Just watched the 90 mins and kept an eye on Josh's performance, to try to see what others are seeing.
Still don't get it I'm afraid. He has nice touch but I have 2 real question marks over him. First, if you watch him, he seems to have no awareness of what's happening around him and, therefore, never picks up his, or any man. He always arrives late to the ball, as he only reacts once the ball has reached an opponent and mostly, the ball has moved on by the time he is in a position to challenge. In this aspect, compare with both Harry's, Bobby or Stef, who are all good readers of the play and often intercept. Josh sometimes gets lucky and the ball breaks near him.
Second, he seems to like playing short, safe, first time passes, which is ok but when he tries to do something more creative, he takes too long and gets caught in possession, or plays a poor pass.
On the positive side, I like him with the ball at his feet and dribbling forward. This is something he can offer, which our other midfielders don't and I hope, as his fitness and confidence increase, he will do more of.
As things stand, I'd play Harry Arter, or Stef ahead of Josh but I understand that others are being won over gradually in his favour.
Onamah is either as bad as people thought a month ago or as good as people think he is now. Onamah is a good squad player and is getting better, but very far from one of the best half-dozen midfielders in the league.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 21, 2020, 10:47:45 PM
Onamah is either as bad as people thought a month ago or as good as people think he is now. Onamah is a good squad player and is getting better, but very far from one of the best half-dozen midfielders in the league.
Well, he is likely neither as bad as some thought he was nor as good as some now think he is. You yourself also contradict your own either/or statement by then placing him somewhere in the middle. Whether he is very far from the best half-dozen midfielders in the league is both subjective, but more importantly not very interesting. His ceiling is much more interesting than his current level, and his development so far with us bodes fairly well for the future. In my opinion.
Right now he is in my mind a borderline starter for us. Just like Parker I cannot really work out our best midfield so far this season. Both me and Parker can partly blame injures for that, and we can both blame Parker as well for seemingly having no idea himself. The only thing that seems fairly sure is that Johansen despite many good games is unfortunately benched almost whenever Parker has other options.
He's certainly improved compared to his first four or five outings there is no doubt of that. But I want him to try and surge forwards more when on the ball as he has the strength and ability to do so, but as to his finishing, it's shocking isn't it. Take away the Leeds goal and he Fluff's his shots on goal time and time again. Always amazes me how some professional players really struggle to put their foot through the ball cleanly at the pivotal time.
josh has massively improved but for me he is currently 'potential.' I do not think he merits an automatic start and does not make enough use of his physical prescence. I think the issue is what is his best position and in all three midfield spots we have better alternatives. But has certainly come on leaps and bounds.
Quote from: ALG01 on January 21, 2020, 11:16:13 PM
josh has massively improved but for me he is currently 'potential.' I do not think he merits an automatic start and does not make enough use of his physical prescence. I think the issue is what is his best position and in all three midfield spots we have better alternatives. But has certainly come on leaps and bounds.
Disagree. I think his physical presence is exactly why he get's playing time, along with his desire to drive the ball forward (receive pass, quick turn...move forward with the ball). While we play him as a box to box, in his own head I think he's thinking like an attacking mid. When he's not in the midfield it's more noticeable than when any other midfielder not named Bobby Reid isn't there. imo. And this is with a 22 year old.
Whose a better box to box than him on the squad? No, not Arter. No, not Stephjo...Tom is a better attacking mid...not Harrison Reed.
And Parker know's his starting midfield when they are healthy. It includes both Tom Cairney and Josh Onomah...and perhaps Bobby Reid (if he's not playing up top or on the wing).
Scott's faith in him this season (and apparent ability to see in him things that members of this forum don't) will benefit the team next season in the EPL.
Imagine him not missing the two sitters he missed in the game. If he'd made those people would be singing his praises.
Quote from: Sting of the North on January 21, 2020, 10:56:44 PM
Right now he is in my mind a borderline starter for us. Just like Parker I cannot really work out our best midfield so far this season. Both me and Parker can partly blame injures for that, and we can both blame Parker as well for seemingly having no idea himself. The only thing that seems fairly sure is that Johansen despite many good games is unfortunately benched almost whenever Parker has other options.
