Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A

Tim Cahill in midfield

By Jack Calvert :  15/01/2008 :  Comments (60) :
On another fans message board I read a comment by a fan talking about the need to sell players at the right time as well as clearing out the deadwood in our squad. The obvious names mentioned; Shandy VDM, Stubbs, Hibbert, Valene and Cahill. He (or she) claimed that in our squad now of Pienar, Fernandes (if signed permanently) Carsley, Arteta, Osman then Cahill would be 6th choice in a 4.

Fair point in my opinion. After all who here rates Cahill as a tackler in the same breath as Carsley, or has the passing ability of Arteta, the pace and movement of Piennar or Osman. Yes the likes of Scholes can't tackle or Flamini can't hit 60 yard passes but Cahill struggles on the traditional attributs of midfielders.

The Fan's opinion was that it would be best to sell now before he loses value sitting on the bench all the time. What it didn't mention however that despite his value to the team as a midfielder has dropped his ability to play as a striker is perfect.

Whenever the so-called experts have described Cahill this season they always mention his ability to arrive in the box late so defenders do not pick him up. These same experts also claim Arteta is still our only supply of goals (Le Tissier: how many assists did Arteta get in our 7-1 drubbing of Sunderland?).

Nowdays it is Osman and Piennar who have been doing this as Cahill has been playing as a second striker, and a very good one at that too. As a strike partner for the Yak in a 4-4-2 he is the perfect foil.

He can be a good target man as he is fantastic in the air. He has a leap that enables him to beat so many top defenders in the air and his energy and work rate does go a long way to compensating for the Yak and his workrate. (Although it could improve in the future.) In the box he is a leathal predator and is a natural poacher.

He hasn't got goals by arriving in the box late, he has done it by getting in the right position in the penalty box, especially from set pieces, and having the ability to lose his marker. He has strength, fantastic airial ability and is a natural finisher - in oter words he is the perfect striker, a poacher a fox in the box. This season he could easilly get 20 goals, if next season he plays as a striker for the most part he could make 30.

The only downside of this - it still leaves us with 5 midfielders and 3 or 4 other players who will be asked to do a job there such as Cahill himself, Faddy and Neville. We may no longer need to sign strikers for a while but we sure as hell need another midfielder or 2. Maybe the funds from selling Mcfadden could help this...

Reader Comments

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Rich Grisdale
1   Posted 16/01/2008 at 01:41:08

Report abuse

Cahill is goin nowhere mate, think someone is winding u up? why the hell would we want to sell him? a goal every 3 games is some goin...cahill is defo in first 11 for me....
Rich Grisdale
2   Posted 16/01/2008 at 01:51:16

Report abuse

And he hasnt got goals arriving late from midfield? You sure about that?
Wayne Smyth
3   Posted 16/01/2008 at 01:56:06

Report abuse

For me its a real dilemma. I’ve never rated cahill as a midfielder. As the poster mentions, he doesn’t appear to have the passing/tackling ability of a good midfielder.

What he does have is a brilliant knack of goalscoring. Moyes moving him to what is in effect a striking role, kind of indicates that perhaps Moyes believes he is more of a striker than a midfielder.

As our squad is improving, and we are getting more well rounded players like fernandes coming in, cahills spot as a central midfielder must look shakey at best.

The only conclusion is that cahill will be competing with johnson/vaughan/anichebe for a striking berth alongside the yak. The worry is that with so many good strikers who need 1st team action Moyes will be hard-pressed to keep squad unity(cf. spurs) without moving someone on.
Peter Bourke
4   Posted 16/01/2008 at 04:11:43

Report abuse

I can?t believe anyone would even think about Cahill?s position in the team as being "shaky". He is without doubt our best TEAM player. He gives us a point of difference and an edge that most teams don?t have, the X-factor if you like.
It doesn?t matter that he is not the best technically gifted midfielder we have, what matters is that he delivers the goods. I think our midfield has the perfect mix of Skill (Arteta, Peinaar and Fernandes), Stability(Carsley) and Attack (Cahill).
Michael Tracey
5   Posted 16/01/2008 at 05:22:09

