Yup. He’s the definition of a systems player. He only works as a cog in a robotic, boring machine.
Phil Foden - What Is His Potential?
- Thread starter Davs
- Start date
System player can mean anything and nothing though. Like Foden would play really well for Conte next to a Lukaku, imo. He does however generally need his teammates help to create the spaces he needs to operate in & find him in those spaces consistently and with the right timing, to be effective. He's not very self-sufficient
Yeah, that’s more of what I was trying to get at.
Hes a very good player when someone else is expected to be the creative hub of the team and he gets to take in passes in from De Bruyne and shoot. But when he's the one thats expected to create for the team he tends to go missing and make poor decisions. Also very lightweight and goes down too easily
Not sure he can play any position other than right wing anymore either. Too quiet on the left and in the middle.
Not sure he can play any position other than right wing anymore either. Too quiet on the left and in the middle.
Bit knee-jerky in here. 39 goals and assists last season, 21 of which were when De Bruyne wasn't on the park. He's still a great player for all his recent drop in form. Only ever managed by Guardiola or Southgate, it'll be interesting to see what he's like under someone else.
I honestly think palmers a better player than Foden. People may laugh at me. I have an argument with a mate at work who’s a city fan about this.
Said the same last year before the euros started, put foden in that chelsea side last season and he would have been another sterling who coincidentally also came from playing well in the pep system
Totally agree, is this a controversial take?
Absolutely. Yet a few city fans I know reckon palmers shining because he’s a standout player in a poor team. I’m like surely it’s the opposite. Foden should be better in a team surrounded with better players than palmer in a poorer team.
Ye. City fans all think they made the right choice and that Fodens better. He really isn’t. Palmer would be quality in that city side. Also palmer is more versatile. Where as Fodens already shown he’s awful when played out of position.
Sterling is also a better footballer than Foden.
Have you ever been right about anything?
Yeah, Foden being one of the most overrated players on Earth for one
I believe his confidence has diminished when playing for England. He doesn't seem to possess the same level of self-assurance when representing the national team. In other words, I see him as someone who has become accustomed to the movement patterns within the Manchester City system under Guardiola. His understanding of the game is remarkably high, but the team system must support him well to harness his potential fully.
He hasn’t started the season well, both at the club level and with the national team, but we shouldn’t worry or be overly concerned just yet. These things take time and need to be observed in the long term, until the end of the season. It will be interesting to see how the next manager after Pep, or the future England manager, performs with him(then you can evaluate his true performances into another level of analysis).
However, he fits best with a manager who has a strong system in place, as he is an important cog in the machine. He is not a soloist or an individualist who can carry the team through every situation, no matter how poor the system may be. His understanding of movement, whether making runs into the half-space, underlapping or overlapping at the perfect timing, is a drill that City players have been well-trained in under Guardiola's management. Moreover, I believe his personal familiarity lies in the zones that Guardiola, an expert in this area, has assigned to him. Familiarity is a crucial factor for certain footballers, and he is one of them. He is accustomed to the areas in which he operates and has a deep understanding of the movement patterns of each City player. England, however, is a completely different story.
His strength lies in his understanding of the game within the system, which suits Guardiola’s tactics, making the two a perfect fit.
He hasn’t started the season well, both at the club level and with the national team, but we shouldn’t worry or be overly concerned just yet. These things take time and need to be observed in the long term, until the end of the season. It will be interesting to see how the next manager after Pep, or the future England manager, performs with him(then you can evaluate his true performances into another level of analysis).
However, he fits best with a manager who has a strong system in place, as he is an important cog in the machine. He is not a soloist or an individualist who can carry the team through every situation, no matter how poor the system may be. His understanding of movement, whether making runs into the half-space, underlapping or overlapping at the perfect timing, is a drill that City players have been well-trained in under Guardiola's management. Moreover, I believe his personal familiarity lies in the zones that Guardiola, an expert in this area, has assigned to him. Familiarity is a crucial factor for certain footballers, and he is one of them. He is accustomed to the areas in which he operates and has a deep understanding of the movement patterns of each City player. England, however, is a completely different story.
His strength lies in his understanding of the game within the system, which suits Guardiola’s tactics, making the two a perfect fit.
He came through and people were talking about him as this awesome creative attacking playmaker. And he's just not a creative playmaker at all. He's Stoichkov without the blinding pace
I think a few things are absolutely essential for Foden in order for him to be able to "shine":
-Space created for him by his teammates when he receives the ball
-Good small space link-up abilities and off-ball movement from his teammates
He has these provided for him at City, so he can receive, turn, and shoot in his usual zones in and on the edge of the opposition box. And I'm sure he has learnt a lot of these pre-planned patterns moves with his teammates where he gets into a good shooting position by the end of it.
