Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In  |  Sign Up
The Mail Bag

What about Cahill?

Comments (49)

I am surprised that no-one has questioned the immediate reinstatement of Tim Cahill into the side and what impact it had on our ability to create any meaningful chances against Wigan.

I am not intending to start a debate on what TC has done for Everton ? I along with many others appreciate the effort and loyalty he has consistently shown to the blue shirt. However, there was simply no justification for his selection on Saturday. He did not appear fit, he contributed nothing (as with many games this season) and most importantly to accomodate him we had to move our best and most creative player back out to the wing, a position where we know he has his limitations.

In my opinion Cahill has peaked and is now on a downward spiral. Some players' ability to influence a game diminishes slowly with age, others rapidly... and I fear Tim falls into the latter category.

Don't get me wrong, I hope I am wrong but what annoys me is that, as soon as he is remotely 'fit', Moyes sticks him straight back in the team, even though he is the one player who the whole team structure has to be accomodated for...

The sign of good management is knowing when to phase a player out and the secret is having most people slightly disappointed if he were to be sold. Moyes is in danger of missing the writing on the wall as far as TC is concerned, he should be used as an impact sub and no more if we are to progress...
Mike Elbey, Liverpool     Posted 03/05/2011 at

back Return to the Mail Bag


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

Michael Kenrick
1   Posted 03/05/2011 at 14:28:48

Report abuse

You are bang on, Mike. Classic Moyes mismanagement, to put his favourites right back in, and in the course of it cause disruption to the team, and especially to Osman, who was less effective.

I am still seething about Cahill having left us for that ridiculous tournament. No tournament like that should be played during the season, denying us our then leading scorer for SIX WEEKS in the middle of the season and then returning him well crocked for what was left just renders the whole business a sick joke.

The irony, of course, being that are form without him is better than with him! Just another twisting of the knife in this frustrating season.

Mark Murphy
2   Posted 03/05/2011 at 14:34:40

Report abuse

Mike, I'm a longstanding supporter and defender of Tim Cahill on this board but I agree with your questioning as to why he was brought straight back in on Saturday (along with Arteta). The back up boys have done very well in their absense with the exception of the hardly surprising set back at OT and should have been trusted with this game. I wouldn't write Tim off yet but I was very surprised and shocked to see him included.
Norman Merrill
3   Posted 03/05/2011 at 14:36:01

Report abuse

Mike, I think you may be in for a ear-bashing on this subject. I have always said it's all about opinions, about players, managers, and life in general, and we are all entitled to that.

On the subject of Cahill & Arteta, I don't know what the rush was to play them, as they are both not fully match-fit, and that is my opinion.

James Martin
4   Posted 03/05/2011 at 14:49:41

Report abuse

He's in the wrong position, that's why. He should be one of a midfield three, two of which are given license to attack whilst one anchors. He should not be looking for flick-ons standing right next to the striker. He is not some sort of continental Number 10, put him back in midfield where he belongs.
Stephen Leary
5   Posted 03/05/2011 at 14:39:46

Report abuse

Could not agree more with you, Mike and Michael, Osman was superb playing in that roll and we played some decent stuff in the final third with him there rather than the pumps upfield to Cahill or passing it about with no movement whatsoever.

On another post, somebody made a very good point saying Cahill was at his best in a central midfield roll coming from deep into the box, as he did very effectively. Don't get me wrong: Tim is a super player and is an Everton legend now, but I feel with the current type of players we have now he just dosen't fit into our team he disturbs the flow of our play.

If he was a Van der Vaart type player, it would work as he is an all-round footballer who can make space for others and play other people in, how many assists has Cahill made in that role?, it won't be many if any. I think it's time now he challenged for a place in the middle of the park; I think he's an under-rated player in that role and, as I said before, has played there many times.

If Moyes stays as manager and still favours this system, it is time for a different type player in the "hole" role, and the way Osman has been playing I would love to see him given a real 10- to 15-game run at it, his assists are great and he does chip in with the odd goal. Other candidates for me would be, Bily, Geuye, and Arteta.
Tony J Williams
6   Posted 03/05/2011 at 14:51:43

Report abuse

Norman, that is the rub. They're both not match fit, so how do you get them fit? Play them in matches.

