• Ekdal

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:21 am**

Seems a bit odd.

: IMG_2851.png (1.61 MiB) Viewed 3192 times

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:25 am**

Definitely backfired, Ekdal wouldn't have been dragged out of position like tuanzebe.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:32 am**

morninbob wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:25 am
Definitely backfired, Ekdal wouldn't have been dragged out of position like tuanzebe.

No course he wouldn’t.
It’s not like we have conceded more big chances than any other team in the league this year whilst Ekdal has been in the team.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:51 am**

I can sort of understand the reasoning, with Parker thinking Tuanzebe may be a little bit more mobile against a pacy Villa attack, and Ekdal getting a short break before international duty. And we need to see if Tuanzebe is good enough to replace Laurent in the back 3 if we are sticking with this formation.

He looked a bit rusty, but to be fair it wasn't him at fault for the goals. These international breaks seem very disruptive when we are trying to work out our best team and get players up to match fitness.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:54 am**

Unfortunately debating between Ekdal and Tuanzebe is like two bald men rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Or something like that.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:56 am**

GDK wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:51 am
I can sort of understand the reasoning, with Parker thinking Tuanzebe may be a little bit more mobile against a pacy Villa attack, and Ekdal getting a short break before international duty. And we need to see if Tuanzebe is good enough to replace Laurent in the back 3 if we are sticking with this formation.

He looked a bit rusty, but to be fair it wasn't him at fault for the goals. These international breaks seem very disruptive when we are trying to work out our best team and get players up to match fitness.

But if the thought is Tuanzebe replacing Laurent in the back 3, why not play him alongside the 2 players he’s most likely to be alongside in Esteve & Ekdal?

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:59 am**

Bonkers!

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:02 am**

GDK wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:51 am

He looked a bit rusty, but to be fair it wasn't him at fault for the goals.

No it wasn’t.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:02 am**

wilks_bfc wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:56 am
But if the thought is Tuanzebe replacing Laurent in the back 3, why not play him alongside the 2 players he’s most likely to be alongside in Esteve & Ekdal?

I agree, that's what I'd have done, unless there was a strong reason to give Ekdal a break

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:04 am**

Tactical eh ?

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:20 am**

Very odd coming across these quotes from Scott in my tea break.

So it was a tactical choice to play somebody quicker, push higher up the field, and try to aggressively win the ball back?

The trouble was it cost us the goal, Tuanzebe missed the tackle stepping up, Esteve was having to cover much of the backline with Laurent being raw in that position, did well initially, but we ended up one on one and the Villa guy proved stronger and a good finisher. Fairly predictable.

Also odd the rumour, that feels true, that Ekdal was on a flight to Denmark the day before (Boden was mentioning the rumour in the podcast). If a CB had gone down ill the morning of the game, that would have left us in a real state. I hope Ekdal hasn't taken it badly, nothing to say he has but there is a whiff about it. Put it this way, if I was Ekdal and I'd been dropped from the 20 man squad with Laurent starting at CB ahead of me, I'd be upset, so I'd be amazed if he wasn't.

I think Scott is overthinking it at the moment. We have winnable games to come and he is clearly trying to adapt us to be less defensive in those games. But for me that comes with dominating midfield with square pegs in square holes, and that means Lesley in there with Cullen and Florentino. Lesley and Ekdal are both going to be away during the bulk of the Leeds prep so I bet Scott is tempted not to change it for that vital game. If he isn't careful, Laurent will prove to be the hill that Scott's career dies on if he stubbornly refuses to change it (bit harsh on Laurent, who I liked in CM in the Championship, not his fault, he can't turn down a chance to play).

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:36 am**

CrosspoolClarets wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:20 am
Very odd coming across these quotes from Scott in my tea break.

So it was a tactical choice to play somebody quicker, push higher up the field, and try to aggressively win the ball back?

