Duff vs Dyer

[SEMTEX]

Prefer Dyer, alot. But at the end of the day, where is Dyer right now? the treatment room, as per.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Is there another player in the football league that has spent as much time out injured?

 

Dyer cost us a bomb. Made an average of 24 (if we round it up) appearances a season. Scored 23 goals for us... in 8 years.

 

Duff in comparison costs less (both transfer fee and wages - if the papers are to be believed), he's been available to play the majority of time, he's not a bad influence on the dressing room, and he has the ocassional good game (about as often as Dyer did).

 

No contest in my view.

 

Slightly shite Irishman > Expensive sicknote.

 

I'd love to know how all the people who bang on about "squad depth" voted on this one.

 

He hasn't like.

[Guest LucaAltieri]

To the 8 people who have voted for Duff: What has he contributed to NUFC? (at all)

 

He's available to play.

 

20 league starts in his first season, 12 in his second

 

 

 

He's had two different, long-term injuries. He's hardly made a career out of it like Dyer has.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

To the 8 people who have voted for Duff: What has he contributed to NUFC? (at all)

 

He's available to play.

 

20 league starts in his first season, 12 in his second

 

 

 

He's had two different, long-term injuries. He's hardly made a career out of it like Dyer has.

 

Yeah, but that's meant he hasn't been available to play.

[oldtype]

someday, somewhere, some doctor is going to make a fortune writing a medical journal that explains Kieron Dyer's body.

[Guest LucaAltieri]

Is there another player in the football league that has spent as much time out injured?

 

Dyer cost us a bomb. Made an average of 24 (if we round it up) appearances a season. Scored 23 goals for us... in 8 years.

 

Duff in comparison costs less (both transfer fee and wages - if the papers are to be believed), he's been available to play the majority of time, he's not a bad influence on the dressing room, and he has the ocassional good game (about as often as Dyer did).

 

No contest in my view.

 

Slightly shite Irishman > Expensive sicknote.

 

I'd love to know how all the people who bang on about "squad depth" voted on this one.

 

He hasn't like.

 

With two serious injuries he still managed to put in the same average number of appearances as Dyer. And now he's back fit he doesn't seem to be getting the same "niggles" Dyer did.

 

You'd expect him to stay fit now until the end of the season.

[junkhead]

Is there another player in the football league that has spent as much time out injured?

 

Dyer cost us a bomb. Made an average of 24 (if we round it up) appearances a season. Scored 23 goals for us... in 8 years.

 

Duff in comparison costs less (both transfer fee and wages - if the papers are to be believed), he's been available to play the majority of time, he's not a bad influence on the dressing room, and he has the ocassional good game (about as often as Dyer did).

 

No contest in my view.

 

Slightly s**** Irishman > Expensive sicknote.

 

I'd love to know how all the people who bang on about "squad depth" voted on this one.

you have a point here, but Duff's only direct contribution to the team so far has been goals against Villa and Ventspilis or whoever the hell it was and I believe he has one assist, probably in a friendly.. that's his third season here..

Dyer has contributed significantly more in his time here, and even when he couldn't last two games without injury, he showed more bravery on the field.

[Guest LucaAltieri]

To the 8 people who have voted for Duff: What has he contributed to NUFC? (at all)

 

He's available to play.

 

20 league starts in his first season, 12 in his second

 

 

 

He's had two different, long-term injuries. He's hardly made a career out of it like Dyer has.

 

Yeah, but that's meant he hasn't been available to play.

 

It all depends where you want take the stats from, doesn't it?

 

Do you want to compare the last 8 years? Just the last 2? The %age of games (afterall, Dyer could make European appearances too)?

 

Duff's injury record is far better than Dyer's. It goes without saying.

[Mowen]

Not even close. Dyer by miles.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Is there another player in the football league that has spent as much time out injured?

 

Dyer cost us a bomb. Made an average of 24 (if we round it up) appearances a season. Scored 23 goals for us... in 8 years.

 

Duff in comparison costs less (both transfer fee and wages - if the papers are to be believed), he's been available to play the majority of time, he's not a bad influence on the dressing room, and he has the ocassional good game (about as often as Dyer did).

 

No contest in my view.

 

Slightly shite Irishman > Expensive sicknote.

