| Is there an argument... 11:57 - Nov 30 with 2539 views | BondiBlue |
...that Burns is more important to the way we play in the championship than broadhead is? We're countering more and he's such a good outlet down the side. Broady god love him is struggling for space. Interesting to see how deep he was dropping to get on the ball against millwall.
Top marks to the aussie boys for last night. Among others of course. |  |
| |  |
| Is there an argument... on 12:00 - Nov 30 with 2503 views | StokieBlue |
He might be struggling a bit at the moment but he's our joint top scorer having played 4 matches less than Chaplin.
SB |  | | |
| Is there an argument... on 12:05 - Nov 30 with 2458 views | FrimleyBlue |
No, because Hutch showed v Swansea that it's a role that can be replicated with another player unfortunately he similar to Burns has an inconsistent end product.
Broadys role is more integral to how we create gaps for the likes of Davis and Luongo to slip into pockets of space. it's not the same role as Burn's who imo hugs the touchline waiting for directness, where as Broady is more of an inverted role. It's not just what he does with the ball, but the movement to take defenders away. He's also got when on form, that close ball control, something which isn't easily replicated as seen by the likes of Harness when he comes on, we lose a bit of a grip from the front, whilst gaining a bit of directness instead, which is it's own positive... But for me, when we replace the Broadheads and the Chaplins, we lose control of the final third, seen again last night when Millwall got their goal after game went a bit end to end following the subs. Although Jackson right, Scarlett uptop and hutch middle, didn't really make sense imo. |  |
| |
| Is there an argument... on 12:26 - Nov 30 with 2411 views | CityBlue |
Burns creates chances, Broadhead teakes them.
Difference is we have a stay at home RB and a supporting runs LB which therefore Burns takes the role Davis takes when pushing forward and Clarke/Williams take the role Davis takes when defending. That allows Broadhead a degree of freedom to come inside which in itself creates space for Chappers and Luongo |  |
| |
| Is there an argument... on 12:30 - Nov 30 with 2390 views | itfcjoe |
I'd say so, he is so key to how we play and makes such a difference to how we can transition and set up as just suits both the in and out of possession roles perfectly plus he knows them inside out
We are a better team whenever he plays, he's not going anywhere in this starting line up |  |
| |
| Is there an argument... on 12:31 - Nov 30 with 2381 views | _clive_baker_ |
Broadhead is technically so good. Watching him up close his touch is frighteningly good, close control, can pick a pass and finish. The only slight concern is the extent to which we have to manage his game time, he doesn't seem the most robust and has had fitness issues in the past. If he stays fit and available he's a quality player to have at this level. McGoldrick levels IMO. |  | | |
| Is there an argument... on 13:27 - Nov 30 with 2216 views | Basuco |
| Is there an argument... on 12:31 - Nov 30 by _clive_baker_ |
Broadhead is technically so good. Watching him up close his touch is frighteningly good, close control, can pick a pass and finish. The only slight concern is the extent to which we have to manage his game time, he doesn't seem the most robust and has had fitness issues in the past. If he stays fit and available he's a quality player to have at this level. McGoldrick levels IMO. |
What makes this team to good is that we have so many players who can drop deep, bomb forward or press, they also have great vision when attacking in spotting someone in space with a better chance of scoring. It looks like every part of KMc's set-up and tactics are hybrid and fluid, it must be a nightmare for scouts to report back on our set-up. |  | | |
| Is there an argument... on 13:31 - Nov 30 with 2192 views | BseaBlue |
I think there is a degree of him being closely marked last season because of how effective he was the season before, with teams doubling up on him.
That hasn't happened as often this season, which has coincided with teams doubling up on Broady instead, so he has been able to floruish again down the right. Having a player on each side which can have that amount of impact on games is a massive advantage. We missed him like crazy when he was injured. |  | | |
| Is there an argument... on 19:01 - Nov 30 with 1903 views | MK1 |
Absolutely. Hutchinson is a promising prospect, but Burns is the real deal. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Is there an argument... on 19:04 - Nov 30 with 1893 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Is there an argument... on 12:00 - Nov 30 by StokieBlue |
He might be struggling a bit at the moment but he's our joint top scorer having played 4 matches less than Chaplin.
SB |
fewer! |  |
| |
| Is there an argument... on 21:06 - Nov 30 with 1792 views | BondiBlue |
| Is there an argument... on 12:31 - Nov 30 by _clive_baker_ |
Broadhead is technically so good. Watching him up close his touch is frighteningly good, close control, can pick a pass and finish. The only slight concern is the extent to which we have to manage his game time, he doesn't seem the most robust and has had fitness issues in the past. If he stays fit and available he's a quality player to have at this level. McGoldrick levels IMO. |
Agree with all of that.
