A new elephant knocking on the door: can Bruno, Zirkzee and Højlund play in the same side?

Borys said:
Mystery solved too quickly!

He wasn't Soton best player, I forgot about the kid who grilled Dalot until we got the goal. Then, they gave up what made it really easy for us. They did nothing after that, and in our team I remember Bruno miscontrolling the ball/ dispossessed a few times.

It's just his contribution to the team is a bit overrated now. But there's definitely an aura around him, even if he makes one thing right, it just counts. It's funny both him and Amad ended up with the same number of goal contribution yesterday, one creating chances constantly and the other having a stinker.
Click to expand...

So for the second time today you’ve backpedaled on some hyperbolic and easily disproven nonsense regarding Bruno.

You have some bizarre bias here mate. How is 87% pass completion including one excellent assist a “stinker”?

I’m not sure what’s “funny” about Amad having another very good game, the more players that contribute to our attacking game, the better, we’ve become too dependable on Bruno so it’s great when he can have a fairly risk free game (87%) and we still have other players providing lots of chances for the team. Especially so when Bruno tends to become his most wasteful when the sole burden for creating is on him. I’m not surprised he kept the ball well when Amad was so creative.

Isn’t that exactly what makes a good side? When Becks was having an off day, Giggs would step up, or Sheringham, Yorke or Scholes.
I don’t ever remember us claiming an assist and 87% for Kanchelskis was a stinker because Sharpe created more. Weird.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
So for the second time today you’ve backpedaled on some hyperbolic and easily disproven nonsense regarding Bruno.

You have some bizarre bias here mate. How is 87% pass completion including one excellent assist a “stinker”?

I’m not sure what’s “funny” about Amad having another very good game, the more players that contribute to our attacking game, the better, we’ve become too dependable on Bruno so it’s great when he can have a fairly risk free game (87%) and we still have other players providing lots of chances for the team. Especially so when Bruno tends to become his most wasteful when the sole burden for creating is on him. I’m not surprised he kept the ball well when Amad was so creative.

Isn’t that exactly what makes a good side? When Becks was having an off day, Giggs would step up, or Sheringham, Yorke or Scholes.
I don’t ever remember us claiming an assist and 87% for Kanchelskis was a stinker because Sharpe created more. Weird.
Click to expand...
Bruno had a poor game, his passing accuracy was high, maybe because he made very little with the ball. Check out the dispossessed stat, I'm sure his topping this one. Stupid yellow card and waving and yelling at the ref is also why I am not a big fan of him as a captain. His influence on our game yesterday was minimalistic, so to speak.

Focusing on the positives, I like that we are using him as a single #10 again this season. This is how he works best, even if he's far from being in good form since the start of the season. It's clear Amad is taking over the playmaker role, also adding some tempo control (something Bruno never learnt). Remains to be seen what role will Bruno play this season, we might need different type of attacking midfielder if Zirkzee and Amad continue to develop in the direction it seems they are heading. The worry is so far out of those midfield and attacking players yesterday, it seemed Bruno was the most out of sync. And that was by far the most controlled, and dominant performance in a long while.
 
I think they would complement each other very well, but not sure how to fit both of them into the same team. One of Zirkzee, Hojlund, or Bruno would probably have to play on the wing tbh, but maybe often drift into central areas.
 
It's a bit too early after only a few games to be calling for Zirkzee to be a starter. I'd imagine he was brought into be be a rotation option. If he kicks on from there and develops into a starter great but he's still young and adapting to a new league. There will be much tougher tests in the PL most weeks than Southampton.
 
Dropping Bruno for Hojlund is a terrible idea. The most important aspect when it comes to goal is chance creation. You cant expect every chance to be converted into goal (as shown against Soton), hence you need create loads of them just to get 1 goal. Bruno might be erratic sometimes but he's still our best creator, Hojlund is yet to show he can be as creative.
Zirkzee, Amad look promising they can work together (pass and receive the ball in tight space like penalty box) but back in 19/20 we had Martial, Greenwood who were just as good (if not better) and Bruno worked with them just fine.

