Sterling into midfield, yes or no

Should Sterling be playing in midfield

  • Yes

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
Gazzabear v2.0

Gazzabear v2.0

Well-Known Member
Lots of threads on different aspects of our games and individual players, one theme keeps coming up over and over again. Sterling into midfield if LB role can be covered.

For me, he shouldn't. I've slated Lundstram recently and over the weekend, but I feel we have plenty of midfielders and we should find a balance with them, rather than shoehorn a player in there when it's not his natural position and we have cover.

So simple question, should Sterling play in midfield if the left back role is covered to your satisfaction.

No for me.
 
Last edited:
A dont think its being shoehorned as you put it a think he shud be in there and stay there. Lundstram is done by the looks of it. Get sterling in there and let him keep his place and build round him and diamonde for next season. Shake lundstram hand thanks for everything and see him out end of season
 
We may have plenty of midfielders but what sort of balance are you finding when these are who you have to choose from:

Lundstram, Dowell, Lawrence, Raskin.

(Didn't include Dimonade as he's a first pick now).

So yes, Sterling should be in midfield. As Empire said, him, Dimonade and A.N. other
 
Play on the right of midfield without a winger. Him and Tav can attack down the wing and can help Tav indefence
 
Kirbys House said:
We may have plenty of midfielders but what sort of balance are you finding when these are who you have to choose from:

Lundstram, Dowell, Lawrence, Raskin.

(Didn't include Dimonade as he's a first pick now).

So yes, Sterling should be in midfield. As Empire said, him, Dimonade and A.N. other
Click to expand...
I like the energy Sterling brings in the engine room, but our lack of options in wide areas likely mean he'll be there when Ridvan is fit.
 
academical said:
Poll not really going how the OP expected.
Click to expand...

Kinda is, as I kept seeing the same sentiment over and over. He's a player in the squad who isn't criticised as he is covering everything for us, and performing in the role he is given week after week. In my opinion that doesn't make him the best option for midfield and wondered what others thought. It's easy to say no when a player is shit, but this is more about suitability for what the team needs, so an opportunity to cast a vote without having to pick fault with the player.
 
I like the idea of Sterling and Dio in midfield but neither of them is a passer or play builder. A 6 basically. The role that Lunny is playing with mixed results.

We would still need that along with Cantwell as the 10.

It is one or the other IMO in the current formation.
 
Gazzabear v2.0 said:
Lots of threads on different aspects of our games and individual players, one theme keeps coming up over and over again. Sterling into midfield if LB role can be covered.

For me, he shouldn't. I've slated Lundstram recently and over the weekend, but I feel we have plenty of midfielders and we should find a balance with them, rather than shoehorn a player in there when it's not his natural position and we have cover.

So simple question, should Sterling play in midfield if the left back role is covered to your satisfaction.

No for me.
Click to expand...
Firstly, this is what we’re doing with him at left back.
Secondly, he was a bit more effective in his midfield role for us.
 
temperance said:
Love or loathe him, Lundstram is the experienced head in midfield, and the manager seems to trust him, I liked the midfield trio from Sunday, and would play Sterling on the right for this season.
Click to expand...
Sterling is at his best for me when breaking up play, protecting the defence and keeping it simple with his distribution. His strength is his power and athleticism, closing down and harrying opponents, winning the ball back and moving us forward in allowing Lundstram and / or Diomande the space to direct our play.

I don’t think he has the subtleness of touch needed to be a wide player.
 
HandsomeHead said:
Sterling is at his best for me when breaking up play, protecting the defence and keeping it simple with his distribution. His strength is his power and athleticism, closing down and harrying opponents, winning the ball back and moving us forward in allowing Lundstram and / or Diomande the space to direct our play.

I don’t think he has the subtleness of touch needed to be a wide player.
Click to expand...
He’s a right back but has always played well when in front of Tav
 
it's a no brainer to get him in the middle , especially at the paedodome

One thing ( amongst a lot of others) that this rangers team lacks is some physicality and the ability to use that physicality appropriately ( I.e smash someone ) when the games not going our way ... Sterling can put himself about and has more than enough quality on the ball to play there .
 
We need a few players in the midfield for next season.
Jack is finished.
Lawrence should be let go.
Raskin needs to battle his way back as he is well down the pecking order.
Diomande looks like a player.
Like him or not, I personally feel that when he wants to play then Lundstram is our best midfielder.
And then Sterling. I feel we lose a lot from him when he plays on the left or right, so arguably he is better and we get more from him in the midfield area.
I was hoping to see more of Baillie Rice as the boy looks a prospect,
And whatever happened to Alex Lowry?!
 
I think for me in the game at parkhead and in the cup final I would go with him, Lundstram and Diomande as we need to win the midfield battle.

My only doubt with Sterling is I’m not sure he could do the same job Lundstram does in controlling possession from that deep lying position (not saying Lundstram doesn’t have faults btw).
 
Would rather play Barisic if it meant getting him into the midfield. Sterling for me is very poor at left back, simply too right sided. It’s a weird one because he’s got no right to be as effective a midfielder as he is and you’d assume a natural right back would be a better left back than he would be a midfielder but he isn’t.

If we want to win at Parkhead he has to start in midfield and Barisic needs to decide that he wants it. It’s doable if that happens.
 
McQueen said:
He’s absolutely wasted at left back.
Click to expand...
He's definitely not. The manager plays him there for good reason. The other two options have proven over the course of the season to be wholly unreliable.

Could Sterling be very useful to us in midfield? Yes. Is there a better option than him at left back currently available to us ? No!
 
Neilston Unionist said:
Would rather play Barisic if it meant getting him into the midfield. Sterling for me is very poor at left back, simply too right sided. It’s a weird one because he’s got no right to be as effective a midfielder as he is and you’d assume a natural right back would be a better left back than he would be a midfielder but he isn’t.

If we want to win at Parkhead he has to start in midfield and Barisic needs to decide that he wants it. It’s doable if that happens.
Click to expand...
Playing Barisic at left back at the piggery is akin to chucking the towel in. They clearly identified him as a weak link years long ago and rightly targeted him for that reason. He doesn't have the legs, but far more importantly the man doesn't have the stomach for this fixture.
 
Bluethruandthru said:
He's definitely not. The manager plays him there for good reason. The other two options have proven over the course of the season to be wholly unreliable.

Could Sterling be very useful to us in midfield? Yes. Is there a better option than him at left back currently available to us ? No!
Click to expand...
He is a much better midfielder than left back.

For that reason he absolutely is wasted at left back.
 
McQueen said:
He is a much better midfielder than left back.

For that reason he absolutely is wasted at left back.
Click to expand...
We have no other viable alternatives.

The boy was signed primarily for his versatility as a defender.

For that reason he absolutely isn't wasted at left back.
 
Yes. In front of the back 4.
Cover for Tav when he breaks forward and also there to pick up possession when it is lost by Lundstram or Diomande.
With the extra man in midfield, we could do without the player wide right.
 
Bluethruandthru said:
We have no other viable alternatives.

The boy was signed primarily for his versatility as a defender.

For that reason he absolutely isn't wasted at left back.
Click to expand...
Borna Barisic is an alternative left back. He’s been poor this season, but so has Sterling at left back.

We’d be better playing Barisic at left back and Sterling in midfield.

Yilmaz should be back for the matches against the filth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top