Mason Mount

JB7 said:
I know you aren't defending Mount's performance but the reality is that Mount's average position in the USA game was higher than Kane and pretty much holding Sterling's hand on the left hand side. He was a good 20 yards further forward than Bellingham & Rice played pretty much directly behind him. If that's him performing as one of two 8s in a midfield 3 then it's astonishing he wasn't taken off regardless of performance level.
Click to expand...
That's the point I made as well. No point saying he's the best option to play in midfield when he wasn't playing in midfield.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
For me it's pretty clear that Mount's best archetype is peak Angel Di Maria - there is absolutely huge value in being able to switch between a role as an inside forward and then as an 8 in the same game. Obviously then this type of nuanced role will always be underappreciated at international level where the managers are dumber and training time is more limited. With England specifically though I just don't think it makes sense to have both Kane and Mount in the same team - both ideally want to be operating between the lines and with both of them in that pocket there is not enough running in behind (especially because Saka has this tendency as well).
Click to expand...
is this a joke?
 
Wouldn't be an international tournament without England fans and media slaughtering a player, and clamouring for him to be replaced by another player who has never really performed for England either.

Mount is in the team for his tactical discipline and defensive work rate. He's a wet dream for a coach like Southgate.
 
Carl said:
Wouldn't be an international tournament without England fans and media slaughtering a player, and clamouring for him to be replaced by another player who has never really performed for England either.

Mount is in the team for his tactical discipline and defensive work rate. He's a wet dream for a coach like Southgate.
Click to expand...

He offered little of this in the last match.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
For me it's pretty clear that Mount's best archetype is peak Angel Di Maria
Click to expand...
Two players who are absolutely nothing like each other. Mount isn’t even anywhere near a poor di Maria. The only thing they have in common is they have two legs and two feet.
 
Stacks said:
Peak Di Maria was a speed demon, dazzling dribbler a bit like young Giggs mixed with older more creative Giggs. Mount is like Nick Barmby
Click to expand...
What's more confusing: Mount starting for England or the American's claiming to have put a man on the moon?
 
Carl said:
Wouldn't be an international tournament without England fans and media slaughtering a player, and clamouring for him to be replaced by another player who has never really performed for England either.

Mount is in the team for his tactical discipline and defensive work rate. He's a wet dream for a coach like Southgate.
Click to expand...

You're right, Southgate is ultimately the issue as he's yet again choosing his forwards based on who puts the best shift in defensively. Doesn't mean people can't criticise Mount as well though. Even by his rather average standards I thought he was pretty poor against the US.
 
Stacks said:
is this a joke?
Click to expand...
Cassidy said:
It must be, surely
Click to expand...
Chief123 said:
Two players who are absolutely nothing like each other. Mount isn’t even anywhere near a poor di Maria. The only thing they have in common is they have two legs and two feet.
Click to expand...

It's not a joke. I'm obviously not saying Mount is anywhere near as good as peak Angel Di Maria or anything like that - but the value Angel Di Maria offered at his apex was that he could play as a shuttler in transition, delivered balls well from wide positions in attack, and did enough work defensively dropping back into midfield to make up for Ronaldo staying high and wide on the left. Yes Mount will never be the dribbler ADM was, but he's generally still a very good player in transition and his workrate and delivery are comparable.

My point is that building an attack around either one as the main man to carry an attack has a very low ceiling - Mount is much more of a system player whose best attributes allow other better players around him to slot in when they might otherwise be poor fits tactically.
 
NoPace said:
Di Maria was special as a ball carrier, though. Mount doesn't have that. Di Maria was a great threat vertically in the halfspace, and if the opposing team's right back moved up he could get behind him too.

Mount reminds me of some of the midfielders Spain had in the 90s when I first started watching football (so my memories may be playing tricks on me) like Caminero and an older Luis Enrique. Clever, technically very good, lacking pace (Luis Enrique had it when he was younger though) and quite good at most parts of attacking play without having a thing he was truly great at.
Click to expand...

Yeah don't hate that comparison. Mount is definitely lacking in terms of pace and ball carrying and that's where the comparison falls somewhat flat - I mostly just meant that Di Maria is probably the best high profile recent example of someone who played in attack in possession and as a midfielder outside it with an engine relentless enough to still be a top tier transition player. Mount can tick those boxes for me even if aesthetically the Di Maria comp is misguided.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
It's not a joke. I'm obviously not saying Mount is anywhere near as good as peak Angel Di Maria or anything like that - but the value Angel Di Maria offered at his apex was that he could play as a shuttler in transition, delivered balls well from wide positions in attack, and did enough work defensively dropping back into midfield to make up for Ronaldo staying high and wide on the left. Yes Mount will never be the dribbler ADM was, but he's generally still a very good player in transition and his workrate and delivery are comparable.

My point is that building an attack around either one as the main man to carry an attack has a very low ceiling - Mount is much more of a system player whose best attributes allow other better players around him to slot in when they might otherwise be poor fits tactically.
Click to expand...

No one said you said they are similar level. The two players are not remotely similar in any way. Mount is more similar to Bruno Fernandes
 
Cassidy said:
No one said you said they are similar level. The two players are not remotely similar in any way. Mount is more simialr to Bruno Fernandes
Click to expand...