Regulus Arcturus Black said:
So for the second time today you’ve backpedaled on some hyperbolic and easily disproven nonsense regarding Bruno.

You have some bizarre bias here mate. How is 87% pass completion including one excellent assist a “stinker”?

I’m not sure what’s “funny” about Amad having another very good game, the more players that contribute to our attacking game, the better, we’ve become too dependable on Bruno so it’s great when he can have a fairly risk free game (87%) and we still have other players providing lots of chances for the team. Especially so when Bruno tends to become his most wasteful when the sole burden for creating is on him. I’m not surprised he kept the ball well when Amad was so creative.

Isn’t that exactly what makes a good side? When Becks was having an off day, Giggs would step up, or Sheringham, Yorke or Scholes.
I don’t ever remember us claiming an assist and 87% for Kanchelskis was a stinker because Sharpe created more. Weird.
Click to expand...

Yup thats how we ALWAYS done it under Fergie. In 2001 when Yorke - Cole ran out of gas Teddy stepped up, in 2006 when Ruud was sold Ronaldo stepped up, in 2011 when Rooney was making scenes Berba and Nani stepped up. I think decades of Ronaldo and Messi has put wrong picture in some people, that "ONE MAN SHOW" could last for eternity but thats not how we did it under Fergie.
 
Gives the manager many tactical options and that's a great thing to have.

Zrikzee + Hojlund can do the trick without Bruno. He needs to get rested once in while - probably played every game since he joined without a break even during the summer.

Bruno + Zirkzee / Hojlund is proven to work.

Bruno RW + Zirkzee + Hojlund if Amad's having a crap game.

Throw Bruno deep and play them all when chasing games. (Ugarte, Bruno midfield)
 
It’s called having a squad. Not everyone needs to start every game. This idea of a first xi is so quaint. I think Fergie famously went through whole seasons without starting the same xi in back to back games.
 
I see Zirkzee and Hojlund as a clash between two styles of football. If our wingers keep insisting on acting like the main top scorers then they are now accomodated by Zirkzee. The Dutch man will drop deep, he'll work hard and he'll create space for them to score. However if they can't score enough goals then Hojlund will come in. His goal conversion rate is at par to the very great. Having said that in such circumstances our wingers will have to do most of the donkey work.
 
There’s finally some good attacking combinations to mix and match for the right opponent and the 70 odd games we play each season.

Bruno, Mount, Eriksen and Zirkzee can all play the #10 with a different flavor.
Rashford and Garnacho can play off the left.
Amad and Antony can play off the right.
Højlund, Zirkzee and Rashford can each play the #9 in each their own style.
 
simonhch said:
It’s called having a squad. Not everyone needs to start every game. This idea of a first xi is so quaint. I think Fergie famously went through whole seasons without starting the same xi in back to back games.
Click to expand...

Yep. I dont know why we keep doing this, "how can we fit them in". As we have seen over the last year, its very unlikely that all of them will be fit / in form at the same time.

It is a very long season, Zirkzee has the spot with Bruno at the moment, Hojlund will be back and will get game time to dislodge Zirkzee. Thats what competition for places is.

Its like the wingers at the moment, Rashford and Amad are the starters but first game Amad was off at 60 mins, now its Rashford because Amad is performing at a higher level.

When Amad hits a dip in form, he will take a back seat for a player in form, we will need a squad this season.
 
The problem with Bruno is he's a turnover machine in the wrong way. Our best and most balanced midfields don't feature him in the squad, he's just too ill disciplined.
 
Whoever is the crappiest in training will have to sit on the bench. It's called healthy competition. Also Mason Mount says hi - from the sidelines of course.
 
dubplate warrior said:
The problem with Bruno is he's a turnover machine in the wrong way.
Click to expand...

Not true.

First of all, when compared to the likes of De Bruyne, Ødegaard and Palmer his pass completion and dispossession stats are more or less on par (often better).