It was a nothing game and we have nothing to play for now apart from holding onto 7th place, why not get the seniors back in to get them fit? It's exactly the same as when posters say play the kids when there is nothing to win/lose.
Michael Kenrick
7   Posted 03/05/2011 at 15:15:08

Report abuse

You're right, Tony. But I think a good manager would have brought them both on as subs later in the game.

Because Moyes started them, and because he has a rigid clock for "normal" substitutions, they get swapped out after playing ¾ of the game!

They weren't switched at half-time because Moyes has established, again through more maddening rigidity, that he only subs players at the break as a sign of displeasure at their lack of performance.
Gavin Ramejkis
8   Posted 03/05/2011 at 15:41:13

Report abuse

Tony does have a point but the reserves games are now worthless, Cahill still doesn't look like he's completely over the injury either, would he be better rested and brought on for last twenty against tired legs rather than still injured against fresher legs?

I tend to side with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" brigade, the side that has done well recently should have earned the right to keep playing ? just as Baines should have taken the first pen on Saturday, despite Arteta's record... but that's a debate you could have for hours over a few beers.
Ian Kearney
9   Posted 03/05/2011 at 15:42:39

Report abuse

It's his first game back, and if he wasn't ready then it's not Tim who should carry the can for poor selection.

Regarding the 'hole', I agree with trying a more technical player in that role but, if you remember earlier in the season when Cahill got injured, Moyes chose to play Fellaini out of position to keep the physical element, rather than give Bily a chance in the position he was scouted at, or the position the man who recommended him played him in. In recent games, Osman showed that a technical player can thrive here, especially against 'park the bus' merchants.
Eugene Ruane
10   Posted 03/05/2011 at 15:57:57

Report abuse

Arteta particularly I feel shouldn't have been brought back, in fact I was hoping he'd have been left out until next season and brought along really gently over the summer. I couldn't (BECAUSE it was a nothing game) see any point in his early return against Wigan.
Paul Olsen
11   Posted 03/05/2011 at 16:11:12

Report abuse

As far as I saw, Cahill WAS the striker in the formation, at least after the opening minutes when Anichebe dropper further and further towards the wing.
Jay Harris
12   Posted 03/05/2011 at 16:23:01

Report abuse

I support David Moyes but you are absolutely right.

Moyes himself even stated recently that the seniors would not be guaranteed an automatic return to the side.

Arteta's penalty miss and Cahill's lack of fitness cost us 2 valuable points.
Tony J Williams
13   Posted 03/05/2011 at 16:28:30

Report abuse

"You're right, Tony. But I think a good manager would have brought them both on as subs later in the game"

Michael it's no surprise you think that, because it's different to Moyes's point of view.

Here's an alternative point of view, play the men coming back from injury from the start and try and get as much out of them from the start, because if you bring them on as a sub in the second half and break down, you then therefore waste another sub to sub the sub. That's a lot of subs.
Michael Kenrick
14   Posted 03/05/2011 at 16:53:33

Report abuse

What a negative way of looking at things, Tony ? expecting the returning players to break down???

But you could well be right: caution and playing it safe... The watchwords of the Moyes Era. No matter that his decisions arguably ended up costing us two points.

But hey, it's a nothing meaningless game (apparently) so who cares? Just some stoopid fans... 4,000 fans times £25 quid... £100k. Hmmmm... makes ya think, eh?
Norman Merrill
15   Posted 03/05/2011 at 16:58:06

Report abuse

Michael, Spot on, some fans on here would argue with JC himself just for the sake of it.
James Hollister
16   Posted 03/05/2011 at 17:05:35

Report abuse

In my opinion there was no purpose to bringing them back this season, I mean seriously they are both not fit, and it ruined the was a game we could have won.

But seriously from now on til the pre season they should be completely rested and ready to go when training resumes..its just senseless nonsense to even think about reinstating..

