Nigeria: midfield questions…

[jungle-jawara]

The analysis was very ok, but bros while I was reading, I became scared, seemed ur diagram (the pitch with the Naija players) is tilted to one side and it seemed it was going to fall on my head.

[marutimon]

Are you guys mad? Mikel, our most creative player, forced to be a destroyer? Hasn't he had enough of that nonsense at Chelsea? The guy creates 3-4 openings every game. What Nigeria needs to do is finish them, not change Mikel's role in the team.

[smartbrother]

Onazi is not an AM. Neither is he a pure DM.
If we play him as the sole DM, gaping holes will magically appear in the space between our midfield and defence
A half decent trequartista like Pjanic (sp) would have a field day in the hole with Onazi playing as the sole DM.
Unlike Ogude, he needs a partner to shoulder the burden of protecting our back four. . Azeez is the best option imho.

Mikel can be our metronome in midfield and chief creator without having to be pushed forward.
Xavi, Pirlo & Cabaye are just a few examples of players who show how this works
The key thing is he needs to be relieved of any primary defensive responsibilities.

............Onazi...........Azeeez
.....................Mikel............

In the absence of Okpalla I am not sure Keshi's & his coaching staff have the collective intelligence to figure this out.
Even if they do, we've run out of friendly matches and therefore live opportunities to test this formation and iron out any kinks in its implementation.

[Enugu II]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

[Odas]

Well, I no no wetin I go say, but make we wate and see sha! For us to win many games and go forward, Keshi need to fool the world (these analysists) with different personnel and line-up. That is, as the opposing coaches anticipates a certain format, they will be punched with another which they may not be prepared for.

[txj]

I have basically covered most of these issues over the last 2-3 years.

The Mundiale is here...no turning back now...

As always, we expect the best...

[txj]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

Its the case of action and consequences.

Pushing Mikel forward has its value, but it has enormous consequences.

BTW its interesting that u agree with him, but has disagreed with my iteration of the same problems over the last 2-3 years!

[maceo4]

I wrote here:

I told you guys that Onazi cannot play at the base of a double pivot, in other words, he is not a DM. The space he concedes in front of the defence at this level is ridiculous

Ogenyi Onzai is forced to act as the deepest midfielder, which doesn’t suit his skillset – he’s more energetic and likes to cover lots of ground. This means he’s bypassed easily, and the defence can be exposed readily.

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2014/06/10/ ... questions/

Either Mikel plays DM like he did at the ANC or another DM is brought in along side Mikel and Obi moves to AM...still cant believe we dropped Nosa who can play any of the 3 roles...

[Enugu II]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

Its the case of action and consequences.

Pushing Mikel forward has its value, but it has enormous consequences.

BTW its interesting that u agree with him, but has disagreed with my iteration of the same problems over the last 2-3 years!

txj,

Sure that would be interesting to note what your iterations were. I do not recall you advocating moving Mikel up or extolling reasons why Musa should play where he is playing or Musa's virtues. Those are key points that I have myself mentioned in the run up to the World Cup and particularly and specifically after Oduamadi, Nosa, and Mba were left off (re: Mikel moving up). I believe those are important even though the author here does not indicate it in his/her alignment of the formation. Perhaps, you may wish to pull up what you have said that is similar and does not involve denigrating the coach or his players.

[niyi]

Are you guys mad? Mikel, our most creative player, forced to be a destroyer?.

He can still create from deep as a deep-lying playmaker. I'm positive this position should bring out the best in him. It will combine his defensive attributes with his creativity. Further, he won't tire out in the 70th minute as he tends to do when he plays as the CAM.

[txj]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

Its the case of action and consequences.

Pushing Mikel forward has its value, but it has enormous consequences.

BTW its interesting that u agree with him, but has disagreed with my iteration of the same problems over the last 2-3 years!

txj,

Sure that would be interesting to note what your iterations were. I do not recall you advocating moving Mikel up or extolling reasons why Musa should play where he is playing or Musa's virtues. Those are key points that I have myself mentioned in the run up to the World Cup and particularly and specifically after Oduamadi, Nosa, and Mba were left off (re: Mikel moving up). I believe those are important even though the author here does not indicate it in his/her alignment of the formation. Perhaps, you may wish to pull up what you have said that is similar and does not involve denigrating the coach or his players.

