Park.

[loftlag]

Perhaps he didnt have a good enough game for you, but his contribution for the winner was possibly more than Mackie has produced all season playing on the right hand side.

As for Onuoha in place of Hill, you are kidding? Hill wins more headers and gets in far more blocks and tacles than Onuoha.

Whilst I think Taarabt is a hugley talented player, I agree with Shearer's assessment of him (he is not using his ability to threaten opposition anywhere near enough).
I think having both Bothroyd and Remy in attack will cause more problems for defences than having Taarabt playing behind the latter.
As for Mackie in central midfield...hmmm.

Talking of Mackie wasn't Parks cross for the goal identical to Mackies against Arsenal last season for Diakite to score
Agree having 2 up front gives better balance makes the m/fielders job easier

[Norths]

Talking of Mackie wasn't Parks cross for the goal identical to Mackies against Arsenal last season for Diakite to score
Agree having 2 up front gives better balance makes the m/fielders job easier

Nothing identical about those assists at all imo.

[loftlag]

Nothing identical about those assists at all imo.

Suit your self both took on the fullback both went down both regained their feet both made perfect crosses to 1st time score from but as I said suit your self

[Norths]

Suit your self both took on the fullback both went down both regained their feet both made perfect crosses to 1st time score from but as I said suit your self

Hadnt realised you meant the build up etc, sorry.

Final ball in was totally different though.

[zeberdee]

Park was good. Certainly the best of the midfielders on Saturday at doing his job. Which don't mean he was great - but he was certainly at a good mid table standard which made him very useful at Southampton - I am sure he is a safe bet to keep his place for the Sunderland game too.

[stanistheman]

I am getting worried about Hill. Every now and then he has one of those performances, like against Liverpool. I think Onuoha has played well this season, playing out of his natural position too.

Mackie in CM would work, he has the energy, and with Diakite behind him and Tarbs in front of him, it would be perfect. Plus, he is better than other CMs on the right wing, so if he found himself in that position, he would do better than Granero or Mbia.

Mackie's 1st touch is poor and most of the time he doesn't seem to know when or who to pass the ball to or even have the accuracy. In short, he would be a catastrophe in CM.

Granero and Mbia should not be playing right wing because QPR have have other better options for the position in Park, Townsend, SWP and even Mackie.

Why would anyone want to fit a square peg in a round hole?

[stanistheman]

Talking of Mackie wasn't Parks cross for the goal identical to Mackies against Arsenal last season for Diakite to score
Agree having 2 up front gives better balance makes the m/fielders job easier

It was similar, but how many times has Mackie done that this season? For a player with as much game time as Mackie has had this season his contribution to goals scored, assists and chances created is very poor.

[Bluehoop]

It was similar, but how many times has Mackie done that this season? For a player with as much game time as Mackie has had this season his contribution to goals scored, assists and chances created is very poor.

You have a point of course - but to be fair to Mackie and every other midfielder/overlapping full back at the Club, their assist stats are severely tarnished by reason of the number of times balls have gone into the box with absolutely zero strikers coming to meet them. Add to that the stat from the Norwich game where Traore (I think it was) did well down the left and put a decent quality cross into the box, pretty much on the head of a Bobby Z or Jay B type striker - only the powerful, towering attacker in the box was SWP and it sailed 10 feet over his head and out for a throw in.

[loftlag]

You have a point of course - but to be fair to Mackie and every other midfielder/overlapping full back at the Club, their assist stats are severely tarnished by reason of the number of times balls have gone into the box with absolutely zero strikers coming to meet them. Add to that the stat from the Norwich game where Traore (I think it was) did well down the left and put a decent quality cross into the box, pretty much on the head of a Bobby Z or Jay B type striker - only the powerful, towering attacker in the box was SWP and it sailed 10 feet over his head and out for a throw in.

Yep bang on, dead right , spot on , now wait for some one to disagree

[Geng]

Park was pretty mediocre on Saturday, against a poor Southampton. If their defender had put in a half decent challenge against him before the second goal, he'd still be getting as much grief on here as usual.