Secondly, the so-called Hollywood ball generally has the lowest possible chance of a turnover. If you're going to lose the ball, you want it to A) happen deep into the opponent's half and B) when your own team lies low or has a stable defence line. When it comes to Bruno's Hollywood balls both A and B tend to be true.

In other words: Bruno's playstyle makes us significantly less prone to turnovers.

For the sake of balance: Bruno has 2-3 clear weaknesses:

1. Dribbling
2. Quick, progressive ball-carrying
3. Finishing (debatable, but definitely true under Ten Hag)

1 and 2 are kind of overlapping and have always been true and it will never change as the man is 30 now. That being said, this is not enough to warrant heavy criticism. Plenty of good players have been mediocre/poor at this. But number 3 is a problem that I'd like to see fixed.
 
Scandi Red said:
Not true.

First of all, when compared to the likes of De Bruyne, Ødegaard and Palmer his pass completion and dispossession stats are more or less on par (often better).

Secondly, the so-called Hollywood ball generally has the lowest possible chance of a turnover. If you're going to lose the ball, you want it to A) happen deep into the opponent's half and B) when your own team lies low or has a stable defence line. When it comes to Bruno's Hollywood balls both A and B tend to be true.

In other words: Bruno's playstyle makes us significantly less prone to turnovers.

For the sake of balance: Bruno has 2-3 clear weaknesses:

1. Dribbling
2. Quick, progressive ball-carrying
3. Finishing (debatable, but definitely true under Ten Hag)

1 and 2 are kind of overlapping and have always been true and it will never change as the man is 30 now. That being said, this is not enough to warrant heavy criticism. Plenty of good players have been mediocre/poor at this. But number 3 is a problem that I'd like to see fixed.
Click to expand...
It's easy to see that the way those players give the ball away is different to Bruno playing a dumb and unnecessary pass as soon as we've got the ball back. This is why stats aren't helpful if you don't actually watch the players.

He also is just way too ill disciplined and leaves us wide open. A number ten absolutely should be able to dribble or at least play on the half turn.
 
dubplate warrior said:
It's easy to see that the way those players give the ball away is different to Bruno playing a dumb and unnecessary pass as soon as we've got the ball back. This is why stats aren't helpful if you don't actually watch the players.

He also is just way too ill disciplined and leaves us wide open. A number ten absolutely should be able to dribble or at least play on the half turn.
Click to expand...
What way do those players give the ball away?
 
If Zirkzee isn't putting the ball in the net, Hojilund will go straight back in, and rightly so. He's had plenty of chances since the Fulham game to do so.
 
dubplate warrior said:
It's easy to see that the way those players give the ball away is different to Bruno playing a dumb and unnecessary pass as soon as we've got the ball back. This is why stats aren't helpful if you don't actually watch the players.
Click to expand...

You just straight up ignored my second point.

Your claim was that Bruno is a "turnover machine", but he clearly isn't if you actually watch the game.
 
Always think it’s weird when people think we should have a fixed 11 with a fixed plan.
 
Scandi Red said:
You just straight up ignored my second point.

Your claim was that Bruno is a "turnover machine", but he clearly isn't if you actually watch the game.
Click to expand...
I think Bruno can try to hard to do everything for us and with that when he inevitably tires he does start to make bad decisions with his passing or non passing sometimes. It irritates me as I just want him to be more calm at times and make the right decision.

To be fair to him though he has been asked to do too much in the team the last few years hopefully other players step up and take some of the load of him so he can be a bit more calm and conserve energy during games.
 
acnumber9 said:
What way do those players give the ball away?
Click to expand...
When it's the right decision to play the pass. Bruno just straight up gives the ball away doing dumb shit, and puts his team under constant pressure when he loses it.

Maybe it's the manager, but this has been a problem many people have stated over and over again since his second season under Ole.
 
Ollie Derbyshire said:
I think Bruno can try to hard to do everything for us and with that when he inevitably tires he does start to make bad decisions with his passing or non passing sometimes.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make him a turnover machine though. How many times do we lose the ball over the course of a game? At least 50. How many of those end up in turnovers (which is just a fancy word for "dangerous counter" right)? And then how many of those were on average Bruno's fault in particular?

