Take it from me Dunkley IS better than Grimes. I'm just surprised that Cookie noticed Grimes was a potential problem, but he wasn't the only one and he is a very good-hearted player.
My own serious view is that in common with other systems one up front can and does work for most teams, but it does rely on the three players behind the lone striker providing both creative and physical support AND switching roles so that the defence is not certain who to pick up. We lose part of that element of surprise when Naylor plays at the back, because he did push forward from his defensive midfield position to assist the three and score goals.
I must admit I favour a back three, and within that I'd be hoping that we might field Araujo who must be quicker than what we've got. But I'd settle for any system so long as the players interpreted their roles flexibly. We discarded King who pushed forward from full back. Mandeville seems to have lost favour despite contributing massively in terms of goals and assists AND being willing not to confine himself to a limited area of the pitch. We need those kind of players
We certainly do need defenders both to push forward from defence and pass well out of it. We need midfielders who see themselves as both defenders and creators and who don't want to be measured by the number of times they can pass the ball sideways successfully. And we need mobility and speed in and around goal. Slow measured build-ups simply allow defences to settle. Even Haaland couldn't score yesterday when City endlessly passed the ball sideways and back on the edge of Arsenal's area.
And yes I do worry about the number of players we have over the age of thirty. It is not so much their playing ability or lack of speed that worries me as their unwillingness to do anything different. When defences are faced with things they've seen before they cope, and I think, like Dancing, that they look at us and see stale. If our team can't surprise themselves they have little chance of surprising the opposition.
My own serious view is that in common with other systems one up front can and does work for most teams, but it does rely on the three players behind the lone striker providing both creative and physical support AND switching roles so that the defence is not certain who to pick up. We lose part of that element of surprise when Naylor plays at the back, because he did push forward from his defensive midfield position to assist the three and score goals.
I must admit I favour a back three, and within that I'd be hoping that we might field Araujo who must be quicker than what we've got. But I'd settle for any system so long as the players interpreted their roles flexibly. We discarded King who pushed forward from full back. Mandeville seems to have lost favour despite contributing massively in terms of goals and assists AND being willing not to confine himself to a limited area of the pitch. We need those kind of players
We certainly do need defenders both to push forward from defence and pass well out of it. We need midfielders who see themselves as both defenders and creators and who don't want to be measured by the number of times they can pass the ball sideways successfully. And we need mobility and speed in and around goal. Slow measured build-ups simply allow defences to settle. Even Haaland couldn't score yesterday when City endlessly passed the ball sideways and back on the edge of Arsenal's area.
And yes I do worry about the number of players we have over the age of thirty. It is not so much their playing ability or lack of speed that worries me as their unwillingness to do anything different. When defences are faced with things they've seen before they cope, and I think, like Dancing, that they look at us and see stale. If our team can't surprise themselves they have little chance of surprising the opposition.