Report abuse

I just don?t get it. Why would we want to get rid of Cahill? It appears some who come on this website really haven?t a clue. It must just be a coincidence that very good run of results started when Cahill returned after injury. He would be one of our most important players end of and one of the first on the teamsheet each week. Its is also funny that Cahill along with Arteta were both signed up for another 5 years and see as the keys for our future success. Its a good thing that team selection is not done by some who have posted above.
Arthur Jones
6   Posted 16/01/2008 at 06:06:50

Report abuse

I agree with Michael Tracey. If our season had started when TC came back into the team we would be mixing it with Chelsea , Arsenal and Utd now, not waving them goodbye. It's not only his goals but his presence on the pitch that seems to raise the standard of those around him. He?s all action, a pain in the posterior for his opponents because of his ?in your face ? attitude and a positive influnce. My RS mates all wish he was playing on the dark side alongside Steevee mee, and you can never get any praise for an Everton player from that lot.
Paul Olsen
7   Posted 16/01/2008 at 07:19:47

Report abuse

Sell Cahill, right....

And the argument that we might receive an extra mill if we sell him now, priceless.

As someone has mentioned earlier here, he’s got the x-factor.
Jimmy Rimmer
8   Posted 16/01/2008 at 07:38:39

Report abuse

I have to say I?m reading some utter drivel this morning in terms of our squad from people who clearly haven?t got a clue about football. "Sell Cahill." Say no more. He is an Everton Talisman! Read another one saying, "put Lescott in at DM because he can tackle and score goals." (isn?t a major role of the DM that when one our attempts at goal break down he is in place to nullify a counter). How can he do that if he?s in the box, trying to poach.
Dick Fearon
9   Posted 16/01/2008 at 05:50:16

Report abuse

How many times do I have to come on this board to explain that the OBJECT of the game is to score more goals than your opponent.
Tim Cahill is a proven world class goal scoring midfielder and as such is the ONLY one of that type on our books and there are few better in the premier eague.
To suggest that he step aside shows a distinct lack of football nous.
Cahill may not have twinkling feet, nor does he have Carsleys bite yet when it comes to goal scoring he has few equals.

Rob Jones
10   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:15:28

Report abuse

Yes, let's get rid of Cahill, Yak and Arteta, then we?ll get fuck all goals, theres a good reason hes the favourite player of alot of people, myself included, and thats because hes a top class midfielder who scores goals and has a good header in him, but also hes got a love for this club that we haven?t really seen since Big Dunc.
Jonathan Tasker
11   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:36:01

Report abuse

Our revival, as someone says above, started when Cahill returned to the team. I don’t rate him particularly as a midfilelder, he’s not very good at most things EXCEPT scoring goals and , in case you hadn’t noticed, that’s pretty important in winning football matches. Cahill is my favourite Everton player for a very long time. At the risk of starting another thread, or being in the wrong thread, I’d love it if we signed/loaned Sidwell.
John Lloyd
12   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:39:41

Report abuse

I think the previous responses say it all really....

It really amazes & confounds me when I read people’s comments or posts on here and I have to ask myself ’have they ever watched Everton play???’

Because even though the author wasnt the one who was stupid enough to suggest selling Cahill the rest of the piece doesnt add up either!!

Whats next, post about sticking Arteta right back cos of that tackle stat on sky or whereever it was!!
Wayne Smyth
13   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:36:49

Report abuse

Just for clarification, I wasn’t suggesting selling him.

However, I still stand by my statement that he is not a good midfielder. He shines when we play 4-5-1 and he is allowed more prominent, attacking role.

Whenever we have played a standard 4-4-2 with cahill in the middle he has generally become anonymous. So far this season, he has effectively been playing up front and has produced the goods.

You could argue that he is our 2nd best forward, but I wouldn’t say that he is a good midfielder.