It seems we may end this transfer window within striking distance (ie 1-4 points) from automatic promotion and highly likely to get at least a playoff. Hence, we need to bring in players in any positions we are not sure about as we have done for RCB, LCB and LB. Onamah is a player any sane person is not sure is good enough yet for the playoffs and most of the other midfielders we cannot be sure they will be injury free, so maybe we should bring in some reinforcements.
We have to get promoted before parchaute payments run out on 25th May 2021. Josh Onamah best football for us will probably be 21/22 and beyond when he is mid 20s.
He's 22, not good enough for Spurs reserves nor Villa reserves.
I think Parker was told by TK to give him a participation badge because everyone thinks TK is a total joke.
So well done Scotty.
Next.
Couple of things. To miss those chances he had to do some things very right to get in those positions, finishing can be fixed. Then there were the standing tackles. I remember two, one brave and successful the other even better - practically the full Etuhu. You could hear the ball compress. Price of admission stuff for me.
He's coming on nicely.
Early on I was very vocally concerned about his continuous starting 11 inclusion when it wasnt reay warranted based on his form, but absolutely am chuffed for him and us that he has massively improved. Now, I think as most would admit, hes no world beater yet, but I do feel he generally gets stuck in and battles well physically quite often and he has made some useful contributions recently.
As said above I think there is still an element of potential with him , if Parker can continue to develop him then by all means I'm all eyes and ears. But agree he's not an automatic starter yet. Can understand his inclusion though if he continues to contribute as he has been and we keep winning games. But I also like arter and think he offers plenty as does Harrison, and even to some extent Kev atm. So we really are spoilt for riches in that CM position right now.
Josh being younger has more potential upsell though so makes sense to see if he can continue to get better and better now he's shown some real improvement, and just in time!
Let's hope he continues to prove everyone wrong and becomes the player he was predicted to be at England youth level!
I can understand why Scott plays Josh, apart from his potential and the fact that Scott knows all about his ability. But he also has much needed physical presence and height which is much needed in a team that not long ago was being bullied by choir boys. Now with Hector and others that Fulham are looking to recruit plus the tenacity of Arter, and the Leadership and muscle of Kevin Mac, we are starting to hold our own in the air and in the tackle. Which is something that has been neglected for far too long.
It appears the club are starting to read my emails.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on January 22, 2020, 02:29:33 AM
Which is something that has been neglected for far too long. It appears the club are starting to read my emails.
Maybe TK is reading your emails, maybe he deserves some credit.
Nice to see a reasoned response, I thought he was very poor when he first came into the team, I admit he has improved and also that he is nowhere near the standard that some are putting him on. Still a lot for him to learn but he has progressed. As said before the problem is what is our best midfield, neither the coaches or us seem to know, at this moment in time I think the middle 3 and their positions are our biggest concern.
Apart from his all -round play which has steadily improved he adds a couple of things which give us a balance we lack without him. Firstly his size and strength make us competetive in second ball situations ,but he also wins back possession in 30 70 challenges and is a presense we have lacked in the more offensive midfield roles. He as energy to get up and down and the abillity to drive the ball forward like few others in the team.
Hes not our best midfielder ,far from it, but he makes us more competetive in my opinion.
He is better than he was and even if does end up as an average Championship player I would have him over Seri any day, he at least gives 100% and after that goal against Leeds has grown in confidence. Remember he's only 22 and still has things to learn. I would argue SteffJo is our best box to box mid but I'll leave picking the team to the Manager.
7 out of 10 so far for Onomah.
There is certainly a player inside his body trying to get Josh Onomah out but I have mixed feelings about him. Firstly he seems to be getting more than decent mentoring because Parker and Wells have an emphatic interest in him doing well but are they the best guys to take this on? My reasoning is that midfield is still an issue in this team and more than a small part of that is organisation and formation which are the head coaches issues. Is he being mentored for a role that wouldn't work no matter how good the lad is or can be? Is that evidence of muddled thinking by our coaches?
