| Willock 21:11 - Feb 17 with 9530 views | extratimeR |
Made a difference again, loves to run with the ball in front of him, defenders backing off, really worried after first half but they guess what they "Bottled it,"
Shame |  | | |  |
| Willock on 08:49 - Feb 21 with 2131 views | gazza1 |
| Willock on 11:03 - Feb 18 by francisbowles |
So you agree with each other. It is correct that he is not starting every game at the moment. |
No we do not....Bakerloo thinks Willock should start-I do not think he should start matches at the moment because he is not currently good enough | | | |
| Willock on 08:59 - Feb 21 with 2086 views | gazza1 |
| Willock on 14:07 - Feb 18 by Antti_Heinola |
I think 'good enough' is poor phrasing. You could just as easily say he is good enough because we signed him, paid decent money, and he's been and around the team all season. I didn't see much of him, but Dieng would certainly have been 'good enough' last season, but we sent him on loan. It comes down to so many more things - shape, formations, tactics and so on than just 'good enough'. I think there's maybe a case for being so nebulous about a defender, but it's much more complex with attackers.
He's come on and changed two games recently, his skill and pace helping to turn 0-1 into 2-1 against two of the best 5 sides in the division. Your grasp of 'good enough' must be very different to everyone else's - including Warbs.
Having said all that, at the moment, I'm not surprised he's not starting, but I think he will get starts soon, and MW is using him very effectively as a sub. |
Rubbish.....I am saying he is not good enough to start in the Team on a regular basis....I presume that is the Managements view as well. He is too inconsistent as the moment in time. If he was 'good enough' MW would get him in that Team somewhere and somehow.
Hopefully, in due time, he will be a starter but that will introduce another problem.....where exactly would he start??
Why isn't Albert starting??.....he has changed games as well?? Why isnt Field starting, he changed the game against Brentford?? Any comments/excuses??
Bottom line....Willock is not starting games because he is not good enough, give him time and good training and he may well be a starter but not yet. Carry on with what he is doing - no issues at all with that.. | | | |
| Willock on 09:02 - Feb 21 with 2066 views | gazza1 |
| Willock on 13:28 - Feb 18 by TW_R |
Lol - Stones, Aguero, Zinchenko, De Bruyne all on the subs bench for City last night. I guess none of them are good enough either. |
When you got a squad with that much talent then players will be rested......it does not make much difference. We are not there yet!!
PS-Aguero & De Bruyne have been injured if you hadnt noticed!! | | | |
| Willock on 10:01 - Feb 21 with 1966 views | francisbowles |
| Willock on 08:49 - Feb 21 by gazza1 |
No we do not....Bakerloo thinks Willock should start-I do not think he should start matches at the moment because he is not currently good enough |
Really? Are you sure?
It looks to me that he is stating why he is not starting games and agrees with MW that he isn't the best option alongside Charlie as the beginning of matches.
It is definitely not a case of him or Albert being good enough. The are both very good players just not the best options for that starting position at present.
As for if they are good enough they would be squeezed in somewhere. Not really, we have found a system that is currently working for us and everyone in it is doing their jobs, so patience needed before they get a starting position. | | | |
| Willock on 10:10 - Feb 21 with 1941 views | dannyblue |
I think Warbs and the team have cracked fitness and how to make best use of the new feature: 5 subs. They have developed roles and ways of playing for late in the game, and are developing specialist players for their plan. They’ve cottoned on a bit faster than some other managers and are able to improve performance second half. It’s not about whether willock is good enough to start, it’s about whether he’s good enough to execute the last 30 plan. the squad is being used well through the game to get wins. |  | | |
| Willock on 10:24 - Feb 21 with 1905 views | TW_R |
| Willock on 10:01 - Feb 21 by francisbowles |
Really? Are you sure?
It looks to me that he is stating why he is not starting games and agrees with MW that he isn't the best option alongside Charlie as the beginning of matches.
It is definitely not a case of him or Albert being good enough. The are both very good players just not the best options for that starting position at present.
As for if they are good enough they would be squeezed in somewhere. Not really, we have found a system that is currently working for us and everyone in it is doing their jobs, so patience needed before they get a starting position. |
Exactly this. If we a playing 3 at the back and 2 defensive midfields and 2 strikers where would Willock start? It would either have to be instead of Chair or as a striker. To suggest someone on the bench isn’t good enough is a nonsense. They wouldn’t be a sub if they weren’t good enough.
The current system is working so why would we change it? Keep it tight and if required put on the likes of Willock and Adomah to push for the win. Every time Willock has come on over the past few weeks he’s looked dangerous and has helped enormously in our current great form. Don’t understand anyone can say he’s not good enough - he obviously is - but he’s not going to start very often in the current system. |  | | |
| Willock on 11:10 - Feb 21 with 1837 views | gazza1 |
| Willock on 10:01 - Feb 21 by francisbowles |
Really? Are you sure?
