Conor Gallagher | Atlético Player

duffer said:
You're right that saying someone is *a bit crap" isn't abuse.

This is.


Also someone got a warning in the England thread for hoping he'd get injured.

These are extremes for Redcafe though because it's well moderated. I'm more talking about the wider social media bell ends who will be abusing players directly, rather than shit talking on a forum.
Click to expand...
Im pretty sure that person is exaggerating because of the setting of being on a forum, of all the types of abuse going on in the world, it’s not really something to get worked up about.

Abuse on social media is a bit of a wider conversation but nothing new, you don’t need to lecture United fans on how England players get abused.
 
Dan_F said:
Im pretty sure that person is exaggerating because of the setting of being on a forum, of all the types of abuse going on in the world, it’s not really something to get worked up about.

Abuse on social media is a bit of a wider conversation but nothing new, you don’t need to lecture United fans on how England players get abused.
Click to expand...

If anything, I was downplaying the depth of animus I have for him.
 
Valencia Shin Crosses said:
Not sure what’s worse, the fact that Southgate has decided Connor Gallagher is the answer to the midfield issues or that that’s the only change he’s making. Probably the latter
Click to expand...
If Connor Gallagher is the answer, then you’re asking the wrong question.
 
I understand it, even though in a purely footballing sense it's natural to want to see a better footballer like Kobbie there.

Being honest, Gallagher does offer more defensively so his workrate will function better in a double pivot with Rice than Kobbie probably would.

If this engine room works, then it will free up Bellingham to pull the strings in attack, mitigating the loss of Kobbie's creativity.

For me it's more important ditching Foden on the left and playing Gordon out there. We've got to stop with this obsession of having everything played into feet. Whether it's Watkins replacing Kane (not likely) or Gordon coming in, someone has to be prepared to chase and stretch defences.
 
Fortitude said:
Liverpool fans were saying the same about TAA before the disaster sessions were there for all to see - that it was about club allegiance, rather than him being an awful fit for the role. I think things are being called as they are with England and even the likes of Foden, Kane and Bellingham are being called out as bad fits in respect of one another (encroaching on the same area of the pitch).

Gallagher is just not the player for a deep role, especially so when there are players who have performed well in them waiting for their turn.
Click to expand...

That’s just not the feeling I get reading all the posts deriding the player, I obviously wouldn’t expect everyone to admit that’s where the biases are coming from, so kind of a moot point anyway.

I agree with those that say Mainoo or Wharton should start instead of him. I’ll fight against the unfair and over the top stick I feel he’s getting as a player.
 
Powderfinger said:
This team is never going to be very good at progressing the ball because this depends on coordinated movements and automatisms that Southgate doesn't appear to coach and because beating the press is really really really hard unless you're using every last yard of width on the pitch and Southgate has set the team up in a way that lets the opponent largely ignore the left quarter since he's got a LB that won't take the ball on his left foot down the line and a left winger that plays in the middle.

England can play Wharton or Mainoo but its not going to help much because they'll still get on the ball and look up to see a hugely congested pitch and a bunch of teammates that aren't moving.

Given all that, I think playing Gallagher is a defensible call because its going to be a disjointed game with a lot of second balls and tackling in midfield and he'll do better in that regard than either Mainoo or Wharton.
Click to expand...

As always, your assessment is fair and reasonable.
 
Gallagher was pencilled in as the pre planned sub for TAA before it started so only right Southgate continues his usual approach. Nothing player and a pointless change, might as well stick with Trent, at least he can hit a free kick
 
WeePat said:
That’s just not the feeling I get reading all the posts deriding the player, I obviously wouldn’t expect everyone to admit that’s where the biases are coming from, so kind of a moot point anyway.

I agree with those that say Mainoo or Wharton should start instead of him. I’ll fight against the unfair and over the top stick I feel he’s getting as a player.
Click to expand...
But it isn't a moot point; there's barely any specific calls for Mainoo across the site, in fact, there are plenty who want him as far away from this shitshow as possible so he is both fresh and not lined up for any blame.

Wharton/Mainoo is the call by the remainder, as has even been shown in the replies to you. What is certifiable is that barely anyone wants Gallagher there, much to the chagrin of Chelsea fans, who, understandably, feel the need to defend their guy.

There's no silent conspiracy and nobody believes Mainoo is perfect or a saviour, but he offers far, far better balance and connective tissue, and Wharton is a natural in the position who had one of the best closing runs to the season in the league. It really should be obvious why they are favoured - by some distance - over Gallagher, who is not in his natural position playing anywhere behind the halfway line.
 
Powderfinger said:
This team is never going to be very good at progressing the ball because this depends on coordinated movements and automatisms that Southgate doesn't appear to coach and because beating the press is really really really hard unless you're using every last yard of width on the pitch and Southgate has set the team up in a way that lets the opponent largely ignore the left quarter since he's got a LB that won't take the ball on his left foot down the line and a left winger that plays in the middle.