Just like the retarded decision of even contemplating putting Anichebe into the team..he is supposed to be a striker but hasn't got a first clue where the goal why play him?...I guess thats another story.
Tony J Williams
17   Posted 03/05/2011 at 17:04:36

Report abuse

Nothing negative about it all Michael, it is well known that Cahill is still suffering with his foot so it's best to let him go gung ho for as long as he can, as he can be subbed easily; however with your reasonaing, he wouldn't be able to go all outn really, as he would have in his mind that it would cost another sub if he pulls up.

I never said I expected him to break down at all Michael, I offered the scenario that if he does, we have wasted another sub replacing the sub.

Norman, I agree people just argue for the sake of it, just look close to home too, any kind of defence or praise of Moyes get set upon straight away.

It was a meaningless game to us, not to Wigan who were fighting for their premiership lives. Makes you think about what Michael?

All the crap the team got for the Man U game and now posters are criticising the manager for changing the team. Gotta love it!
Tony J Williams
18   Posted 03/05/2011 at 17:30:26

Report abuse

Forgot to mention that Ossie has been shafted again to bring back a favourite, but I do like arguing.....I mean debating an alternative point of view.
Trevor Lynes
19   Posted 03/05/2011 at 17:30:56

Report abuse

The above comments are nothing new. I have always said that a run out for at least an hour for the reserves should be a norm when a player is coming back from injury. How on earth is a player to gain match fitness??

DM has always played his favourites whether in or out of form and that goes back to Weir and Naysmith when both were past Premiership standard... also Pistone and others.

DM is given false credit to my mind when he is supposed to encourage young players... he has consistently played 'name' players out of position rather than 'blood' a youngster. As long as Lescott could play full-back, Baines was kept out; he has blossomed since Lescott went.

Even Rooney was not utilized fully when he obviously was good enough for our team.

Luke Dunn
20   Posted 03/05/2011 at 17:42:55

Report abuse

Time to get rid, he has done his bit for the cause, now is the time to cash in. Same applies to Arteta. The team needs to move on.
David Price
21   Posted 03/05/2011 at 17:58:04

Report abuse

Then again Trevor, Lescott kept scoring goals at left back so it was difficult to change that at the time. However, Baines has blossomed and can't understand how Cole got the PFA vote for left back in the best Prem eleven this season.
Ray Robinson
22   Posted 03/05/2011 at 18:44:19

Report abuse

I too felt it was wrong of Moyes to bring Arteta and Cahill straight back as they are clearly not 100% fit. My big concern goes wider than that however. Just as Yakubu was deemed to have lost his mojo, it could be that Arteta, Cahill and Neville may have all started the inevitable decline that comes with injury / age. So instead of "just" having to find a couple of strikers this close season, we may have to find replacements for half the team. Worrying with no money.
Jon Beck
23   Posted 03/05/2011 at 19:36:25

Report abuse

Whilst I tend to agree that neither needed to be rushed back and, in hindsight, the bench was the right place for both initially on Saturday, I guess I can understand why Moyes did what he did, particularly with Cahill and his potential goal threat. As for "time to get rid", Luke that seems somewhat premature.
Michael Kenrick
24   Posted 03/05/2011 at 20:40:28

Report abuse

Tony, that risk applies to all tactical substitutions. At least one and often two of Moyes's substitutions in a game are "nominal" anyway ? occurring in the final 10 mins and usually to zero effect or benefit... but let's not go there.

The scenario you cite has such a low percentage probability, it is not worth thinking about. Moyes had a decision to make and there is plenty to indicate that he got it wrong and that it contributed to us losing two more points ? two points that some of us thought might be important... But no, you have informed us it was a meaningless game for Everton FC. Certainly the way most of the players performed, I can't argue with that, so you must be right on that score.

What it made me think about was those poor bloody fans who paid out good money. Read Ken Buckley's report for a sense of how they probably felt about things.
Gavin Ramejkis
25   Posted 03/05/2011 at 21:09:00

Report abuse

Tony I'm no doctor but letting a player go gung ho for it with an existing injury must surely risk it getting much worse and possibly create other complications. I've no idea how bad his injury is but he's been back for weeks and he still isn't right. What if he plays on it and creates an injury which keeps him out for a few months and miss the start of next season, then if it's bad how long into next season before he's right?
Mike Elbey
26   Posted 03/05/2011 at 21:21:29

Report abuse

I think I maybe didnt point my point over correctly.

