Mason Mount

[xceleryx]

3 hours ago, martin1905 said:

You are if course right, a back 4 or a back 5 makes almost no difference to how the full backs play. It's a weird argument that goes on here and dates back to Conte when some would argue black is white to back him and his tactics. 

I've been fortunate enough to watch literally hundreds of games since Conte, through to now where we played both systems and can categorically say there is no difference to how the full backs play in either system. 

It's such a weird stance to take.

Not really a weird stance to take at all. 

While roles may appear quite similar but there are differences between the two and just how they're played, or what it takes to play them effectively. I know it's far from Premier League level but having played both fullback and wingback many year ago myself I can say with first hand experience there's a difference. 

Whether it's something as simple as starting positions being deeper as a fullback and higher as a wingback, the difference in workload and ethic needed between the two, and even just ones general positioning or defensive ability changes, it all has an effect on how either positions are played. 

You can also just look at someone like Alonso when he played fullback compared to wingback as a recent example here.  Some players are going to suit the more fullback-like role, others that adapt better higher up the pitch where certain winger like qualities are more valuable and defensive ones can be covered for by either the left or right central defender behind them. 

[jasonb]

For me Mount was excellent under Lampard and TT's first season.

Yet I think he is limited and as we are getting better players he is only likely to be a bench player.

I think he will want more than this and I won't miss his corners.

 

[martin1905]

7 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

Not really a weird stance to take at all. 

While roles may appear quite similar but there are differences between the two and just how they're played, or what it takes to play them effectively. I know it's far from Premier League level but having played both fullback and wingback many year ago myself I can say with first hand experience there's a difference. 

Whether it's something as simple as starting positions being deeper as a fullback and higher as a wingback, the difference in workload and ethic needed between the two, and even just ones general positioning or defensive ability changes, it all has an effect on how either positions are played. 

You can also just look at someone like Alonso when he played fullback compared to wingback as a recent example here.  Some players are going to suit the more fullback-like role, others that adapt better higher up the pitch where certain winger like qualities are more valuable and defensive ones can be covered for by either the left or right central defender behind them. 

All depends on the team, the opposition and the tactics employed.

Playing wing back for Potter is a completely different thing to playing full back for Barcelona under Pep.

It's not the position or formation that makes a difference to how a player plays the role, it's the way the team is set up. You can be a much more defensive wing back, with much less of a workload in a back 5 compared to a full back who is expected to join in the attack at every opportunity in a back 4 and vice versa.

 There is no way in a million years our wing backs are having to do more work, in an attacking sense than our full backs used to under Mourinho or Ancelotti or what Liverpool's, City's, Madrid's or  Barcelona's do. It's just not the case. We may be more reliant on their attacking output but that's because we you play a back 5 you are lining up with 8 defensively minded players. 

 

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, jasonb said:

Yet I think he is limited and as we are getting better players he is only likely to be a bench player.

Who are the better players?

[martin1905]

10 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Who are the better players?

Enzo is no doubt a better level than Mount but that's it. We should be doing absolute everything to keep him and making him one of the first names on the team sheet.

Unfortunately Graham will play him left wing or bring him on for half an hour here and there whilst RLC plays 90% of the time. 

He will end up at Liverpool and will be the start of their revival. He is literally perfect for Klopp's midfield and will thrive there.  I can see him becoming one of the best all round midfielders in the world and have said so for years. He's got absolutely everything to be a world class CM yet we can't get him in the side because we are  playing 5 defenders due to the inept manager. It's scandalous.

We will then be crying about how we should have never let him go and how well he would do for us once we have a proper manager in who plays a proper system. 

Mason Mount is the ONE player I would keep, above literally all others. It will be one of the worst decisions this club has ever made letting him go.

[Mark Kelly]

2 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

 

Mason Mount is the ONE player I would keep, above literally all others. It will be one of the worst decisions this club has ever made letting him go.

Have to say I agree wholeheartedly but how can we get him to sign? What will it take?

