Not really the point though is it. I like him a lot as a player but its still true that he doesn't offer much defensively.Yeah I'm sure they'd rather have had two hard fought, ground out 0-0 draws instead
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not really the point though is it. I like him a lot as a player but its still true that he doesn't offer much defensively.Yeah I'm sure they'd rather have had two hard fought, ground out 0-0 draws instead
Not really the point though is it. I like him a lot as a player but its still true that he doesn't offer much defensively.
But who cares when he helps us score loads of goals and play boss football and tank teams? Would we have won 6-2 if Naismith had played instead?
It's kinda like how Hazard was a bit of a liability on the left till Mourinho taught him he could defend and be a worldy in attack.
Rather win 1-0 than try and win 6-2 tbh mate. If we were against anyone half decent yesterday they'd have ruined us. Hell they still managed like 15 shots on goal against us. We'll come up against much better left-sided players than van Aanholt (Cresswell and Moses next week wooooo) and we could be in trouble.
There you go lads, Naismith to replace Deulofeu, we can at least trust him to work his socks off and defend. I mean no one's arsed about being entertained anyway, let's just be defensively secure and focus on grinding out 1-0 wins
lol you're so naive. I prefer Deulofeu as a player obviously but to completely disregard the weakness it poses on our right flank is just plain stupid. Did you even watch the game yesterday? A better left-side for Sunderland would have roasted us. We should have been 2-0 down early on from attacks down that side. Get your head out of your arse.
Well maybe we should be looking at Coleman's defensive capabilities rather than Deulofeu's then mate. I want my wingers to be wingers, not auxiliary full backs. A winger is an attacking player
From the Times article a few pages backYou can be both pal - Hazard last season, Sanchez any season etc. He has pace to burn so he shouldn't neglect his defensive duties just so he can be in the final third when he needs to be. It's what Emery was moaning about last season.
From the Times article a few pages back
"Interestingly, Martinez perceives a youngster now trying to play with discipline and wants to ensure he doesn’t go too far that way. After all, with Deufolfeu’s tricks yet ability to play the penetrating pass (why Barça youth coaches saw him as a No 10), and with his speed — “I’ve never seen a player so quick with the ball,” Martinez says — you put him on a pitch primarily to attack, not track back.
“The manager has said I’ve been playing very well on the defensive aspect but he wants me to score and get more assists,” says Deulofeu. What he’s been saying to Martinez is: “I want to play more minutes.”
You can be both pal - Hazard last season, Sanchez any season etc. He has pace to burn so he shouldn't neglect his defensive duties just so he can be in the final third when he needs to be. It's what Emery was moaning about last season.
lol you're so naive. I prefer Deulofeu as a player obviously but to completely disregard the weakness it poses on our right flank is just plain stupid. Did you even watch the game yesterday? A better left-side for Sunderland would have roasted us. We should have been 2-0 down early on from attacks down that side. Get your head out of your arse.
Think that is the theory behind having two DMs though - provide the cover so both Deulofeu and Coleman can go on the attack.Hard to have someone primarily attacking when Coleman is obsessed with the oppositions corner flag.