Whilst I accepted Cahill was not fit, my main point was that he was just automatically brought back in without any justification in my mind.

To me, we looked a far better team and far more creative team with Osman in the supporting striker role. I believe Cahill offers very little in this position now other than to 'rough up' the defenders. He doesnt score enough goals to compensate for the fact that creatively he contributes very little.

That does not mean I don't appreciate what Cahill has done for Everton; I do. However, his service for the club should not guarantee him a place in the side at the team's expense... which I believe is happening now.

Osman should be the automatic choice in the 'hole' position with TC as his back-up, or to be utilised against certain sides where his aggressive in-your-face attitude is required.

If Moyes continues to pick Cahill irrespective of form or ability, then a fantastic Everton career will be over-shadowed by the crowd getting on his back as his influence dwindles ? and that will be sad.
Dennis Stevens
27   Posted 03/05/2011 at 21:26:47

Report abuse

"They're both not match fit, so how do you get them fit? Play them in matches. It was a nothing game and we have nothing to play for now apart from holding onto 7th place, why not get the seniors back in to get them fit? It's exactly the same as when posters say play the kids when there is nothing to win/lose."

I can't quite see the logic here, Tony. What would be the point of giving the pair a lot of playing time in the last matches of the season, just to get them fit in time for the summer break? Pre-season training should be adequate preparation for the next campaign, so the odd sub-appearance is all one would expect from a couple of players returning from injury to a team that's been on a quite decent run of form of late.

There's no comparison with the "play the kids" perspective ? the idea there is that the youngsters get some experience & a chance to see whether they look like they have the potential to make it at this level. I could even understand Moyes starting them if he has doubts about whether they can come back to their best & he's considering off-loading them in the summer, but don't imagine for a moment that would be the case.

As for "nothing games", three more performances like Saturday's & we may well struggle to hang on to a top half finish, never mind 7th place!

Jeff Armstrong
28   Posted 03/05/2011 at 22:02:40

Report abuse

Correct Dennis #27... get them fit for what? Their holidays?
Should be giving Vellios, Forshaw, Mustafa, even Duffy (get him off loan) some game time. What does he need to know about Anichebe, Arteta, Cahill?

I could tell him one is not up to standard, and the other two are unfit. He could find out he has other options with the youngsters. He would at least get one thing... some enthusiasm.

Jeff Armstrong
29   Posted 03/05/2011 at 22:11:39

Report abuse

Noticed another Glaswegian manager in this city has been blooding some youngsters lately...
James Stewart
30   Posted 03/05/2011 at 22:14:50

Report abuse

He looked half fit at best so don't see the point in throwing him back in.

I agree with Michael as well ? Cahill should have backed out of that tournament, which was a joke.
Aiden Doyle
31   Posted 03/05/2011 at 22:46:01

Report abuse

God knows I?m not one of Cahill?s biggest fans, but I?d never criticise him for wanting to represent his country in the Asian Cup any more than I?d chastise any of our European squad members for wanting to play in Euro 2012.
Trevor Lynes
32   Posted 04/05/2011 at 00:35:50

Report abuse

Jeff #29... yes and they are all doing well... Gerrard is not being missed at all. Dalglish seems like he is bringing in British youngsters and none of them so far have been poor!!

It may be a good idea to try a few out ourselves in the next couple of games. At least it will keep the 'senior' players safe from injury... Perhaps it will encourage Rodwell to take more responsibility and show his worth. He seems to be just going through the motions at present.

Dick Fearon
33   Posted 04/05/2011 at 00:29:27

Report abuse

So Cahill is to blame for the fact that Osman reverted to his usual ineffective form? I suppose Timmy was also responsible for Anichebe's dire performance and Baines awful defensive error that led to Wigan's goal.

I guess Arteta's lousy penno can be put down to Cahill while Neville's repeated shite crosses were all his fault as well. Jag's hoof balls and Coleman's head down blind alley runs were the result of Cahill being in the team and if he wasn't in the team Rodwell would probably have made at least one forward pass.