 

I'd love to know how all the people who bang on about "squad depth" voted on this one.

 

He hasn't like.

 

With two serious injuries he still managed to put in the same average number of appearances as Dyer. And now he's back fit he doesn't seem to be getting the same "niggles" Dyer did.

 

You'd expect him to stay fit now until the end of the season.

 

Dyer had some pretty serioud injuries as well though.

 

I would still say Dyer contributed far more during his time here.  For a start he had a positive effect on the play, something which Duff hasn't done.  I would say he did more in that FA cup game down at Southampton, than Duff has contributed.

 

We're not going to agree though, are we

[Guest LucaAltieri]

Is there another player in the football league that has spent as much time out injured?

 

Dyer cost us a bomb. Made an average of 24 (if we round it up) appearances a season. Scored 23 goals for us... in 8 years.

 

Duff in comparison costs less (both transfer fee and wages - if the papers are to be believed), he's been available to play the majority of time, he's not a bad influence on the dressing room, and he has the ocassional good game (about as often as Dyer did).

 

No contest in my view.

 

Slightly shite Irishman > Expensive sicknote.

 

I'd love to know how all the people who bang on about "squad depth" voted on this one.

 

He hasn't like.

 

With two serious injuries he still managed to put in the same average number of appearances as Dyer. And now he's back fit he doesn't seem to be getting the same "niggles" Dyer did.

 

You'd expect him to stay fit now until the end of the season.

 

Dyer had some pretty serioud injuries as well though.

 

I would still say Dyer contributed far more during his time here.  For a start he had a positive effect on the play, something which Duff hasn't done.  I would say he did more in that FA cup game down at Southampton, than Duff has contributed.

 

We're not going to agree though, are we

 

Probably not.

 

Dyer was quick. He had decent ball control and liked to run at defenders. That made him fairly exciting to watch. However, he wasn't a great player. No end product whatsoever. As far as I'm concerned he was one of the worst buys we've made. Years of wages pissed up against the wall.

 

I'm no Duff fan either, but if we're picking which one of the two was the least worst buy, then Duff gets my vote.

 

Where would we have been without Dyer? - He rarely played anyway.

Where would we be without Duff? - Doesn't really bare thinking about. Just Milner (replaced by Jonas) and N'Zogbia as wide players. He's far more important to us than Dyer ever was.

[junkhead]

I'd rather we keep N'Zogbia out of the argument but at least he's not a footballing fraud.

[Baggio]

Is there another player in the football league that has spent as much time out injured?

 

Dyer cost us a bomb. Made an average of 24 (if we round it up) appearances a season. Scored 23 goals for us... in 8 years.

 

Duff in comparison costs less (both transfer fee and wages - if the papers are to be believed), he's been available to play the majority of time, he's not a bad influence on the dressing room, and he has the ocassional good game (about as often as Dyer did).

 

No contest in my view.

 

Slightly shite Irishman > Expensive sicknote.

 

I'd love to know how all the people who bang on about "squad depth" voted on this one.

 

He hasn't like.

 

With two serious injuries he still managed to put in the same average number of appearances as Dyer. And now he's back fit he doesn't seem to be getting the same "niggles" Dyer did.

 

You'd expect him to stay fit now until the end of the season.

 

Dyer had some pretty serioud injuries as well though.

 

I would still say Dyer contributed far more during his time here.  For a start he had a positive effect on the play, something which Duff hasn't done.  I would say he did more in that FA cup game down at Southampton, than Duff has contributed.

 

We're not going to agree though, are we

 

Probably not.

 

Dyer was quick. He had decent ball control and liked to run at defenders. That made him fairly exciting to watch. However, he wasn't a great player. No end product whatsoever. As far as I'm concerned he was one of the worst buys we've made. Years of wages pissed up against the wall.

 

I'm no Duff fan either, but if we're picking which one of the two was the least worst buy, then Duff gets my vote.

 

Where would we have been without Dyer? - He rarely played anyway.

Where would we be without Duff? - Doesn't really bare thinking about. Just Milner (replaced by Jonas) and N'Zogbia as wide players. He's far more important to us than Dyer ever was.