However, we saw how he performs in a subpar system when he plays for England.
He's obviously got great qualities, and you can say he's a great player, but how can you rate such a player above ones who can receive the ball, and just make things happen on their own? And they don't need to be playing in the best system in the world for it to happen? Guys like Saka, Palmer, Rashford, Sterling, Grealish, Gordon, Madueke, etc..
Last edited:
Foden is a really good player when he's not burdened to be the star man.
The only problem with him is he's not as good as the media amd pundits have decided to pretend he is. So now he's held to standards he can't reach.
Less of a problem in a city team that I'd successful so doesn't attract much criticism (at least not directed at the players). Bigger problem for England where he's expected to be a star player in a team he arguably shouldn't start in.
Less of a problem in a city team that I'd successful so doesn't attract much criticism (at least not directed at the players). Bigger problem for England where he's expected to be a star player in a team he arguably shouldn't start in.
At #10, I'd say he should be easily behind Bellingham and Palmer.
On the right, easily behind Saka, Palmer, and arguably Bowen.
On the left, I'd say he should behind all of those players I listed in my previous post: Saka, Palmer, Rashford, Sterling, Grealish, Gordon, Madueke. And arguably behind the likes of Sancho, Bowen, and Gittens too.
Not sure if I forgot anyone.
Glad I'm not the only one who reads his posts and thinks this.
Phils biggest issue seems to be his own head. He's absolutely lost at the minute, I think his struggles with England have really got to him and he's really struggling, even when he plays for City, he's all hustle but pretty ineffective. Its something he's gonna have to sort quickly. I think City will get the best of him even without Pep unless we're in league 2 or whatever but I can see him being that kind of player who just never delivers for England cause its in his head too much. Where he overthinks, overcomplicates and always plays with hesitancy. He looks lost.
Giorno is spot on, he's very much more Stoichkov than some creative machine, albeit that wasn't the case at youth levels and more how he's developed in the first team. Like most City fans I still feel Phil at his best is a better all round play than Palmer. But right now Palmer is 5 times the player.
Giorno is spot on, he's very much more Stoichkov than some creative machine, albeit that wasn't the case at youth levels and more how he's developed in the first team. Like most City fans I still feel Phil at his best is a better all round play than Palmer. But right now Palmer is 5 times the player.
This, kinda.
You all keep trying to look for technical reasons why he doesn't perform for England, and sure, some of it certainly must play its part, but honestly, to me it looks clear the issue is the England shirt just feels too heavy on his shoulders
Won player of the year last season with citeh, barely gets a look in this season. Spends a lot of time sitting on the bench. Not much said about it.
Rashford gets subbed in the second half of a game after two seasons of being utter shite and the media whips up a frenzy.
There’s levels to these two clubs and how they’re treated by the media.
Rashford gets subbed in the second half of a game after two seasons of being utter shite and the media whips up a frenzy.
There’s levels to these two clubs and how they’re treated by the media.
Another Dele Ali in Poch's system. Useless to any other manager.
"Results cancel Insults".
Even though some of it has to do with United being a good source of engagement for the media, a lot of it has to do with the club not performing well. If United were winning, or indeed won that game that Rashford got benched for, you wouldn’t hear so much noise about it. You don’t hear much about which players are benched for City because they get results regardless. And of course they’re a much smaller club.
He's certainly closer to Dele Ali than Rooney.
One garners significant attention globally. The other doesn’t.
Foden does, Rashford doesn't? I would say neither do.
I think he's talking about the clubs.
Yes, thank you.
I wouldn't disagree with the general point you're making. That's what he's up against though. The likes of Neville talking him up like he's the next Iniesta when he's probably the 3rd best No10 in the England squad.
It doesn't make him a bad player it just makes our media/pundits idiots, but he'll get the bullets for that.
At least when we had the Scholes/Gerrard/Lampard problem they were all genuinely world class players and irreplaceable at club level, so there was a degree of justification in criticising them for saving up their trash bag performances for England. Foden is a piece of a jigsaw at city. If he left they'd find someone else. Yet whenever he plays for England he's getting shot down for not turning shit on a stick into magic.
Oh come on Madueke
One thing England have never done well is understanding that sometimes you have to leave talented players out, so you can play a cohesive system. We saw this with the infamous Scholes, Lampard and Gerrard nonsense, where every manager was intent on shoe horning the three of them into the team, at a time when we most often played a flat four midfield. It was ridiculous, one of them needed to be on the bench for the good of team functionality; but the national psyche couldn’t handle leaving a star name out. And the team suffered as a result
It’s the same with Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham. You can’t play them all at once and have the team work. Instead you need to build a system of play, an approach, that you think will be successful in a tournament environment, and then pick the best players to fill each position. Not pick the players and then try and shape the positions around them.
