Why Knight should start at RB

[sage]

25 minutes ago, David said:

You can't say he's the best option if it's the only option we've tried ?

He explained why he is the best current option. We have seen Odurah in pre season and at Mansfield. 

[brady1993]

1 hour ago, LERam said:

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 

Honestly that could be completely true and it could see it being the case. I've even said elsewhere that I'd be thinking about coaching Smith into the role to potentially free Knight up.

But alternatively we might have a better solution and our best team with everyone fit might have Knight at RB.

[brady1993]

1 hour 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.

The thing is... you have seen it before.  At Derby no less. Byrne at times last season, especially early in the season would be playing an inverted role. The same is true about Bogle under Cocu. It wasn't all the time and it perhaps wasn't as obvious but it did happen.

The fullbacks still are defenders when we are defenders. In fact their overall role is more defensive than previous seasons as they've less license to break forwards.

Ah sorry forgot it was league 1. Best go back in time and tell Chris Wilder to knock it off with that funny business with the overlapping CBs. Can't be having tactics in league 1 ?.

Flippant answer aside, because if it clicks it will allow us to counter what is commonly put in front of us in this League.

[Day]

1 minute ago, sage said:

He explained why he is the best current option. We have seen Odurah in pre season and at Mansfield. 

One game and he's out then, judged and written off as being not ready? Surely we've seen plenty of young players come through to know that it can take a run of games to get a feel for it.

Look at Max Bird when he broke through.

Had it been a signing under a previous manager, I could maybe understand it, yet Rosenior signed him, the guy that creates the system we play.

If he's not good enough right now, why are we sitting him on the bench and not giving him minutes with the U21s?

Makes no sense, at what point do we decide he's ready? After sitting on his arse for 20 games and only kicking a ball in training?

Give him a first half, what's the worst that can happen? Take him off, bring on Smith or Sibley and move Knight into right back.

In the games we've played so far, our defence hasn't been under a lot of pressure.

I just fail to see how you can say he's the best option when he's the only option we tried so far.

[brady1993]

37 minutes ago, David said:

You can't say he's the best option if it's the only option we've tried ?

I mean to an extent your right. We've seen Odurah and Knight has looked better than him there at the moment. 

And any other option is a player out of position with various degrees of suitability.

[Warwick Ram]

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) 

Playing a central midfielder at right back instead of recruiting an actual right back is very short sighted.

Knight should be running the midfield as well as providing a goal threat.

If this was Cocu it would be slated.

Some would say it is very naive of Rosenior to potentially waste Knight at full back.

[Blondest Goat]

2 hours 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? 

Play Sibley instead of Knight in midfield.   Same energy as Knight but with more goals / end product.

[sage]

3 minutes ago, David said:

One game and he's out then, judged and written off as being not ready? Surely we've seen plenty of young players come through to know that it can take a run of games to get a feel for it.

Look at Max Bird when he broke through.

Had it been a signing under a previous manager, I could maybe understand it, yet Rosenior signed him, the guy that creates the system we play.

If he's not good enough right now, why are we sitting him on the bench and not giving him minutes with the U21s?

Makes no sense, at what point do we decide he's ready? After sitting on his arse for 20 games and only kicking a ball in training?

Give him a first half, what's the worst that can happen? Take him off, bring on Smith or Sibley and move Knight into right back.

In the games we've played so far, our defence hasn't been under a lot of pressure.

I just fail to see how you can say he's the best option when he's the only option we tried so far.

Wow

We had 5, players and have signed another 14. Not everyone will have been brought to be first choice at the start of this season. 

LR has seen him in pre season amd in training amd prefers to play and out of position Knight there. 

He is on the bench because he is deemed to be one of the best 18 fit players at the club. 

I would imagine he will get Cup games and learn the role in training. 

Knight is CURRENTLY the best option. Someone has to be that,  based on the evidence,  even if ideally there would be more evidence. 

LR thinks the drop from Knight to Odurah is bigger than the drop from Smith or Sibley to Knight. 

 

[brady1993]

3 minutes ago, David said:

One game and he's out then, judged and written off as being not ready? Surely we've seen plenty of young players come through to know that it can take a run of games to get a feel for it.

Look at Max Bird when he broke through.

Had it been a signing under a previous manager, I could maybe understand it, yet Rosenior signed him, the guy that creates the system we play.

If he's not good enough right now, why are we sitting him on the bench and not giving him minutes with the U21s?