Carl Howey
14   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:14:38

Report abuse

Jack, I think you and anyone else who thinks we should sell Cahill have lost the plot.

Peter Bourke is spot on with his comments. Every team needs a balance of players (skill, graft and goals) and Tim helps give us that balance in no small measure.

To sell him would be pure lunacy, he is worth more to us on the pitch than any transfer fee.

Long may the corner flags of Goodison, and everywhere else, be boxed by The Blue Kangaroo!
Steve Carter
15   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:49:08

Report abuse

"traditional attributs of midfielder" my arse. Take apart discrete individual skill attributes of individual players as much as you like Jack, the outcome with Tim is that we generally win (or at least draw in the last minute against the likes of Chelsea) and he generally scores (against the likes of Man U - even if we do lose because the "the pace and movement of Piennar"?s brain is such that it explodes)
Leon Purton
16   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:43:47

Report abuse

I am very happy with Tim in the midfield, when we have the ball and hold good possession (something that has only started to happen recently, past few seasons) we have a very effective two man strike partnership. When we lose the ball and Cars holds up the counter we have five players to tuck in and clog the midfield. This has worked very effectively, and has forced top sides to play ugly football against us, i.e Arse and Man City. If we sell Timmy I will certainly question the toffees drive for trophies. Have to agree I think Sidwell would be good competition for Cars and Neville when he is played out of position in the midfield.
Andy Ellams
17   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:53:00

Report abuse

For anyone who think we should cash in on Cahill because he can’t tackle, have you ever seen Paul Scholes tackle? And I’d have a 27 year old Paul Scholes in any team. And as for Cahill’s passing, did you see the part he played in Osman’s goal against Larissa. Cahill’s objective in the team apart from his goals is to keep it simple around the opposition box and keep the ball moving and making life as uncomfortable as possible for defenders. The current 4-5-1/4-4-1-1 works perfectly for Everton. It enables people like Arteta/Pienaar/Osman/Fernandes to bring the ball forward quickly and get the ball into the forwards whilst the opposition is still on the back foot without having to hoof it from one penalty box to another. It is obvious that David Moyes need to strenghten, but not that much at this time, maybe just squad players and a full back.
Jjimmy Rimmer
18   Posted 16/01/2008 at 08:48:16

Report abuse

He is a good midfielder. He scores goals, including vital goals, he gives 110%, is a great headerer for defending set pieces and provides flick ons. He harries players well and puts them off their game. At the game against city and through the wonders of streaming I?ve been watching him closely in the 4-4-2. I thought he did really well and worked so hard. If you?ve ever watched Roy Keane in the flesh he may seem anonymous, you have to watch him carefully to understand his contributions to a game. I?m not comparing the two players here apart from that point. Cahill has been working his socks off in a postion that he doesn?t usually play. If given time in that role I think he could be good. BUT I don?t think that is where he is best employed. Moyes and every fan I speak to seem to think so too. I?d say you?re onto a loser here with this one personally.
Peter Laing
19   Posted 16/01/2008 at 09:27:53

Report abuse

To suggest that Cahill thrives in a 4-5-1 formation would be true, same must be said though for Lee Carlsey (utter rubbish when he is asked to get forward and offer anything creatively) and Leon Osman who is given the protection to get on the ball by a 4-5-1 formation. IMHO all 3 player’s thrive off the 4-5-1 approach and when we adopt this formation we have the knack of being hard to beat and extended ubeaten run’s as witnessed before Christmas. Tim Cahill’s goal return has been nothing short of phenomenal, give me the blue Kangaroo in our team any day as the opposition just hate him. The only player by the way to also score in 4 successive derbies, this hasnt probably been done since the good ol’ days of Dixie.
Rupert Coghlan
20   Posted 16/01/2008 at 09:42:25

Report abuse

Cahill is class.

