Quote:
|
Originally Posted by [Removed User
;2026455]Sorry, is there only one definition of a successful cross then?
Beating the first man only matters if there's someone behind them. Generally there wasn't. His attempts at finishing were poor but he consistently got varied crosses in. Expecting players at this level to consistently hit the one player running in is a big ask. So, many of his crosses were speculative and some were poor. I can live with that. He rarely hides and always makes himself available and tries to make things happen. The bigger problem was the lack of strikers and midfielders making the speculative runs to create real chances.
|
No there's not but if the ball actually gets into the box then you can point at lack of firepower or attacking the balls. His do not beat the full back or get into an area where strikers should be. Usually repelled by the full back before they've even made the 18yrd box so can't blame the strikers or lack of them for that. Shooting and finishing are well below average. And as for his workrate he runs a lot chasing the ball between centre back and midfielders. My Labrador can do that and could probably be more effective as Rutherford is constantly 2 yards behind the balls so he has next to no chance of winning the ball and generally is so far behind that the opposition aren't even rushed Into a mistake. Might give the impression he is trying hard but the total waste of energy answers your question as to why he is knackered after 60minutes
Posted via mobile theme