Maybe if we got rid of the little Aussie bastard those brilliant super subs Beckford and Bily could show just how fantastic they are. Then again we could all benefit from a dose of reality.

Jamie Sweet
34   Posted 04/05/2011 at 01:11:55

Report abuse

I've argued for some time that the system we play with Cahill in the side suits Cahill to a tee, but doesn't really suit the team as a whole.

Subsequently, Timmy scores a decent amount of goals and makes himself look good, while the overall balance of the team suffers.

Remember the game against Spurs at Goodison this season? I think it was the first game since TC had left to play in that worthless competition... Moyes surprised everyone by going with Saha and Beckford up front, and we looked a completely different, and improved team for it.

Don't get me wrong, I love our Timmy, but for the benefit of the TEAM... there is no way that he should be a guaranteed starter.

Just thought I'd throw put this out there, but I wonder how many of those on here who defend TC so passionately are Blues residing Down Under? I imagine it would be the vast majority!
Mike Elbey
35   Posted 04/05/2011 at 01:20:14

Report abuse


You really do live up to your name....
James Flynn
36   Posted 04/05/2011 at 02:38:34

Report abuse

Interesting to see everyone who never sees the team in training declaring players on the pitch unfit.
Paul Gladwell
37   Posted 04/05/2011 at 06:38:00

Report abuse

Dick Fearon, quick to get the digs back in on Osman, mate. The lad has been the main reaon we never got into a relegation battle we looked liked getting into when we got those injuries a few months back.

Cahill in my eyes is an Everton legend but, after seeing us create hardly any chances for months just before he was injured, then change tactics and create a glut of chances and a good few goals, I actually feared us getting back to creating nothing when Cahill came back; although it's early days, I cannot see it changing.

We had started to see far more movement upfront with a very basic first eleven too and that had a lot to do with the Cahill factor.

Paul Gladwell
38   Posted 04/05/2011 at 06:57:48

Report abuse

And also cast your mind back to the best run we had last year when we beat the so-called big boys Chelsea etc, little old flimsy Leon was MotM match in all those games against the big Champions League players, playing in the middle.

Maybe it's about time the fans and manager started realising he is actually as good, if not better, than some of the undroppables when played in his prefered position.

Tony J Williams
39   Posted 04/05/2011 at 08:52:50

Report abuse

Apart from the childish post, Mike, do you not think he has a point about the numerous failings of other players?
Tony J Williams
40   Posted 04/05/2011 at 08:55:55

Report abuse

Also Paul, it is widely stated on this site that Osman and Howard were the only two to come out of this game with any kind of pride.

This season just reflects the shitty results we always seem to get at Wigan. I hate them and can't wait to see them gone, I just wish Birmingham would go with them too.
Alan Clarke
41   Posted 04/05/2011 at 08:55:33

Report abuse

To me, it would have made sense to bring Cahill on later when the pace of the game slowed down. It was a hot day and some players were knackered early on. Cahill looked knackered after 10 minutes.

As for playing Arteta, what was wrong with that? We've all been moaning about how shit Bily is. Moyes drops him to play 'the best little Spaniard we know' and everyone's pissed off about it.
Dick Fearon
42   Posted 04/05/2011 at 08:53:11

Report abuse

Paul #s 37 + 38, If Osman is so good, why is he not producing in game after game? A few good games regardless of where in the midfield does not prove whether or not he is first class.

To blame Cahill for Osman's weakness in his other games is plainly ridiculous. I have no doubt that, should Bily or Anichebe get the same number of games as Leon, at some point they would hit a short-lived purple patch. That would not suddenly turn them into consitently top-class performers.

Dennis Stevens
43   Posted 04/05/2011 at 09:29:09

Report abuse

Dick, you just seem determined to twist everything into an attack on Osman, consequently you're not really making much sense.
Paul Gladwell
44   Posted 04/05/2011 at 12:10:05

Report abuse

Dick, as I said, that man IMHO has been the difference between us being safe and being sucked into a relegation dogfight and you are having a go at him for having a quiet game at Man Utd; I personally thought he was still our best outfield player on Saturday too.

I am staunch Cahill but have started to realise it's time to look at the system that accommodates him.