The trouble was it cost us the goal, Tuanzebe missed the tackle stepping up, Esteve was having to cover much of the backline with Laurent being raw in that position, did well initially, but we ended up one on one and the Villa guy proved stronger and a good finisher. Fairly predictable.

Also odd the rumour, that feels true, that Ekdal was on a flight to Denmark the day before (Boden was mentioning the rumour in the podcast). If a CB had gone down ill the morning of the game, that would have left us in a real state. I hope Ekdal hasn't taken it badly, nothing to say he has but there is a whiff about it. Put it this way, if I was Ekdal and I'd been dropped from the 20 man squad with Laurent starting at CB ahead of me, I'd be upset, so I'd be amazed if he wasn't.

I think Scott is overthinking it at the moment. We have winnable games to come and he is clearly trying to adapt us to be less defensive in those games. But for me that comes with dominating midfield with square pegs in square holes, and that means Lesley in there with Cullen and Florentino. Lesley and Ekdal are both going to be away during the bulk of the Leeds prep so I bet Scott is tempted not to change it for that vital game. If he isn't careful, Laurent will prove to be the hill that Scott's career dies on if he stubbornly refuses to change it (bit harsh on Laurent, who I liked in CM in the Championship, not his fault, he can't turn down a chance to play).

Gone home to Sweden...

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:39 am**

I said after the City game that i'd be looking to change Ekdal and I was surprised to not see Walker alongside Esteve yesterday. Think its been coming for a while and no surprise to me. That said the biggest worry for me is this system. It's not working and imo we need to go 4-4-2 as we're conceding too much in midfield and thus not creating anything in the final third.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:53 am**

ashtonlongsider wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:39 am
I said after the City game that i'd be looking to change Ekdal and I was surprised to not see Walker alongside Esteve yesterday. Think its been coming for a while and no surprise to me. That said the biggest worry for me is this system. It's not working and imo we need to go 4-4-2 as we're conceding too much in midfield and thus not creating anything in the final third.

I wonder if when Roberts is back, we'll see Walker as a centre-half before we can bring in another in January. It's another square peg in a round hole but we just don't seem to have an adequate partner for Esteve.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:04 pm**

We don’t have 2 competent centre halves yet we’re playing with 3.

I actually think Bashir Humphreys has huge potential at centre half, I’m just not sure on the idea of 2 left footers for some reason (yet I wouldn’t have the same thought with 2 right footers) which is strange.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:06 pm**

Having Worrall on the bench over Ekdal made absolutely 0 sense.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:18 pm**

If it genuinely was a tactical decision, then surely Ekdal would have been on the bench. He'd never have been dropped from the starting XI and given nothing when he's certainly not been hopeless or to blame for our current position. There's got to be more to this I'm thinking.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:22 pm**

Goliath wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:06 pm
Having Worrall on the bench over Ekdal made absolutely 0 sense.

This.

I’ve no problem with Tuanzebe getting the nod over Edkal (although I think Edkal has generally been OK this season) but Worrall getting on the bench ahead of him is an insult - he’s looked crap practically every time he’s pulled on the jersey.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:28 pm**

morninbob wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:25 am
Definitely backfired, Ekdal wouldn't have been dragged out of position like tuanzebe.

It was Laurent getting caught out which meant Tuanzebe got dragged over. Then esteve being stuck what to do.

Disaster all round yesterday in regards to our back 5. Walker and hartmans poorest games to

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:50 pm**

KRBFC wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:04 pm
We don’t have 2 competent centre halves yet we’re playing with 3.

Yep!

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:51 pm**

If Ekdal was fit and did not even make the squad that tells me something-Parker does not think he is good enough. Plus we know Parker is very loyal and so you would expect Ekdal to be on the bench if it was just tactics. Smacks of a snub

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:56 pm**

If you watch the City game closely , he was very slow at getting to his man for 2 of their goals .