Why on earth would we sell one of our best 3 players?
Connor Rohrer
21   Posted 16/01/2008 at 09:46:13

Report abuse

Cahill is fine in a 4 man midfield. He won’t score as many goals but his legs, box to box stamina, aerial ability and aggression would be perfect for our midfield.

People try to make out like he’s a limited footballer but that is far from the case. He’s a much better footballer than Carsley, Neville and Jagielka and all of them have had some decent games in our midfield. Cahill has a decent touch and his short passing range is also decent. He keeps it simple but he’s also very positive. People like Carsley will pass backwards or sideways but Cahill always looks forward.

I’d personally like to see him alongside Fernandes in a few home games this season. think he’d revel with a ball playing midfielder alongside him. I remember when we played Charlton at home in the 05/06 season and Cahill played alongside Arteta in the middle of a four man midfield and he was class. He scored two, had one unfairly disallowed, hit the bar and his general all round play was excellent.

I don’t really care if he’s playing in a 4 or a 5 as he’s our most important player. He’s a winner and he gels everything together.
Sean Allinson
22   Posted 16/01/2008 at 10:02:43

Report abuse

There is a bit of a myth being built up about Cahill. The one about him not being able to tackle. Whether in a 4 or a 5, he wins his fair share of the ball. In fact it is one of the strengths of his game, be it in the air or on the ground.

Sell him? Pfffft!
Jack Calvert
23   Posted 16/01/2008 at 10:10:02

Report abuse

Okay most of you are missing the point.
I gave one hell of a reason not to sell him - he should be our first choice centre forward.
I also meant THIS SEASON he hasn’t got his goals arriving late, the article is based on this seasons performances.
My point was that as a midfielder, especially in a 4-4-2 he does go anonomous. In a 4-5-1 he effectively becomes a striker.
These comments do come from watching him play where he scores goals and is a target, a focal point of the team. It is not the same as moving Lescott to midfield or Arteta to defence. It was noting how Cahills whole game gives him the attributes of a world class striker.
When the ACON is over next month and if we have a fully fit squad and every other midfielder is on form, where would you, if in charge, pick cahill?
He would not get in a 4 man midfield with Arteta and Piennar on the flanks, Manny and Cars in the centre. As I said before when picked in a 5 he effectively becomes a second striker in a 4-4-2.
In conclusion I wasn’t saying sell him - if people read the article they would have seen that I said that they were other someone elses words - I was saying keep him now as a striker and continue to improve the midfield
Robert Carney
24   Posted 16/01/2008 at 10:19:22

Report abuse

Ask any pro what he thinks of Cahill. As well as is un-doubted ability as a midfilder and goalscorer he is also one of the most niggly disruptive players you come across.

Opposing teams hate playing against him, he his on your heels one moment then in the box the next. You can not keep the kangaroo down.

When it comes to cashing in at the right time, the master of this is Wenger.

No player is too big to let go, get the maximum for is transfer. Usual just before their thirteith birthday.

A few years left for our stars.
Peter Bourke
25   Posted 16/01/2008 at 10:18:31

Report abuse

Thank God most of you agree Cahill is one of our best players and to rate him a 6th choice in a 4 man midfield is hilarious.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but how quickly some forget how ordinary we look without Timmy. I cant recall exactly but i am pretty sure last year he was rated in the top 50 players in Europe, and he is only 6th choice in an Everton midfield. Get me a bucket.
I am still in shock that an EFC supporter could even suggest such nonsense.
Then again some people still think the earth is flat. :)
John Jones
26   Posted 16/01/2008 at 10:49:58

Report abuse

Co-incidence how we’ve been doing so well since he came back? Obviously Carsley’s return co-incided to our defensive improvement, but the fact we’ve been banging goals in has a lot to do with Cahills return.