Its all there on the blog and on CE!

In some instances complete with diagrams!

You will note especially on CE the torrent of abuse I received for these

[Enugu II]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

Its the case of action and consequences.

Pushing Mikel forward has its value, but it has enormous consequences.

BTW its interesting that u agree with him, but has disagreed with my iteration of the same problems over the last 2-3 years!

txj,

Sure that would be interesting to note what your iterations were. I do not recall you advocating moving Mikel up or extolling reasons why Musa should play where he is playing or Musa's virtues. Those are key points that I have myself mentioned in the run up to the World Cup and particularly and specifically after Oduamadi, Nosa, and Mba were left off (re: Mikel moving up). I believe those are important even though the author here does not indicate it in his/her alignment of the formation. Perhaps, you may wish to pull up what you have said that is similar and does not involve denigrating the coach or his players.

Its all there on the blog and on CE!

In some instances complete with diagrams!

You will note especially on CE the torrent of abuse I received for these

If you did, you may ask why did you receive CE abuses? May be the way you delivered your message? Note the way zonal marking delivers its message without denigrating the coach or any one. Sometimes that helps. After all, you are writing to persuade your readers and it is always very important to understand the values of your audience and work towards writing in order not to annoy them (see several persuasion theories on this issue). Those are basic points for successful persuasion.

[txj]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

Its the case of action and consequences.

Pushing Mikel forward has its value, but it has enormous consequences.

BTW its interesting that u agree with him, but has disagreed with my iteration of the same problems over the last 2-3 years!

txj,

Sure that would be interesting to note what your iterations were. I do not recall you advocating moving Mikel up or extolling reasons why Musa should play where he is playing or Musa's virtues. Those are key points that I have myself mentioned in the run up to the World Cup and particularly and specifically after Oduamadi, Nosa, and Mba were left off (re: Mikel moving up). I believe those are important even though the author here does not indicate it in his/her alignment of the formation. Perhaps, you may wish to pull up what you have said that is similar and does not involve denigrating the coach or his players.

Its all there on the blog and on CE!

In some instances complete with diagrams!

You will note especially on CE the torrent of abuse I received for these

If you did, you may ask why did you receive CE abuses? May be the way you delivered your message? Note the way zonal marking delivers its message without denigrating the coach or any one. Sometimes that helps. After all, you are writing to persuade your readers and it is always very important to understand the values of your audience and work towards writing in order not to annoy them (see several persuasion theories on this issue). Those are basic points for successful persuasion.

Wrong!

First I don't write to persuade. I write to express my opinion, based on my understanding of the issues. It is left for the audience to make its decision one way or the other.

2nd, nothing in my write up is denigrating of anybody...

[Enugu II]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

Its the case of action and consequences.

Pushing Mikel forward has its value, but it has enormous consequences.

BTW its interesting that u agree with him, but has disagreed with my iteration of the same problems over the last 2-3 years!

txj,

Sure that would be interesting to note what your iterations were. I do not recall you advocating moving Mikel up or extolling reasons why Musa should play where he is playing or Musa's virtues. Those are key points that I have myself mentioned in the run up to the World Cup and particularly and specifically after Oduamadi, Nosa, and Mba were left off (re: Mikel moving up). I believe those are important even though the author here does not indicate it in his/her alignment of the formation. Perhaps, you may wish to pull up what you have said that is similar and does not involve denigrating the coach or his players.

Its all there on the blog and on CE!

In some instances complete with diagrams!

You will note especially on CE the torrent of abuse I received for these

If you did, you may ask why did you receive CE abuses? May be the way you delivered your message? Note the way zonal marking delivers its message without denigrating the coach or any one. Sometimes that helps. After all, you are writing to persuade your readers and it is always very important to understand the values of your audience and work towards writing in order not to annoy them (see several persuasion theories on this issue). Those are basic points for successful persuasion.

Wrong!

First I don't write to persuade. I write to express my opinion, based on my understanding of the issues. It is left for the audience to make its decision one way or the other.

2nd, nothing in my write up is denigrating of anybody…

txj,

Bros, all writing is written to persuade or to clarify an ambiguous situation (intact all communication i.e. including verbal and nonverbal). Do you not provide justifications for your points? What exactly do you think justifications are for? Why are you then concerned about how people feel about what you have written?