England can play Wharton or Mainoo but its not going to help much because they'll still get on the ball and look up to see a hugely congested pitch and a bunch of teammates that aren't moving.

Given all that, I think playing Gallagher is a defensible call because its going to be a disjointed game with a lot of second balls and tackling in midfield and he'll do better in that regard than either Mainoo or Wharton.
Click to expand...
The more the pitch is condensed, the more it favours Mainoo, who is a futsal player and is used to a much more attenuated pitch than a full sized one. A natural at creating triangles also becomes a quick and viable option for progression, especially for those who don't have the nerve to be expansive; the ball then goes through the conduit and that, by itself, encourages movement, and we've seen how much the other components in that midfield thrive orbiting such a player at club level. It's more familiar for them than what they're playing with England, that's for certain - they look like rabbits in the headlights because there's nothing they associate with playing in this NT team under Southgate.

It would be preferential for the left flank to be the talking point rather than the midfield. That's also a quicker fix, even for Southgate.
 
Powderfinger said:
That's completely fair and I absolutely agree that Mainoo would bring some real qualities to that kind of game with his skills at retaining the ball and getting out of tight spaces.

I just think (and my sense is that you agree) that sometimes these conversations seem to imply that England just needs the right midfielder to unlock this smooth possession based football and that's just not realistic with Southgate as manager. They're going to play a scrappy, disjointed, frustrating game and be less than the sum of their parts no matter who he puts into midfield and they're always going to struggle once they meet a side with similar talent but a much better setup and tactical instruction.
Click to expand...
Yeh very much agree with that second paragraph. Southgate has stayed one tournament too many. Unlike most I can appreciate he’s done some good work and brought some of the best memories I’ve had as an England fan (it’s been bleak okay…). But I think it was obvious he’s taken us as far as we can with him. Now he’s starting to make really questionable selection decisions which in my opinion seem more political rather than sticking to his original convictions (for better or worse). Eventually the pressure of the job catches up to anyone and I think that’s even more prevalent if you’re limited tactically.
 
Fortitude said:
It would be preferential for the left flank to be the talking point rather than the midfield. That's also a quicker fix, even for Southgate.
Click to expand...
It is a fix that doesn't even need to change players, just tell Foden to stay on the left. It's not ideal for Foden, but it's not like he can't play well there. Overloading that side would be good too as it would leave England's best 1vs1 player in acres of space on the other side. Overload one side, switch to the other quickly and attack with space. It's football abc
 
mikeyt said:
Gallagher was pencilled in as the pre planned sub for TAA before it started so only right Southgate continues his usual approach. Nothing player and a pointless change, might as well stick with Trent, at least he can hit a free kick
Click to expand...
For this game he should start TAA RB and play Walker and Stones together. That’s the area of the pitch TAA is best in anyway from a passing standpoint. We should boss possession and he can play a much more balanced midfield.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
For this game he should start TAA RB and play Walker and Stones together. That’s the area of the pitch TAA is best in anyway from a passing standpoint. We should boss possession and he can play a much more balanced midfield.
Click to expand...
We've complained about having players out of position, playing Walker as a CB in a back 4 doesn't make sense imo. He can do the RCB role in a back 3 but I wouldn't trust him in a back 4
 
saivet said:
We've complained about having players out of position, playing Walker as a CB in a back 4 doesn't make sense imo. He can do the RCB role in a back 3 but I wouldn't trust him in a back 4
Click to expand...
Purely for this game. If we can’t handle Slovenia we might as well just pack up.
 
giorno said:
It is a fix that doesn't even need to change players, just tell Foden to stay on the left. It's not ideal for Foden, but it's not like he can't play well there. Overloading that side would be good too as it would leave England's best 1vs1 player in acres of space on the other side. Overload one side, switch to the other quickly and attack with space. It's football abc
Click to expand...
Yep, and it's not hard for even Southgate to convey, and England, with the players they have, can bludgeon it through, even if it is a blatant and simple.

England are one of few teams in the tournament who can telegraph their exact intentions and still be an absolute nightmare to stop, if set up right, which makes it all the more frustrating.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
Purely for this game. If we can’t handle Slovenia we might as well just pack up.
Click to expand...
England need a settled and functional system asap, not chopping and changing any more than absolutely necessary.

Because Southgate elected to experiment during the tournament proper, crucial tweaks and slight modifications other teams are making have passed England by and it’s already a matter of harsh catch up before facing an organised side with a plan and the competence to execute it to the wire.

As things currently stand, the vast majority of the team are in disarray, uncertain of their own roles let alone as part of a functional unit. If that isn’t fixed, a first KO round exit is his highly probable.
 
Fortitude said:
England need a settled and functional system asap, not chopping and changing any more than absolutely necessary.