The point was more about tactics than individual players' performances though. Maybe its how well harness has played in his position but i'm now not so worried when broady's not playing. When burns is out, it feels like we're missing a vital cog. Lots of talk on here about how much of a step down jackson is and hutchinson's very talented but doesn't do the same thing as burns. Feels like we have to change how we play a bit when either of those two play. Either stick it in behind for jackson because he's not a great dribbler or get it to hutchnson's feet a bit deeper because he loves a dribble and he's left footed. | |
| |
| Is there an argument... on 21:11 - Nov 30 with 1775 views | FromReuserWithLove |
His athleticism is so under appreciated it's outrageous. He is an absolute tank who puts in so much powerful running that most fullbacks just can;t cope with it. Forget about three lungs, Him and Davis have four.
After 60/70 mins of trying to keep up with the pace, power and energy of Burns we can then bring on the direct dribbling brilliance of Hutchinson. It's almost like a carefully considered plan. |  | | |
| Is there an argument... on 00:24 - Dec 1 with 1642 views | BondiBlue |
| Is there an argument... on 21:11 - Nov 30 by FromReuserWithLove |
His athleticism is so under appreciated it's outrageous. He is an absolute tank who puts in so much powerful running that most fullbacks just can;t cope with it. Forget about three lungs, Him and Davis have four.
After 60/70 mins of trying to keep up with the pace, power and energy of Burns we can then bring on the direct dribbling brilliance of Hutchinson. It's almost like a carefully considered plan. |
Like someone knows exactly what we need?
We are so lucky. Although saying that doesn't give ashton enough credit. | |
| |
| Is there an argument... on 08:50 - Dec 1 with 1449 views | bobbyramsey |
| Is there an argument... on 21:11 - Nov 30 by FromReuserWithLove |
His athleticism is so under appreciated it's outrageous. He is an absolute tank who puts in so much powerful running that most fullbacks just can;t cope with it. Forget about three lungs, Him and Davis have four.
After 60/70 mins of trying to keep up with the pace, power and energy of Burns we can then bring on the direct dribbling brilliance of Hutchinson. It's almost like a carefully considered plan. |
It's almost as if someone knows what they're doing...... |  | | |
| Is there an argument... on 09:34 - Dec 1 with 1372 views | Wickets |
| Is there an argument... on 12:05 - Nov 30 by FrimleyBlue |
No, because Hutch showed v Swansea that it's a role that can be replicated with another player unfortunately he similar to Burns has an inconsistent end product.
Broadys role is more integral to how we create gaps for the likes of Davis and Luongo to slip into pockets of space. it's not the same role as Burn's who imo hugs the touchline waiting for directness, where as Broady is more of an inverted role. It's not just what he does with the ball, but the movement to take defenders away. He's also got when on form, that close ball control, something which isn't easily replicated as seen by the likes of Harness when he comes on, we lose a bit of a grip from the front, whilst gaining a bit of directness instead, which is it's own positive... But for me, when we replace the Broadheads and the Chaplins, we lose control of the final third, seen again last night when Millwall got their goal after game went a bit end to end following the subs. Although Jackson right, Scarlett uptop and hutch middle, didn't really make sense imo. |
Bit strong to say it didnt make sense but i did wonder if Hutch in place of Burns and Taylor for Chaplin might have worked better when we made that quadruple change . |  | | |
| Is there an argument... on 10:08 - Dec 1 with 1323 views | textbackup |
| Is there an argument... on 12:30 - Nov 30 by itfcjoe |
I'd say so, he is so key to how we play and makes such a difference to how we can transition and set up as just suits both the in and out of possession roles perfectly plus he knows them inside out
We are a better team whenever he plays, he's not going anywhere in this starting line up |
He’s got that athleticism you mentioned the other day.
Height, strengthen, speed, agility… yes he lacks a final ball at times, makes a wrong decision, but he’s key to this team |  |
| |
| Is there an argument... on 11:29 - Dec 1 with 1226 views | BigCommon |
Thought they gave Broadhead a lot of attention. The flip side was that Luongo was able to find pockets of space further up the pitch. Broady the sacrificial lamb, in this instance to create space for someone else.
Burns has a great relationship with Chaplin.. No surprise to me, that Chaplin has had a slight drop off in Burn's recent absence..
If he's available, then Burns starts for me, over Hutchinson. Hutchinson is a more versatile bench option. Who is still growing into our team, imo. In terms of "on pitch" partnerships/understanding with our other forwards.. So much of our successful attacking play relies on , almost telepathy, with our trade mark, team goals. Which is something Burns brings to the table... Both Broadhead and Hutch have the ability to provide a moment of individual magic, if we are getting nullified as a unit.. Shout out to Hirst, who is integral to the team ethic of our forward play. And a mention to Harness, who showed an exceptional bit of skill to lay that chance on a plate for Scarlett. Had it not been for Bart, then a Scarlett goal would have been the cherry on top of a great win on Wednesday.... Harness looked the sharper of the 4 that came on, imo...
Getting back to the OP.. I find it hard to say whos better than who, off the back of a decent win. As they all have a role to play.. Some roles are sexier than others. But everyone's role is equally as important. Nice to see our players appreciating each others roles, when we score a goal.. Instead of taking the glory and pointing to the name on their own shirts in celebration... Love the togetherness of our squad.. [Post edited 1 Dec 2023 12:10]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
