Is subbing Martins causing these late reversals?

[madras]

Martins may lack ability and finesse at times, but one thing he always offers is threat. His mere presence forces opposing defenders to sit deeper, which in turn takes some of the pressure off our midfield (who, let's face it, aren't exactly technically wonderful when their game is being squeezed).

 

He'll never be a world class footballer but as long as he has pace (power) he'll always be a danger, and frankly we are severely lacking in players who can be put in the same category.

his threat is often outweighed by his giving the ball away too easily and poor positioning meaning when we get the ball out it comes straight back.

 

True, but Martins isn't exactly the only player guilty of giving the ball away too easily. We have players in far more volatile positions who give it away just as often if not more often.

 

Players like Viduka only offer a threat when the ball is in the box, which first requires us to be dominating the midfield and actually getting the ball into the box first. As our midfielders aren't good enough to do that, more often than not, we have to rely on the threat of a ball in-behind (or over the top of) the defence instead - there's only Martins in our squad who can really capitalize on that.

 

Opposing managers can blatantly see how limited we are when the game is squeezed, so as soon as that threat in-behind is removed, they literally push their defenders right up into the center of the pitch and laugh as our midfielders s*** themselves at the first sign of pressure.

i agree about others,particularly midfielders giving the ball away cheep, but what changes could we make in midfield recently ?

[Andy]

None, and that's why we need to keep that threat of pace until we can strengthen up in the center.

[madras]

None, and that's why we need to keep that threat of pace until we can strengthen up in the center.

i'll take you back to the threat he carries pace wise (which he rarely uses and would be much more effective if he had decent positioning) is offset by his giving the ball away easy through poor control etc.

[Guest]

Let's look it another way. 4-5 years ago, if Lua-Lua was starting and we were 2-0 up with 30 minutes left, would we be complaining because we were losing "pace" and "a threat" if we brought Shearer on to replace him?

 

Now obviously Lua-Lua isn't as good as Martins, and Viduka isn't as good as Shearer, but the same model applies.

[Rich]

Let's look it another way. 4-5 years ago, if Lua-Lua was starting and we were 2-0 up with 30 minutes left, would we be complaining because we were losing "pace" and "a threat" if we brought Shearer on to replace him?

 

Now obviously Lua-Lua isn't as good as Martins, and Viduka isn't as good as Shearer, but the same model applies.

 

For what it's worth, even though it's somewhat of an aside to the debate, one of the main reasons I felt we didn't make more of a title challenge after Bellamy's injury in 2001/02 was because Robson opted for Cort ahead of Lua Lua, who seemed a far more like-for-like replacement for Bellers.

 

I'd be willing to bet Wor Al had some involvement in that decision though as he probably didn't fancy playing with the unpredictable Lomana much.

[Rich]

I'm at a loss to decide who the best front two is myself and with the injuries we have in midfield at the moment I'm banging my head against a wall with the hope that Fat Joe will go 4-3-3...

 

Viduka, Martins and Owen stand alone as three of our best players, easily. They are extremely valuable to the team. Joe has to involve all of them, and hopefully he'll realise that sooner rather than later.

[Guest]

Let's look it another way. 4-5 years ago, if Lua-Lua was starting and we were 2-0 up with 30 minutes left, would we be complaining because we were losing "pace" and "a threat" if we brought Shearer on to replace him?

 

Now obviously Lua-Lua isn't as good as Martins, and Viduka isn't as good as Shearer, but the same model applies.

 

For what it's worth, even though it's somewhat of an aside to the debate, one of the main reasons I felt we didn't make more of a title challenge after Bellamy's injury in 2001/02 was because Robson opted for Cort ahead of Lua Lua, who seemed a far more like-for-like replacement for Bellers.

 

I'd be willing to bet Wor Al had some involvement in that decision though as he probably didn't fancy playing with the unpredictable Lomana much.

 

True, although our biggest win of the season came when we had Shearer & Cort up-front (Everton 6-2).

[Guest rebel_yell12]

http://telegraph.jumpmediagroup.com/PlayerStat.aspx?p1id=5127&p2id=3789

Martins and Owen stats are virtually identical.

 

There is a stark difference however in the way both players have been treated. Formations and personnel and tactics have been tweaked to accomodate Owen. Martins has been treated with contempt by every manager since Roeder. He scored a double in his first game under Allardyce and did not get a chance to play half a dozen games b4 he was replaced by Owen as soon as Owen was half fit.

 

 

Martins (2008/09) -- League =  5 goals in 36 shots, with 12 of those shots on goal, in 11 appearances, none of them as a substitute.  Martins' season is 5 goals in 39 shots, with 15 of those shots on goal in 12 appearances, none of them as a substitute.  He also has two assists.

            (2007/08) -- League = 9 goals in 72 shots, with 38 of those shots on goal, in 31 apps, 8 of those as a sub.  He had three assists.

 

Owen (2008/09) -- League = 6 goals in 19 shots, with 12 of those shots on goal, in 12 appearances, with four of them being as a substitute.  Owen's season has 8 goals in 23 shots, with 15 of those on goal, in 14 appearances, with five of them as a sub.