If that means that players like Foden or Palmer start off on the bench, then so be it. That’s called depth. All three of Saka, Foden and Palmer are probably best playing off the right, although Palmer and Foden can play as a 10 too, which probably means that 2 of the 3 are likely to be left out. C’est la vie. If one of them was as good on the left as they are on the right, then they’d be a guaranteed starter, but they aren’t. Therefore, in all likelihood, to create a functional unit one should pick something balanced like Grealish, Bellingham and Saka as the three behind the striker, with a double pivot in midfield of Rice, Mainoo, Gomes, Gallagher, Wharton etc.
The only way I can actually see England able to accommodate 2 of the three, is to operate with a false nine. Which I wouldn’t be against at all. I was generally unimpressed by Kane at the Euros. I think he excels when he has willing runners going beyond him that he can feed, as he likes to drop deep to get the ball. The problem is that Rashford is probably the only English player who likes to play like that from wide or deep, and he’s way out of form.
Again, the reluctance to bench a star name hurts the collective, but if I were to experiment with England, I would play Bellingham as a roving false 9, much like he did for much of last season with Madrid - to devastating effect - often arriving late in the box, and providing not only a lot of workrate up front but also a highly technical retention of the ball; and then play Palmer or Foden as a 10 behind him. My preference being Palmer. But it could go either way.
A front six of Rice, Mainoo; Grealish, Palmer, Saka; Bellingham, is an exciting, young, highly technical attacking unit that I would love to see. You’d have Foden, Gordon, Kane, Watkins, Bowen, Madueke, Gomes etc to bring off the bench, as either like for like replacements or to change the shape. The insistence on always playing Kane, or a traditional center forward, is somewhat problematic in my opinion, and the move towards a more fluid interpretation of the CF role - such as a false 9 - seems the natural evolution of this team when you consider the nature and type of players at our disposal.
It’s the same with Foden, Palmer, Saka and Bellingham. You can’t play them all at once and have the team work. Instead you need to build a system of play, an approach, that you think will be successful in a tournament environment, and then pick the best players to fill each position. Not pick the players and then try and shape the positions around them.
If that means that players like Foden or Palmer start off on the bench, then so be it. That’s called depth. All three of Saka, Foden and Palmer are probably best playing off the right, although Palmer and Foden can play as a 10 too, which probably means that 2 of the 3 are likely to be left out. C’est la vie. If one of them was as good on the left as they are on the right, then they’d be a guaranteed starter, but they aren’t. Therefore, in all likelihood, to create a functional unit one should pick something balanced like Grealish, Bellingham and Saka as the three behind the striker, with a double pivot in midfield of Rice, Mainoo, Gomes, Gallagher, Wharton etc.
The only way I can actually see England able to accommodate 2 of the three, is to operate with a false nine. Which I wouldn’t be against at all. I was generally unimpressed by Kane at the Euros. I think he excels when he has willing runners going beyond him that he can feed, as he likes to drop deep to get the ball. The problem is that Rashford is probably the only English player who likes to play like that from wide or deep, and he’s way out of form.
Again, the reluctance to bench a star name hurts the collective, but if I were to experiment with England, I would play Bellingham as a roving false 9, much like he did for much of last season with Madrid - to devastating effect - often arriving late in the box, and providing not only a lot of workrate up front but also a highly technical retention of the ball; and then play Palmer or Foden as a 10 behind him. My preference being Palmer. But it could go either way.
A front six of Rice, Mainoo; Grealish, Palmer, Saka; Bellingham, is an exciting, young, highly technical attacking unit that I would love to see. You’d have Foden, Gordon, Kane, Watkins, Bowen, Madueke, Gomes etc to bring off the bench, as either like for like replacements or to change the shape. The insistence on always playing Kane, or a traditional center forward, is somewhat problematic in my opinion, and the move towards a more fluid interpretation of the CF role - such as a false 9 - seems the natural evolution of this team when you consider the nature and type of players at our disposal.
He's definitely not a bad player. He's just not a player who can make things happen on his own. He can shine and take advantage of his strengths, when his teammates around him know what to do and how to use him. But you give him the ball in a shit team and he's going to be ineffective, and invisible. I will never rate such a player above real difference makers like Saka, for example.
I'm not saying he's a better player. Just that his overall skillset compared to Foden's, makes him a better option as a winger, arguably even on the left.