[paulw66]

22 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

. He's got absolutely everything to be a world class CM yet we can't get him in the side because we are  playing 5 defenders due to the inept manager. It's scandalous.

 

Whilst I agree with your overall sentiment that we must keep them, there are a couple of points you make that I find odd.

Re, the above, does that make Tuchel inept for playing 5 at the back? Potter has actually played the vast majority of games with a 4, only recently (and successfully) returning to a 3 or a 5, whatever you want to call it.

"we cant get him in the side"........he has played just about every game under Potter until his recent injury, then allegedly being left out at Leicester because of the contract standstill. 20 PL starts (out of 26), and at least a couple of the other 6 were due to injury. In what way can we not get him in the side?

 

Edit - his performances this season have not even merited the starts he has played IMO. And I also think there is good reason for that.

22 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

 

Unfortunately Graham will play him left wing or bring him on for half an hour here and there whilst RLC plays 90% of the time. 

 

RLC playing 90% of the time? Have you had a drink? 

Edited March 16, 2023 by paulw66

[martin1905]

2 minutes ago, Mark Kelly said:

Have to say I agree wholeheartedly but how can we get him to sign? What will it take?

The only thing that I think will help is to sack Potter and bring in a man that will play a high pressing, high intensity 433 with him playing as a cm alongside Enzo/Kovacic/Kante/Gallagher with a proper DM in-between them. 

Our entire midfield is built for it, as are our wide players, along with the outrageous options we have for a back 4. We could have played anyone, literally anyone as a CDM and given it a proper go.

Instead we tried a 4231 to accommodate a loan player, which failed as we just played sidewards and backwards 'posession' football with zero energy and absolutely no attempt to win the ball back high up the pitch and have now reverted back to playing 5 defenders and a defensive pivot meaning there is no place for Mount in this team. 

He absolutely should go, he'd be silly not to and I don't blame him one bit.

[paulw66]

9 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

 

Our entire midfield is built for it, as are our wide players, along with the outrageous options we have for a back 4. We could have played anyone, literally anyone as a CDM and given it a proper go.

 

I fully expect in the summer we will buy a pure DM, and this is exactly what will happen

[martin1905]

12 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

Whilst I agree with your overall sentiment that we must keep them, there are a couple of points you make that I find odd.

Re, the above, does that make Tuchel inept for playing 5 at the back? Potter has actually played the vast majority of games with a 4, only recently (and successfully) returning to a 3 or a 5, whatever you want to call it.

Slightly different team to the one  Tuchel inherited. 

We haven't played the vast majority of games with a back 4, far from it. I'd imagine it's almost 50/50 or not far from it. 

12 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

"we cant get him in the side"........he has played just about every game under Potter until his recent injury, then allegedly being left out at Leicester because of the contract standstill. 20 PL starts (out of 26), and at least a couple of the other 6 were due to injury. In what way can we not get him in the side?

RLC playing 90% of the time? Have you had a drink? 

Going forward do you think Mount will be starting games regularly for us between now and the end of the season? Can you see him staring the next two champions League games? I'd be amazed personally.

RLC has started 16 out of the 20 league games he has been available for. 

[paulw66]

1 minute ago, martin1905 said:

 

We haven't played the vast majority of games with a back 4, far from it. I'd imagine it's almost 50/50 or not far from it. 

 

I am stubborn enough to check this. I will come back to you. 

I don't see why Tuchel doing it is fine, and for Potter, it isn't but let's leave that.

1 minute ago, martin1905 said:

 

Going forward do you think Mount will be starting games regularly for us between now and the end of the season? Can you see him staring the next two champions League games? I'd be amazed personally.

 

I think the contract situation may mean he wont.

different question. Do you think he deserves to? I can't remember the last good game he had for us.

3 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

 

RLC has started 16 out of the 20 league games he has been available for. 

How many of those were at wing back? I shall find out. 

you want Mount playing WB?

 

[martin1905]

Just now, paulw66 said:

I am stubborn enough to check this. I will come back to you. 