          (2007/08) -- League = 11 goals in 47 shots, with 31 of those shots on goal, in 29 appearances, with five of them as a sub.  He had one assist.  His season total was 12 goals in 51 shots, with 34 of those shots on goal, in 32 appearances, with five as a sub.  Still only one assist.

 

Martins' conversion ratio in the league this season is about 1 in 7.  In fact, 3 in 10 of his shots are even on target.  Owen's conversion ratio in the league this season is about 1 in 3, and about 6 in 10 of his shots are on target.  Last season, Martins conversion was 1 in 8.  Owen's conversion was 1 in 4.2.  I don't think that is quite "virtually identical".  At least, not in my maths classes.  Owen's goals to shots taken ratio is better -- enough so that I think you need more than "Martins' shots are from farther out" to equate the two.  If you're stating  Martins is taking worse shots, isn't that rather proving the point that he's not as good at reading the game as Owen?  At any rate, I think the conversion rate rather proves that if you are looking for a goal, Owen is the better bet to leave on if chances are scarce.  Plus, I think there is the opinion around that if you're looking for a player to drop into the midfield to defend effectively, Michael Owen is better suited to that than Oba Martins (see the Chelsea match).  It may or may not make sense to us, but I'd bet that's how Kinnear reasoned it when he's left Owen on when trying to defend a lead.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

I'm at a loss to decide who the best front two is myself and with the injuries we have in midfield at the moment I'm banging my head against a wall with the hope that Fat Joe will go 4-3-3...

 

Viduka, Martins and Owen stand alone as three of our best players, easily. They are extremely valuable to the team. Joe has to involve all of them, and hopefully he'll realise that sooner rather than later.

 

As so often happens at the Toon. mangers stumble across the best formations completely be accident when injuries build up.

 

If one of Guthrie or Butt is not fit for Sat I could see a 4-3-3 being employed out fo necessity

[Guest]

http://telegraph.jumpmediagroup.com/PlayerStat.aspx?p1id=5127&p2id=3789

Martins and Owen stats are virtually identical.

 

There is a stark difference however in the way both players have been treated. Formations and personnel and tactics have been tweaked to accomodate Owen. Martins has been treated with contempt by every manager since Roeder. He scored a double in his first game under Allardyce and did not get a chance to play half a dozen games b4 he was replaced by Owen as soon as Owen was half fit.

 

 

Martins (2008/09) -- League =  5 goals in 36 shots, with 12 of those shots on goal, in 11 appearances, none of them as a substitute.  Martins' season is 5 goals in 39 shots, with 15 of those shots on goal in 12 appearances, none of them as a substitute.  He also has two assists.

             (2007/08) -- League = 9 goals in 72 shots, with 38 of those shots on goal, in 31 apps, 8 of those as a sub.  He had three assists.

 

Owen (2008/09) -- League = 6 goals in 19 shots, with 12 of those shots on goal, in 12 appearances, with four of them being as a substitute.  Owen's season has 8 goals in 23 shots, with 15 of those on goal, in 14 appearances, with five of them as a sub.

          (2007/08) -- League = 11 goals in 47 shots, with 31 of those shots on goal, in 29 appearances, with five of them as a sub.  He had one assist.  His season total was 12 goals in 51 shots, with 34 of those shots on goal, in 32 appearances, with five as a sub.  Still only one assist.

 

Martins' conversion ratio in the league this season is about 1 in 7.  In fact, 3 in 10 of his shots are even on target.  Owen's conversion ratio in the league this season is about 1 in 3, and about 6 in 10 of his shots are on target.  Last season, Martins conversion was 1 in 8.  Owen's conversion was 1 in 4.2.  I don't think that is quite "virtually identical".  At least, not in my maths classes.  Owen's goals to shots taken ratio is better -- enough so that I think you need more than "Martins' shots are from farther out" to equate the two.  If you're stating  Martins is taking worse shots, isn't that rather proving the point that he's not as good at reading the game as Owen?  At any rate, I think the conversion rate rather proves that if you are looking for a goal, Owen is the better bet to leave on if chances are scarce.  Plus, I think there is the opinion around that if you're looking for a player to drop into the midfield to defend effectively, Michael Owen is better suited to that than Oba Martins (see the Chelsea match).  It may or may not make sense to us, but I'd bet that's how Kinnear reasoned it when he's left Owen on when trying to defend a lead.

 

But, but...Martins can run fast and hit the ball from 30-yards at 120mph into the top corner!

[Tooj]

Since when did we all turn into Sam Allardyce btw? Facts don't give the whole story at all.

 

Of course Martins is going to have a worse ratio than Owen due to the fact he takes a lot of pot shots from outside the box, when I can barely remember Owen since playing for us taking risky shots like Martins does. He normally takes them when he's on the end of something or snatching at a loose ball, rather than striking from anywhere like Oba does.