I’d argue he is just as important as Arteta to our team, and all this ’he does nothing but scores goals’ and ’he’s not a midfielder’ is nonsense. He’s an excellent attacking midfielder and tracks back to hassle players and put tackles in, and he CAN pass a ball. People seem to be looking too much into this. Cahill is a midfielder, and an excellent one at that. Obviously he works best in a 5 man midfield as he is better suited to attacking, but equally he can do a job when called upon to track back. He isn’t a striker.
John Lloyd
27   Posted 16/01/2008 at 10:56:52

Report abuse

Jack although a few people may of misread your article the general consensous disagree with the rest of your article too.
Dan McKie
28   Posted 16/01/2008 at 11:06:43

Report abuse

Everton are a miles better side with Cahill spearheading a 5 man midfield - simple as!
Adam Hunter
29   Posted 16/01/2008 at 11:08:03

Report abuse

Cahill is a MUST starter, whether it be up front or in centre midfield. I cant believe the bit where i read he would be 6th choice in a four man midfield, nonsense! He would be equal first choice with Arteta, and not behind the ’amazing’ ..ahem.. Manny.
Martin Doherty
30   Posted 16/01/2008 at 11:35:49

Report abuse

I can’t believe you referred to a great Everton servant like Alan Stubbs as deadwood! Yes, he is past his best but he still has a lot to offer in terms of experience and savvy. We given away quite a few goals from set plays recently. That never seems to happen when Stubbs is in the team. Too many fans can’t separate playing Championship Manager from the real thing.
Alex Naylor
31   Posted 16/01/2008 at 11:46:05

Report abuse

Even if Cahill was our 6th best midfileder (which he isn’t), we often play 5 accross the midfiled. We are trying to build a squad here and with injuries I would suggest that we would need 6 real quality midfileders to challange for the honours we all desire.

Selling any of our (even) good players is maddness unless we have ALREADY replaced them with a better alternative.

With regards to Cahill, in his role I would be hard pushed to find a better player in the premiership if not the world.
Albert Velthuijsen
32   Posted 16/01/2008 at 11:46:41

Report abuse

The overhead kick against Chelsea... do I have to say more??
Wayne Smyth
33   Posted 16/01/2008 at 10:57:39

Report abuse

I think some of you need to take a look at:

No-one on here is disputing that Cahill is immensely effective in a 4-5-1. No-one is disputing his contribution to the team when he is given an advanced role.

It's amusing to hear comparisons with Scholes however.

If you?re going to describe an attacking midfielder as class/excellent then he needs to have good vision and the passing ability to match. He needs to be able to hold on to the ball too. Scholes was class and would not have looked out of place in any team in the world. Cahill by comparison is not.

Moyes is spot on in choosing the 4-5-1 formation for the players we have. Why? Probably because any 2 of our centre midfielders are not good enough to stand up to the better teams and hold on to the ball.

The fact that our form improved when cahill came back says as much for Cahill's goals as it does for the paucity of talent we had in CM. Neville/Jags are not midfielders.

Our midfield is improving however, and with Fernandes coming in, we are finally getting to the stage where we can sucessfully play a 4-4-2 against most teams and not suffer.

If you were to play a 4-4-2 and play Cahill in CM, he would lose much of his goalscoring threat. Question is, does his remaining contribution warrant his CM place? I would argue not. I?d prefer an essien type in there. I would however use Cahill as a forward, just off the main striker where is is a nuisance and will score plenty of goals.
Paul Lenehan
34   Posted 16/01/2008 at 12:44:43

Report abuse

I think most are in agreement that our strongest formation is 4-5-1. In the formation Carsley and Cahill fulful their roles in a many which I doubt anybody else in the squad can do. For this reason they would be my first names (along with Mikel) on the team sheet. He may not be the best tackler but he is not supposed to be. What he does have is work rate and pressuring players into forcing a pass is just as important. As for not having vision, we have fernandes, ossie, Pienaar and Arteta for that. Additionally Cahills passing isn’t that bad, sure not in the class of those mentioned but its sufficient to keep the ball and keep moves going.
Peter Roberts
35   Posted 16/01/2008 at 12:51:48

Report abuse

Although I?ve not read all the responses, there?s one critical flaw in your argument, Jack.

