Leeds(away)predictions

[alfinyalcabo]

Leeds 1 Rovers 1 .. I would love to see you beat those deluded cnuts from oer the border though..

[AucklandRover]

Champs - my concerns with Bell involve two areas, really.
1) In defensive terms, he doesn't have a full-back's instincts. He often gets caught out by diagonal passes behind him, or commits to a tackle too early. I thought Cunningham was much steadier, in that respect, as was Williams when he was playing there regularly, two seasons ago.
2) He is just as inconsistent as Armstrong.
I agree that he has looked excellent on the ball at times, but he has rarely had what I would call an overall "influential" game.
In a way, I think he is in the same "class" as Armstrong and Rothwell - impressive when we are dominating a game, but anonymous or slightly panicky when we are on the back foot.
You identify a few occasions when he has looked good, but he has had quite a lot of opportunities to "force" his way into the team, and I really don't think he has done that. If we had regularly used 3-5-2, it might have been a different story, of course.
Comparing him with Downing is not really like-for-like. Downing is there as a steadying influence and a link-player in midfield - much in the same way Craig Conway was. For me, a full-back is primarily there to defend. If he can add something to the attack as well, all well and good, but in the last couple of seasons, it's been in defence, above all, that we have lacked consistency and calm steadiness.

[champs95]

Champs - my concerns with Bell involve two areas, really.
1) In defensive terms, he doesn't have a full-back's instincts. He often gets caught out by diagonal passes behind him, or commits to a tackle too early. I thought Cunningham was much steadier, in that respect, as was Williams when he was playing there regularly, two seasons ago.
2) He is just as inconsistent as Armstrong.
I agree that he has looked excellent on the ball at times, but he has rarely had what I would call an overall "influential" game.
In a way, I think he is in the same "class" as Armstrong and Rothwell - impressive when we are dominating a game, but anonymous or slightly panicky when we are on the back foot.
You identify a few occasions when he has looked good, but he has had quite a lot of opportunities to "force" his way into the team, and I really don't think he has done that. If we had regularly used 3-5-2, it might have been a different story, of course.
Comparing him with Downing is not really like-for-like. Downing is there as a steadying influence and a link-player in midfield - much in the same way Craig Conway was. For me, a full-back is primarily there to defend. If he can add something to the attack as well, all well and good, but in the last couple of seasons, it's been in defence, above all, that we have lacked consistency and calm steadiness.

I get all of that Auks, and find myself agreeing with the majority.
And I do like and appreciate your views.
Now employ all of that thinking and rationale and try and explain how Bennett is getting in this team. Or how he can play him LB? Over Bell?
I'm at a loss.

[AucklandRover]

Bennett is, I agree, a grey area. To be honest, I thought he was at his worst in the early-season games. Since then he has been patchy, but not terrible in the way some supporters have suggested.
We shouldn't forget, though, that Nyambe was dropped in the first place because he, too, had a very poor spell of form.
My view is that he should have been brought back earlier, but I don't see training.
Bennett is now in the that position that Keith Andrews found himself in. People are looking out for his mistakes. I thought he had a good second half last week, but it is always the errors that seem to get picked up.
Would I have him in MY first XI? Probably not if it was 4-4-2 or similar, but if we were playing 3-5-2, I think there is a case for playing him on the right flank of the "5", because one thing you DO always get from EB is 100% effort and commitment. None of our other potential wide players make the effort to help out the defence in the way he does.
My take on it would be that either Bennett or Downing should be on the pitch at the moment, because of their experience, but possibly not both.
To be fair, Cunningham's injury has caused many of the extra headaches, and, clearly, the "captaincy" issue is another complication.
Bottom line, though, I really don't think he has been as bad as some fans are making out.
It's fine to be calling for more creative players, but that is not without its problems. Would a team that contained Gallagher, Dack, Armstrong, Chapman, Rothwell, Buckley and Rankin-Costello, for example, have the necessary bottle? I still think you do need a few soldiers to go alongside the artists.

[champs95]

Bennett is, I agree, a grey area. To be honest, I thought he was at his worst in the early-season games. Since then he has been patchy, but not terrible in the way some supporters have suggested.
We shouldn't forget, though, that Nyambe was dropped in the first place because he, too, had a very poor spell of form.
My view is that he should have been brought back earlier, but I don't see training.
Bennett is now in the that position that Keith Andrews found himself in. People are looking out for his mistakes. I thought he had a good second half last week, but it is always the errors that seem to get picked up.
Would I have him in MY first XI? Probably not if it was 4-4-2 or similar, but if we were playing 3-5-2, I think there is a case for playing him on the right flank of the "5", because one thing you DO always get from EB is 100% effort and commitment. None of our other potential wide players make the effort to help out the defence in the way he does.
My take on it would be that either Bennett or Downing should be on the pitch at the moment, because of their experience, but possibly not both.
To be fair, Cunningham's injury has caused many of the extra headaches, and, clearly, the "captaincy" issue is another complication.
Bottom line, though, I really don't think he has been as bad as some fans are making out.
It's fine to be calling for more creative players, but that is not without its problems. Would a team that contained Gallagher, Dack, Armstrong, Chapman, Rothwell, Buckley and Rankin-Costello, for example, have the necessary bottle? I still think you do need a few soldiers to go alongside the artists.

Again, for the largest parts, I totally agree Aucks. He did have a better 2nd half last week, and played a part in the goal. Plus dropped over a great cross just before that for Rothwells header. I do also agree that either him or Downing should be playing to balance it out of we have a few young lads in the side.
I do though think Bennett has cost us in a few games. And while I totally agree that Nyambe, or anyone for that matter, was dropped when his form dipped. I just feel by making him captain, Bennett plays regardless. I get why someone like Dack gets in. Because he wins you 3 points if he's on form. I've always been a big believer in any manager will always have a 6/7 out of 10 type of player in a side at all times. It's sensible in that you always get a consistent performance. We don't I feel with Bennett. And there has been times, Nyambe should have been brought back. It will be tough to shift him out of the side now. I think Nyambe will start tomoz.

[champs95]

I want to change my prediction. I'm going to go with an entertaining 3-3 (rather my my original 1-1)

[AucklandRover]

Streuth - Champs! You'll get damned good odds for that!

[seventwo]

I'll have a pint of whatever Champs is on!

[champs95]

Streuth - Champs! You'll get damned good odds for that!

just fancy that tomoz. I've seen is draw 3-3 at Elland Road before, a certain Mr Shearer getting a hat-trick.

[seventwo]

Hope you're right Champs.
I'll go with a 1-0 loss