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:59 pm**

Assuming Ekdal was on his way home on Saturday there are two scenarios:

1 - this was a genuine tactical decision and has led to a bit of a fallout or you'd still have expected Ekdal to travel with the squad
2 - there is a personal issue at play which Parker doesn't want to be drawn on.

From a purely football perspective I'd hope it's option 2 (although it goes without saying I'd hope that it's nothing serious)

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:05 pm**

expoultryboy wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:56 pm
If you watch the City game closely , he was very slow at getting to his man for 2 of their goals .

Can't disagree-its a good example of how far behind "PL standard" some of our players are. THe ones that consistently perform are in my view PL standard ie Dubrovka, Walker, Cullen, Luis, Ugochukwu ,Hartman,Anthony (at a push). Think this is why the starting 11 are finding it hard to match teams. When you look at our centre halves for example I doubt none would be even first choice back up with the possible exception of three or four PL clubs.

Factor this in and were are doing pretty well to have come so close to when we played Man Utd, Liverpool and even Villa yesterday

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:12 pm**

The bloke has explained his decision.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:26 pm**

I've no Ikea why Parker made that decision

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:26 pm**

If Parker's dropped Ekdal from the match-day squad completely then we have a real problem. Ekdal has done well on the whole. He's always going to struggle against the big six, as he's not at that level. He was excellent against both Sunderland and Forest though. His average to the end of September was higher than Esteve. As has already been said, why not bring Tuanzebe in for Laurent? Something doesn't feel right about this.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:29 pm**

Exterminate exterminate!!!

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:30 pm**

KRBFC wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:04 pm
We don’t have 2 competent centre halves yet we’re playing with 3.

I actually think Bashir Humphreys has huge potential at centre half, I’m just not sure on the idea of 2 left footers for some reason (yet I wouldn’t have the same thought with 2 right footers) which is strange.

Left-footed defenders tend to grow up playing almost exclusively on the left, whereas right-footed defenders often have to fill in on the left at different stages, so they generally pick up more experience playing on their ‘wrong’ side.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:34 pm**

Parker, despite apparently being the most negative manager on the planet, went with an aggressive, high line, high press to try and trap Villa and play on their, hoped, tiredness from playing in Europe. Playing with a higher line, Parker went for the much quicker Tuanzebe in this game. That’s that one. Laurent has been starting as a RCB out of possession but most of the time, in possession, he is pushing into midfield to form a three. This hybrid role Parker has tried is quite interesting tactically, but arguably hasn’t been full effective. Though this explains why it’s been Laurent in there, and not Tuanzebe, who wouldn’t be familiar wit playing in midfield in possession. Why Ekdal out the squad altogether? Who knows, not sure why it matters, Worrall or Ekdal on the bench is hardly a massive deal or massive problem, though I’m sure some will add it to their massive problem list.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:36 pm**

KRBFC wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 12:04 pm
We don’t have 2 competent centre halves yet we’re playing with 3.

I actually think Bashir Humphreys has huge potential at centre half, I’m just not sure on the idea of 2 left footers for some reason (yet I wouldn’t have the same thought with 2 right footers) which is strange.

Humphreys isn't as totally left footed as you may think.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:50 pm**

Is Ekdal about to become the new Tresor ?

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 2:07 pm**

ashtonlongsider wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 11:39 am
I said after the City game that i'd be looking to change Ekdal and I was surprised to not see Walker alongside Esteve yesterday. Think its been coming for a while and no surprise to me. That said the biggest worry for me is this system. It's not working and imo we need to go 4-4-2 as we're conceding too much in midfield and thus not creating anything in the final third.

Agree we need to go 442, because it's not giving any assurance or advantage whatsoever to persist with this system, problem is I've completely run out of patience with foster, after much perseverance he's not good enough, no desire at all yesterday, looked uninterested along with a few other's yesterday.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 2:12 pm**

We missed Ekdal's heading ability, owing to his size. They won every header.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 2:54 pm**

boatshed bill wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:36 pm
Humphreys isn't as totally left footed as you may think.