My other issue has been there since day one and concerns his basic body shape when attacking the ball/opposition which seems much too clumsy, awkward, or not very athletic. He is wasting an awful lot of energy achieving very little IMHO.
Quote from: toshes mate on January 22, 2020, 08:39:28 AM
Firstly he seems to be getting more than decent mentoring because Parker and Wells have an emphatic interest in him doing well but are they the best guys to take this on? My reasoning is that midfield is still an issue in this team and more than a small part of that is organisation and formation which are the head coaches issues. Is he being mentored for a role that wouldn't work no matter how good the lad is or can be? Is that evidence of muddled thinking by our coaches?
I'm never a massive fan of these posts that claim nepotism/underhand reasons for playing someone. Parker (and by default Wells') jobs depend upon the results that the team get, not how single players perform. Since Josh has come into the side we've won 8 (3 subs appearances of 20,24 and 30 mins), drawn 2 and lost 3 (one sub appearance of 68 mins). In the ones we'd lost at Preston and Brentford, he was pretty clearly our best player, admittedly with a low bar. It's from those two games that I've seen him kick on and become pretty integral to this team so confidence likely key for the lad.
Would agree that he isn't that athletic, still has the look of a growing kid about him.
Quote from: Carborundum on January 21, 2020, 11:35:38 PM
Couple of things. To miss those chances he had to do some things very right to get in those positions, finishing can be fixed. Then there were the standing tackles. I remember two, one brave and successful the other even better - practically the full Etuhu. You could hear the ball compress. Price of admission stuff for me.
He's coming on nicely.
0001.jpeg
Quote from: Jim© on January 22, 2020, 09:33:53 AM
I'm never a massive fan of these posts that claim nepotism/underhand reasons for playing someone.
And so why infer that I have?
I'm not inferring anything, you said "Parker and Wells have an emphatic interest in him doing well" as in emphatically more than other players in the squad.
Perhaps I'm wrong and if so I apologise, but it did seem clear as day to me.
The best thing for Josh is that he has found his position and isn't being moved all over the pitch as he was initially. He's looked better with game time in one role and is a valuable part of the squad now.
I don't think the last game was the best to judge him, or TC for that matter, as both are working their way back from time away/in and out of the team. Tonight may be a better example of seeing what he's made of.
Hes a very athletic player who is very much box to box and wins most of physical challenges. Has become better on the ball of late but did have a bit of a puppy look about him . Lack of playing time in recent times meant he looked very leggy when he first came in. The answer to all our problems ? probaly not but has done well of late,and shown the abillity to play in all the positions across the midfield line. Badly coached by confused coaches ? Id say probably the opposite was true . Is a different players now to 6weeks ago.
He has been better than TC in recent games
Quote from: Jim© on January 22, 2020, 10:35:27 AM
I'm not inferring anything, you said "Parker and Wells have an emphatic interest in him doing well" as in emphatically more than other players in the squad.
Perhaps I'm wrong and if so I apologise, but it did seem clear as day to me.
I emphasised their interest since they mentored/were involved with Onomah at Spurs and that probably influenced our signing of him. That naturally gives them a continuing interest and reason for mentoring the lad here but in the first team? My point is 'are they the best guides for him with a midfield that has at times stunned us (with Onomah or without him), but then stuttered and stalled' ... throughout this season? They may be too close to the lad since both Parker's and Wells's roles are different here - this is a first team football and not a youth squad. R Sessegnon was noted to be SJ's pet (Cairney comment last season) because he was nurtured and cared for as a bright young FFC prospect for a long time to come and we lost him because of last season's fiasco. Reverse psychology may be applied to Onomah since he can be seen as the hopeful replacement for our once bright star and some redemption for getting last season so hopelessly wrong.
