Are you a Fashion (Sakala) snob?

[Frankie 8,182]

There no doubt that under Michael Beale, Fashion Sakala has become a really useful player - providing a threat in attack with his pace and unpredictability - and converting that into the creation of chances and goals.

 

At times he looks like he's never seen a football before but that unpredictability seems to increase his threat. He falls over the ball one minute, then creates or scores a goal the next. Is he really good enough though?

 

I think many would take that view that he's best used as an impact player/sub but the argument may be that he needs to play regularly to get the very best out of him. Use him sparingly and he's less effective. Start him often and he will contribute goals outside of his foibles.

 

It's fascinating how someone like Kent - an undoubtedly more skilful player - doesn't seem able to contribute the same numbers but Sakala - so clumsy and inconsistent - usually always does something of note.

 

For example, if we were to choose between him and renewing Ryan Kent's contract, how would you vote? Kent, whilst arguably more skilful, can flatter to deceive and actual stats appear poorer. But is he a better, all-round option? Or are we just Sakala snobs?

[Scott7 5,237]

I like him. He’s a disruptor. Play him from the start for a decent run of games. May turn out to be no good but we can afford to experiment.

[compo 6,215]

If the lads playing well keep him in the starting eleven it’s not rocket science.

[Rousseau 9,487]

I thought your tweet questioning whether he was good enough was harsh. 

 

He's not the most technical, but I think he has a useful skill set: quick, energetic, combative, good stamina and likes to shoot.

 

A large part of his recent form is because he's playing more centrally as part of a front-two, but with the freedom to drift to find space. His most effective period for Oostende was playing from the left as an inside-forward. 

 

I think we've finally found a suitable role for his skill set: the 4-diamond-2 needs mobile forwards, or at least one, to stretch the play, opening up space in the pockets. He was too often playing wide - touchline-hugging wide - which negates his strengths and emphasises his weaknesses. 

[Rousseau 9,487]

In regards to Kent: I've had enough. 

 

I don't mind - and would prefer - quick, skilful players in the #10 position, but you need to back it up with numbers. 

 

I'd like to see what Tillman could do as the #10. I always thought he was more of a second-striker going by his Bayern clips. He gets on the end of things but he's also creative. He's not got the pace of Kent, but he can beat a man. Cantwell can play as a #10 too; both in the same side could see them dovetailing quite fluidly. 

[Whosthedado 1,519]

Sakala has been excellent recently and has contributed. Thought Kent was outstanding last night in a kind of free role behind Colak. Jack and Kent were at the heart of most of our good stuff of which there was plenty!

[onevision 1,454]

We need a player that runs at defenders, always unpredictable and we have this in Sakala.

I love the guy, he reminds of the tinman, what chance does a defender have at reading his play when he doesn't know himself what he's about to do.?

Frustrating at times but unless we can sign a better player then he is a starter every match for me.

[Frankie 8,182]

17 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

I thought your tweet questioning whether he was good enough was harsh. 

 

He's not the most technical, but I think he has a useful skill set: quick, energetic, combative, good stamina and likes to shoot.

 

A large part of his recent form is because he's playing more centrally as part of a front-two, but with the freedom to drift to find space. His most effective period for Oostende was playing from the left as an inside-forward. 

 

I think we've finally found a suitable role for his skill set: the 4-diamond-2 needs mobile forwards, or at least one, to stretch the play, opening up space in the pockets. He was too often playing wide - touchline-hugging wide - which negates his strengths and emphasises his weaknesses. 

Harsh but also fair I think as he can be technically awful at times.

 

However, there's also no doubt he's contributing well and deserves a lot of praise for his self-belief in particular.

 

There will be times where I think he'd be the wrong choice in certain games but as long as he creates and scores then he has to be a genuine first choice player - whether that be instead of or alongside Kent.

[Rousseau 9,487]

3 minutes ago, Frankie said:

Harsh but also fair I think as he can be technically awful at times.

 

However, there's also no doubt he's contributing well and deserves a lot of praise for his self-belief in particular.

 

There will be times where I think he'd be the wrong choice in certain games but as long as he creates and scores then he has to be a genuine first choice player - whether that be instead of or alongside Kent.

It is interesting discussion point. 

 

Schrödinger's Fashion?

[Sutton_blows_goats 4,330]

I think its a balance between unfashionable (lol) players like Sakala who just produce output and more cultured players who are great to watch but struggle to have that cutting edge. I think having different options is great and will benefit the squad. Throw the likes of Tillman, Hagi and Matondo (I still think he can come good..) and we have some good options to support Colak/Morelos/an other #9.

 

FWIW Raskin and Cantwell have come in to the midfield as completely different players to what we already had(and i dont mean injured) and have added that variety to the midfield.

 

I think the manager will want to pick different types of players for different games. So options are important.