Few turnovers come as a result of a long ball being played into the box or a shot missing the target. That is also one of the reasons why some pretty average DMs and CBs still have a pass accuracy in the high 90's. They cannot afford to make that mistake. But a creative AM can and should. Honestly, I don't want my AM to have a pass accuracy high above 85%. That's starting to look like a player who's afraid to take any chances.
 
Pexbo said:
Always think it’s weird when people think we should have a fixed 11 with a fixed plan.
Click to expand...
Exactly, I’m more happy that for the first time in ages it looks like we have options
 
AltiUn said:
Exactly, I’m more happy that for the first time in ages it looks like we have options
Click to expand...
Agreed, it's always good to have options.

The question is who does and doesn't work together on the pitch, and what is our strongest, most cohesive team.
 
dubplate warrior said:
Agreed, it's always good to have options.

The question is who does and doesn't work together on the pitch, and what is our strongest, most cohesive team.
Click to expand...
And nobody knows the answer to that because there’s so many variables the two most important are:

Who are we playing?
Who is in form?

The answer to those questions will drastically change the answer.
 
Zirkzee was bought as a 2nd striker, but can also play all across the forward positions. I don't see why Bruno, Hojlund and him all need to play at the same time; I don't think that was ever the plan. It allows us options and competition for places, something the club has sorely lacked for quite some time now.
 
The best teams have options. We had Yorke, Cole, Sheringham & Solskjaer. Later we had Rooney, Ronaldo, Tevez and Berbatov.

In those scenarios it is impossible to keep everyone happy. In the aforementioned case Tevez ended up leaving. At City for example they just lost Alvarez who seems to have more ambition than their other players who were happy pocketing the money and warming the bench.

Situation is not easy but it is does create motivation in players to fight for their place and elevate the whole team. We haven't had this for ages. Now we have it in the forward positions and the wide positions to an extent (although Anthony is not good enough and Mount is injured all the time), as well as in defence.

We still need to create the same scenario in midfield and are still short there since if Ugarte gets injured we are in trouble again.
 
Pexbo said:
Always think it’s weird when people think we should have a fixed 11 with a fixed plan.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I really don't understand people worrying about the prospect of us maybe having more than 11 decent players.

Didn't do us much harm when we had Cole, Yorke, Sheringham, and Solskjaer for two spots. Doesn't do City much harm to have four or five first choice quality options at CB.
 
dubplate warrior said:
When it's the right decision to play the pass. Bruno just straight up gives the ball away doing dumb shit, and puts his team under constant pressure when he loses it.

Maybe it's the manager, but this has been a problem many people have stated over and over again since his second season under Ole.
Click to expand...
How do you measure when it’s the right decision? Sounds like you’re making it up to be honest.
 
acnumber9 said:
How do you measure when it’s the right decision? Sounds like you’re making it up to be honest.
Click to expand...
You can't measure that with a spreadsheet mate, its clear and obvious watching a match or even if you just play football, and I don't mean to sound condescending when saying that so please don't take it the wrong way.

Neither of the other two are anywhere near as guilty of playing the Hollywood pass as Bruno. You don't need your attacking midfielder to have a incredibly high pass completion rate but the way Bruno loses it is indicative of a player with a lack of intelligence.
 
devilish said:
I see Zirkzee and Hojlund as a clash between two styles of football. If our wingers keep insisting on acting like the main top scorers then they are now accomodated by Zirkzee. The Dutch man will drop deep, he'll work hard and he'll create space for them to score. However if they can't score enough goals then Hojlund will come in. His goal conversion rate is at par to the very great. Having said that in such circumstances our wingers will have to do most of the donkey work.
Click to expand...
I think Zirkzee and Hojlund would work quite well as partners, especially if you had Amad on the right, but the issue becomes that you don't have a fullback on the left that will hold width and provide that outlet and balance. Shaw/Dalot etc. aren't really that type of player.

To answer OP's question, no I don't think those two along with Bruno work well, at least not in this team dynamic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.