Mackie at CM is an awful idea. How do you propose to ever get the ball forward? I would honestly rather see Mackie played in every other position on the pitch, including centre-half, than in centre mid. Maaaaaaaaaaaybe we could get away with him in and advanced pressing role as part of a midfield three (think Pepe in Classicos last season, or Phil Jones when played alongside both Scholes/Giggs and Carrick). But still an awful idea. The guy has zero vision or movement and is unable to control the ball. We would have to just hoof the ball over his head every time.

[Geng]

Whilst I think Taarabt is a hugley talented player, I agree with Shearer's assessment of him (he is not using his ability to threaten opposition anywhere near enough).

Even by Shearer's standards that was a particularly lazy, dishonest piece of punditry. He was comparing two totally different tactical set-ups, against two different sides. We looked more dangerous in a short clip vs a sh1te side pressing high up the pitch than we do in a short clip playing the best side in the country with lots of men behind the ball, really??

Against United Taarabt mostly played in the centre, behind a striker. The threat 'in behind' was supposed to come from the striker and, especially, the wingers.

At Southampton we had three CMs, with two wingers/wide forwards supporting the central striker. Taarabt's position there would have been on the left, where Hoilett played. When Taarabt plays with Remy - when anyone plays with Remy - we look dangerous as Remy has pace and clever movement. The ball for his goal was similar to Adel's v West Ham, or the numerous times Adel has put Mackie/Cisse/SWP through this season, only for one of the latter three to mess it up.

Don't forget only Santi Cazorla has completed more through balls than Taarabt in the Premier League this season. The idea that Adel doesn't 'ask questions' if daft. Not that Shearer bothers define what he means by that.

[vblockranger]

Even by Shearer's standards that was a particularly lazy, dishonest piece of punditry. He was comparing two totally different tactical set-ups, against two different sides. We looked more dangerous in a short clip vs a sh1te side pressing high up the pitch than we do in a short clip playing the best side in the country with lots of men behind the ball, really??

Against United Taarabt mostly played in the centre, behind a striker. The threat 'in behind' was supposed to come from the striker and, especially, the wingers.

At Southampton we had three CMs, with two wingers/wide forwards supporting the central striker. Taarabt's position there would have been on the left, where Hoilett played. When Taarabt plays with Remy - when anyone plays with Remy - we look dangerous as Remy has pace and clever movement. The ball for his goal was similar to Adel's v West Ham, or the numerous times Adel has put Mackie/Cisse/SWP through this season, only for one of the latter three to mess it up.

Don't forget only Santi Cazorla has completed more through balls than Taarabt in the Premier League this season. The idea that Adel doesn't 'ask questions' if daft. Not that Shearer bothers define what he means by that.

how could we forget when you bring it out every time Adel is criticized?

[Geng]

how could we forget when you bring it out every time Adel is criticized?

Hey its the '4th most chances created in the league' one that gets used the most...

Well its a useful reminder that the vast majority of this forum suffer from a very bad case of confirmation bias, ie having a preconceived idea of what Adel's overall contribution, or lack of, is, and then ignoring the incidents in a game that don't fit in with this view.

This explains why the anti-Adel types are so surprised by these stats. They're too busy remembering the time he tried one stepover too many to recall all the chances Mackie wasted for Adel. Mackie miscontrolling a pass is far less annoying than Adel over-elaborating as Mackie has less talent and potential, so his errors do not stick in our memory in the same way.

[vblockranger]

Hey its the '4th most chances created in the league' one that gets used the most...

Well its a useful reminder that the vast majority of this forum suffer from a very bad case of confirmation bias, ie having a preconceived idea of what Adel's overall contribution, or lack of, is, and then ignoring the incidents in a game that don't fit in with this view.

This explains why the anti-Adel types are so surprised by these stats. They're too busy remembering the time he tried one stepover too many to recall all the chances Mackie wasted for Adel. Mackie miscontrolling a pass is far less annoying than Adel over-elaborating as Mackie has less talent and potential, so his errors do not stick in our memory in the same way.

well i think overall its quite obvious why both Mackie and Adel are playing poorly for the team at the bottom of the league.