Again though - my point is that that is who Mount should be modeling his game after. Chelsea have been far better in generally when he does less pressing high and instead drops deep to receive the ball, be an extra body in midfield, and aid our efforts in transition.

Agreed that he's more similar to Bruno but I want him to be more like Di Maria and I think that's within his capabilities.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
My point is that building an attack around either one as the main man to carry an attack has a very low ceiling - Mount is much more of a system player whose best attributes allow other better players around him to slot in when they might otherwise be poor fits tactically.
Click to expand...

This part I resonate with not sure about the Di Maria comparison. I've seen Mount domestically have a very good influence under Lampard and Tuchel. He is indeed a system player and to some extent the likes of Sterling is too. Rice I'd throw into a similar conversation he was the best player for me at the Euro's because with the pragmatic formation deployed he shielded the defence really well positionally and made crucial interceptions when breaking up play.

In the 4-3-3 however he's more exposed because neither him, Bellingham or Mount are great at distributing the ball from base midfield and playing passess that breaks the opposition lines.

There seems to be an evolution of B2B midfielders on the rise but not many who are particularly talented in passing the ball (weight, speed, playing into space).
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Again though - my point is that that is who Mount should be modeling his game after. Chelsea have been far better in generally when he does less pressing high and instead drops deep to receive the ball, be an extra body in midfield, and aid our efforts in transition.

Agreed that he's more similar to Bruno but I want him to be more like Di Maria and I think that's within his capabilities.
Click to expand...
DiMaria could do that because he has both a better engine and was/is better at transitioning the play from defence to attack with his dribbling. Mount needs to be closer to the goal to be effective and stay out of Kovacic’s way. Like Bruno Mount is pretending to be a midfielder because he isn’t quite good enough to be an attacker alone
 
Vapor trail said:
This part I resonate with not sure about the Di Maria comparison. I've seen Mount domestically have a very good influence under Lampard and Tuchel. He is indeed a system player and to some extent the likes of Sterling is too. Rice I'd throw into a similar conversation he was the best player for me at the Euro's because with the pragmatic formation deployed he shielded the defence really well positionally and made crucial interceptions when breaking up play.

In the 4-3-3 however he's more exposed because neither him, Bellingham or Mount are great at distributing the ball from base midfield and playing passess that breaks the opposition lines.

There seems to be an evolution of B2B midfielders on the rise but not many who are particularly talented in passing the ball (weight, speed, playing into space).
Click to expand...
Well the problem with the 4-3-3 England have set up with is that you have your B2B in Bellingham - who is talented but young so expect some inconsistency from time to time, Rice as the holding midfielder and then you have no number 6 to balance everything out. For all the talk of Foden or Maddison or Grealish playing, they are better as 10s or wide forwards. Phillips isn’t the answer, Ward-Prowse wouldn’t be the answer. They’re shoe horning in Mount (who is frankly way out of form) to be a 6 and a pressing midfielder.

The pleb Southgate should stop trying to force his frankly low tactical ability on a squad and play to the teams strengths. That’s either have a second holding midfielder and play Jude as a goal scoring 10 or play Foden as a playmaking 10. Sterling needs dropping for Grealish and then I believe we would be a lot more threatening.

For me it is not why Mount is playing over Foden. It’s that Southgate doesn’t think Foden and Bellingham can be in the same team without sacrificing something else.
 
Cassidy said:
DiMaria could do that because he has both a better engine and was/is better at transitioning the play from defence to attack with his dribbling. Mount needs to be closer to the goal to be effective and stay out of Kovacic’s way. Like Bruno Mount is pretending to be a midfielder because he isn’t quite good enough to be an attacker alone
Click to expand...

I guess I just respectfully disagree. Mount and Chelsea have both always looked better when he is dropping into midfield and getting on the ball - many of our most disjointed attacking performances over the past couple seasons have the common thread of Mount staying too high and being isolated.
 
I probably rate Mount higher than many on here and in the Chelsea fanbase do but if the plan is to continue with a 4-2-3-1 there just doesn't seem to be a natural place for him as a guaranteed starter anymore. He's not one to play as one of the deeper midfielders alongside Enzo but also not quite creative enough to play as the man behind the striker where Felix has played in recent games. Even if we don't buy Felix on a permanent we'll still have Nkunku coming in and for creativity and goalscoring potential he's probably a better fit for that role too.

Mount would IMO still be a valuable player to have on occasion when we want/need to overload the midfield at the expense of creativity in the number 10 role but he probably won't accept a smaller role and his wage demands are also too big for the club to keep him around as a squad player, which makes me think he'll be sold.

Mount's best role would be as a number 8 in a 4-3-3 which incidentally is how Liverpool seem to be operating and they're in big need of a midfield rebuild. I really think he'd be great for a Klopp team and if we sold him to the dippers there's a real chance we'll sooner or later go on to regret that decision.

It's a tough situation we find ourselves in. If only the previous regime extended his contract after the CL win for somewhat higher wages and running till 2026 we could now see a little bit longer where his long term role lies before having to make any decisions. He's too valuable to lose on a free next year so one way or the other a decision will have to be made by next summer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.