And as for your shouts on Bily and Anichebe, good lord, get real: Anichebe has had enough games for us to have this purple patch.

Daniel A Johnson
45   Posted 04/05/2011 at 12:26:23

Report abuse

Post #1 Michael Kenrick is bang on the money.

Where is Cahill's love for Everton when he keeps fucking off for these Mickey Mouse cups?

The fact that he comes back injured as well takes the biscuit. Again add Cahill to the Osman, Neville, Hibbert group of players who can do no wrong.

I feel sorry for Osman, he's a good squad player who, when injuries hit, can come in and do a job; credit where it's due, he's been playing bloody well. What a kick to the balls then to be shafted aside and moved over because everyone's favorite Aussie is back in town.

David Moyes man-management skills again there for all to see.
Daniel A Johnson
46   Posted 04/05/2011 at 12:31:31

Report abuse

Plus lets not forget Arteta claiming penalty duty back off Baines.....
Ian Kearney
47   Posted 04/05/2011 at 12:57:46

Report abuse

Thats nonsense Daniel, your having a pop at Cahill because he doesnt love Everton more than his country? seriously?

Arteta has, or perhaps had a better record than Baines from the spot, I wanted him to take it if I'm honest, had Baines took it and missed you'd be having a pop at Arteta for not having the balls to take it. He wanted the responsiblity, he missed, get over it. People bang on about his wages and taking responsibilty, you cant have it both ways.
Mike Elbey
48   Posted 04/05/2011 at 14:38:48

Report abuse


I have never suggested that others did not have bad games on Saturday; I thought collectively we were poor.

However, one of 'Dick's' comments was that Osman reverted to type which is slightly unfair as he was actually one of our better players (not hard on Saturday, admitedly).

I have actually been one of Osman's biggest critics down the years but these last few months he has shown me that when played on a central position he IS a good player. As such I have decided it is unfair to criticise him when he plays poorly when played out of position.

My point in the initial article was: Why should Cahill automatically be picked in his favoured position and the whole shape of the team be changed to accommodate him??

Maybe this change of formation / shape contributed to the poor performance by others? If it did, that's not a criticism of Cahill but it is of the manager for changing the shape.

If Moyes wanted Cahill back in the team, why couldnt he have shoved him out on the right wing instead of Osman? ? I will tell you why: because Cahill now offers little apart from winning a few headers and annoying the opposition.

It has been proven over the past couple of seasons that we create more chances when he is not in the team than in it and, as has been pointed out by others above, our best form coinidently seems to coincide with his absence from the teamsheet, for whatever reason.

Isn't it funny that, when Cahill plays, he seems to be the only player who scores... wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that our whole style of play is set up to accommodate him, would it?

Dick's post was irrelevant to this topic: we all know Victor is shit, that Coleman runs down blind alleys and that Jags has a great 'av it' on him. But they are also the players who come good when Cahill is not in the team and as a team we seem to play with a LOT more creativity; I'm afraid that is an indisputable fact.

Scott Goin
49   Posted 04/05/2011 at 14:33:55

Report abuse

Cahill carries the football banner for Australia. He takes his role seriously and that cup meant a lot to his country. It's not Cahill's fault that the schedulers put it in the middle of the club season.

The problem with Cahill is obvious. With him playing Advanced Midfield, our ball movement is restricted to the wings. Cahill will just set up at the edge of the box and wait for the cross.

With Osman, however, he moves to where the ball is and creates passing triangles at every location (3 in midfield, 3 on both the wings-i.e. Baines, Arteta, Osman). A 3-man passing attack is a lot more effective than a 2-man attack.

If we insist on using Cahill in the hole, we absolutely need great service from the wings. Unfortunately, although Baines can handle the left side, Coleman/Hibbo aren't good crossers from the right. Maybe Magaye Gueye should get more time when Cahill is in. He seems quite adept at crosses.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to the MailBag, 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

Latest News

Subscribe to The Athletic, Get 40% off

Online Football Betting with Betway

Bet on Everton and get a deposit bonus with bet365 at

Recent Articles

Talking Points & General Forum

Pinned Links


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.