Makes no sense, at what point do we decide he's ready? After sitting on his arse for 20 games and only kicking a ball in training?

Give him a first half, what's the worst that can happen? Take him off, bring on Smith or Sibley and move Knight into right back.

In the games we've played so far, our defence hasn't been under a lot of pressure.

I just fail to see how you can say he's the best option when he's the only option we tried so far.

To be clear I'm not personally opposed to doing that.

Odurah looks like he's talented and he looks like he could play that role. And my bet is at some point he takes over the role. 

Knight has looked better so far though and Odurah has looked like he's not quite ready for playing week in, week out. 

So it's a question of do you risk it ? Can you ride out the occasional mistake ? And is it worth disrupting our right hand side which has looked our most effective path for attacking?

The answer could be yes for sure. And if he starts tomorrow I'll be happy about it personally. I can just see why Knight is currently starting there.

[Blondest Goat]

6 minutes ago, Warwick Ram said:

 

Knight should be running the midfield as well as providing a goal threat

But does he provide a goal threat?  Four goals in the last two seasons.  Already missed an absolute sitter this season.  I certainly wouldn't be dropping Hourihane to make way for Knight.  Knight doesn't have Hourihanes goal against Oxford in his locker.

[chadlad]

Knight is an international midfield player who was voted MOM in the last international match.

A midfield 3 of Bird, Knight and Hourihane is without doubt our strongest midfield and most probably the strongest in L1.

Knight offers goals from midfield, something we seem to be short of.

Knight offers aggression, tenacity and legs in midfield again something we seem to be lacking.

He doesn’t get bullied, reminds me of Roy Keane!

I would argue that Roberts at RB would be a better option than JK in terms of defensive and aerial ability. Being left footed would also help when coming inside onto his left foot. Odurah and Smith just not good enough options at RB IMHO.

 

[brady1993]

8 minutes ago, Warwick Ram said:

Playing a central midfielder at right back instead of recruiting an actual right back is very short sighted.

Knight should be running the midfield as well as providing a goal threat.

If this was Cocu it would be slated.

Some would say it is very naive of Rosenior to potentially waste Knight at full back.

Your implication that we haven't tried to recruit a right back is more than certainly false. Rosenior has mentioned many many times about wanting to get a right back in. Why that hasn't happened is almost certainly down to we are still under fairly heavy restrictions.

As it stands Knight likely is our best option at right back. He fits what we need there and is playing well there. Whether it's worth him playing in midfield and putting someone else there is an open question but we have other good midfielders we can play.

[Day]

10 minutes ago, sage said:

Wow

We had 5, players and have signed another 14. Not everyone will have been brought to be first choice at the start of this season. 

LR has seen him in pre season amd in training amd prefers to play and out of position Knight there. 

He is on the bench because he is deemed to be one of the best 18 fit players at the club. 

I would imagine he will get Cup games and learn the role in training. 

Knight is CURRENTLY the best option. Someone has to be that,  based on the evidence,  even if ideally there would be more evidence. 

LR thinks the drop from Knight to Odurah is bigger than the drop from Smith or Sibley to Knight. 

 

Fully aware of the number of signings, but right now he's the only right back we have in the first team and we're playing a CM ahead of him.

Had he been playing for the U21s, I would be more accepting that he wasn't signed for the first team.

Fact is, he hasn't even made a match day squad for the U21s.

As for best option, that's like having breakfast and declaring it to be the best meal you've had today and it's not even past 10am.

[Gerry Daly]

Your initial post was excellent Brady and follow my thoughts on this too. However I do think you acknowledged but then quickly moved on from the other main potential option playing exactly this system and that is to swop Knight and Smith. Knight would give us more value than Smith does in midfield I think, particularly goal scoring but also all round involvement in the play. But Smith, a decent midfielder who has also crucially played right back for some of his career could in my opinion slot in very effectively to the role Knight is currently playing. I don't think the 'coaching time' is a deal breaker with that 

[Day]

12 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

To be clear I'm not personally opposed to doing that.

Odurah looks like he's talented and he looks like he could play that role. And my bet is at some point he takes over the role. 

Knight has looked better so far though and Odurah has looked like he's not quite ready for playing week in, week out. 

So it's a question of do you risk it ? Can you ride out the occasional mistake ? And is it worth disrupting our right hand side which has looked our most effective path for attacking?

