Dip in form coincides with resting of Anderson?

Originally Posted by borsuk

bitterness

our style of playing is nothing like liverpool's and i think the comparison is nonsense, nothing more. i'm not against a three-man or even a five-man midfield at all; i think the intent and approach is more important than the nominal layout of the team. the key thing will be to watch barca's movement between the halfway line and the box and i think the three i suggested will be best at that. as far as our attacking goes i think speed is the key - a very quick transition with ronnie roaming when we have possession (obviously he'll need to drop back wide when we lose possession) and tevez and rooney stretching barca wide. carrick's ability to hit the ball long is important, hence his selection.

Bitterness about that shower winning one EC and nearly another despite being fundamentally $#*!e.

I have no problem with any of the rest of what you're saying really but I believe in having a back six with two defensively sound midfielders sitting in front of the back four.

What you do with the remaining four outfield players is much of a muchness.

I think it's particularly important, however, when we already carry Ronaldo defensively.

Dip in form has coincided with a lot of things, the main one being a tight title run in. These are never easy or straightforward.

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

Dip in form has coincided with a lot of things, the main one being a tight title run in. These are never easy or straightforward.

Totally.

Yep, I thought Chelsea were rather fortunate to be facing an away trip to Everton where the home side didn't look ar*sed.

That game would have been a different story a few weeks ago when Everton were still in the hunt for 4th spot.

I agree we've looked very good with 2 defensive minded midfielders this season - those 2 being predominantly Carrick and Anderson!!

Carrick is our most importantd efensive mid by far, he makes it a solid defence as opposed to a backs against the wall scruff of the neck type defending Hargreaves does - which makes him look like a hero but leaves us on a tight rope. I always think Hargreaves as the main defensive mid forces us to play scrappy defensive football whereas Carrick is more about reading the play and controlling or sheparding attacks and we're much better that way.

Of course if Carrick is struggling and getting overrun anyway thats where Hargreaves scrappy pacey style becomes more important - if you're going to get over-run, atleast make sure you snap at people's heels and get stuck in.

Carrick and Anderson are hardly purely defensive in the way that Alonso and Mascherano are. Anderson especially can be a real box to box player. Willingness and the capability to be competent in the defensive side of the game is a real bonus in both their games.

Who would have expected Anderson to be such a powerful prescence and ball winner?