Re: Ndidi

[txj]

Noticed the changing role of Ndidi, starting from the opening game, onwards...

Appears to be falling deeper and deeper as the tournament progresses.

Very little indication of pushing forward as an arrival in the box (except for the Madagascar game), but instead playing close to the CDs, as well as tracking runs into the box, especially from wide..

Conversely, it is Iwobi who's made to drop back to be closer to the two CMs...

Always hoped we could transition to a 4-3-3 at some point with a fit Mikel in anchor role, shadowed on either side by Ndidi and Etebo, with Iwobi returning to his Arsenal role...

Those two are easily the best CM combo in the tournament so far.

Wonder at what point does Rohr expand the playbook a bit.

There's quite a bit more you could do tactically with the current group...

[waka-man]

The big change was half time agains Cameroon.
And to be fair, it worked.
The CD’s have also pushed up 5 or so yards.
So the full backs can give width and the wide forwards can get close to Ighalo.

The system you advocate is Sarri-ball and it depends on such incessant menace from the two forward of the three mids that we just don’t have. And Ndidi, our best player, does his best work in deeper positions: cutting off passing lanes, breaking up playing, laying the ball off simply.

For the personnel we have, I think it’s the best thing.

[Ugbowo]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

[danfo driver]

Noticed the changing role of Ndidi, starting from the opening game, onwards...

Appears to be falling deeper and deeper as the tournament progresses.

Very little indication of pushing forward as an arrival in the box (except for the Madagascar game), but instead playing close to the CDs, as well as tracking runs into the box, especially from wide..

Conversely, it is Iwobi who's made to drop back to be closer to the two CMs...

Always hoped we could transition to a 4-3-3 at some point with a fit Mikel in anchor role, shadowed on either side by Ndidi and Etebo, with Iwobi returning to his Arsenal role...

Those two are easily the best CM combo in the tournament so far.

Wonder at what point does Rohr expand the playbook a bit.

There's quite a bit more you could do tactically with the current group...

The use of that word makes your comment hard to understand.(1) It makes it seem like you are comparing Ndidi's role to Iwobi's, and (2) it makes it seem like they are playing the same role. You should edit that a bit for better understanding.

As to the crust of your comment, I think Ndidi is compensating for Rohr's decision to play Etebo that deep. Etebo isnt good defensively and his positioning is quite poor. So, Ndidi has no other option but to drop deep to take that role. If we had another player like Azubuike (let me make it clear that I am not advocating for Azubuike, as I have not watched him well enough. Instead, I am referring to a player with th attributes of Azubuike), we will see the full capacity of Ndidi.

[metalalloy]

Noticed the changing role of Ndidi, starting from the opening game, onwards...

Appears to be falling deeper and deeper as the tournament progresses.

Very little indication of pushing forward as an arrival in the box (except for the Madagascar game), but instead playing close to the CDs, as well as tracking runs into the box, especially from wide..

Conversely, it is Iwobi who's made to drop back to be closer to the two CMs...

Always hoped we could transition to a 4-3-3 at some point with a fit Mikel in anchor role, shadowed on either side by Ndidi and Etebo, with Iwobi returning to his Arsenal role...

Those two are easily the best CM combo in the tournament so far.

Wonder at what point does Rohr expand the playbook a bit.

There's quite a bit more you could do tactically with the current group...

Rohr specifically mentioned this in his press conference. My guess is that he had to resort to this due to the problems we have at the FB positions, and Mikel's injury.

[metalalloy]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

I suspect this.

Do you know if Mikel was at the base at Boro last season?

[txj]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

In an old interview, it came out clearly to be the player's (Mikel) choice...

Agreed, Rohr is set for the championship. There will be no major changes unless some unexpected event forces his hand.

Part of what makes Ndidi's role work at Leicester is the counter weight of Tielemans as compared to Etebo...

Beyond AFCON, we need to find a left sided CM who is above Ogu's level...

[txj]

Noticed the changing role of Ndidi, starting from the opening game, onwards...

Appears to be falling deeper and deeper as the tournament progresses.

Very little indication of pushing forward as an arrival in the box (except for the Madagascar game), but instead playing close to the CDs, as well as tracking runs into the box, especially from wide..

Conversely, it is Iwobi who's made to drop back to be closer to the two CMs...

Always hoped we could transition to a 4-3-3 at some point with a fit Mikel in anchor role, shadowed on either side by Ndidi and Etebo, with Iwobi returning to his Arsenal role...