You say Cahill should be employed as a supporting striker? That would seem to suggest we should be playing 4-4-2 instead of the more defensive 4-1-4-1 formation?

Excuse my French but that?s complete cack. There?s no reason to ditch a 4-1-4-1 formation at all. As far as I?m concerned, out of our midfielders, Arteta, Cahill, Pienaar and Fernandes, with Carsley sitting back, would be first choice, and Osman, much as I love the guy, is the bench midfielder to come on and bamboozle opposition defences with 20 minutes to go, much like Slick Vic. 4-1-4-1 has been working a treat this season, why ditch it?

Pienaar and Arteta on the flanks almost play forward roles in much the same way Chelsea did with Robben and Duff supporting Drogba when they first won the Premiership in 2005. Cahill and Fernandes in the middle give great middle support with Carsley (or his long-term replacement as the defensive midfielder) holding back and waiting on any counter attack.

Nice idea, but also Cahill doesn?t get enough goals to be meriting a striker?s role as that?s not his natural position. However, as an attacking midfielder his goal ratio is second to none. That?s where he should be, and that?s where Moyes will put him.
Lewis Abbott
36   Posted 16/01/2008 at 12:58:59

Report abuse

I agree with wayne two posts up.

Cahill is a great player, but for me he isnt effective in a four man midfield cause he gets tied down to doing to many jobs he shouldn't be doing.

He is most effective as most people have said when he is a five man midfield(with Cahill and Carsley doing thier respective jobs) or if we were to play 4-4-2 then for me he has to play further forward just off the yak.

But I think this presents us with another big problem that all of you people have missed. Johnson? McFadden (who hopefully will be sold asap) Vik and Vaughan? How long will they sit there and wait for there first team chance? I think the yak and cahill is our strongest pairing, and it is also flexible, and johnson would be next inline, but how long will he wait?

To sell Cahill would be stupid... end of.
Dan Murphy
37   Posted 16/01/2008 at 13:13:31

Report abuse

More eejits proposing selling Hibbert after he just shut down Petrov on Saturday. Petrov seems a good player but is the sort of johnny-come-lately media darling that people fawn over.
I had to listen to people bag Hibbert after the Arsenal game when what happened was they tried switching it to his wing, got nowhere, then reverted to hitting it down the middle where Howard, Yobo and especially Jagielka gave away goals.
A lot of people are so dug in to their anti-Hibbert positions that they can’t even bring themselves to admit when he has a good game.
Cahill can hold a ball, knock it around a bit and tackle on top of his goal poaching and aerial ability so let’s put this he can’t play rubbish to bed right now.
Also Valente is a class player and lets see how true blue Stubbsy goes the rest of the season. I’d rather have him at the back than Jagielka.
Liam Reilly
38   Posted 16/01/2008 at 12:48:30

Report abuse

Best player outside the top 4 IMO. It’s no coincidence that the teams unbeaten run started when Cahill came back from injury.
Scores regularly at international level alos and and he loves the club.
Most top sides build their teams around their top players and to talk about him not been in the team is utter nonsense.
Joanne Gaskell
39   Posted 16/01/2008 at 14:23:38

Report abuse

You must be having a laugh, cahill sitting on the bench? errmmmm lets think again?
He scores goals for us, he absoloutley loves everton football club just like all mad evertonians do, so please explain why it would be hard for him to get into the first 11, well hes in my team for many years to come and in years to come he is gona be an EVERTON LEGEND!!!!!
Adam Doyle
40   Posted 16/01/2008 at 14:48:53

Report abuse

Nice to see some fans thinking of their club as a business. Tim Cahill is an amazing player, what makes you think he wouldn?t/shouldn?t get into the starting XI? One of the best players in the team, selling him is just ridiculous

Arteta, Cahill, Carsley, Fernandes, Osman & Pienaar. One of the best midfeilds in the Premiership if you ask me
Mike Allison
41   Posted 16/01/2008 at 16:10:39

Report abuse

I just want to make a point to Peter Roberts, who refers to ’the more defensive 4-1-4-1 formation’.