Because Southgate elected to experiment during the tournament proper, crucial tweaks and slight modifications other teams are making have passed England by and it’s already a matter of harsh catch up before facing an organised side with a plan and the competence to execute it to the wire.

As things currently stand, the vast majority of the team are in disarray, uncertain of their own roles let alone as part of a functional unit. If that isn’t fixed, a first KO round exit is his highly probable.
Click to expand...
The only person who would be in a semi unfamiliar role would be Walker though - the rest of the team is in their usual positions. Look, we should beat Slovenia even if we played a lot of the guys who haven't played but if they are just going to sit in, I think TAA back in his usual RB slot is a great tactical offensive option. You can even rest Walker if you'd prefer Stones/Guehi.

The key for us is midfield, I'd personally like to see Wharton in his actual role but if it's Gallagher it's fine. Hopefully we see Mainoo as well at some point.

I disagree more broadly though re settled roles, we need some tactical flexibility - it's just weird Southgate chose the experiment of TAA when literally everyone (apart from henry Winter whose eye for football is terrible for someone who writes about it for a career) said it was a bad idea when you are already somewhat shoehorning Bellingham and Foden into the team. But, if he really wants TAA in the team for his deliveries, then just play him at RB.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
The only person who would be in a semi unfamiliar role would be Walker though - the rest of the team is in their usual positions. Look, we should beat Slovenia even if we played a lot of the guys who haven't played but if they are just going to sit in, I think TAA back in his usual RB slot is a great tactical offensive option. You can even rest Walker if you'd prefer Stones/Guehi.

The key for us is midfield, I'd personally like to see Wharton in his actual role but if it's Gallagher it's fine. Hopefully we see Mainoo as well at some point.

I disagree more broadly though re settled roles, we need some tactical flexibility - it's just weird Southgate chose the experiment of TAA when literally everyone (apart from henry Winter whose eye for football is terrible for someone who writes about it for a career) said it was a bad idea when you are already somewhat shoehorning Bellingham and Foden into the team. But, if he really wants TAA in the team for his deliveries, then just play him at RB.
Click to expand...
When the pressure is on, which is the KO stages, players will revert to type and what they, as individuals, feel most safe doing, which is why they need to be drilled, confident and familiar going into those games so their automated play is constructive, un-panicked and assured instead of self-serving and nervous.

You can’t magically acquire that; these players need to be settled, running drills in real games until they are assimilated.

The game against Slovenia is the last chance to tune things as best as possible. There can be no feigned surprise if England are routinely beaten next round whilst falling apart should they not get their house in order now.
 
Fortitude said:
England need a settled and functional system asap, not chopping and changing any more than absolutely necessary.

Because Southgate elected to experiment during the tournament proper, crucial tweaks and slight modifications other teams are making have passed England by and it’s already a matter of harsh catch up before facing an organised side with a plan and the competence to execute it to the wire.

As things currently stand, the vast majority of the team are in disarray, uncertain of their own roles let alone as part of a functional unit. If that isn’t fixed, a first KO round exit is his highly probable.
Click to expand...
This is an exaggeration. History is littered with teams that took the whole group stage to figure themselves out and then went on to win/make the final

And there's nobody at international level capable of executing a plan to the wire, unless the plan is sit deep and counter.

England need to find a functional lineup, anf from there, build an identity, and the time for that is indeed running out. But it hasn't ran out yet, and they might even get another game of reprieve. Then it's the QF and yeah, by then you either have a working team or you're likely going out.
 
Fortitude said:
But it isn't a moot point; there's barely any specific calls for Mainoo across the site, in fact, there are plenty who want him as far away from this shitshow as possible so he is both fresh and not lined up for any blame.

Wharton/Mainoo is the call by the remainder, as has even been shown in the replies to you. What is certifiable is that barely anyone wants Gallagher there, much to the chagrin of Chelsea fans, who, understandably, feel the need to defend their guy.

There's no silent conspiracy and nobody believes Mainoo is perfect or a saviour, but he offers far, far better balance and connective tissue, and Wharton is a natural in the position who had one of the best closing runs to the season in the league. It really should be obvious why they are favoured - by some distance - over Gallagher, who is not in his natural position playing anywhere behind the halfway line.
Click to expand...

It is because I don't believe this thread would even exist if the added context of Mainoo sitting on the bench didn't exist.

I don't want Gallagher to start in the role Southgate is asking him to fulfil either, so don't misunderstand me and think I'm posting in here because I'm upset people don't want him in the team, but if people are in here giving him unfair flak and piling on him based on, what is in my opinion, inaccurate assessment of his strengths and weaknesses, then of course I'll defend him.
 
giorno said:
This is an exaggeration. History is littered with teams that took the whole group stage to figure themselves out and then went on to win/make the final

And there's nobody at international level capable of executing a plan to the wire, unless the plan is sit deep and counter.