It looks to me that he is stating why he is not starting games and agrees with MW that he isn't the best option alongside Charlie as the beginning of matches.
It is definitely not a case of him or Albert being good enough. The are both very good players just not the best options for that starting position at present.
As for if they are good enough they would be squeezed in somewhere. Not really, we have found a system that is currently working for us and everyone in it is doing their jobs, so patience needed before they get a starting position. |
Whatever way you put it.....if Willock was good enough to start then MW would start him - simple as that. He is not good enough so he does not start.
I am not 'slagging him off', I like him but there are better players for the 1st 11 at this moment.
The debate is should he start......imo he is not good enough to start regularly atm. [Post edited 21 Feb 2021 11:12]
| | | |
| Willock on 12:54 - Feb 21 with 1767 views | simmo |
| Willock on 11:10 - Feb 21 by gazza1 |
Whatever way you put it.....if Willock was good enough to start then MW would start him - simple as that. He is not good enough so he does not start.
I am not 'slagging him off', I like him but there are better players for the 1st 11 at this moment.
The debate is should he start......imo he is not good enough to start regularly atm. [Post edited 21 Feb 2021 11:12]
|
It's clearly nothing to do with being 'good enough', it's more about prioritising the system and the fact that he's having such a good impact being introduced later in games.
Also to get the best from Austin you need a partner to do more of the donkey work and challenge for the direct/long balls. Charlie doesn't really do that, so Dykes will keep getting picked on that basis.
Overall Willock is currently our most effective attacking player and sooner or later we will have to find a way to start him. |  |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Willock on 13:47 - Feb 21 with 1685 views | gazza1 |
| Willock on 12:54 - Feb 21 by simmo |
It's clearly nothing to do with being 'good enough', it's more about prioritising the system and the fact that he's having such a good impact being introduced later in games.
Also to get the best from Austin you need a partner to do more of the donkey work and challenge for the direct/long balls. Charlie doesn't really do that, so Dykes will keep getting picked on that basis.
Overall Willock is currently our most effective attacking player and sooner or later we will have to find a way to start him. |
We will have to beg to differ re Willock starting.........I stand by my view that he is not good enough to get a starting place in the starting 11 whether that be because of systems or impact. I know many think he is good enough to start but the facts are the facts and I go along with MW not starting him.
If Willock was our 'most effective attacking player' he would start especially when we were struggling to create chances, score goals and win games _ I do not think that MW would leave our 'most effective attacking player' on the bench - why would he??
I would also suggest that CA puts in a fair shift every week, I watched all of the games and he defends from the front which is what is needed - I do not think that CA would have it any other way. | | | |
| Willock on 14:40 - Feb 21 with 1606 views | simmo |
Willock has been directly involved in goals every time he has come on, we have improved offensively after every introduction and the winner against Watford, the first goal against Brentford and the winner yesterday were all started with progressive running or passes from Willock. Considering him total match time over those games is probably around 90mins, that's a great return.
Again I don't think his ability is anything to do with him not starting, it's likely about effectively managing a developing player and maintaining a winning system, so it's not a criticism of Warburton. But he's been a game changer for a while and we look a better team when he's on the pitch, it's not a coincidence. | |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| Willock on 14:56 - Feb 21 with 1565 views | francisbowles |
| Willock on 13:47 - Feb 21 by gazza1 |
We will have to beg to differ re Willock starting.........I stand by my view that he is not good enough to get a starting place in the starting 11 whether that be because of systems or impact. I know many think he is good enough to start but the facts are the facts and I go along with MW not starting him.
If Willock was our 'most effective attacking player' he would start especially when we were struggling to create chances, score goals and win games _ I do not think that MW would leave our 'most effective attacking player' on the bench - why would he??
I would also suggest that CA puts in a fair shift every week, I watched all of the games and he defends from the front which is what is needed - I do not think that CA would have it any other way. |
Well we will have to differ as you are the only one saying he is not good enough, over and over but not adding anything to new to make myself and others reconsider our view that he definitely is good enough. | | | |
| Willock on 15:27 - Feb 21 with 1493 views | gazza1 |
| Willock on 14:56 - Feb 21 by francisbowles |
Well we will have to differ as you are the only one saying he is not good enough, over and over but not adding anything to new to make myself and others reconsider our view that he definitely is good enough. |
I don't think it matters what I say.......he is part of the squad and will start occasionally but at this moment he only deserves a place on the bench. He could get into the team, perhaps, if Chair is injured or looses his form or if MW decides to play 2 wide players in a more attacking way. He may start occasionally if players need a rest.