Although this certainly seems to be the general consensus I think it is incorrect to describe it as more defensive. I haven’t bothered to trawl through all our games and what formations we played but I would happily take a spot bet for a large amount of money that we average more goals per game playing 4-5-1 than 4-4-2. The simple logic that "two up front is more attacking" just doesn’t ring true. We are a much more coherent attacking unit with five midfielders, including Cahill. What matters is the way those midfielders play, and having one midfielder (Carsley) sitting allows the other four to all attack, as well as the full backs getting forward.

Our best formation is the one striker with Cahill freed up to support him. Playing a second striker forces the midfielders, and noticeably Cahill in particular, to play more negatively. Consequently we should be looking to add numbers in midfield, as at the moment we have 7 midfielders (one of whom is Gravesen) for 5 positions, but 5 strikers for 1. This is imbalanced and needs to be fixed. We need a geniune midfielder to share Carsley’s load, and a natural left sided player.
Micky Norman
42   Posted 16/01/2008 at 16:44:42

Report abuse

OK so imagine we’ve just heard that Cahill has broken his foot again and is out for the season. how do you feel?Nuff said.
Jim Starling
43   Posted 16/01/2008 at 17:00:29

Report abuse

Sell Cahill???? NO!!!!!!!!

I see the posters point that his game is arguably better suited to a forward role rather than midfield but I think he’s found his natural role in the hole between the two.

He get’s under people’s skin during a game, he can get into the box late and he’s not worries about having to take care of the Carsley like responsibilities that he’s not so go at.

In my opinion, keep him playing in between the midfield 4 and the front man and let him work his magic!
Eric Hardman
44   Posted 16/01/2008 at 16:56:00

Report abuse

I agree that Cahill would walk into any team but would he if he didn?t score frequently. I?ve always regarded him as a brilliant striker first and an adequate midfielder second.
There is no doubt either in my mind that he does better in a 5 than a 4 man midfield and the reason is he dosen?t have to curb his attacking instincts in a 5 as he does with two ahead of him. Recently, at Chelsea he was largely anonymous until his marker was sent off and suddenly we became attack minded.
I also think the reason he and Arteta are on long term contracts, much as it pains me to suggest, has more to do with maximising their value when the big boys come calling than any plan to keep them in that event.
Ottar Gadid
45   Posted 16/01/2008 at 17:21:56

Report abuse

Not only is he a decent player, a great goalscorer and blessed with fighting spirit that would send Muhammad Ali cowering into the corner, he loves Everton too. Remember against Croatia at the World Cup, when he traded his sweaty ossie jersey for an Everton one. Stevie Mee and Rooney can go to hell, that?s a player who loves his club.
Sean Rico
46   Posted 16/01/2008 at 17:24:37

Report abuse

Can i just say that we dont really play 4-5-1 its more a 4-3-3 or a 4-1-4-1 when we have the ball, when we lose the ball the system becomes a 4-5-1.

With the players we have it suits tiny tim perfect, and would just like to say also that cahill is NOT a striker. if he was up top with yak tiny would be picked up to easly by other defenders there for arriving late he dosnt get picked up plus he gets the space
Ron Leith
47   Posted 16/01/2008 at 20:00:27

Report abuse

The main thing is actuallly have at least 8 quality midfielders not 4 or 5. Our problem is replacing Carsley as a first priority. He is the best midfielder in his position in the premier league. I hope he has a few more years in him. Cahill is the best goalscoring midfielder in the premier league and Arteta the most likely to provide a great cross or pass. Pienaar is ok on the ball but a bit prone to making a mistake that opens up the team to a counter attack.
Philip Kolvin
48   Posted 16/01/2008 at 21:19:26

Report abuse

The debate is academic. David Moyes would be completely mad to sell Tim Cahill and I have no reason to think that he is. I hope we are lucky enough to see Tim play in blue until the end of his career.
Tony Hawkins
49   Posted 16/01/2008 at 21:42:51

Report abuse

I think I’m on the wrong board or something...