The lad may be wasting a lot of his potential out there if he is not getting the right advice and guidance because Parker and Wells are guilty of naivety or inexperience or both? I am trying to find a reason why, as I have said elsewhere, Onomah has been getting the nod over players who are potentially better by many measures because I feel Parker is over-complicating things
Nothing underhand implied.
Apology accepted.
Quote from: toshes mate on January 22, 2020, 10:59:17 AM
I am trying to find a reason why, as I have said elsewhere, Onomah has been getting the nod over players who are potentially better by many measures.
I think the answer is simple most of the players are carrying injuries, if Onamah plays today those other players will be fresher for the rest of the season.
Quote from: The Rock on January 21, 2020, 11:35:05 PM
I think Parker was told by TK to give him a participation badge because everyone thinks TK is a total joke.
I guess this makes sense if we ignore that every report talked about how it was Parker pushing for Onomah and the many interviews of him praising him as a great prospect.
There is plenty of stuff you can complain about when it comes to Tony Khan, but Onomah is someone that Parker was pushing for by all accounts. I can't imagine that his stats would look any good after his two seasons in the Championship.
As to Onomah, he has improved, but I still don't think he should be a starter.
Quote from: KJS on January 22, 2020, 10:56:58 AM
He has been better than TC in recent games
Unfortunately not the yardstick it used to be. Hopefully that changes in the run in.
Quote from: Tabby on January 22, 2020, 11:30:30 AM
Quote from: The Rock on January 21, 2020, 11:35:05 PM
I think Parker was told by TK to give him a participation badge because everyone thinks TK is a total joke.
I guess this makes sense if we ignore that every report talked about how it was Parker pushing for Onomah and the many interviews of him praising him as a great prospect.
There is plenty of stuff you can complain about when it comes to Tony Khan, but Onomah is someone that Parker was pushing for by all accounts. I can't imagine that his stats would look any good after his two seasons in the Championship.
As to Onomah, he has improved, but I still don't think he should be a starter.
I don't think SP would take a blind bit of notice of TK saying who has to start, it's conspiracy theory gone mad. Again, here's the stats since he's been involved: we've won 8 (3 subs appearances of 20,24 and 30 mins), drawn 2 and lost 3 (one sub appearance of 68 mins). In the ones we'd lost at Preston and Brentford, he was pretty clearly our best player, admittedly with a low bar.
He starts for me. Strong on the ball, strong physically, box-to-box. I trust him when he gets the ball. How many times in the Boro match did he lose the ball? How many times was he able to keep the ball moving?
He does a lot of little things that get under-appreciated, and that's exactly what you want from a midfielder in his role.
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on January 21, 2020, 11:32:45 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on January 21, 2020, 11:16:13 PM
josh has massively improved but for me he is currently 'potential.' I do not think he merits an automatic start and does not make enough use of his physical prescence. I think the issue is what is his best position and in all three midfield spots we have better alternatives. But has certainly come on leaps and bounds.
Disagree. I think his physical presence is exactly why he get's playing time, along with his desire to drive the ball forward (receive pass, quick turn...move forward with the ball). While we play him as a box to box, in his own head I think he's thinking like an attacking mid. When he's not in the midfield it's more noticeable than when any other midfielder not named Bobby Reid isn't there. imo. And this is with a 22 year old.
Whose a better box to box than him on the squad? No, not Arter. No, not Stephjo...Tom is a better attacking mid...not Harrison Reed.
And Parker know's his starting midfield when they are healthy. It includes both Tom Cairney and Josh Onomah...and perhaps Bobby Reid (if he's not playing up top or on the wing).
Scott's faith in him this season (and apparent ability to see in him things that members of this forum don't) will benefit the team next season in the EPL.
Imagine him not missing the two sitters he missed in the game. If he'd made those people would be singing his praises.
I said I do not think he makes enough of his physical prescence, mening he can do more to impose himself. I think he can be way better than he is and I actually think stef jo is better box to box by about a mile. TC does not compare because he is a thorougbred artist not a work horse,. I like TC a bit deeper so he has the canvass in front of him not compressed into a small spac in the last third.