Those two are easily the best CM combo in the tournament so far.

Wonder at what point does Rohr expand the playbook a bit.

There's quite a bit more you could do tactically with the current group...

The use of that word makes your comment hard to understand.(1) It makes it seem like you are comparing Ndidi's role to Iwobi's, and (2) it makes it seem like they are playing the same role. You should edit that a bit for better understanding.

As to the crust of your comment, I think Ndidi is compensating for Rohr's decision to play Etebo that deep. Etebo isnt good defensively and his positioning is quite poor. So, Ndidi has no other option but to drop deep to take that role. If we had another player like Azubuike (let me make it clear that I am not advocating for Azubuike, as I have not watched him well enough. Instead, I am referring to a player with th attributes of Azubuike), we will see the full capacity of Ndidi.

Read in relation to the sentence above it...

[txj]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

I suspect this.

Do you know if Mikel was at the base at Boro last season?

I saw him at least three times in that role for Boro...

[charlie]

Ndidi is being wasted at Leicester.
He should be playing for a UEFA Champions League bound European side.

It will happen eventually,....it is inevitable.

[green4life]

Ndidi is being wasted at Leicester.
He should be playing for a UEFA Champions League bound European side.

It will happen eventually,....it is inevitable.

No doubt. He will fit in well at a top team like Man U that has a lot of deficiencies in midfield.

[txj]

Ndidi is being wasted at Leicester.
He should be playing for a UEFA Champions League bound European side.

It will happen eventually,....it is inevitable.

No doubt. He will fit in well at a top team like Man U that has a lot of deficiencies in midfield.

He does have weaknesses to his game, like everyone else. Was really disappointed that Claude Puel did not challenge him properly to enable him grow, like I see increasingly with Rogers...

[green4life]

Ndidi is being wasted at Leicester.
He should be playing for a UEFA Champions League bound European side.

It will happen eventually,....it is inevitable.

No doubt. He will fit in well at a top team like Man U that has a lot of deficiencies in midfield.

He does have weaknesses to his game, like everyone else. Was really disappointed that Claude Puel did not challenge him properly to enable him grow, like I see increasingly with Rogers...

Rodgers approach has been to simplify his role to increase the speed of his decision making and movement within his assigned spaces. The benefits are already evident in his overall play.

[YUJAM]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

Chief the problem is Mikel has no legs left, at least in this tourney. It doesn’t matter where you play at this level. You cannot be effective if you don’t have the mobility and stamina to get around. Everyone saw it in the games he played in and I am sure this is why Rohr benched him. The other thing is it is no self respecting coach should represent a player’s wishes. It’s up to the coach to put the player in the position they think us best for them.

[txj]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

Chief the problem is Mikel has no legs left, at least in this tourney. It doesn’t matter where you play at this level. You cannot be effective if you don’t have the mobility and stamina to get around. Everyone saw it in the games he played in and I am sure this is why Rohr benched him. The other thing is it is no self respecting coach should represent a player’s wishes. It’s up to the coach to put the player in the position they think us best for them.

He was also injured; no?

Also, there's no black and white rule about the choice of position, and coaches have been known to confer with players on best positions. For instance Henderson's switch of positions in the 2nd half of the league at LFC...

[1naija]

Noticed the changing role of Ndidi, starting from the opening game, onwards...

Appears to be falling deeper and deeper as the tournament progresses.

Very little indication of pushing forward as an arrival in the box (except for the Madagascar game), but instead playing close to the CDs, as well as tracking runs into the box, especially from wide..

Conversely, it is Iwobi who's made to drop back to be closer to the two CMs...

Always hoped we could transition to a 4-3-3 at some point with a fit Mikel in anchor role, shadowed on either side by Ndidi and Etebo, with Iwobi returning to his Arsenal role...

Those two are easily the best CM combo in the tournament so far.

Wonder at what point does Rohr expand the playbook a bit.

There's quite a bit more you could do tactically with the current group...

Perhaps you should send Rohr the extended playbook you used to win your last tournament so he can borrow from it.

[YUJAM]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

Chief the problem is Mikel has no legs left, at least in this tourney. It doesn’t matter where you play at this level. You cannot be effective if you don’t have the mobility and stamina to get around. Everyone saw it in the games he played in and I am sure this is why Rohr benched him. The other thing is it is no self respecting coach should represent a player’s wishes. It’s up to the coach to put the player in the position they think us best for them.