I am surprised that you do not realize that communication is designed to do the following:

Persuade the listener
Remove uncertainty about a situation

Your well known strategy of never quitting a thread and going back and forth is for what if it is not to persuade the other than you are right? IT IS ALWAYS ABOUT PERSUASION and there is nothing wrong with that, bro. I am surprised that you do not realize that.

In addition, next time that you write, I suggest do not post immediately. Read it over and think of your audience and delete points that tend to denigrate and yet add little to the crux of the points that you make. I bet you will get a different reaction. It is the basic lesson on persuasive writing. I truly believe you make some very good points but they are often devalued by the unnecessary and distracting remarks that you often make. See below:

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/ ... asion/main
A message is more likely to be persuasive when it:

Is endorsed by others in authority or of high status in the community and/or in your group.
Suggests that a benefit offered is scarce, as in "we don't have many left," or "seats are going fast," or "first come, first served."
Suggests that a benefit has a time limit or deadline, as in "this is a limited time offer," or "please let us know by the end of the week," or "applications must be received by September 1st."
Is consistent with past behavior or expectations of the audience. People resist believing or acting in ways inconsistent with their previous beliefs or actions. But, if your message can be shown to fit with those prior beliefs or actions, to be a natural extension of them, that gives you a persuasive advantage.
Appeals to the norms or your audience or your target group. Every group has norms -- a set of behavioral and attitudinal standards, sometimes explicit, but often not. If your message appears to violate these group norms (of propriety, of custom, of written or unwritten rules), it will probably be rejected. If it goes well with those norms, acceptance is more likely.
Uses the principle of reciprocity, suggesting, in effect, that the communicator (or someone else) has helped you in the past and now needs some help in return. Or, as a variation (either directly stated or implied), suggest that if you help out now, you can request and receive help at some later date.

[Coach]

Creativity is a function of one's individual artistry. Lahm, playing as a defensive midfielder for Bayern was of great creative influence, Pirlo remains the deep lying talisman for the Old Lady, Gerrard registered a plethora of assists from the depth of midfield. If one has the ability to create, positional deployment is merely an adjustment of the easel's angulation before the naked sitter. For as long as the palette has its paints and the jar its brushes, the art remains the produce of the artist.

[deanotito]

Creativity is a function of one's individual artistry. Lahm, playing as a defensive midfielder from Bayern was of great creative influence, Pirlo remains the deep lying talisman for the Old Lady, Gerrard registered a plethora of assists from the depth of midfield. If one has the ability to create, positional deployment is merely an adjustment of the easel's angulation before the naked sitter. For as the palette has its paints and the jar its brushes, the art remains the produce of the artist.

Sorry, but don't buy it. The creator from the rear thing is actually quite rare. Most teams -even the best- don't do it....Nigeria has never tried it....etc..its complex, and needs a unique player..right now, its too late to find out if Mikel is that unique.

For every Pirlo, there are 10 Zidane's. Please before many go flying off their horses, take some time to understand the analogy...I'm not saying there are many Zidane-like players in the world....I'm simply saying the traditional position for the creator-in-chief is at the top of the midfield, not at the rear.

Wouldn't have been opposed to seeing Keshi try your thoughts out in a friendly...alas, he did not, and the big dance is too big of a dance to go try it.

[goke313]

http://outsideoftheboot.com/2014/06/09/ ... nd-set-up/


The Super Eagles of Nigeria booked their spot in Group G of the FIFA World Cup after what was in hindsight an easy qualifying campaign. Stephen Keshi’s side are now getting ready to face Argentina, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Iran for the honour of being in the World Cup’s round of 16. A feat that will definitely be a brilliant achievement from the African Champions. A lot has changed since Nigeria’s (led by Lars Lagerback) last appearance at the World Cup in 2010 that was summed up by Yakubu Aiyegbeni missing one of the easiest tap ins you will ever see. In fact 2010 was so forgettable for Nigerian football that the President banned the national team from any official matches. The said ban was only overturned when FIFA handed the Nigerian National team a ban of their own for government interruption. After a confusing period of switching manager after manager. The Eagles finally found the right man in Stephen Keshi. And since his appointment, Nigeria has not looked back. They won the 2013 African Cup of Nations and put out a good account of themselves and the continent in the Confederations Cup in a group that contained Uruguay and Spain. The Nigerian team is certainly capable of being a surprise package at the World Cup.