England need to find a functional lineup, anf from there, build an identity, and the time for that is indeed running out. But it hasn't ran out yet, and they might even get another game of reprieve. Then it's the QF and yeah, by then you either have a working team or you're likely going out.
Click to expand...
You mean teams that chopped and changed (tweaked and fine tuned, as I said), not ones in disarray across 5 positions (LB, LW, CM, AM and CF).

The bolded, however, maybe so, but looking at Switzerland, that’s a bad match up for the England we’ve seen thus far - time to find their feet is at a premium.
 
Fortitude said:
You mean teams that chopped and changed (tweaked and fine tuned, as I said), not ones in disarray across 5 positions (LB, LW, CM, AM and CF).

The bolded, however, maybe so, but looking at Switzerland, that’s a bad match up for the England we’ve seen thus far - time to find their feet is at a premium.
Click to expand...
Beat Slovenia and they can't play Switzerland until the QF. Besides, Italy won't lose that one either so really, no chance for England to play the swiss

And I'm Italian. We barely managed 3 draws in the first group in Spain, looked worse than this England frankly. Then we beat Argentina and Brazil and won the WC. In '94 we made the final after barely making out of a group with Mexico, the ROI and Norway as one of the best 3rd place teams - again, we looked terrible. We even looked pretty disjointed against Nigeria in the R16 but then Baggio came through. By then we'd settled on stay compact, defend our half well, and then just give it to Baggio
 
I mean let's be honest it's very good news for United fans, after seeing the turf of one or two games and it doesn't look great. He should be holidaying but il accept no euro games just to keep him free from injury risk.
 
Fortitude said:
When the pressure is on, which is the KO stages, players will revert to type and what they, as individuals, feel most safe doing, which is why they need to be drilled, confident and familiar going into those games so their automated play is constructive, un-panicked and assured instead of self-serving and nervous.

You can’t magically acquire that; these players need to be settled, running drills in real games until they are assimilated.

The game against Slovenia is the last chance to tune things as best as possible. There can be no feigned surprise if England are routinely beaten next round whilst falling apart should they not get their house in order now.
Click to expand...
In club football yes, but international football you don't really have time for that. Southgate gets a few weeks through the year and then post season before a tournament (and then most players have extra rest). Errors and individual acts of brilliance I feel are more common in international football because a) the opposition are generally not the best unless you draw 1 of maybe 5 or 6 teams and b) there aren't really any systems teams, coaches don't have time, so unless you can just put a midfield in from the same domestic team (Spain 2010) you are cobbling a unit together somewhat. What that needs is big balls to drop one or two big names to get the balance right and that's what Southgate hasn't, yet, done. He still has time, we still have a very good team and I think we should beat most opponents but he needs to use some common sense.
 
Lyng said:
Slovenia have proven much harder to deal with than anyone thought.
Click to expand...
Ranked below Saudi and Iraq in world football, I get they can be tough to beat but we should be comfortably winning here, even playing the way we are. Denmark were much better than them in their game, if you watch out for Sesko’s thunderbolt shot I don’t see them causing us issues.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
Ranked below Saudi and Iraq in world football, I get they can be tough to beat but we should be comfortably winning here, even playing the way we are. Denmark were much better than them in their game, if you watch out for Sesko’s thunderbolt shot I don’t see them causing us issues.
Click to expand...

Their manager have them playing well above their level of squad. We where much better in the first half but they where better in the second. We had more trouble with Slovenia than England.
 
Lyng said:
Their manager have them playing well above their level of squad. We where much better in the first half but they where better in the second. We had more trouble with Slovenia than England.
Click to expand...
Let’s see tonight!
 
"He works hard and is a pressing machine"....can just hear Roy Keanes response to that.

Argued at work about Gallagher early on in the season, virtually everybody else rated him and thinks he will be a top player,including resident colleague "I havecoaching badges" who is an ecpertin his own head haha.

Had convo with friend about England aferDenmark and I was positive as it forced changes.....worst thing he can dois jus swap Trent for Gallagher....and what does it look like he is going to do.

He did wellat palacebut overhypedd after a couple of good goals.

If Chelsea sell him in two years he fades like Calvin Phillips, Tom Cleverly or Spurs guy Ive evenforgotten his name.....ashejust isnt that good. His passing his weak, first touch is weak,againt pressure he is sloppy. Not saying he is a bad player but deary me, there are better that missed the squad
 
GledTheRed said:
Getting rewarded with a start after those sub appearances is absolutely laughable.

Mainoo is twice the player.
Click to expand...
You know none of this matters to our Gareth? His pre planned subs has Gallagher on the list for Trent so that’s what he’ll do. He’ll sub Bowen on for Foden after about 65 minutes too
 
Why is the ref stopping the game for a foot injury?

Wrong thread!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.