He was also injured; no?

Also, there's no black and white rule about the choice of position, and coaches have been known to confer with players on best positions. For instance Henderson's switch of positions in the 2nd half of the league at LFC...

Injured or not, he was really poor. Just not good enough to hold down a starting position. That was apparent. Besides at this point in his career he does not have the legs to play Etebo’s role.

And as per the coach respecting a player’s wishes on their position, I guess that can happen but only if it is aligned with what the coach sees as his best tactical formation. The player cannot talk his way into the starting 11 nor can he tell the coach what position he must play.

[maceo4]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

Chief the problem is Mikel has no legs left, at least in this tourney. It doesn’t matter where you play at this level. You cannot be effective if you don’t have the mobility and stamina to get around. Everyone saw it in the games he played in and I am sure this is why Rohr benched him. The other thing is it is no self respecting coach should represent a player’s wishes. It’s up to the coach to put the player in the position they think us best for them.

He was also injured; no?

Also, there's no black and white rule about the choice of position, and coaches have been known to confer with players on best positions. For instance Henderson's switch of positions in the 2nd half of the league at LFC...

Injured or not, he was really poor. Just not good enough to hold down a starting position. That was apparent. Besides at this point in his career he does not have the legs to play Etebo’s role.

And as per the coach respecting a player’s wishes on their position, I guess that can happen but only if it is aligned with what the coach sees as his best tactical formation. The player cannot talk his way into the starting 11 nor can he tell the coach what position he must play.

He got injured 30something minute in our 3rd game.

[danfo driver]

Ndidi is being wasted at Leicester.
He should be playing for a UEFA Champions League bound European side.

It will happen eventually,....it is inevitable.

No doubt. He will fit in well at a top team like Man U that has a lot of deficiencies in midfield.

He does have weaknesses to his game, like everyone else. Was really disappointed that Claude Puel did not challenge him properly to enable him grow, like I see increasingly with Rogers...

[danfo driver]

Ndidi is being wasted at Leicester.
He should be playing for a UEFA Champions League bound European side.

It will happen eventually,....it is inevitable.

No doubt. He will fit in well at a top team like Man U that has a lot of deficiencies in midfield.

He does have weaknesses to his game, like everyone else. Was really disappointed that Claude Puel did not challenge him properly to enable him grow, like I see increasingly with Rogers...

Rodgers approach has been to simplify his role to increase the speed of his decision making and movement within his assigned spaces. The benefits are already evident in his overall play.

I strongly disagree with you, but its been a long day, so i go just leave am at that.

[Cellular]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

Chief the problem is Mikel has no legs left, at least in this tourney. It doesn’t matter where you play at this level. You cannot be effective if you don’t have the mobility and stamina to get around. Everyone saw it in the games he played in and I am sure this is why Rohr benched him. The other thing is it is no self respecting coach should represent a player’s wishes. It’s up to the coach to put the player in the position they think us best for them.

Yujam, how much mobility and stamina did Pirlo have?

It boils down to having complimentary players should you insist on playing him.

[danfo driver]

I think he tried that personnel in the first game but obviously out them in differing positions in his 4-2-3-1.

I wonder if its Rohr respecting Mikel's wishes or Rohr really thinks Mikel is better upfield. Its doing the player a disservice. He needs to be anchoring.

Conversely, Rohr may want different attributes for that role especially when we dont have the ball. While Mikel's positional ability in that anchor role was always top notch, i'm not sure we have seen him play there enough lately to make that same argument. Ndidi has done that especially since Rodgers came in and played him with both Maddison and Tielemans, leaving him at the base.

I doubt Rohr makes any more tweaks. I think the SA line up will be the same line up against Algeria.

Chief the problem is Mikel has no legs left, at least in this tourney. It doesn’t matter where you play at this level. You cannot be effective if you don’t have the mobility and stamina to get around. Everyone saw it in the games he played in and I am sure this is why Rohr benched him. The other thing is it is no self respecting coach should represent a player’s wishes. It’s up to the coach to put the player in the position they think us best for them.

Yujam, how much mobility and stamina did Pirlo have?

It boils down to having complimentary players should you insist on playing him.

Even Xavi and Xabi Alonso. Mobility is overrated. Positioning, reaction and workrate, and you wouldnt even notice how slow a player actually is.