Cahill Vs Felli

[jofanon]

I think yesterdays mauling confirmed that they both can't really play in the same team.

 

At least not both in midfield anyway.

 

Neither are tacklers, particulary good passer of the ball or offer pace.

 

What they offer is a goal threat, particularly aerially.

 

So what do we do about it? There isn't the scope in the team to have two midfielders of this type.

[CaptainFerguson10]

Out of the two, I'll say Cahill is the more ill disciplined to play center midfield. Cahill is undroppable, but his passing and general control is poor. Plus he gets a little too over-hyped and causes dangerous moments by giving away needless fouls. Don't get me wrong I'm only labeling his bad points while his good weight the bad, but for center mid he isn't what we need. Say I say Felliani, through virtue of default.

[jamiemaher85]

The problem yesterday was that neither player was defined as attacking or defensive, last season it was always clear who was playing in which position. Yesterday they where obviously both told to go out and be annonymous.

 

They can play together in the same team, the final for example, both played well, swaping positions throughout the game.

[Adpom]

Yesterday main problem attacknig wise, was the lack of creativatvy, neither Cahill or Fellini is that sort of creative player. However we play better when Cahill off the stikers, but what we miss is Arteta, as he provides 90% of all Cahills goals. As for the middle, i not sure fellini is that creative, Neville is obiously defensive, so can Fellini play in the middle an create like Fabragas did yesterday?

[troy8]

Cahill over Fellaini anyday. Cahill boasts far more experience in the attacking role then Fellaini, and is far more of a goal scoring threat. I hate seeing Cahill being pushed back into central midfield, play him up front off a striker!

[Jesse_Wray]

I think it's entirely possible to play both of them in the same side, but Cahill needs to be the more attacking of the two. He's not the best distributor of the ball but he's sooooo damn good at playing off a lone striker (as we've always seen and particularly against Ireland the other night).

Felli has impressed me with the way he has improved his passing and especially his motor since he joined us. He came from Standard as a defensive mid but has now shown that he can be a bit more attacking minded. For that reason I'd like to see him partner Neville in the middle with Cahill in a more advanced role behind the striker.

 

Basically just reverse the roles they had on Saturday.

[Bill]

I think it's entirely possible to play both of them in the same side, but Cahill needs to be the more attacking of the two. He's not the best distributor of the ball but he's sooooo damn good at playing off a lone striker (as we've always seen and particularly against Ireland the other night).

Felli has impressed me with the way he has improved his passing and 1 ...especially his motor since he joined us. 2 ....He came from Standard as a defensive mid but has now shown that he can be a bit more attacking minded. For that reason I'd like to see him partner Neville in the middle with Cahill in a more advanced role behind the striker.

 

Basically just reverse the roles they had on Saturday.

 

 

1 .... His Motor wouldnt pass its M.O.T, He just trots up and down the field and is usually 10 yards behind the action.

2 .... If he came here as a defensive midfielder we bought a white elephant, the lad cant tackle to save his life.

 

Cahill is also a poor tackler and gives away too many free kicks but he always works his socks off and puts in a good shift, as well as scores goals.

If you ask, who i would put in my eleven it would have to be Cahill for me.

[Romey 1878]

Cahill over Fellaini every time, and I actually like Fellaini.

[Lowensda]

If it was just the one, i would have to say Cahill. In a supporting forward role, he's one of the best in the world, and for what he lacks in height, passing and tackling...he makes up in hard work, tenacity, goals, bullying defenders, making space! Fellaini has got a few years to work on his weakness', then im sure he'll be pretty close!

[chicagoblue]

I actually think Fellaini's tackling is getting much better and I think we'll continue to see it improve. In a game that was as poor as Saturday's it's hard to pick any one area apart, but I forgot Cahill was on the pitch for long stretches.

[Blue 250]

Cahill is a one trick pony......but it's a very good trick.He drifts into the penalty area and scores goals.He scores from corners and is basically a pain the arse to defenders.Behind the right Forward and with the right tactics Cahill is brilliant at what he does......WHY didn't anyone try and buy Cahill! I think because when other tactics/formations are applied Cahill isn't that great.

That would mean to me that an Everton team with Cahill in it has to play to his strenghts, when things go well it can be very good.......when they go badly

 

God knows Fellaini's best position, he can score,and if his header had gone in Saturday it might have not been so bad, but his tacklings not that great.They (Cahill and Fellaini) could perhaps play in the same team, but I'd say to do that you need a great defencive midfielder to do mountains of work and we haven't got one of them.

 

We have to get a result in midweek and against Burnley, I'd go back to what Everton do best...Cahill behind the forward (and hope the forward actually does something), put out the best midfield you can behind him (Cahill) a midfield wanting it!....and have Fellaini on the bench, as an impact player!!.....Fellaini will get back in depending on his willpower and possibly Everton buying a midfield general (defencive).

 

You know what you've got with Cahill, like I say a one trick pony.....with Fellaini, what he does best and where he can play, I think we will have to just give him a bit more time.