BASIC FORMATION

Stephen Keshi’s preferred formation since taking over has been the 4-3-3. Even though he at times experimented with a 4-2-3-1/4-4-2. If all players are fit and available, his starting XI is normally constant. Enyeama is a certainty in the post, with Kenneth Omeruo and Godfrey Oboabona being the centre backs. Efe Ambrose and Juwon Oshaniwa should be the starters at right and left back respectively, with a midfield trio of John Obi Mikel, Ogenyi Onazi and Ramon Azeez. Upfront, Ahmed Musa and Victor Moses are on the flanks and Emmanuel Emenike is the preferred striker. Although the inclusion of Peter Osaze Odemwingie and Shola Ameobi in the provisional squad means serious competition for the front 3 players.

ANALYSIS

Stephen Keshi, since he took charge of the Nigerian team has favoured a more reactive style of play. The Nigerians have become very adept at holding off pressure from opponents, waiting for them to lose the ball, and then they counter with lightning speed. They are not the kind of team that camps players in front of their box looking to soak up press or “park the bus”, they look to press the opponents from the midfield, as such are closer to goal most of the time they win the ball. Even in the games versus Spain in the Confederations Cup where you would expect them to sit very deep, they actually came out and pressed the Spanish in midfield, and for a while Nigeria actually dominated the World Champions. When the ball is won in the centre, it is immediately passed to their quick wingers who use their pace and trickery to fashion out chances for the team. The fact that Nigeria’s fullbacks are not very adventurous in attack and the presence of three defensively solid central midfielders means that the defence is well protected. So most of the time Nigeria’s centre backs are more concerned with defending the box and are rarely forced out of position into the wider areas or high up the field.

The team has problems defending down its flanks especially in situations when they have lost the ball and the wingers are high up. This is caused by the fact that Nigeria’s wingers, although they try, are not very adept at tracking back and helping their fullbacks. In a situation where Nigeria were on the attack and lost the ball, the fullbacks would be isolated because they don’t go high up the pitch, and there is no way the wingers can track back in time to prevent attacks. This problem is more evident when Nigeria play against a team with an offensive fullback, as this leaves the Nigerian full back in a lot of 2v1 situations. An attempt from the midfielders to cover could leave the centre exposed, and the same goes for the centre backs as they are not comfortable defending the wide positions if their fullback is exposed. A good example of this is the goal that Spain scored via Jordi Alba to break the deadlock in the Confederations cup.

Another problem of the team is building up play via passing moves. Nigeria’s team is designed to hurt teams with quick transitions and find it hard to fashion chances against teams that are deep and compact. This is mostly because they have wingers that are better with space in front of them or behind the opposition defence to run into. The fullbacks in the team are not the offensive types so do not provide width during attacks. Another reason is that Nigeria don’t have the type of creative midfielders adept at breaking down deep defences. Mikel’s passing is at its most dangerous during counters. These factors altogether make it hard for Nigeria to break down deep, compact defences.

Another factor that could deter this Nigerian team is their finishing. The Nigerians are often guilty of squandering an alarming amount of chances in big games. In previous tournaments, Emmanuel Emenike has been their only efficient finisher, with wingers like Musa and Moses being good at fashioning out chances but disappointing with the finish. The presence of more EPL standard strikers like Odemwingie and Ameobi could solve this problem though.

KEY PLAYERS

Vincent Enyeama | The keeper has had a wonderful season at Lille and how far Nigeria goes will depend on his form.

Jon Obi Mikel | The Chelsea midfielder at club level is mostly known for his ability to provide a solid and stable screen to shield the Chelsea defence. He provides stability and anchors the midfield and also helps Chelsea slow down games with his passing and ability to hold the ball. He does the same for his country, but with far more freedom to be creative. Once Nigeria win the ball back, Mikel is their main distributor, quickly locating the outlets or sometimes splitting defences directly with through or long passes on the counter. He is Nigeria’s main playmaker and midfield anchor.

Victor Moses and Ahmed Musa | They are Nigeria’s main outlets on the counter attack. If found on the run, they will look to run at defenders and beat them with a combination of pace and trickery to create chances or score them. They are also Nigeria’s main source of width as the fullbacks are not very offensive.