Why do you think he should start? Who would he replace? who is he better than? I do not think he is better than any of the players that he could replace.
Anyways I have said enough on the subject, no point in saying any more. [Post edited 21 Feb 2021 15:28]
| | | |
| Willock on 15:32 - Feb 21 with 1466 views | bakerloo8 |
| Willock on 15:27 - Feb 21 by gazza1 |
I don't think it matters what I say.......he is part of the squad and will start occasionally but at this moment he only deserves a place on the bench. He could get into the team, perhaps, if Chair is injured or looses his form or if MW decides to play 2 wide players in a more attacking way. He may start occasionally if players need a rest.
Why do you think he should start? Who would he replace? who is he better than? I do not think he is better than any of the players that he could replace.
Anyways I have said enough on the subject, no point in saying any more. [Post edited 21 Feb 2021 15:28]
|
Honestly dont think you get it and we're going round and round in circles so I think we should leave it there. 👌 |  | | |
| Willock on 15:45 - Feb 21 with 1415 views | Burnleyhoop |
Antii has already made the point, Willock is plenty “good enough”. The issue is more to do with tactics, formations and a multitude of other factors.
The issue for me is more about the form of Dykes. He looks a little out of his depth and lacking in confidence. This is sometimes resolved by taking a break from the team, but can also be addressed by persevering and playing your way through it.
Willock has plenty of pace, is technically very good and looks to have an eye for goal. He may be a great foil for Austin. Similarly, Dykes is a work horse who pressures defenders and perhaps disrupts teams from playing out from the back. Horses for courses.
I personally would like to see Willock given a shot, but then again, why change what has been an unprecedented winning formula.
Preston is another tough test and in truth, Dykes physical presence, at least for the first hour, is probably the best option. | | | |
| Willock on 17:15 - Feb 21 with 1330 views | QPROslo |
I think both Willock and Albert have been doing great coming off the Bench. Apart from the reasons already posted on here, I suspect it is because neither can last 90 minutes I don't remember either of them doing that for us before, they usually faded before they'd managed 45, but both are excellent played as subs as now. | | | |
| Willock on 17:24 - Feb 21 with 1305 views | francisbowles |
| Willock on 15:27 - Feb 21 by gazza1 |
I don't think it matters what I say.......he is part of the squad and will start occasionally but at this moment he only deserves a place on the bench. He could get into the team, perhaps, if Chair is injured or looses his form or if MW decides to play 2 wide players in a more attacking way. He may start occasionally if players need a rest.
Why do you think he should start? Who would he replace? who is he better than? I do not think he is better than any of the players that he could replace.
Anyways I have said enough on the subject, no point in saying any more. [Post edited 21 Feb 2021 15:28]
|
I don't think he should start at present.
I am happy with the way things are going and the team being selected. He may gets starts soon though, with the amount of games and the need to rotate the squad. He definitely has the ability and he is getting used to the physicality of the championship. It will be interesting to see how he gets on when he is called upon from the beginning of matches. | | | |
| Willock on 18:09 - Feb 21 with 1224 views | W7Ranger |
He also set up 2 of Bonne's 3 chances yesterday. |  | | |
| Willock on 18:11 - Mar 6 with 842 views | TW_R |
| Willock on 18:05 - Mar 6 by gazza1 |
He did well today, just like most of the players.
You were very quiet indeed on Wednesday when we got well beaten and when he was very average but you didnt see me coming on here asking questions - I am a lot better than that and you. [Post edited 6 Mar 2021 18:07]
|
He didn’t start on Wednesday so the question wouldn’t have made any sense. Sometimes you have just got to admit you’re wrong and move on. | | | |
| Willock on 18:14 - Mar 6 with 812 views | gazza1 |
| Willock on 18:11 - Mar 6 by TW_R |
He didn’t start on Wednesday so the question wouldn’t have made any sense. Sometimes you have just got to admit you’re wrong and move on. |
No he didn't, but when he did come on he was average. He did start at B'ham - any comments about his game then?? | | | |
| Willock on 18:21 - Mar 6 with 771 views | bakerloo8 |
| Willock on 18:14 - Mar 6 by gazza1 |
No he didn't, but when he did come on he was average. He did start at B'ham - any comments about his game then?? |
Serious question fella, are you on the windup or what? | | | |
| Willock on 18:25 - Mar 6 with 751 views | TW_R |
| Willock on 18:14 - Mar 6 by gazza1 |
No he didn't, but when he did come on he was average. He did start at B'ham - any comments about his game then?? |
Thought he did OK against Birmingham, but not at his best. Wasn’t a great team performance overall and thought MW was a bit too negative taking Willock and Austin of so early in the 2nd half, particularly replacing Willock with Field. Probably should have brought on Adomah and I think that cost us in the end. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
