Cant Clyne and Chambers BOTH start?

[Jeff Le Taxi]

As its looking like we wont get the winger we are reportedly after, why dont we play Clyne and Chambers together, with Clyne as an out and out winger and as a crutch for Chambers when in trouble? Clyne seemed to turn the game around completely on Saturday and made it obvious we need pace down the flank.

[Lighthouse]

We don't play with 'out and out' wingers.

[Jeff Le Taxi]

Yet.

[Dig Dig]

We haven't properly been linked with many wingers. Our fullbacks are expected to provide width.

[mcbendy]

I'm not sure about starting but bringing one or other on to facilitate a tactical switch could be an option.

[Jeff Le Taxi]

According to lots of sources, Monk for example we have been actively seeking a winger.

[S-Clarke]

According to lots of sources, Monk for example we have been actively seeking a winger.

 

Depends the definition of a winger really, I don't think we're after an out and out wide man - that's for sure. We want someone who can play anywhere across the front 3, in between the lines etc. Pretty certain we won't be playing with out and out fixed wingers anytime soon.

[Jeff Le Taxi]

Didnt we make a 3m bid for Scott Sinclair? is he not a winger?

[Lallana's Left Peg]

Jesus Perez said something very interesting last night. He said players don't play in positions, they play from positions. On that basis it would appear anyone who starts out wide in the three behind the striker must be able to come infield and be comfortable - be that with or without the ball. That would appear to completely eliminate the view that we'll ever play traditional wingers in the first team at a senior level and may provide some insight as to why Puncheon was let go and found himself out of favour towards the end of last season.

[laughba]

I think Clyne is still considerably better than Chambers to be fair. Although Chambers seems an excellent prospect for the future.

[Jeff Le Taxi]

And dont we have one of the larger pitches in the premier league? thus suited to wing play? ....i know we play 50% of our games away.

[austsaint]

I think Clyne is still considerably better than Chambers to be fair. Although Chambers seems an excellent prospect for the future.

 

I do too. Although Chambers has looked full of promise....Clyne had a wonderful 12/13 at RB and surely would have started the season but for the injury.

[Jeff Le Taxi]

Equally good on the left if Saturday was anything to go by.

[austsaint]

Equally good on the left if Saturday was anything to go by.

 

True, but Shaw and Clyne were so good for us last season, I'd hate to see too much tinkering just to accommodate a lad like Chambers who doesn't look ready yet to genuinely challenge Clyne for his spot. Yet again I would have said that about JWP up until a week ago.

[Jeff Le Taxi]

And Im pretty sure you would have said the same about Luke Shaw around the time of his debut!

[The9]

Given that one of our main tactics is for the full back to overlap into the space created by the wide right attacker pulling inside, it makes no sense for us to play the defensively minded Chambers (who wouldn't overlap, and hasn't overlapped) with the "not-attacking midfielder the rest of the time" Clyne ahead of him.

 

So I'd say the answer is "no", unless we play Clyne at left back - and even then Chambers would have to get forward a lot more.

 

Noticed last night during the Spanish SuperCopa that Henk Ten Cate pointed out that Barca are no longer playing such a high pressing game due to the rigours of adopting such a system and the difficulties in motivating players of a certain standing to do so... and they're not as good as a result. All his opinion of course but makes you think...

[Chez]

I missed Saturday's game in favour of a non event at the Oval (followed by an abandoned game at the Valley), but was JWP played at right midfield again and was he very good? I ask because for me he was ineffective at WBA for me and showed the need for a right midfielder/winger.

[dubai_phil]

I missed Saturday's game in favour of a non event at the Oval (followed by an abandoned game at the Valley), but was JWP played at right midfield again and was he very good? I ask because for me he was ineffective at WBA for me and showed the need for a right midfielder/winger.

 

He started right and was meh OK

 

We then took off Morgan and changed to only 1 DM in VW and gave JWP licence to roam in CM and he looked REAL class

 

Away from home think we need 2 DM's at home when teams park the bus we may have found a home grown answer with a formation tweak

[Graffito]

I missed Saturday's game in favour of a non event at the Oval (followed by an abandoned game at the Valley), but was JWP played at right midfield again and was he very good? I ask because for me he was ineffective at WBA for me and showed the need for a right midfielder/winger.

 

Put in a couple of good crosses. He may have been there partly to protect Chambers. More effective when he moved to a central role second half.