 

We can't afford any more crap performances....Moyes, play you best players the ones that want it the most.....if that's Gosling or Rodwell, get them in.

[t-cahill]

Fellaini for me.. Cahill does not thrill me as much as he did a couple of seasons ago.

[Romey 1878]

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/everton-fc/everton-fc-news/2009/09/09/everton-manager-david-moyes-has-a-dilemma-on-tim-cahill-and-marouane-fellaini-100252-24641128/

[Hafnia]

The problem I see is that if we are to play 2 strikers (which is something I think we need to be able to do to get better results against the top 4, and certainly avoid draws against lesser teams) - namely Yak and Saha, then neither player warrants selection.

 

This is a pretty bad state of affairs when you consider one is a great goalscoring talisman who is a firm fan favourite who you would hate to drop through loyalty alone, and the other is a £15m investment.

 

The first choice centre pairing would be Rodwell and Arteta (billy on left, pienaar on right) without a shadow of a doubt. Already Rodwell shows more ability in positioning, athleticism, passing, composure - than fellaini and Cahill combined.

 

Arteta is one of the best midfielders in the Premier league from the perspective of making things happen and changing pace and direction of play.

 

Neither Fellaini or Cahill are effective as out an out midfielders, they need another player to supplement their weaknesses which means we only have one striker when they play. If we had another decent option on the right hand side I would probably give pienaar the attacking midfield role in a 5 man attack also - which means there could be 3 for one place.

 

I think in all honesty both players may find themselves warming the bench more than they would have hoped and being used in a rotation. However the impact that they would have would be great, would they be happy with that though?

[MikeO]

Moyes...

 

“There will be times when I use Tim in some games and Fellaini in others and not both together. But, as well as that, I know I can play them together if I have to."

 

“Once I get a squad, that will happen. At the moment, I don’t have a squad to make those decisions."

 

[CaptainFerguson10]

I think Moyes is the problem, judging by that Mike.

[Hafnia]

You certainly wouldn't spend £15m on a player that can't fit in with another key member of the squad. At least he's admitted it I suppose.

[Everton_Worshiper]

You certainly wouldn't spend £15m on a player that can't fit in with another key member of the squad. At least he's admitted it I suppose.

 

It was only a matter of time before this type of admission was made.

Bit like the Gerrard/Lampard issue with England (although that seems to be getting better).

[jofanon]

The problem I see is that if we are to play 2 strikers (which is something I think we need to be able to do to get better results against the top 4, and certainly avoid draws against lesser teams) - namely Yak and Saha, then neither player warrants selection.

 

This is a pretty bad state of affairs when you consider one is a great goalscoring talisman who is a firm fan favourite who you would hate to drop through loyalty alone, and the other is a £15m investment.

 

The first choice centre pairing would be Rodwell and Arteta (billy on left, pienaar on right) without a shadow of a doubt. Already Rodwell shows more ability in positioning, athleticism, passing, composure - than fellaini and Cahill combined.

 

Arteta is one of the best midfielders in the Premier league from the perspective of making things happen and changing pace and direction of play.

 

Neither Fellaini or Cahill are effective as out an out midfielders, they need another player to supplement their weaknesses which means we only have one striker when they play. If we had another decent option on the right hand side I would probably give pienaar the attacking midfield role in a 5 man attack also - which means there could be 3 for one place.

 

I think in all honesty both players may find themselves warming the bench more than they would have hoped and being used in a rotation. However the impact that they would have would be great, would they be happy with that though?

 

 

I couldn't agree more. Billy, Peanuts, Arteta ,Rodders give us an excellent midfield. We have two excellent strikers in Saha and Yak, both capabable of 20 goals a season. I don't think we should dispose of them to shoehorn Cahill and Felli in. Neither Cahill or Felli offer the attacking threat of Yak or Saha. They are good players though don't get me wrong.

 

Its about time we had a quality bench anyway.

[Hafnia]

I'm not totally opposed to Fellaini and I am hoping he can develop his game more in a way that his lack of mobility and pace is not so evident - however when you look at the circumstances you can not help be frustrated.

 

We could and should have got Moutinho for an extra couple of million more than what we paid for fellaini - we identified him, toyed about, left it late and then paid more for an unproven belgian at the very last minute in order not to face a massive fan backlash for getting rid of carsley with no backfill (who could still do a better job than fellaini - we wouldn't pay his contract for 2 years!) - the problem immediately was that Fellaini wasn't able to do Carsley's old role and he was deployed further up field to hold up the play like a deep lying second striker.

 

You can't grumble with Cahill - he has been an awesome player for us, but the current system we play needs to change and that means no place for him in a 2 man central role.

 

If we had got Moutinho, he would have gone straight in to the midfield and given us an Arsenal style look about our centre - highly mobile, comfortable on the ball and able to create. It would have allowed us to mix up play with him and Arteta changing to freshen things up.

 

I do honestly feel that some Everton fans are in denial about Fellaini, there is atendancy to point at the number of goals he scored (6ft 4in arial threat should score) and ignore his inability to track back effectively when hit on the counter attack by pacey players. If we had paid £5m for him we would say it was good business - £15m is a bit hard to take.