I don't see why Tuchel doing it is fine, and for Potter, it isn't but let's leave that.

I made it 13 or 14, I think,  that we have started a back 5, could be wrong though.

Because Tuchel had a completely different squad.

Just now, paulw66 said:

I think the contract situation may mean he wont.

different question. Do you think he deserves to? I can't remember the last good game he had for us.

I don't think he's been anywhere near as bad as some have made out, certainly no worse than others. We as a team have been absolutely shocking and that includes pretty much every single individual.

Just now, paulw66 said:

How many of those were at wing back? I shall find out. 

you want Mount playing WB?

 

9.

And absolutely not. I want no wing backs and Mason Mount playing. Playing 5 defenders and by default wing backs means we are only playing two in midfield.

[ROTG]

6 minutes ago, paulw66 said:

I don't see why Tuchel doing it is fine, and for Potter, it isn't but let's leave that.

One gave the the team an identity, the other has no idea what to do is bimbling along until the end of the season. 
 

Gareth loves Mason. 

[paulw66]

24 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

I made it 13 or 14, I think,  that we have started a back 5, could be wrong though.

 

27 games under Potter in the league and CL combined, 15/27 with a back 4, 12/27 with a 3/5

(if you count the 2 domestic cup ties it is 17/29 with a back 4, but am leaving those out as they were scrambled teams)

And before the Leeds game, when he went back to it, it was 15/24 (62.50%) with a back 4. 

The 12 games with a 3/5 have yielded 7 wins (58% win ratio)

The 15 with a 4 have yielded 5 wins (33% wr)

 

24 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

 

Because Tuchel had a completely different squad.

Yes and no.......A large core is the same, particularly in the positions where role changes between the systems.

Thiago and KK are just too slow to play in a 4, and Fofana only recently returned, and Badiashile only arrived in January

 

24 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

 

I don't think he's been anywhere near as bad as some have made out, certainly no worse than others. We as a team have been absolutely shocking and that includes pretty much every single individual.

 

Hardly a glowing endorsement though, is it? He's been no worse than the terrible performing players. He has still started 79% of games under Potter that he has been available for. (two games missed with injury and one with suspension)

19/24 available starts under Potter. 3 goals and 2 assists, coming over 3 total games. In 16 of the 19 starts under Potter he hasn't delivered a goal or assist. 

Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan, but his contribution this season has been awful.

24 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

 

9.

 

yes, RLC has started 9 games (out of 27) in midfield since Potter took over. 7 of those were November and before, so let's not make out RLC is starting regularly over Mount in midfield. he isn't.

 

[paulw66]

50 minutes ago, ROTG said:

 

Gareth loves Mason. 

Is that a back handed compliment?

[jasonb]

2 hours ago, ROTG said:

Who are the better players?

Felix, Sterling, Havertz, and off the bench Gallagher (preferred).

[ROTG]

20 minutes ago, jasonb said:

Felix, Sterling, Havertz, and off the bench Gallagher (preferred).

LOL

Felix is back to AM at the end of the season to play for TT. 
 

Sterling and MM are two completely different player and do not play the same roles  when was Sterling a CM or ACM player ?

Havertz has been his most productive when playing with MM

Gallagher is more likely be moved if MM contract is sorted out.  Palace / Brighton is Gallagher level. 

[jasonb]

25 minutes ago, ROTG said:

LOL

Felix is back to AM at the end of the season to play for TT. 
 

Sterling and MM are two completely different player and do not play the same roles  when was Sterling a CM or ACM player ?

Havertz has been his most productive when playing with MM

Gallagher is more likely be moved if MM contract is sorted out.  Palace / Brighton is Gallagher level. 

Forgot Mudryk too.

Mount's best performances for us have come as an attacking midfielder or wide forward, there is too much quality there in the other players for me.

[xceleryx]

11 hours ago, martin1905 said:

All depends on the team, the opposition and the tactics employed.

Playing wing back for Potter is a completely different thing to playing full back for Barcelona under Pep.

