Ipswich 1-2 Wolves: Verdict Thread

[Deutsch Wolf]

“Objectively” is too strong; your strongest XI may not always be your XI best individuals.

This isn’t to say I think Cunha shouldn’t start.

We've had this kind of crap before. Like win 1-0 and Ebanks-Landell was at CH standing in for someone.

Oh you can't drop him, we won and kept a clean sheet.

Right so we'll wait for him to literally cost us a goal and probably a game and then we'll change it.

It's ridiculous thinking.

 

[Alan]

We've had this kind of crap before. Like win 1-0 and Ebanks-Landell was at CH standing in for someone.

Oh you can't drop him, we won and kept a clean sheet.

Right so we'll wait for him to literally cost us a goal and probably a game and then we'll change it.

It's ridiculous thinking.

I mean there are two things I kind of dislike here.

1) It projects like there’s no actual competition for places in the XI.
2) It minimizes the real possibility that a player improves or has better “chemistry” with the players around them.

It’s a bit rigid for me. Shouldn’t be a hard rule one way or the other, really.

 

[Wilf Wolf]

“Objectively” is too strong; your strongest XI may not always be your XI best individuals.

Sticking with inferior players because a team is winning is as flawed as shoehorning in good players into positions they aren’t suited to. Playing Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes in the same team is a good example.

 

[AndyWolves]

The ghost of Matt Hill

 

[basher]

It's just objectively wrong.

All you're doing is playing someone you know is worse then waiting for them to have a shit game and you'll lose, then you'll do what you should have done in the first place. Nonsense thinking.

Makes even less sense when the inferior player isn't even playing well.

Fulham away...GoN moved Lemina into defense, Wolves won with ease, people saying it was genius and Lemina should start there every game.

Next game, home to Bouremouth...utter carnage!!

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

I absolutely guarantee you that if we left Cunha on the bench next week, we lost 1-0 and had very little goal threat, the overriding reaction would not be 'that's OK, it made sense not to play him'.

Perhaps we should have left Steve Bull on the bench every time he came back from a ban or an injury if we happened to have won while he was out. You can't drop John Paskin, don't you know we just won.

 

[Alan]

Sticking with inferior players because a team is winning is as flawed as shoehorning in good players into positions they aren’t suited to. Playing Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes in the same team is a good example.

Precisely my point, with the caveat that I don’t think it’s often as clear cut as we perceive it to be. Suppose from my perspective it would depend on the overall performance in question; EEL for example never looked like convincing anyone that he was good value for the shirt.

 

[Alan]

I absolutely guarantee you that if we left Cunha on the bench next week, we lost 1-0 and had very little goal threat, the overriding reaction would not be 'that's OK, it made sense not to play him'.

Perhaps we should have left Steve Bull on the bench every time he came back from a ban or an injury if we happened to have won while he was out. You can't drop John Paskin, don't you know we just won.

You do keep picking cases where it’s extremely clear, though, as it is with Cunha.

It’s not that universal, is it. Sometimes a player you thought was inferior comes in, takes the chance, and never lets go. Coady, for example.

 

[Squeak]

Then there is the counter argument that it is a team game and no player is bigger than the team. These players have delivered for four consecutive games without Cunha. What's to say they won't make it a fifth?

In theory, putting a better player straight back in is the done thing but what if it then upsets team balance as the "star" player comes straight back in? What if it causes resentment among other players, particularly the player replaced?

There's more to it than simply saying he walks back in.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

I absolutely guarantee you that if we left Cunha on the bench next week, we lost 1-0 and had very little goal threat, the overriding reaction would not be 'that's OK, it made sense not to play him'.

The people discussing with you today though aren't saying we shouldn't start Cunha?

 

[AndyWolves]

The manager should pick the best team he can, not pick the team because they won last week

 

[prawnking]

At this stage I'd be pretty happy with Vitor making the most informed call out of all of us (he's earned that) and then hopefully it pays off

 

[Dire Wolf]

We've had this kind of crap before. Like win 1-0 and Ebanks-Landell was at CH standing in for someone.

Oh you can't drop him, we won and kept a clean sheet.

Right so we'll wait for him to literally cost us a goal and probably a game and then we'll change it.

It's ridiculous thinking.

I would generally agree. However, you can't simply disregard the comments of the man who picks the team, who has straight out said that JSL's good run of form is  because of the presence of Munetsi and the work he does. As far as I'm aware Vitor's words carry a bit more weight than the opinion of a bunch of fans on a forum, who all agree that Cunha is a far better player.

So I don't think it's a case of anyone saying "you can't drop him because we won against Ipswich and Southampton", it's people wondering if Munetsi keeps his place because the man who picks the team has said he has been invaluable in contributing to the improvement in the play of our number 9.

 

[Squeak]

I would generally agree. However, you can't simply disregard the comments of the man who picks the team, who has straight out said that JSL's good run of form is  because of the presence of Munetsi and the work he does. As far as I'm aware Vitor's words carry a bit more weight than the opinion of a bunch of fans on a forum, who all agree that Cunha is a far better player.

So I don't think it's a case of anyone saying "you can't drop him because we won against Ipswich and Southampton", it's people wondering if Munetsi keeps his place because the man who picks the team has said he has been invaluable in contributing to the improvement in the play of our number 9.

Precisely. Vitor obviously has belief in Munetsi and that he is helping the team. Results are everything and how you drop any player on the basis of the last four games is beyond me? They've given us safety and Prem. football next season. Cunha previously played his part, of course, but rather stupidly got sent off at the business end of the season. Let him sit on the bench against Spurs.

 

[Squeak]

I absolutely guarantee you that if we left Cunha on the bench next week, we lost 1-0 and had very little goal threat, the overriding reaction would not be 'that's OK, it made sense not to play him'.

Perhaps we should have left Steve Bull on the bench every time he came back from a ban or an injury if we happened to have won while he was out. You can't drop John Paskin, don't you know we just won.

All hypothetical. What if we play him from the start and lose? What if he offers no goal threat?

 

[NicholasG1973]

Precisely. Vitor obviously has belief in Munetsi and that he is helping the team. Results are everything and how you drop any player on the basis of the last four games is beyond me? They've given us safety and Prem. football next season. Cunha previously played his part, of course, but rather stupidly got sent off at the business end of the season. Let him sit on the bench against Spurs.

Maybe if we had an array of talent to choose from, there might be an argument here.

As we’re choosing from Cunha v Munetsi/Bellegarde, there most definitely isn’t.

 

[YoungWolf]

The only reason I could think Cunha might be sub is if he is unfit like last time he was out of the team - but if I remember right he’d also had an injury that time.

Otherwise he has to start.

 

[Squeak]

Maybe if we had an array of talent to choose from, there might be an argument here.

As we’re choosing from Cunha v Munetsi/Bellegarde, there most definitely isn’t.

Agreed, on paper, it's no contest. However, both Munetsi and Bellegarde have played important roles over the last four games. That said, I'm having great difficulty coming to terms in arguing for Bellegarde to stay in the team. But, he's done well the last two months.

 

[Dire Wolf]

I think Cunha will start. But I think it may well be Bellegarde he replaces, not Munetsi.

 

[HanDoJin]

How many consecutive games did Nuno pick the same starting xi?