Well he did play a couple of times at right back last season for us.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 2:56 pm**

Having seen Walker Ekdal and Tuanzebe at centre half, I think I’d give Worrall a go in a 433, just for his physical attributes.

Park the bus and counter attack, not the centre halves running up the field.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 3:39 pm**

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:26 pm
I've no Ikea why Parker made that decision

Flat pack four ?

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 3:52 pm**

Humphrey Tuanzebe and Esteve for me with Ekdal and Laurent on bench ( no Worrall)

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 4:20 pm**

Give Tuanzebe a chance. He will be rusty before getting u to speed, but when he does he should be the mobile more defender.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 4:53 pm**

Big Vinny K wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 3:39 pm
Flat pack four ?

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:10 pm**

If we had a fully fit Beyer who had not experienced his horrific injury then he would be the ideal centre half to play in the Laurent role as he could primarily play at the back but step forward with the ball into midfield

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:12 pm**

Big Vinny K wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 3:39 pm
Flat pack four ?

You'd definitely have Ekdal in a flat pack four

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:41 pm**

So

If Ekdal was dropped you would still think he was in front of Worrall in the pecking order for a bench slot
And then if he threw his dummy out of the pram when he saw Laurent still in a back three position that Josh struggles with, you could understand that, and why either Parker left him totally out of the squad or Ekdal refused to be part of the squad

Whatever, the end result was that the whole back five were caught out of position so many times as they all went AWOL chasing forward throughout the 90 mins

Total tactical mess from Parker which I hope he learns from

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:43 pm**

Big Vinny K wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 3:39 pm
Flat pack four ?

That's something we could build on

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:03 pm**

Very strange that he was dropped from the squad altogether after the starts he has had.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:38 pm**

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:03 pm
Very strange that he was dropped from the squad altogether after the starts he has had.

Perhaps to give him a bit of time off before training for the internationals? It's not like we didn't have cover.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:45 pm**

RVclaret wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 1:34 pm
Parker, despite apparently being the most negative manager on the planet, went with an aggressive, high line, high press to try and trap Villa and play on their, hoped, tiredness

It didn't work, though. Nobody has said he's claiming world recognition for negativity but there is no doubting his tactics are dour and dull. A lack of ideas even with a very limited squad at his disposal will eventually result in support turning against him. Far too many players already have not had a 'look in' and that doesn't bode well for a happy camp.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:48 pm**

Is it not beyond the realms of possibility that Parker has informed Ekdal that he wouldn’t be in the squad on Saturday for the reasons he gave in the press conference and given him permission to travel home slightly earlier than everyone else to see his family before he joins the Swedish National team?

Not everything needs a hidden meaning behind it or be part of some training ground drama.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:52 pm**

According to a table shown on MOTD last night we have made the least number of changes to the starting line up along with Palace (?).

Not sure what that indicates, but hazarding a guess he thinks we have a better chance of gelling using the same players plus he doesn't think the second stringers are up to it.

TBF he has had to build an entirely new defence playing some of the most free scoring teams in the Division.

Posted: **Mon Oct 06, 2025 7:59 pm**

jojomk1 wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 06, 2025 5:41 pm
So

If Ekdal was dropped you would still think he was in front of Worrall in the pecking order for a bench slot
And then if he threw his dummy out of the pram when he saw Laurent still in a back three position that Josh struggles with, you could understand that, and why either Parker left him totally out of the squad or Ekdal refused to be part of the squad

Whatever, the end result was that the whole back five were caught out of position so many times as they all went AWOL chasing forward throughout the 90 mins

Total tactical mess from Parker which I hope he learns from

I can see why Worral would be the preference for the bench. He's being used to close games out. More experienced, more of a talker and motivator for the team, he's often coming on as an extra defender rather than like for like swap.

Ekdal

Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal

Re: Ekdal