Why would any manager sell one of their top scoring players?

The only person Fernandes is likely to replace is Carsley. If Moyes retains 4-5-1 the midfield is most likely Arteta, Osman,Fernandes, Cahill, Pienaar.

Any questions?
Paul Coldock
50   Posted 16/01/2008 at 22:36:30

Report abuse

I have just solved the problem of playing a 4-4-2 with Cahill and Carsley in midfield.

Don’t! Play 4-5-1 instead!
Paul Whitehouse
51   Posted 16/01/2008 at 22:57:18

Report abuse

No way on earth should Cahill be sold or even on the bench.

the bigger question is Arteta, He should be sold before is value begins to wain. If you replace Arteta for cahill in this post that should be the real discussion us Evertonians should be having
Tony Williams
52   Posted 16/01/2008 at 23:31:23

Report abuse

Paul, please explain why Arteta’s value would begin to "wain"?

After Saturday, he again proved his worth. He was the only player on the pitch who could receive the ball and hold it. It is very rare that he loses the ball, either by moving iit or by getting fouled.

Even when he is having a quiet season, he is still one of our best players.

Why even consider selling Cahill or Arteta when they are the heartbeat of our side?

Cahill’s winning mentality is infectious for those around him and Arteta’s ball skill are second to none.

No way in Hell should we even consider selling these two

Paul Whitehouse
53   Posted 16/01/2008 at 23:39:48

Report abuse

Tony got a feeling about Arteta this season, he doesn?t seem to have the goal threat or the final killer ball.
Just look at the amount of free kicks or corners that hit the first man. For me if we can 15mill plus from one of the Spanish teams that would be a great piece of business. For some reason I just think he wants to go back to Spain...
liam pender
54   Posted 16/01/2008 at 23:34:06

Report abuse

we should not sell anybody, we should be aiming to turn the big 4 back into the big 5 and poaching other teams big players.
Alan Creevy
55   Posted 17/01/2008 at 01:11:35

Report abuse

Let’s nip this in the bud right now... genuine goalscoring midfielders are rare. Tim is one, and the team will ALWAYS be better for him being there, believe me!
Sean Condon
56   Posted 17/01/2008 at 05:22:20

Report abuse

I?m glad that i?m not the only one who believes Arteta isn?t having his best season. Mind you, for much of last season he was arguably one of the best ten or twenty players in the world.
What kind of nutcase would advocate selling the most effective player we?ve had since AK in the last half of the ?95-?96 season? Like many, I truly hope that Cahill never leaves the club. COYB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ste Kenny
57   Posted 17/01/2008 at 08:30:52

Report abuse

Is this some kind of anti-top midfielders thread. True that cahill will never be a player who sprays passes all over the park and beats men for fun. But his strike rate is far better than most strikers in the premier league. IMO he is a deep lying striker who drops deep when we lose the ball. I think cahill’s attitude epitomises what we have got at the club. People who care about winning things not money

To start talking of selling one of the most creative players in europe in case he loses value is ridiculous, how do you know he’s not still improving his game. Its more likely that we now have other creative outlets and mikky doesnt feel the need to try and do it all on his own.
James Power
58   Posted 17/01/2008 at 13:23:37

Report abuse

I love it " he is a lethal predator and is a natural poacher" - magic, you weave your words with synchronicity and rare beauty!!!
James Power
59   Posted 17/01/2008 at 13:29:44

Report abuse

Just a clarification ? you cannot give 110%. It is just not possible.
Alicia Cleft
60   Posted 23/05/2008 at 02:39:31

Report abuse

Cahill is the best player you will ever see and, if you want him off the team, there must be something seriously wrong with your eyes.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to Column articles, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.

© ToffeeWeb

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.