More vital information from Colin
Here.
This tells a story and a half. Teams were walzing through our midfield like a pair of lovestruck ramblers in a country meadow. Think about what it’s saying: if Andreasen makes 12 interventions a game and (say) Steve Davis makes four, that’s eight occasions where someone else has to step in. That someone else is probably going to have to come from the back four. This is a problem because a) the intervention will now be nearer our goal, b) it might not be successful, and c) doing this pulls the defence out of position. Great stuff, Colin!
Andreasen and Hangeland are obscenely good signings for the price we paid. I am genuinely concerned that we’ll lose these guys upon relegation.
Those stats are really interesting. After Volz’s performance against ManU and the fact that Murphy again struggled to adjust to playing as a defensive mid (I maintain that Bullard, Dempsey and Murphy are the same player and that there should only be room for one of them in the side) I think we should go in with Andreasen and Volz in the middle. That would be one hell of a combative midfield and a great platform from which our attackers can play.
rjbiii
4 Mar 08 at 2:04 am
I think you’re exactly right, rjbiii, Volz and Andreasen would appear to be the platform we need. I would doubt they’ll leave that soon though. Neither signed expecting to be in the European places, and a three month stint would seem rather short, quality player or not.
Very disappointing that a post about whether an un-named stranger thinks Clint Dempsey can cross gets a lot more attention than this superb piece of digging by Colin. (shrugs)
weltmeisterclaude
4 Mar 08 at 12:13 pm
Andreasen and Volz would seem to be a natural fit for the 4-2-3-1 tactics we’ve been playing. I really do appreciate what Danny Murphy brings, but I think his best asset (passing) is somewhat negated when he’s played that far back. We could conceivably play Bullard on the right, and then be able to fit two of Bullard/Murphy/Dempsey on the pitch. That leaves out Simon Davies, but it also brings us into “good problem to have” territory.
Personally, I’d prefer to use two true wingers. That means Davies and Bouazza, along with one of the 3-headed attacking-midfield monster:
—————————-Niemi————————–
Stalteri—-Hughes—-Hangeland—-Konchesky
—————-Andreasen——Volz——————-
Davies—Bullard/Murphy/Dempsey—Bouazza
—————insert striker otd here——————
Re: losing players if we’re relegated - if we do somehow qualify for the UEFA Cup by winning this Fair Play league, would that convince a few otherwise-deserters into staying?
Colin
4 Mar 08 at 1:06 pm
I don’t think we’d lose Hangeland, Andreasen, or Johnson upon relegation. I think they’re goning to be committed to Hodgson. I also don’t think we’d lose most of our NI contingent since most of them are CCC players anyhow. Steve Davis may be the exception.
Of the “regulars” on the side right now, I think, as a minimum, we’d lose Stalteri, Konchesky, Davies, Bullard, Dempsey, Murphy, and Smertin to transfers, and McBride, Kasey, and two or three others to retirement. Boca might stay with us — and in Europe through 2010 — since being in the CCC won’t hurt his international chances.
I don’t see us bouncing right back up because I don’t see us paying the wages necessary to keep a good side together for the fight back. We’re already one of the lowest-paying sides; I honestly see us cutting back and bouncing between the CCC and L1 for the next dozen or so years.
HatterDon
4 Mar 08 at 1:39 pm
No doubt at all that Andreasen and Hangeland were excellent acquisitions.
The trouble is that we have no true replacement for Andreasen. Although Volz puts in bags of effort in midfield, he doesn`t have the skill to hold on to the ball or to make enough good passes. He makes it worse by trying to run at players and weave past them. He lost the ball countless times on Saturday by trying to do too much. Andreasen sticks to what he is good at - tackling and playing simple passes.e
Wing Half
4 Mar 08 at 6:38 pm
Colin: Good to see someone else agreeing with the Bullard/Murphy/Dempsey three-headed monster. I’ve been banging that drum for some time. I’m a big fan of Hodgson but two things have annoyed me: (1) his poor use of a strong bench during games; (2) his persistence with all three of those guys even after stating when he came in that the team was too similar. Those guys and the lack of height were the main reasons the team was too similar. He corrected one, but didn’t correct the other.
You team is basically what I’d like. However, I think Davies and Kamara should rotate depending on the game (venue, opposition, etc.).
———————————————-
HatterDon: So long as Mo sticks around there’s no way we bounce around between the championship and league one for the next dozen years. The reason why not is for the very reason that you argue we will: namely our low wages. The teams that struggle when they drop do so almost every time because of high wages. Forest, Wednesday, Leeds, Saints and the Hammers (initially) are all examples of this. The teams that succeed are the ones that have wage levels compatible with their club size (just look at the Championship this season). The problem for us is that our low wages now are still probably too high for a club our size (we are very small), so we will be in trouble if Mo goes. But if he doesn’t we’ll be in good shape.
I agree with all of the players that you’ve said we’ll lose with the exception of Dempsey who hasn’t proven himself enough to move I suspect. If we keep everyone else we’ll have a first team that looks like this: Niemi; Omozusi, Hangeland, Hughes, Baird; Andreasen, Volz, Dempsey; Bouazza, Johnson/Nevland, Kamara. That team should piss on most of the Championship and certainly will do if we are able to get a couple of others in or promote young players to strengthen the squad.
rjbiii
4 Mar 08 at 8:27 pm
WMC: “Very disappointing that a post about whether an un-named stranger thinks Clint Dempsey can cross gets a lot more attention than this superb piece of digging by Colin. (shrugs)”
That comment made my day! I don’t know if you ever read the Guardian’s online sport pages. But they have been reduced to nothing more than mouth pieces for the top four teams and Newcastle seemingly because of their obsession with getting as many comments as possible to each article. As I said a while back you could have done the same by running endless stories about Clint, Johnson, Boca and Co but that would’ve drowned out the very strength of this cite: the fact that it consistently posts some of the most thought-provoking pieces available, not only about Fulham, but about football more generally. Keep it up! (And merge with Colin’s Championship at Best — if we go down that name will be somewhat redundant anyway!)
rjbiii
4 Mar 08 at 8:41 pm