[holystove]

I do honestly feel that some Everton fans are in denial about Fellaini, there is atendancy to point at the number of goals he scored (6ft 4in arial threat should score) and ignore his inability to track back effectively when hit on the counter attack by pacey players. If we had paid £5m for him we would say it was good business - £15m is a bit hard to take.

 

I think you're focusing on the negative here. His composure on the ball is very good. His passing is more than decent. With his impressive body he's a clear target to pass the ball to and gives opponents trouble. He scores goals.

 

The only thing that IMO he clearly needs to work on is his positioning etc when we don't have the ball. Once he learns that, he can gradually move to the DM position where he'll be very useful as a box-to-box midfielder in the near future. He'll be comparable to Moutinho then. It's just that Moutinho would have given Everton a more technical midfielder while Fellaini is a big dude with the advantages that come with it.

 

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth but it seems to me that if Moyes had signed Moutinho you might have focused on how very short he is and doesn't win any headers if what you focus on with Fellaini is his inability to track back.

Edited September 10, 2009 by holystove

[Bill]

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth but it seems to me that if Moyes had signed Moutinho you might have focused on how very short he is and doesn't win any headers if what you focus on with Fellaini is his inability to track back.

 

Thats because he cannot tackle anyway and added to his inability to move into second gear, if he moves any slower he will slip into reverse mode.

 

Have said this before, when all our players are fit and able to play, Fellaini may not get into the line up.

[Blue 250]

Thats because he cannot tackle anyway and added to his inability to move into second gear, if he moves any slower he will slip into reverse mode.

 

Have said this before, when all our players are fit and able to play, Fellaini may not get into the line up.

 

Didn't a benched Fellaini when he came on against Wigan improve the team!Was it being on the bench that motivated him? was it his instruction from Moyes as he came on? Something did it....I didn't see it happen, but have read many reports stating that fact.

surely the jury's still out on him....or maybe should we say on his price!

 

If he works on his fitness that will go a long way.

[marcopaulo]

I do honestly feel that some Everton fans are in denial about Fellaini, there is atendancy to point at the number of goals he scored (6ft 4in arial threat should score) and ignore his inability to track back effectively when hit on the counter attack by pacey players. If we had paid £5m for him we would say it was good business - £15m is a bit hard to take.

 

you even make the fact that he scores sound negative here...also sometimes already this season ive seen him as the only player running back and ok he isnt the quickest and as he gets older and reads the game better he wont need to be. carsley wasnt ever the fastest i know he wasnt a slouch but as he got older he got wiser and became a better player he wasnt always as good as he was the last 3 years and i dare say in the first two he wasnt good enough to be on the bench at times.

[StevO]

cahill is the finished article, felli is still only young. for now, for me, if cahill is fit, he has to play! felli will make a good long term replacement in my eyes.

 

but most defences dont like playing against either of them.

[Hafnia]

you even make the fact that he scores sound negative here...also sometimes already this season ive seen him as the only player running back and ok he isnt the quickest and as he gets older and reads the game better he wont need to be. carsley wasnt ever the fastest i know he wasnt a slouch but as he got older he got wiser and became a better player he wasnt always as good as he was the last 3 years and i dare say in the first two he wasnt good enough to be on the bench at times.

 

 

Scoring goals isn't negative at all, but buying a midfielder who offers very little mobility for £15m is, if we are talking about awaiting for this maturity was £15m the right deal at that time? I really really hope I am proved wrong about him, but the QE2 seems to turn quicker. As a similar statured player Patrick Viera was effective as he broke up play cos his long strides chewed up the ground and he was highly mobile, when that pace went, so did the player.

[holystove]

Scoring goals isn't negative at all, but buying a midfielder who offers very little mobility for £15m is, if we are talking about awaiting for this maturity was £15m the right deal at that time? I really really hope I am proved wrong about him, but the QE2 seems to turn quicker. As a similar statured player Patrick Viera was effective as he broke up play cos his long strides chewed up the ground and he was highly mobile, when that pace went, so did the player.

 

Need to get over the 15m .. General consensus is that Everton got royally fucked on that.

 

The only relevant discussion can be about his play. You said he would have been good business if he had cost only £5m .. What does that mean in light of his performance?

[flaminfox]

i dont know

[DonKey]

I think he generally uses the ball well when he gets it, and is a big focus for us when we go forward. Last season he was getting used to the tempo and style of the prem and so far (if were honest) the rest of the squad haven't shone in a below average start to the season.

 

The fact is we have the makings of a good squad with the potential to bring real quality and or experience off the bench. As a general point I'd be pleased if no-one was guaranteed a game and places were at stake every week.

 

Although we did get stung for £15m (or thereabouts), lets wait and see what happens as he matures a bit more.

[StevO]

im sure people forget £15m was the spin put on the deal, the initial outlay was more along £4/5m. hardly a bank breaker! if liege actually get £15m from us it means he has become a great success.