Alan Browne

If ever a post summed up how sh*te we are it's this. 

Whoope-dooooo we've a mid week player of the week in a 2nd tier league. 

Knight is creative when he's played in a role that allows him to be creative. Being used as a workhorse by Derby has led to a lot of people (like John here) mistakenly believing that he isn't.

In Ireland's first choice midfield Cullen is the sitter who can start a play with some useful passing, Molumby is your box to box workhorse and Knight can offer creativity as well as putting in a shift as a second workhorse off the ball. Smallbone is then maybe the first pick off the bench and is a good option to have as he can do all three roles - a sitter, a workhorse or a creative type. He doesn't do any of the three roles as well as the starter in that position though, so he usually doesn't make the starting team. Browne is also a useful option and is in good form.

Look, you can argue about the overall quality of our midfield and be justified in doing so. The five midfielders listed above have only played about 25 top flight games between them and we are often outplayed by other teams with better midfielders. But the balance of the midfield is actually fine and Molumby is in there on merit.

I disagree! I dont like the balance between Cullen, Molumby and Knight at all and I dont mistakenly think anything about Knight, but thanks for the condescension. Knight can certainly affect games positively, much more so than Molumby and I like Knight, but I still feel he doesnt contribute as much as he might in the attacking third, and ultimately he is a runner, similar to Molumby, but pacier, more positive and better disciplined - Ultimately, none of the three are good at advancing the ball through the lines consistently. As a result, the ball gets played into our midfield passed around laterally and ultimately back to our defenders or to the opposition. We need a midfielder who can link midfield and attack, Smallbone is a player who can do that (whether he is good enough is another question, but he is the right type). It is not Knight's game and it is certainly not either Molumby or Cullen's. If we had very good wing backs who could carry the ball forward at pace that would help, but we dont (bar a fully match fit Doherty which may never happen again).

As I said I'm well aware of what Knight is capable of, and yes that was a good pass. Passing through the lines is not his game though. The last para is rubbish btw, Kenny doesnt tell players not to try that pass, it was on, Sykes has got half the pitch free in front of him to run into ffs. 

It still doesnt make Knight the type of midfielder who tries to progress the ball through midfield with sharp passing, that is not his game, I dont want it to be his game, I'm not criticising him for it, I'm happy to have a midfielder with his qualities, I just dont want another one with similar (albeit more limited) qualities beside him.

In any case, I'm looking toward the future and hopefully an evolution towards a 4-3-3. I'm happy with Cullen as the 6, the question then is who are the two 8s. For me Knight is one, but I dont want Molumby as the other, I just think it's too one dimensional, I'd prefer Smallbone as the other 8, even Browne. 

Likewise, if we look to play a 4-2-3-1 I'd prefer to see Cullen and Knight as the 2 with Molumby as back up and Moran/Smallbone/Azaz as the 10.

If we stick with 5 at the back, then having Cullen, Molumby and Knight as the 3 in front of the 5 really gives the team a very defensive, uncreative look. We have actually used 4 in a box midfield ahead of the 5 in this campaign vs France /Holland with Molumby and Cullen at the base and Ogbene and Knight at the top. This was actually a reasonable tactical approach for those particular games but ultimately very limiting.