But Onomah has hopefully way more to give and but needs to be much more involved and that is just up to him to impose himself...
Quote from: toshes mate on January 22, 2020, 10:59:17 AM
Quote from: Jim© on January 22, 2020, 10:35:27 AM
I'm not inferring anything, you said "Parker and Wells have an emphatic interest in him doing well" as in emphatically more than other players in the squad.
Perhaps I'm wrong and if so I apologise, but it did seem clear as day to me.
I emphasised their interest since they mentored/were involved with Onomah at Spurs and that probably influenced our signing of him. That naturally gives them a continuing interest and reason for mentoring the lad here but in the first team? My point is 'are they the best guides for him with a midfield that has at times stunned us (with Onomah or without him), but then stuttered and stalled' ... throughout this season? They may be too close to the lad since both Parker's and Wells's roles are different here - this is a first team football and not a youth squad. R Sessegnon was noted to be SJ's pet (Cairney comment last season) because he was nurtured and cared for as a bright young FFC prospect for a long time to come and we lost him because of last season's fiasco. Reverse psychology may be applied to Onomah since he can be seen as the hopeful replacement for our once bright star and some redemption for getting last season so hopelessly wrong.
The lad may be wasting a lot of his potential out there if he is not getting the right advice and guidance because Parker and Wells are guilty of naivety or inexperience or both? I am trying to find a reason why, as I have said elsewhere, Onomah has been getting the nod over players who are potentially better by many measures because I feel Parker is over-complicating things
Nothing underhand implied.
Apology accepted.
I don't see how you can argue they're not doing a good job coaching him, his performances have improved massively over the time he's been at the club, so this reflects well on the coaches.
I think the reason he starts over other perhaps more polished midfielders is he poses a goal threat in the way that realistically McDonald, Reed and Arter (excluding the worldie vs Aston Villa) don't. Johansen used to get in the box more than he does these days, presumably because he's lost a bit of pace and can't get up and down the pitch in the same way he did a few years ago. You've got Reid and Cairney that pose a goal threat but both of those players are more of a playmaker so they won't necessarily be busting a gut to get in the box.
I think Onomah is pulling his weight but we're blessed to have lots of quality in midfield so he knows he needs to keep performing.
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on January 22, 2020, 12:32:14 PM
I don't see how you can argue they're not doing a good job coaching him, his performances have improved massively over the time he's been at the club, so this reflects well on the coaches.
I could say I don't see how you can argue they are (doing a good job).
It is called subjective opinion since neither of us know how (or even if) he would have played had someone else been in charge.
Quote from: toshes mate on January 22, 2020, 12:50:40 PM
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on January 22, 2020, 12:32:14 PM
I don't see how you can argue they're not doing a good job coaching him, his performances have improved massively over the time he's been at the club, so this reflects well on the coaches.
I could say I don't see how you can argue they are (doing a good job).
It is called subjective opinion since neither of us know how (or even if) he would have played had someone else been in charge.
All you can do is base it on the evidence available, he joined and looked like a fish out of water and now he's starting and playing quite well. That's down to the coaches surely?
As for the suggestion he could be playing better under another coach, you just need to look back at his career and see if he was much better at another team as that could suggest maybe another coach could have got even more from him but nothing jumps out.
Therefore it makes sense to credit the coaching team and of course the player for the improvement and of course to hope he will continue to improve.
Quote from: toshes mate on January 22, 2020, 10:59:17 AM
Quote from: Jim© on January 22, 2020, 10:35:27 AM
I'm not inferring anything, you said "Parker and Wells have an emphatic interest in him doing well" as in emphatically more than other players in the squad.
Perhaps I'm wrong and if so I apologise, but it did seem clear as day to me.
