it's a ridiculous suggestion to move Bash inside and have Baldock back at RWB so I don't see why you're so against it? IT seems to have really touched a nerve and I'm not sure why!

I haven't said Lunstram was shit or anything negative about him at all. I do, however, agree with the post about the proposed changes to the team. If you don't, fine, but I do suspect youve overreacted somewhat!

You’ve not touched any nerves, I was fully expecting Lundstram to get the blame by some on here. You’ve blamed Lundstram for us conceding 5 because he’s currently scape goat number one and you’ve seemingly done so without considering the impact other players had.

Would Fulham have dominated midfield as much? I don’t see what Basham would have done differently or better than Lundstram. As I asked before. Who would have played our passing game with Basham in there? Who would have dropped deep to get it from the defence? Lundstram did a good job of that tonight.

 

[McGrath]

Think the only player on the books who could copy the coutts role would be lundstram, tried to fill it today.. coming back and taking it off the defenders and trying to spread it out! A few games under his belt could do him some good aswell! Also like said above... that tackle!

Samir is too attacking for me, the type of player what could replace duffy when injured/late on. Drifts by players and looks good on the ball, just dont think hes the type of player to come back and try and take control of it all.

I think we might need to play a bit different with Lundstram. But it might be a case of Duffy and Fleck getting used to him as well

 

[blader]

You’ve not touched any nerves, I was fully expecting Lundstram to get the blame by some on here. You’ve blamed Lundstram for us conceding 5 because he’s currently scape goat number one and you’ve seemingly done so without considering the impact other players had.

Would Fulham have dominated midfield as much? I don’t see what Basham would have done differently or better than Lundstram. As I asked before. Who would have played our passing game with Basham in there? Who would have dropped deep to get it from the defence? Lundstram did a good job of that tonight.

Fine, you think he did a good job. I think having a more defensive minded player in there would have benefited us. We scored 4 and lost, clearly attack wasn't the problem, it was defending our goal. I think we'd be better next game having Basham in there, with the extra bonus of having a better RWB out there.

There's a huge difference between scapegoating and having a different opinion. Personally, I think you're looking to call someone's out on scapegoating Lundstram, when I have done nothing of the sort. Thinking we should replace Lundstram with Basham isn't scapegoating, it's having an opinion.

 

[snootyfenooty]

There's no point blaming Lundstram, it was a comedy of errors at the back which cost us. But Lundstram aint good enough. And Carruthers can't cover for Coutts - Duffy maybe, but that's a different role altogether. So that leaves us with Basham but that will give us a more defensive shape and that's not the answer either. A proper conundrum for CW to sort out is this one.

 

[Foody]

Lundstram was far from the worst player today he was better than: CCV, Wright, Bash, Enda, Duffy and Sharp. Only Clarke and JOC were noticeably better, perhaps Fleck marginally so. Our wing backs struggled, defence made a number of errors and Fulham played some really good stuff at times.

Onwards and upwards, for me 1 chchange on Saturday: Baldock (if fit) in for either CCV or Wright. No need to panic, We made mistakes against a team who's league position belies their quality.

 

[LJBlade]

Fine, you think he did a good job. I think having a more defensive minded player in there would have benefited us. We scored 4 and lost, clearly attack wasn't the problem, it was defending our goal. I think we'd be better next game having Basham in there, with the extra bonus of having a better RWB out there.

There's a huge difference between scapegoating and having a different opinion. Personally, I think you're looking to call someone's out on scapegoating Lundstram, when I have done nothing of the sort. Thinking we should replace Lundstram with Basham isn't scapegoating, it's having an opinion.

But would we have scored 4 with Basham in there?

I think you are scapegoating. The game had barely finished and straight away you were on here arguing that Lundstram should be dropped and that we wouldn’t have conceded 5 if he hadn’t played. We probably wouldn’t have conceded 5 if Basham had played right centre back instead of CCV. Can you point me in the direct of the thread where you’ve argued that CCV needs to be dropped? You probably can’t because instead of discussing who was really at fault for the loss tonight you’re blaming Lundstram instead.