 

Dyer was one of the only players worth watching in the first few years he was here and went on to play a big part in midfield under Robson when we qualified for the CL, he missed games with injury but we were always a better team with him in it than not, even under Roeder he made a difference to the team when he came back, getting 7 goals that season even though he was shifted into different positions most games, compare that to Duff who some think has shown his best form since he's been here yet is still fucking shite is a bizarre comparison.

 

Like comparing Duncan Ferguson to Sibierski.

[2sheds]

Dyer refused to play for the team.

 

Duff hasn't.

 

End of debate.

[junkhead]

Dyer refused to play for the team.

 

Duff hasn't.

 

End of debate.

Duff refuses to play when played. End of debate.

[oldtype]

I agree that whatever contribution Dyer made to the club has to be balanced out with the damage he's done due to his row with SBR and the Bowyer brawl.

 

Particularly the latter. That day is still such a bad memory, only time I've actually felt ashamed to be a Newcastle supporter.

[Guest LucaAltieri]

Dyer refused to play for the team.

 

Duff hasn't.

 

End of debate.

Duff refuses to play when played. End of debate.

 

Given the situation we're in now... if you could do a straight swap, Duff for Dyer can you honestly say you'd rather have Dyer (with his injuries, wages, and just generally being a "bling" cunt)? I know I certainly wouldn't want him back.

 

I've no doubt who the better player is. We got the best years of Dyer whereas we signed Duff 3 seasons too late. It's all the rest of the crap that makes it impossible to pick Dyer in my opinion.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

I wonder what Duff's wages are.

[junkhead]

Dyer refused to play for the team.

 

Duff hasn't.

 

End of debate.

Duff refuses to play when played. End of debate.

 

Given the situation we're in now... if you could do a straight swap, Duff for Dyer can you honestly say you'd rather have Dyer (with his injuries, wages, and just generally being a "bling" c***)? I know I certainly wouldn't want him back.

 

I've no doubt who the better player is. We got the best years of Dyer whereas we signed Duff 3 seasons too late. It's all the rest of the crap that makes it impossible to pick Dyer in my opinion.

no, of course.. I was simply pointing out that Dyer has contributed a lot more in his time here than Duff, which is the original question.. anyway, fuck it, they're both overpaid wankers

[Mick]

 

With two serious injuries he still managed to put in the same average number of appearances as Dyer. And now he's back fit he doesn't seem to be getting the same "niggles" Dyer did.

 

You'd expect him to stay fit now until the end of the season.

 

Duff being unfit to play is a bonus.

[TRon]

Obviously Dyer's injury record made him a liability but when he was actually fit to play he carried far more threat going forward. He did exactly what Duff doesn't do...run at the defenders and take them on.

[cp40]

Not even close. Dyer by miles.

 

 

Your describing kierons shooting there arnt you?

[dcmk]

Dyer one season i remember played the majority of the games that year, and only contributed 2 assists and 1 goal.  Absolutely a joke, a KEY PLAYER huh

 

Just because he was a part of a 'successful' (for us) team doesnt make him a better player than Duff.

 

Duff has better passing, crossing and a better shot on him.  No contest.  Just hasn't the pace of Dyer... but i forget Dyer could use his pace for a whole 10 yards before pulling up injured.

 

 

[cp40]

Dyer one season i remember played the majority of the games that year, and only contributed 2 assists and 1 goal.  Absolutely a joke, a KEY PLAYER huh

 

Just because he was a part of a 'successful' (for us) team doesnt make him a better player than Duff.

 

Duff has better passing, crossing and a better shot on him.  No contest.  Just hasn't the pace of Dyer... but i forget Dyer could use his pace for a whole 10 yards before pulling up injured.

 

 

 

 

lol, as ive said ,usually running diagonally away from the goal,.. he was fucking awsome, at running the ball into the corners.

[Mick]

Dyer one season i remember played the majority of the games that year, and only contributed 2 assists and 1 goal.  Absolutely a joke, a KEY PLAYER huh

 

Just because he was a part of a 'successful' (for us) team doesnt make him a better player than Duff.

 

Duff has better passing, crossing and a better shot on him.  No contest.  Just hasn't the pace of Dyer... but i forget Dyer could use his pace for a whole 10 yards before pulling up injured.

 

 

 

Which season are you on about for Dyer?