November 18, 2017, 04:18:34 PM

Author Topic: Everton v Stoke City  (Read 32633 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

December 01, 2011, 07:48:19 PM
Reply #30
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
You read my mind Blargs. I would love to see this although I'd be amazed if Moyes actually did it. I think Moyes should give the 4-4-2 a go at least once. Our 4-2-3-1 doesn't suit our players too much.

We do play 4-4-2; it's just Cahill is one of the 2.

He's often further forward than Saha.

December 01, 2011, 07:52:51 PM
Reply #31
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
I agree that I wouldn't wanna see us play that way, just saying if we did resort to long balls like we seem to have done quite a bit this season, I'd fancy our chances more if we had 2 big fellas with aerial ability rather than a low on confidence Saha. Hopefully we do try and play some proper football against them cos they are a bunch of yard dogs.

I don't think Stoke have bigger players at the back than most other teams to be honest, their CBs are pretty much standard size for the PL. So I wouldn't see any long balls being any more futile than against anyone else, certainly not to consider Straq ahead of either Cahill or Saha. Nor Vellios for that matter given how he did against Hangeland.

December 01, 2011, 08:34:36 PM
Reply #32
Offline

American Evertonian


We do play 4-4-2; it's just Cahill is one of the 2.

He's often further forward than Saha.

To me it seems it is more a 4-4-1-1 or when Cahill does drop back a 4-2-3-1. Granted I could very well be wrong as I have a relatively young football mind. I will agree that in the last two matches it is Saha who has dropped back more than Cahill. We have gotten 2 wins in the last 2 with that formation so I can't argue with the results.
A ship is safe in the harbor, but that's not what ships are for.


December 01, 2011, 10:25:03 PM
Reply #33
Offline

GLewis

NSNO Subscriber
To me it seems it is more a 4-4-1-1 or when Cahill does drop back a 4-2-3-1. Granted I could very well be wrong as I have a relatively young football mind. I will agree that in the last two matches it is Saha who has dropped back more than Cahill. We have gotten 2 wins in the last 2 with that formation so I can't argue with the results.

Well, you're right in that one of them usually drops off, either Saha to get the ball or Cahill when we are defending.

But that would happen if we had 2 (in name) strikers playing, or at least it should do. That's just natural movement of the team during a game.

Otherwise, if the listed formation was based on where players go during a game we'd be playing 3-5-2 or 3-6-1 given how much time Baines is in the opposition half.

December 02, 2011, 01:39:56 AM
Reply #34
Offline

American Evertonian


All fair points. In all reality I would like to see us with 2 actual strikers on the pitch. I do love Cahill, but he is not a striker although he might as well be with how much Moyes plays him up there.
A ship is safe in the harbor, but that's not what ships are for.

December 02, 2011, 01:41:59 AM
Reply #35
Offline

Optimistic Blue


I think Stoke are badly shite to be honest

This is the perfect game for the Stracq to get his form running

4-0, 3 in a row, onward and upward
you cant take the right out of Kenwright


December 02, 2011, 03:20:46 AM
Reply #36
Offline

Big Al


This is the perfect game for the Stracq to get his form running

I think you need to change your name to Off my head on crack blue with that statement   :snigger:,
seriously wish it was but he's just not good enough im afraid ! 
“There is something magical about this club that captures you the minute you step into Goodison – and it doesn’t let you go.”

December 02, 2011, 05:00:27 AM
Reply #37
Offline

billbones80


I don't think we've seen enough to know whether he's good enough or not.I'd like to see him get some mins.

December 02, 2011, 05:49:09 AM
Reply #38
Offline

blargins

NSNO Subscriber
All fair points. In all reality I would like to see us with 2 actual strikers on the pitch. I do love Cahill, but he is not a striker although he might as well be with how much Moyes plays him up there.

I think that has completely nullified him.

As an attacking midfielder his goal scoring ratio was good. As a striker, it's mediocre.
"All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you."
- Walt Disney

December 02, 2011, 02:30:02 PM
Reply #39
Online

Silas

NSNO Subscriber
I think that has completely nullified him.

As an attacking midfielder his goal scoring ratio was good. As a striker, it's mediocre.

He has to lead the line with Saha in the team as Saha does so little attacking the ball or defenders.  His game is off because he can't arrive in the box late.  When Vellios plays he is the most advanced man, even just this is enough for me to think Saha and Cahill shouldn't be playing together.

December 02, 2011, 03:31:42 PM
Reply #40
Offline

nomorechang

RIP
A lot of Cahill's goals have come from set pieces ie crosses from free kicks and corners which in all honesty it doesnt matter what position he's chosen to play in .His goal drought has been from when he returned injured from the Asian cup tournament . I would not be surprised to see Landon given the " 2nd striker " job in January and Cahill being used more as an impact sub which I think would suit him much better . The 'impact ' he made when coming on against City at home last season actually changed the game and I think the last thing tiring defenders want to see in the last 20 minutes of a game is a nemesis like Tim C warming up to torment them .
Once Everton has touched you nothing will be the same"
Alan Ball

" Notoriously shy and laconic off the field, Dean's quotes are sparse. He is reputed to have said to an over-enthusiastic marker 'I'm going for a pee. You coming?' "

December 02, 2011, 10:52:10 PM
Reply #41
Offline

American Evertonian


Donovan is no striker. He will do no better at that role than Cahill. Donovan is a winger. I am so confused as to why so many people on this forum want to play him as a forward/striker. The solution to our problem is as someone stated earlier, if you want Cahill to play better we need Velios in to hold the line.
A ship is safe in the harbor, but that's not what ships are for.

December 03, 2011, 01:47:55 AM
Reply #42
Offline

nomorechang

RIP
Donovan is no striker. He will do no better at that role than Cahill. Donovan is a winger. I am so confused as to why so many people on this forum want to play him as a forward/striker. The solution to our problem is as someone stated earlier, if you want Cahill to play better we need Velios in to hold the line.
Doesnt really matter , Cahill is not a striker , both him and Donovan are goalscorers and at the moment Cahill has not been scoring goals , Donovan has . Its a trait of players that Moyes signs , they have to be adaptable and versatile and If Moyes thinks he can do a better job than Tim C then he'll use him in that role
Once Everton has touched you nothing will be the same"
Alan Ball

" Notoriously shy and laconic off the field, Dean's quotes are sparse. He is reputed to have said to an over-enthusiastic marker 'I'm going for a pee. You coming?' "

December 03, 2011, 04:57:53 AM
Reply #43
Offline

TheRam

NSNO Subscriber
If we start Vellios upfront with Saha we will win 3-0.

If he goes with Cahill and Saha upfront then 0-0 bore draw.

December 03, 2011, 05:17:00 AM
Reply #44
Offline

bluegrant


If we start Vellios upfront with Saha we will win 3-0.

If he goes with Cahill and Saha upfront then 0-0 bore draw.
Why does  every one pick saha as first choice up front? hes had his chances and not taken them.Shoundnt vellios start up front with timmy .I hope rodwell is fit again  and billy instead of osman well good for 3-0 win.