The answer could be yes for sure. And if he starts tomorrow I'll be happy about it personally. I can just see why Knight is currently starting there.

You risk it as the benefits of having Knight in midfield far outweigh it.

Look at the games so far, we have largely dominated with little pressure on the back line. 

The start of the season, players finding their way into match fitness, it's absolutely the right time to give the lad some minutes.

If he looks flaky, play Knight. I just want to see him given a run of games if possible to show what he can do.

He's obviously going to look nervous initially, the only way he can kick on is by actually playing.

[brady1993]

10 minutes ago, chadlad said:

Knight is an international midfield player who was voted MOM in the last international match.

A midfield 3 of Bird, Knight and Hourihane is without doubt our strongest midfield and most probably the strongest in L1.

Knight offers goals from midfield, something we seem to be short of.

Knight offers aggression, tenacity and legs in midfield again something we seem to be lacking.

He doesn’t get bullied, reminds me of Roy Keane!

I would argue that Roberts at RB would be a better option than JK in terms of defensive and aerial ability. Being left footed would also help when coming inside onto his left foot. Odurah and Smith just not good enough options at RB IMHO.

 

Knight is a good midfielder and quite likely would be part of our best midfield three. It's more debatable if we want to play with a 10 like Sibley or McGoldrick that he'd start though. 

There is a couple issues sticking Roberts there. Him being left footed would hinder him rather than help. It'd make harder for him to find the right winger or the midfielder in front of him or to take the ball on the half turn. Also it means we'd have to play Fozzy and he's really unsuited to playing that role so you would have to further shuffle the team around to compensate.

[brady1993]

4 minutes ago, David said:

You risk it as the benefits of having Knight in midfield far outweigh it.

Look at the games so far, we have largely dominated with little pressure on the back line. 

The start of the season, players finding their way into match fitness, it's absolutely the right time to give the lad some minutes.

If he looks flaky, play Knight. I just want to see him given a run of games if possible to show what he can do.

He's obviously going to look nervous initially, the only way he can kick on is by actually playing.

You might be right. It might be worth the risk. And I'm not opposed to trying it.

In terms of games so far though we are going at a decent rate especially considering its a rapidly assembled squad with a short preseason. And our best attacking outlet has been down the right with Knight a big part of that.

We do need to find a way to break teams down better and part of that is a better balanced midfield (alongside more time coaching, more game time and more familiarity between players)

[brady1993]

12 minutes ago, Gerry Daly said:

Your initial post was excellent Brady and follow my thoughts on this too. However I do think you acknowledged but then quickly moved on from the other main potential option playing exactly this system and that is to swop Knight and Smith. Knight would give us more value than Smith does in midfield I think, particularly goal scoring but also all round involvement in the play. But Smith, a decent midfielder who has also crucially played right back for some of his career could in my opinion slot in very effectively to the role Knight is currently playing. I don't think the 'coaching time' is a deal breaker with that 

I don't disagree. And with no right back on the horizon it is what I'd probably look at doing. I'd look at coaching Smith into that role because I feel he could do a similar job there whilst Knight is likely a better midfielder from what we've seen.

My point about Smith though is we had the entire preseason to prepare Knight for playing there and won't have had the same time with Smith. That's not a deal breaker but it might mean it's not as simple as just swapping them at going smoothly. And sticking with Knight whose doing well there does make sense.

[chadlad]

9 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

Knight is a good midfielder and quite likely would be part of our best midfield three. It's more debatable if we want to play with a 10 like Sibley or McGoldrick that he'd start though. 

There is a couple issues sticking Roberts there. Him being left footed would hinder him rather than help. It'd make harder for him to find the right winger or the midfielder in front of him or to take the ball on the half turn. Also it means we'd have to play Fozzy and he's really unsuited to playing that role so you would have to further shuffle the team around to compensate.

Fozzy is a Chamionship standard LB, I would argue that he is as good if not better than Roberts at LB.

I can think of a few RB who have successfully played the LB position and Roberts seems to have 2 good feet.

We gain more than we lose and Roberts is a good defender whereas both Oduroh and Smith would be targeted aerially.

[Sparkle]

We can only sign players who are out of contract for limited wages or possible loans who are allowed to be released by other clubs who may well want guaranteed playing time for them - it’s a limited pool of choice and yes I want knight in central midfield but he is doing what he has always done for the club and that is play anywhere that he is asked to and usually because of the teams deficiencies and not to his advantage