brady1993 Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there. Tactics I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up. Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of. Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders. This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback). Inverted fullback The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball. Why Knight ? Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes. Why not X instead of Knight ? Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet. Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role. Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role. Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace. Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably. New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying. Should he play midfield anyway ? Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall. TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have. (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) Sufferingfool, LeedsCityRam, BramcoteRam84 and 16 others 3 15 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 7 minutes ago, brady1993 said: Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders. Why do we do this? Is it really necessary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouRams Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 12 minutes ago, brady1993 said: So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there. Tactics I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up. Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of. Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders. This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback). Inverted fullback The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball. Why Knight ? Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes. Why not X instead of Knight ? Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet. Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role. Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role. Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace. Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably. New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying. Should he play midfield anyway ? Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall. TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have. (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) Agree with everything you say so here's one for you, is he now easier to replace as a midfielder than a right back? We miss his energy in midfield so do we go out and buy/loan an engine midfielder instead of a new right back? Are they easier to come by than a solid right back? vonwright and Carnero 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted August 19, 2022 Author Share Posted August 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: Why do we do this? Is it really necessary? I feel like I mostly laid out the why in the post but I get that some of things can get lost in a big post. - So that the midfielders who aren't Bird can push right up looking to exploit space - So that wingers can take up aggressive positions high and wide - So we have more bodies in build up play to play through a pressing team (Also helps the couple CBs we have who may not be the best on the ball) - To have cover against the counter and so possession can be recycled to keep up pressure. Is it necessary? Yes and no. As with any set of tactics it's a choice. It's necessary for what we are trying to do but it wouldn't be necessary if we set up differently. And we've set up this because it will likely pay off against we shall face week in week out once its properly embedded and we've found the right balance. ramit, duncanjwitham, LeedsCityRam and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 Why do you need the player with the best running stats playing at right back ? His energy should be utilised as a goal scoring central midfielder who makes late runs into the box and can recover to get back into shape during the attack to defence transition. r_wilcockson, Carl Sagan, Ellafella and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted August 19, 2022 Author Share Posted August 19, 2022 6 minutes ago, YouRams said: Agree with everything you say so here's one for you, is he now easier to replace as a midfielder than a right back? We miss his energy in midfield so do we go out and buy/loan an engine midfielder instead of a new right back? Are they easier to come by than a solid right back? Thing is I don't think we entirely need to replace him as a midfielder. I think we have options there namely in Sibley and Thompson. And with McGoldrick fit we likely play him as a 10. And maybe maybe Smith if I'm to give him the benefit of the doubt in that Rosenior sees something there that I've not so far. YouRams 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 6 minutes ago, YouRams said: Agree with everything you say so here's one for you, is he now easier to replace as a midfielder than a right back? We miss his energy in midfield so do we go out and buy/loan an engine midfielder instead of a new right back? Are they easier to come by than a solid right back? We don't need an extra mid. Bird, Hourihane, Smith, Tommo, McGoldrick and Sibley cover those central 3 positions. We then have Rooney, DRobinson and Aghatise coming through to provide additional cover. brady1993 and YouRams 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IslandExile Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 I think it's a reasonable argument @brady1993. Nevertheless, I think a bigger issue that we have at the moment is creating and taking chances. I believe a better balanced midfield would greatly help in that regard. And I would put Knight as a key element in that midfield. Perhaps, they're all still relatively young, compared to Smith and Hourihane, but they all now have sufficient experience. Therefore, I like the balance offered by: Knight - legs, box-to-box-midfielder Bird - passing ability Sibley - creativity and goal threat Therefore, the recruitment process should have focused - could still focus, if there is time and money - on bringing in a right back to play that role. Byrne would have been great but he screwed us over. Carl Sagan and brady1993 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted August 19, 2022 Author Share Posted August 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, hintonsboots said: Why do you need the player with the best running stats playing at right back ? His energy should be utilised as a goal scoring central midfielder who makes late runs into the box and can recover to get back into shape during the attack to defence transition. I feel like I've explained why..... But to take a different approach our best team might have Knight at RB even if it's not his best position. Better players than Knight have had to play in roles that you'd think unconventional or not their best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 They say if you're fit enough for the bench, you're fit enough to play. If Odurah is good enough for the bench and not be playing for the U21s, then he should be good enough to start. The only way he will settle is by playing games. He would have a vastly experienced Stearman next to him and Mendez-Laing that is a right handful. Give the lad a chance. Knight in the middle can be a key player in this team, a midfield 3 of Bird, Hourihane and Knight in League 1 is just silly, they would do bits in the Championship. I won't be convinced Knight at RB is good for this team or his own personal development as a player. Quicker we get him in the middle, the quicker we will see us banging in more goals. sage, Ellafella, hintonsboots and 2 others 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted August 19, 2022 Author Share Posted August 19, 2022 9 minutes ago, IslandExile said: I think it's a reasonable argument @brady1993. Nevertheless, I think a bigger issue that we have at the moment is creating and taking chances. I believe a better balanced midfield would greatly help in that regard. And I would put Knight as a key element in that midfield. Perhaps, they're all still relatively young, compared to Smith and Hourihane, but they all now have sufficient experience. Therefore, I like the balance offered by: Knight - legs, box-to-box-midfielder Bird - passing ability Sibley - creativity and goal threat Therefore, the recruitment process should have focused - could still focus, if there is time and money - on bringing in a right back to play that role. Byrne would have been great but he screwed us over. Thing is I do pretty much agree. On the recruitment I suspect from what Rosenior has said we have tried to get a RB in and are probably still trying. But it's likely just a case with our financial situation we just can't find the right person if anyone at all. And so if you aren't getting a RB this window you've got to think about your options. Knight is doing well there. So it becomes a series of questions: Does moving him into midfield fix the issues there? Can we solve the midfield issues without moving him? Does moving him from right back create more problems than it solves? Thats what Rosenior needs to try to answer. My post was mostly to argue its not as simple as people are making it out to be and that he is playing well there. IslandExile 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramarena Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 (edited) 55 minutes ago, brady1993 said: So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there. Tactics I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up. Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of. Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders. This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback). Inverted fullback The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball. Why Knight ? Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes. Why not X instead of Knight ? Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet. Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role. Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role. Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace. Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably. New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying. Should he play midfield anyway ? Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall. TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have. (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) I can see the reasoning for playing him at RB. However the problem then lies in the midfield which is too static and one paced, with players who replicate each others work, as you've identified. I wonder if a solution for this could be- at home we play Sibley or McGoldrick to solve the midfield issue and Knight at RB. And away, where LR clearly wants to be more solid, we play Knight in midfield and one of Smith or Thompson at RB if we can't sign an RB? *** should also add, looking at it from a totally non-tactical perspective, an in form Knight is one of the better midfielders in the division and would be a bit of a waste him not being there! Edited August 19, 2022 by Ramarena Forgot to mention brady1993 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 1 hour ago, brady1993 said: ...Is it necessary? Yes and no. As with any set of tactics it's a choice. It's necessary for what we are trying to do but it wouldn't be necessary if we set up differently. And we've set up this because it will likely pay off against we shall face week in week out once its properly embedded and we've found the right balance. How many fullbacks do you know in League 1 or even the Championship can play this way? I've never seen it before, I'm old fashioned and like my fullbacks to be defenders not midfielders. As for 'we've set up this way', well yes, but why? This is League 1 not the Champions League. S8TY and Ellafella 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LERam Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 1 hour ago, brady1993 said: So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there. Tactics I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up. Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of. Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders. This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback). Inverted fullback The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball. Why Knight ? Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes. Why not X instead of Knight ? Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet. Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role. Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role. Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace. Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably. New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying. Should he play midfield anyway ? Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall. TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have. (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) I don't disagree with Knight being the best option we have at RB But in my opinion we lose more in midfield than we gain by having him out of position. I think any downside of having the others at RB is outweighed by what Knight can offer in the middle RoyMac5, brady1993 and Marriot Ram99 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 44 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said: How many fullbacks do you know in League 1 or even the Championship can play this way? I've never seen it before, I'm old fashioned and like my fullbacks to be defenders not midfielders. As for 'we've set up this way', well yes, but why? This is League 1 not the Champions League. You do know @brady1993 isn't LR don't you? He has excellently explained why Knight is playing there under LR and is currently the best option. Ramarena, brady1993, Grimbeard and 3 others 1 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, sage said: You do know @brady1993 isn't LR don't you? He has excellently explained why Knight is playing there under LR and is currently the best option. You can't say he's the best option if it's the only option we've tried ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therealhantsram Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 Just listening to LR on the radio saying the selection for Fleetwood might surprise a few people. My immediate thought was Knight to midfield. I wonder... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Clough Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 4 minutes ago, therealhantsram said: Just listening to LR on the radio saying the selection for Fleetwood might surprise a few people. My immediate thought was Knight to midfield. I wonder... Surprising because it'll be exactly the same starting 11 as against Shrewsbury? ? Srg and Grimbeard 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 13 minutes ago, therealhantsram said: Just listening to LR on the radio saying the selection for Fleetwood might surprise a few people. My immediate thought was Knight to midfield. I wonder... We're playing the tea lady at right back, new signing at centre back and Loach up top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Ram Posted August 19, 2022 Share Posted August 19, 2022 2 hours ago, brady1993 said: So I'm putting this post together because since the start of the season there have been question marks on Knight starting at RB which have ranged from mildly questioning to outright ridiculing. But very frequently what gets missed is why Knight is starting there, why he's good at it and why it actually relies on his skillset. So I'm going to play devil's advocate and argue for Knight should start there. Tactics I think that Rosenior identified that a few things going into the season; we have talent in midfield, we likely have technical superiority and teams are likely going to sit back and try to counter or press and try to counter. And so he's built tactically from that point.You can see this in how our flanks are set up. Wingers play high and wide and are both fast, phsyical and good 1v1. A compact opposition has to stretch or leave a man free. A team that presses always has to be wary of that threat in behind if they overcommit. Also it helps provide space in the centre for our midfield to take advantage of. Meanwhile our fullbacks essentially play as midfielders when we have the ball. They tuck right into the middle operating from a much more central postion and given the responsibilities of a deep midfielder in getting the play going and supporting the play. This provides extra functional bodies in the build up play making it theoretically easier to pass through a press and it allows other midfielders to go take up dangerous positions further up field as they don't have to worry so much about the build up. Same applies to the wingers who can play high and wide because the fullbacks are functionally midfielders. This isn't something revolutionary that Rosenior has done. In fact it's almost identical to what Guardiola has done in the past (who often would play midfielders like Delph at fullback). Inverted fullback The demands on this role are different that was is typically called for. They need to very comfortable on the ball in central areas, their passing needs to be good, they need to know what to do positionally when they are in midfield and they need that high energy to cover ground, support the attack and quickly get back into position. Functionally it operates a lot more like a wide midfield role on the ball. Why Knight ? Simply put he excels at all of the above qualities is the primary reason whilst being sound defensively. There is a good reason why most our success in attacking has happened down the right. Playing him there essentially allows us to cheat and play another midfielder The second reason is with a decent number of midfielders going into pre-season but no right back in sight with restricted dealings in the window. It made sense to coach someone into the role and Knight ticked the most boxes. Why not X instead of Knight ? Odurah - Seems a decent prospect but looked a touch raw and shaky in pre-season. Likely isn't ready just yet. Smith - This could work but Knight has more energy and crucially Smith hasn't had the same coaching time to coach him into the role. Thompson - isn't as phsyical as Knight which could get exposed defensively and would need coaching into the role. Stearman - This is a joke right ? He looks too awkward at CB on the ball never mind in midfield areas and would get exposed for pace. Roberts - The role benefits from someone playing on their stronger side so they can open their body easier. Also needed at LB as Fozzy can't really play that role reliably. New Right Back - Well yeah... but that's increasingly unlikely to happen but it won't be for a lack of trying. Should he play midfield anyway ? Now that's a tricky question. Because we have a balance problem in midfield (at least some of the time) that you can point to Knight as a fix. And Id agree with that to a large degree that Knight as one of the three would help. The two counterarguments I might make are that problem might be better solved by playing either Sibley or a fit McGoldrick and by moving Knight from there you might be just shifting a problem rather than fixing it overall. TLDR; The way we play calls for someone comfortable in midfield at right back. And Knight is likely the best at it we have. (PS you may be able to tell I'm bored because I'm ill at home) Nah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now