[dubai_phil]

Oh in answer to the OP.

 

No, not yet.

 

Chambers is being focused on defending.

 

The time WILL come when he starts to play more like Clyne/Shaw but right now, no way

 

Oh and am happy to have him in the team he is more than capable but Clyne adds more

[KelvinsRightGlove]

As its looking like we wont get the winger we are reportedly after, why dont we play Clyne and Chambers together, with Clyne as an out and out winger and as a crutch for Chambers when in trouble? Clyne seemed to turn the game around completely on Saturday and made it obvious we need pace down the flank.

 

How many times have we heard that this summer?

 

What's the betting one signs shortly now?

[teenagegsaint]

Is this a joke? Clyne didn't change the game at all

[The9]

Jesus Perez said something very interesting last night. He said players don't play in positions' date=' they play from positions. On that basis it would appear anyone who starts out wide in the three behind the striker must be able to come infield and be comfortable - be that with or without the ball. That would appear to completely eliminate the view that we'll ever play traditional wingers in the first team at a senior level and may provide some insight as to why Puncheon was let go and found himself out of favour towards the end of last season.[/quote']

 

Although some of Puncheon's best performances in the past 3 years came as a narrow left sided midfielder for Millwall on loan there, a position ideally suited to our current formation.

[The9]

Is this a joke? Clyne didn't change the game at all

 

In the sense that we spent most of the first half pinging barely successful long passes and looked pretty disjointed at best, and the second half passing the thing on the floor and attacking repeatedly, we looked a lot better whilst he was on the pitch.

[eurosaint]

For me:

a) Clyne should be our 1st choice at RB and only used at LB in an emergency !

b) Chambers should be used sparingly when required !

c) Ward Prowse should be utilised as a CM and never on the right where he is wasted !

d) Playing Clyne as a winger with Chambers behind him is pointless !

All IMHO of course !!

[JoeShmoe]

He started right and was meh OK

 

We then took off Morgan and changed to only 1 DM in VW and gave JWP licence to roam in CM and he looked REAL class

 

Away from home think we need 2 DM's at home when teams park the bus we may have found a home grown answer with a formation tweak

 

Great point, when were not playing the top 6 teams, the rest will come and park the bus and hit us on the break with long balls. In that situation you dont need 2 DM, you can play more of a 4-1-4-1 type formation, with JWP in the forward CM role (or Davis who I think would be good at that). That would mean leaving Cork and Morgan out which wont go down well with everyone here

[The9]

Great point, when were not playing the top 6 teams, the rest will come and park the bus and hit us on the break with long balls. In that situation you dont need 2 DM, you can play more of a 4-1-4-1 type formation, with JWP in the forward CM role (or Davis who I think would be good at that). That would mean leaving Cork and Morgan out which wont go down well with everyone here

 

It will be interesting to see the balance between Wanyama and Schneiderlin depending on our need to retain possession. Wanayama's great at getting it back and knocking it to the defence, not so hot on passing it around and his longer passing tendencies might or might not fit with our more mobile strikeforce. Personally I think Cork's better at moving the ball around but Wanyama's shooting is much better. Schneiderlin obviously had great interception and tackling stats last season and his record last season speaks for itself, and also played ridiculously far forward in the first half on Saturday.

 

There's a choice to be made if we don't have two holding midfielders.

[oracle saint]

Is this a joke? Clyne didn't change the game at all

 

Agree. Clyne looked fairly rusty and it's noticeable that when playing on the left he tends to cut inside. What changed the game was that Saints changed their tactics in the second half to playing with more pace, more one-touch and passing forward instead of laterally as they had done for the first 45 minutes. I thought JWP had a superb first half and a better second - my MOM. Very secure, good ball retention, excellent passing vision and (finally) a player that can consistently deliver a dead ball in exactly the right spot. It's probably been said elsewhere but he looks an embryonic Paul Scholes.

 

I also wondered if Chambers was under strict instructions not to overlap (which he did in the pre-season game against Real Sociedad).

 

One thought that's often exercised me is how different our perceptions often are of player performance in a game; after all we all watched the same game. Does where we sit fundamentally determine our conclusions? I've sat in the Itchen for the last 2 seasons (previously the Chapel) and I reckon I get a much better appreciation of mid-field play. Maybe that largely influenced my views on the excellence of JWP on Saturday.