I had the pleasure of watching Rostock v. Bochum the other day. This was my first chance to see Christiansen in action. Unfortunately Bochum lost, but the game was quite enjoyable. It was interesting to compare his performance to Anelka's recent performances since both are playing similar positions -- lone strikers up front with recessed strikers to their left and right. Christiansen seems to be good in the air and to have good positioning and pace. I am surprised that he is able to hold his own as a lone striker up front without a foil. Like Anelka, he is not a muscle player. These days Anelka is being forced out of the center of the field because he does not have a physically strong strike partner to open space up for him in the front. For some reason, Christiansen did not need such a partner in the game against Rostock. My sense was that Christiansen was covered and as a result the chances came to a guy named Buckley -- a South African international who seemed quite talented.
Well, I don't really see how you got the idea to compare Christiansen with Anelka, but okay. I don't really know Anelka in detail, but maybe some words on Christiansen: In this specific game he had problems. Usually Bochum can play counter attacking style, they're really good with it. Rostock as another rather small team didn't do them the favour to be offensive and allow Bochum to play their game, that's why Christiansen wasn't that convincing this weekend.
I see. As a Dortmund fan, I am used to the lone striker being a big strong guy who can't run fast. The idea to compare was simply that I have been watching Anelka and been frustrated at the way he plays up front alone with no support. I was also wondering why he is being played up front alone when he is not a Koller style player. (I am not alone in my frustration, Keegan is looking to buy a power striker to pair up with him. Dunno who he will get. Flo would have been good.) Christiansen, like Anelka, is also playing up front alone with no support but is knocking in the goals. Neither is short, both are fast on the ball with good technique. The question I had was why is Christiansen, who I have never heard of before this year, doing phenomenally well, while Anelka is struggling. Your counter-attack theory makes a lot of sense because on the counter-attack there is a lot of space to take advantage of pace and technique. Anelka would do well in a counter-attacking game, but Keegan has his team all-out on attack all the time. The result is that Anelka is often in a crowd and has nowhere to go except the corner. In the game on Sunday, Christiansen was often in a crowd, but Buckley had space.
Oh, I see. You're right that Christiansen is the only nominal forward. Bochum is working with a very quick transition usually, which means that in their counter attacking style they have four really offensive players with Buckley, Wosz and Freier.