I emphasised their interest since they mentored/were involved with Onomah at Spurs and that probably influenced our signing of him. That naturally gives them a continuing interest and reason for mentoring the lad here but in the first team? My point is 'are they the best guides for him with a midfield that has at times stunned us (with Onomah or without him), but then stuttered and stalled' ... throughout this season? They may be too close to the lad since both Parker's and Wells's roles are different here - this is a first team football and not a youth squad. R Sessegnon was noted to be SJ's pet (Cairney comment last season) because he was nurtured and cared for as a bright young FFC prospect for a long time to come and we lost him because of last season's fiasco. Reverse psychology may be applied to Onomah since he can be seen as the hopeful replacement for our once bright star and some redemption for getting last season so hopelessly wrong.
The lad may be wasting a lot of his potential out there if he is not getting the right advice and guidance because Parker and Wells are guilty of naivety or inexperience or both? I am trying to find a reason why, as I have said elsewhere, Onomah has been getting the nod over players who are potentially better by many measures because I feel Parker is over-complicating things
Nothing underhand implied.
Apology accepted.
Sorry to keep banging on about this, but you're saying nothing underhand implied but at the same time say that he's being put in the team ahead of potentially better players because of their (SP & MW) continuing interest in mentoring him? I may be missing the point but I just don't understand.
Quote from: Jim© on January 22, 2020, 02:16:47 PM
Sorry to keep banging on about this, but you're saying nothing underhand implied but at the same time say that he's being put in the team ahead of potentially better players because of their (SP & MW) continuing interest in mentoring him? I may be missing the point but I just don't understand.
You used two emotive words - nepotism and underhand - in order to make your point in your post. You haven't explained where I used the word nepotism and you haven't explained where I said anything underhand.
You may well be missing the point of your original post.
Actually, mine was the original post and it's fascinating to see a fairly broad range of opinions in response. Impressive also, that no ranting or name-calling but just reasoned views and opinions on a new, youngish player.
The concensus seems to be, however, that a) we have seen Josh improve significantly since his early poor performances and b) he is probably not yet one of our best 3 midfield starters, assuming everybody is fit.
For my part, based on his first handful of appearances, I felt Josh was a liability and should only start as a last resort. Thankfully, his improvement in fitness and performance have improved to such an extent that I no longer get a sinking feeling when he is named to start but I do still have severe misgivings about his onfield awareness and inability to put himself into positions where his teammates can easily find him.
In summary, for me, good progress but at this stage, still think we're more competitive with Harry Arter or Stefan in that third midfield slot.
Quote from: millsy on January 22, 2020, 02:55:50 PM
Actually, mine was the original post ...
I was referring to Jim's first post just to be clear.
Quote from: Dr Quinzel on January 22, 2020, 10:43:09 AM
The best thing for Josh is that he has found his position and isn't being moved all over the pitch as he was initially. He's looked better with game time in one role and is a valuable part of the squad now.
I don't think the last game was the best to judge him, or TC for that matter, as both are working their way back from time away/in and out of the team. Tonight may be a better example of seeing what he's made of.
Why not judge him by the last game? He finish his chances he's easily MOTM.
Sent from my CMR-W19 using Tapatalk
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on January 22, 2020, 06:50:39 PM
Quote from: Dr Quinzel on January 22, 2020, 10:43:09 AM
The best thing for Josh is that he has found his position and isn't being moved all over the pitch as he was initially. He's looked better with game time in one role and is a valuable part of the squad now.
I don't think the last game was the best to judge him, or TC for that matter, as both are working their way back from time away/in and out of the team. Tonight may be a better example of seeing what he's made of.
Why not judge him by the last game? He finish his chances he's easily MOTM.
Sent from my CMR-W19 using Tapatalk
But he didn't, and he wasn't (at least not officially). I prefer to judge players on their performance, but surely missing a few sitters is not reflecting well in that regard even though it was good to get in the positions to begin with. He could and should have put the game to bed in the first half. Nevertheless, I thought he was quite good but not even top 5 in the team on the day. Scoring a few would likely have pushed him into the top 5, because again that is part of the performance.
In my opinion.