It's not the position or formation that makes a difference to how a player plays the role, it's the way the team is set up. You can be a much more defensive wing back, with much less of a workload in a back 5 compared to a full back who is expected to join in the attack at every opportunity in a back 4 and vice versa.

 There is no way in a million years our wing backs are having to do more work, in an attacking sense than our full backs used to under Mourinho or Ancelotti or what Liverpool's, City's, Madrid's or  Barcelona's do. It's just not the case. We may be more reliant on their attacking output but that's because we you play a back 5 you are lining up with 8 defensively minded players. 

I agree, there's a lot of other variables at play but that's also why it's not as black and white as saying both positions are the same.

Beg to differ that formation or position don't play a part to some degree, but that's all an extension of tactics and a teams setup anyway. That's going to be what largely defines how a manager wants their fullback or wingback to operate, as will the strengths and weaknesses of each player that's picked for those positions. 

I implore you to go back over old games from those eras and compare them to now, there's visible difference in the workload that the positions now demands - especially in those early Mourinho years where the fullbacks barely advanced beyond the half way line.  Modern fullbacks/wingbacks have a much more demanding role because there's greater emphasis placed upon them contributing high up the pitch. This naturally means more work is needed to get into this positions more frequently, while simultaneously increasing the workload required to get back and defend. There's obviously exceptions to all of this, say for example Roberto Carlos or Cafu who where already doing this in their day, but by large the norm wasn't really to have your fullbacks operate like auxiliary wingers like there is now - particularly with the trend of traditional wingers being converted into more inside forward types that cut in and attack goal opposed to bylines. 

But yeah, to avoid the wraith of the mods for dragging the thread off-topic I'll leave it at that. We've obviously got a slight difference of opinion here which is fine.

[ROTG]

13 hours ago, jasonb said:

Forgot Mudryk too.

you might as well have and Madueke  - Both are palace / brighton level with room for improvement over the next eight years

[jasonb]

We will see as time progresses.

I think the Sterling situation might change assuming Mudryk's form improves as the season progresses.

[chara]

I could also post this on the Media site but as I recall there was "speculation" that Mason was not injured for the Leicester game and "speculated" that it was a result of messy contract negotiations. Usual Media s**t stirring.

Now it seems he has a strange injury that not only is keeping out of the selection process but forcing him to withdraw from the England set up.

Thoughts anyone?

[paulw66]

3 hours ago, chara said:

I could also post this on the Media site but as I recall there was "speculation" that Mason was not injured for the Leicester game and "speculated" that it was a result of messy contract negotiations. Usual Media s**t stirring.

Now it seems he has a strange injury that not only is keeping out of the selection process but forcing him to withdraw from the England set up.

Thoughts anyone?

Just shows how little the Media know. Amazes me how often people are taken in by rumours. 

[xceleryx]

6 hours ago, chara said:

I could also post this on the Media site but as I recall there was "speculation" that Mason was not injured for the Leicester game and "speculated" that it was a result of messy contract negotiations. Usual Media s**t stirring.

Now it seems he has a strange injury that not only is keeping out of the selection process but forcing him to withdraw from the England set up.

Thoughts anyone?

Southgate has a habit of calling up injured players, so it's hard to gauge too much from that. 

If Mount withdrawals, then it would give a clearer indication that he is indeed injured. If he remains, maybe even takes part in games, then there could be more to the situation as a whole. 

I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[kev61]

6 hours ago, chara said:

I could also post this on the Media site but as I recall there was "speculation" that Mason was not injured for the Leicester game and "speculated" that it was a result of messy contract negotiations. Usual Media s**t stirring.

Now it seems he has a strange injury that not only is keeping out of the selection process but forcing him to withdraw from the England set up.

Thoughts anyone?

The likely explanation is Mounts head is not in the right place with contract negotiations and that has filtered through to southgate.

Are we about to get rid of a player that(most people agree)will shine again  with (A) half decent players around him (B)played in the right position and (C)a good coach.

Money involved is also a major issue of course.