The third in our seasons verdict on Southampton Football Club's great promotion season of 2011/12 continues with a look at the centre of midfield.
The central midfield positions were in many ways an enigma, in some respects perhaps the stablest of the areas in the team, in that it was generally perming two out of three players after Richard Chaplow's sojourn to the flanks, but often although well drilled, it was missing something that meant that you were never quite sure which two from three it would be starting the game.
Morgan Schneiderlin would perhaps be seen as the nearest many would consider to being a first choice in the centre but ironically he had the least appearances out of the three starting 29 and appearing 13 times off the bench, which would perhaps scotch the myth that he was first choice if not injured.
Jack Cork played the most times starting 39 plus 7 as sub meaning that he played a part in every one of Saints 46 matches, the only Saints player to do so, with Dean Hammond making 31 starts plus 12 as sub.
But for a midfield trio who for every intense and purpose were regular and unchallenged by anyone else for their place, there was one thing missing and that was goals, top scorer of the trio was Schneiderlin who notched 2, to add to his single strike in the previous 100 or so games he had played for the club, ironically that goal was a wonder strike against Bristol Rovers in April 2010, a goal that made you wonder why he didnt score many more, certainly the two he scored werent spectacular, the equaliser at Burnley was a stab in from three yards out, whilst the his goal at Nottingham Forest although from distance wasnt a great shot and one the keeper should have saved, Jack Cork failed to get on the scoresheet at all. Hammond's solitary goal was good, but coming on the opening day of the season against Leeds, you have to wonder why he didnt score again.
So three goals from a trio who between then started 99 matches plus 32 as sub is a poor return whatever way you look at it, of course it could be argued that the style Saints play means that the central midfield were more about winning the ball and creating, their job to get the ball wide etc and certainly the men who played wide got goals, but it still comes back to the fact that between then they only scraped together three goals and that has to be a weakness that needs to be addressed.
In many respects all three of them were too similar, they all liked to sit in the midfield rather than attack, when Richard Chaplow played in the centre it gave the right balance as Chaplow was a genuine box to box player who liked to get forward and his goals to games ratio proved that, it could have been that Chaplow would have played more often in the centre if a combination of injury and the need to play him out wide hadnt intervened.
So although it didnt let us down, there was something about our central midfield that didnt quite gel and as i said it was perhaps because they were all too similar, indeed our worst run came when with Chaplow injured and Guly needed up front, Adkins used all three of the trio, pushing one wide right, it rarely worked as results when we did it proved.
All in all we were solid in the centre of midfield but not spectacular and the lack of goals is an area that clearly needs to be addressed.