Quote from: Sting of the North on January 22, 2020, 07:17:45 PM
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on January 22, 2020, 06:50:39 PM
Quote from: Dr Quinzel on January 22, 2020, 10:43:09 AM
The best thing for Josh is that he has found his position and isn't being moved all over the pitch as he was initially. He's looked better with game time in one role and is a valuable part of the squad now.
I don't think the last game was the best to judge him, or TC for that matter, as both are working their way back from time away/in and out of the team. Tonight may be a better example of seeing what he's made of.
Why not judge him by the last game? He finish his chances he's easily MOTM.
Sent from my CMR-W19 using Tapatalk
But he didn't, and he wasn't (at least not officially). I prefer to judge players on their performance, but surely missing a few sitters is not reflecting well in that regard even though it was good to get in the positions to begin with. He could and should have put the game to bed in the first half. Nevertheless, I thought he was quite good but not even top 5 in the team on the day. Scoring a few would likely have pushed him into the top 5, because again that is part of the performance.
In my opinion.
Well, since he's starting again we'll have another game to judge him.
I think he's going to do well. imho.
Hasn't impressed in the first half but he's not alone.
Onomah like the rest of our midfield needs to chip in with a few goals, they are all very talented but lack that bite in the box.
Onomah needs a little rest on the bench for a few games. Good utility player but not good enough to hold one position. Could you think of anyone less suited for playing in a front 3 with his poor end product
Quote from: fulhamben on January 22, 2020, 09:57:22 PM
Onomah needs a little rest on the bench for a few games. Good utility player but not good enough to hold one position. Could you think of anyone less suited for playing in a front 3 with his poor end product
I'd rather have him over Cairney at the moment - every time Tom tried a pass longer than 5 yards he messed it up tonight, and he offers no physical presence at all. Onomah actually created two chances by winning the ball back in the Charlton half, when has TC ever done that?
Quote from: fulhamben on January 22, 2020, 09:57:22 PM
Onomah needs a little rest on the bench for a few games. Good utility player but not good enough to hold one position. Could you think of anyone less suited for playing in a front 3 with his poor end product
He created 2 or 3 chances for Reid, Cav and McDonald. Held up the ball well and took on two players at one time on the flank. If anything, he's showing his adaptability and depth.
Still very confused by what you all see in Onomah but seem to be in the minority.
Quote from: fulhamben on January 22, 2020, 09:57:22 PM
Onomah needs a little rest on the bench for a few games. Good utility player but not good enough to hold one position. Could you think of anyone less suited for playing in a front 3 with his poor end product
Would anyone play Paul Pogba as a #6 or as a winger? No? Why?
Because he'd look average to poor.
Onomah is midfielder. Not a winger. If anyone else should have been on the bench it should have been Arter or TC (and I love TC).
Not sure why you're going in on Josh for Parker playing him out of position (due to injuries).
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on January 22, 2020, 10:05:19 PM
Quote from: fulhamben on January 22, 2020, 09:57:22 PM
Onomah needs a little rest on the bench for a few games. Good utility player but not good enough to hold one position. Could you think of anyone less suited for playing in a front 3 with his poor end product
Would anyone play Paul Pogba as a #6 or as a winger? No? Why?
Because he'd look average to poor.
Onomah is midfielder. Not a winger. If anyone else should have been on the bench it should have been Arter or TC (and I love TC).
Not sure why you're going in on Josh for Parker playing him out of position (due to injuries).
because lots of people have a melt down when you point out that Parker is a poor manager
Quote from: toshes mate on January 22, 2020, 10:10:38 AM
Quote from: Jim© on January 22, 2020, 09:33:53 AM
I'm never a massive fan of these posts that claim nepotism/underhand reasons for playing someone.
And so why infer that I have?
Based on what Norway staff said it is likely Stefjo has runners knee, which would be similar to Novak Djokovic tennis elbow a few years ago. In 2017, Djokovic was one of the top dozen players in the world but playing poorly by his standards, but after he took a few months off at the end of that year started playing his best again. Stefjo probably needs a little rest before the busy February fixtures, make it through to the playoffs and then take a longer summer rest for full recovery (like Djokovic).