Ogenyi Onazi and Ramon Azeez | The two central midfielders in front of Mikel are the ones tasked with the important duty of pressing the ball in midfield and forcing turn overs. Both players have brilliant work-rates, are strong and dynamic, and when they do win the ball, they go for the short pass to a close team mate (mostly Mikel). Both players also make forward runs on or off the ball from deep to help the attack.

Emmanuel Emenike | The striker was a key player for the team that won the African Cup of Nations. Although the inclusion of Shola Ameobi and Osaze Odemwingie casts doubts over his role in the team, he will probably still be the starter at Brazil. A striker that possesses a dangerous mixture of pace, technical ability and strength could be a nightmare for opposition defences. Emenike holds up play well, drops deep to play with the midfield allowing the wingers space in the channels to work with. All this while having a thunderous shot in him. His form in front of goal could be key for the Eagles as his absence was clearly felt in the Confederations Cup.

TALENT RADAR KEY YOUNG PLAYER

Kenneth Omeruo (21) | The 21 year old Chelsea defender has been a regular starter for the Super Eagles since their successful Nations Cup campaign. A physically imposing player for his age, he is strong, fast a very good tackler and interceptor. If he can brush up the technical side of his game and add a bit of maturity, the sky is the limit.

Ramon Azeez (21) | The 21 year old central midfielder had a good season with Almeria, during which he showed the potential that won him plaudits at the 2009 Under-17 World Cup. A capable defensive or central midfield player, he offers decent playmaking ability among other players that are more physical. But he also doesn’t shy away from a physical confrontation. He is certainly a player to watch.

Ogenyi Onazi (21) | The Lazio midfielder has proven himself to be Nigeria’s most frequent ball winner. Combining his wonderful dynamism and work-rate with decent tackling and marking abilities. He has become a main stay in the Nigerian team.

Ahmed Musa (21) | Pace, trickery and dribbling skills; those are the attributed to best describe CSKA’s Ahmed Musa. The winger is well capable of providing moments of sheer brilliance on his own.

EXTRA

There is a lot of hope going into Nigeria’s World Cup campaign. They have already showed that they are capable of going toe to toe with the best in the World at the Confederations Cup. Bar any spectacular capitulation, and as long as they can brush up on the finishing, they are in with a shout to make it out of the group. The fact that they struggle against deep teams may not be a factor as I fully expect that most teams would come at them and try to attack, which will play into their hands.

[txj]

I like the thinking. My only disagreement is his placement of players in the middle. Here is why:

1. Mikel should be tried ahead of both Azee and Onazi in the alignment. Mikel is the major creator and he will have more opportunities for this by playing closer to goal. If you go back and watch the Greece game, the few Nigerian opportunities in the opening half came when Mikel featured to more advanced position seeking Musa or Emenike. Osaze just had no clue from that position and was just too static.

2. It all depends on Keshi's willingness to do this. I feel that Onazi and Azeez can provide cover for our defense. Onazi, in addition, moves all over and presents himself as an outlet for the defense to distribute the ball. This is an important role that Mikel plays but I feel Onazi does just as well. Azeez would have to up his work rate but I have confidence that he can do it.

3. I like the recognition of Musa's value. I truly believe that he should start ahead of Osaze and for our needs, he is a better option. Osaze can be used to spell Musa and Moses if either of them is having a poor game.

My tuppence.

Its the case of action and consequences.

Pushing Mikel forward has its value, but it has enormous consequences.

BTW its interesting that u agree with him, but has disagreed with my iteration of the same problems over the last 2-3 years!

txj,

Sure that would be interesting to note what your iterations were. I do not recall you advocating moving Mikel up or extolling reasons why Musa should play where he is playing or Musa's virtues. Those are key points that I have myself mentioned in the run up to the World Cup and particularly and specifically after Oduamadi, Nosa, and Mba were left off (re: Mikel moving up). I believe those are important even though the author here does not indicate it in his/her alignment of the formation. Perhaps, you may wish to pull up what you have said that is similar and does not involve denigrating the coach or his players.

Its all there on the blog and on CE!

In some instances complete with diagrams!

You will note especially on CE the torrent of abuse I received for these

If you did, you may ask why did you receive CE abuses? May be the way you delivered your message? Note the way zonal marking delivers its message without denigrating the coach or any one. Sometimes that helps. After all, you are writing to persuade your readers and it is always very important to understand the values of your audience and work towards writing in order not to annoy them (see several persuasion theories on this issue). Those are basic points for successful persuasion.