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 22, 2020, 11:36:59 PM
Quote from: toshes mate on January 22, 2020, 10:10:38 AM
Quote from: Jim© on January 22, 2020, 09:33:53 AM
I'm never a massive fan of these posts that claim nepotism/underhand reasons for playing someone.
And so why infer that I have?
Based on what Norway staff said it is likely Stefjo has runners knee, which would be similar to Novak Djokovic tennis elbow a few years ago. In 2017, Djokovic was one of the top dozen players in the world but playing poorly by his standards, but after he took a few months off at the end of that year started playing his best again. Stefjo probably needs a little rest before the busy February fixtures, make it through to the playoffs and then take a longer summer rest for full recovery (like Djokovic).
got a link for where they said this? (not saying it's false, just interested in what they said)
So if Norway make it to the Euros and we go on a playoff run he'll be run to the ground with very little rest for next season
Quote from: fulhamben on January 22, 2020, 10:49:38 PM
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on January 22, 2020, 10:05:19 PM
Quote from: fulhamben on January 22, 2020, 09:57:22 PM
Onomah needs a little rest on the bench for a few games. Good utility player but not good enough to hold one position. Could you think of anyone less suited for playing in a front 3 with his poor end product
Would anyone play Paul Pogba as a #6 or as a winger? No? Why?
Because he'd look average to poor.
Onomah is midfielder. Not a winger. If anyone else should have been on the bench it should have been Arter or TC (and I love TC).
Not sure why you're going in on Josh for Parker playing him out of position (due to injuries).
because lots of people have a melt down when you point out that Parker is a poor manager
I don't agree that he's a poor manager. I think he makes mistakes...but he also makes timely adjustments.
Yesterday, I thought he didn't deal with our loss of Mitro, AK47 and Knock very well.
But that was one game. And in no way is my OPINION on him playing Onamah out of position based on anything other than what I've seen in the games. Scott may have weighed playing Joe Bryan as a winger and thought it was simply smarter to have Josh out there.
Using a player (who a lot here don't even want to see on the pitch) in his less than favorable position didn't work yesterday. It is what it is.
Great clearance
Really isn't very good.
Is out of his depth
He looked anonymous yesterday; not sure moving him around again, after a steady run in one position is helping. Very up and down.
Quote from: filham on January 22, 2020, 09:54:34 PM
Onomah like the rest of our midfield needs to chip in with a few goals, they are all very talented but lack that bite in the box.
Agreed on that - think the rational fan touched on it too. We've scored goals in midfield but with the players we have playing at the moment, we're not scoring half as many as we should and in fairness can - Johansen can score goals - Cavaleiro and Reid could do when playing in midfield, but there's a dearth there.... Part of that is having Cairney randomly sitting on the bench to come on for short periods and the mysterious inclusion and then vanishing of Harry Arter - both players who like to score and have a natural ability to do so.
Does anyone know what's happening with Arter and Cairney? I know Harrison Reed is injured, but the other two have had this awkward peripherial figure without it fully being explained it seems.
Onomah is our best box to box midfielder. He adds a directness, strength and pace to our midfield, that no one else offers. He's been pushed out wide recently due to injuries, where he isn't a natural.
Right now, our best midfield 3 is Onomah McDonald Reid, but we've been restricted of late.
Quote from: Facts Not Fiction on January 27, 2020, 10:06:16 AM
Onomah is our best box to box midfielder. He adds a directness, strength and pace to our midfield, that no one else offers. He's been pushed out wide recently due to injuries, where he isn't a natural.
Right now, our best midfield 3 is Onomah McDonald Reid, but we've been restricted of late.
If our back line is "Rodak, Odoi, Hector, Mawson/Kongolo and Bryan" (mostly borderline premier league), with a forward line of "Knockaert, Mitro and Cav" (all borderline premier league), then surely if people are suggesting "McDonald, Onomah and Reid" is our best midfield, then its midfield where we should be upgrading the team.
He didn't exactly bust a gut with his work rate.
092.gif