Wrong!

First I don't write to persuade. I write to express my opinion, based on my understanding of the issues. It is left for the audience to make its decision one way or the other.

2nd, nothing in my write up is denigrating of anybody…

txj,

Bros, all writing is written to persuade or to clarify an ambiguous situation (intact all communication i.e. including verbal and nonverbal). Do you not provide justifications for your points? What exactly do you think justifications are for? Why are you then concerned about how people feel about what you have written?

I am surprised that you do not realize that communication is designed to do the following:

Persuade the listener
Remove uncertainty about a situation

Your well known strategy of never quitting a thread and going back and forth is for what if it is not to persuade the other than you are right? IT IS ALWAYS ABOUT PERSUASION and there is nothing wrong with that, bro. I am surprised that you do not realize that.

In addition, next time that you write, I suggest do not post immediately. Read it over and think of your audience and delete points that tend to denigrate and yet add little to the crux of the points that you make. I bet you will get a different reaction. It is the basic lesson on persuasive writing. I truly believe you make some very good points but they are often devalued by the unnecessary and distracting remarks that you often make. See below:

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/ ... asion/main
A message is more likely to be persuasive when it:

Is endorsed by others in authority or of high status in the community and/or in your group.
Suggests that a benefit offered is scarce, as in "we don't have many left," or "seats are going fast," or "first come, first served."
Suggests that a benefit has a time limit or deadline, as in "this is a limited time offer," or "please let us know by the end of the week," or "applications must be received by September 1st."
Is consistent with past behavior or expectations of the audience. People resist believing or acting in ways inconsistent with their previous beliefs or actions. But, if your message can be shown to fit with those prior beliefs or actions, to be a natural extension of them, that gives you a persuasive advantage.
Appeals to the norms or your audience or your target group. Every group has norms -- a set of behavioral and attitudinal standards, sometimes explicit, but often not. If your message appears to violate these group norms (of propriety, of custom, of written or unwritten rules), it will probably be rejected. If it goes well with those norms, acceptance is more likely.
Uses the principle of reciprocity, suggesting, in effect, that the communicator (or someone else) has helped you in the past and now needs some help in return. Or, as a variation (either directly stated or implied), suggest that if you help out now, you can request and receive help at some later date.

Thanks for the lesson, condescending and all...

I have been writing for a long time, on various fora, successfully I might add; not just on CE.

I write first and foremost to express an opinion, based on understanding of the issues. I am happy to leave it to the reader to decide what side of the issue they fall on and clarify where necessary.

As for the claim of denigration, lets say that is your personal opinion...Its ironic that you speak of denigration while simultaneously being condescending and patronizing...

[Coach]

@Deano, the 4-2-3-1 is perfectly set up to execute and counter a number ten, who addresses the deep-lying playmaker? By default, the position of greatest influence vs the orthodoxy of today is the base of midfield, unchecked is their sphere of influence. With time, the number ten will disappear and the Pirlo will become the fetish of fashion.

[Enugu II]

Creativity is a function of one's individual artistry. Lahm, playing as a defensive midfielder from Bayern was of great creative influence, Pirlo remains the deep lying talisman for the Old Lady, Gerrard registered a plethora of assists from the depth of midfield. If one has the ability to create, positional deployment is merely an adjustment of the easel's angulation before the naked sitter. For as the palette has its paints and the jar its brushes, the art remains the produce of the artist.

Sorry, but don't buy it. The creator from the rear thing is actually quite rare. Most teams -even the best- don't do it....Nigeria has never tried it....etc..its complex, and needs a unique player..right now, its too late to find out if Mikel is that unique.

For every Pirlo, there are 10 Zidane's. Please before many go flying off their horses, take some time to understand the analogy...I'm not saying there are many Zidane-like players in the world....I'm simply saying the traditional position for the creator-in-chief is at the top of the midfield, not at the rear.

Wouldn't have been opposed to seeing Keshi try your thoughts out in a friendly...alas, he did not, and the big dance is too big of a dance to go try it.

Deanotito

You hit the nail on the head. It takes a special player like Pirlo to create from deep. Btw we saw Mikel do this back at the u-20 with Long range passes but can he do it now? The much easier solution is creating from a more advanced position and that is why that is far more common.