[Andy]

None, and that's why we need to keep that threat of pace until we can strengthen up in the center.

i'll take you back to the threat he carries pace wise (which he rarely uses and would be much more effective if he had decent positioning) is offset by his giving the ball away easy through poor control etc.

 

Again though, my counter-argument to that is that a Martins who gives the ball away is still more effective than a Viduka who doesn't see the ball because we can't get it to him anywhere near where he needs it.

[ChezGiven]

Has anyone got any stats to prove that opposing teams play further up the pitch when Martins comes off?

[Guest]

Since when did we all turn into Sam Allardyce btw? Facts don't give the whole story at all.

 

Of course Martins is going to have a worse ratio than Owen due to the fact he takes a lot of pot shots from outside the box, when I can barely remember Owen since playing for us taking risky shots like Martins does. He normally takes them when he's on the end of something or snatching at a loose ball, rather than striking from anywhere like Oba does.

 

And quite a few times, there's been a simple pass available to him, or he could (well, probably not in Martins case) hold the ball up allowing other players to get into a better position.

[Guest]

Has anyone got any stats to prove that opposing teams play further up the pitch when Martins comes off?

 

When Martins & Owen are on the pitch for an average 63.4 minutes per game, the defence is on average 26.7 yards away from their own goal-line, when Owen & Viduka are on for an average 26.6 minutes per game, the defence pushes up to a whopping 29.2 yards. Or something...

[gray]

4-3-3 is the answer

[mrmojorisin75]

http://telegraph.jumpmediagroup.com/PlayerStat.aspx?p1id=5127&p2id=3789

Martins and Owen stats are virtually identical.

 

There is a stark difference however in the way both players have been treated. Formations and personnel and tactics have been tweaked to accomodate Owen. Martins has been treated with contempt by every manager since Roeder. He scored a double in his first game under Allardyce and did not get a chance to play half a dozen games b4 he was replaced by Owen as soon as Owen was half fit.

 

 

Martins (2008/09) -- League =  5 goals in 36 shots, with 12 of those shots on goal, in 11 appearances, none of them as a substitute.  Martins' season is 5 goals in 39 shots, with 15 of those shots on goal in 12 appearances, none of them as a substitute.  He also has two assists.

             (2007/08) -- League = 9 goals in 72 shots, with 38 of those shots on goal, in 31 apps, 8 of those as a sub.  He had three assists.

 

Owen (2008/09) -- League = 6 goals in 19 shots, with 12 of those shots on goal, in 12 appearances, with four of them being as a substitute.  Owen's season has 8 goals in 23 shots, with 15 of those on goal, in 14 appearances, with five of them as a sub.

          (2007/08) -- League = 11 goals in 47 shots, with 31 of those shots on goal, in 29 appearances, with five of them as a sub.  He had one assist.  His season total was 12 goals in 51 shots, with 34 of those shots on goal, in 32 appearances, with five as a sub.  Still only one assist.

 

Martins' conversion ratio in the league this season is about 1 in 7.  In fact, 3 in 10 of his shots are even on target.  Owen's conversion ratio in the league this season is about 1 in 3, and about 6 in 10 of his shots are on target.  Last season, Martins conversion was 1 in 8.  Owen's conversion was 1 in 4.2.  I don't think that is quite "virtually identical".  At least, not in my maths classes.  Owen's goals to shots taken ratio is better -- enough so that I think you need more than "Martins' shots are from farther out" to equate the two.  If you're stating  Martins is taking worse shots, isn't that rather proving the point that he's not as good at reading the game as Owen?  At any rate, I think the conversion rate rather proves that if you are looking for a goal, Owen is the better bet to leave on if chances are scarce.  Plus, I think there is the opinion around that if you're looking for a player to drop into the midfield to defend effectively, Michael Owen is better suited to that than Oba Martins (see the Chelsea match).  It may or may not make sense to us, but I'd bet that's how Kinnear reasoned it when he's left Owen on when trying to defend a lead.

 

priceless

[Ashley17]

I don't care if we have Messi up front, if you can't defend a set piece in injury time you won't win the game.

[Guest rebel_yell12]

Since when did we all turn into Sam Allardyce btw? Facts don't give the whole story at all.

 

Of course Martins is going to have a worse ratio than Owen due to the fact he takes a lot of pot shots from outside the box, when I can barely remember Owen since playing for us taking risky shots like Martins does. He normally takes them when he's on the end of something or snatching at a loose ball, rather than striking from anywhere like Oba does.

 

I was just pointing out the flaw in the statement that their stats are "virtually identical".  They aren't.  Plus, you seem to have missed my comment that arguing that Martins' shots are off-target because he's shooting from farther out accounts for some difference...but double?  That seems to stretch it beyond reasonable estimation.  Plus, doesn't it prove that Owen thinks the game better if he's taking such better shots?  He is, by that reasoning, making the better decisions/runs. 

 

Owen has never been much of a "risky" player, imo.  You don't buy or play Michael Owen if you want flair/risky play.  Maybe that's why he wasn't a big hit at Madrid.  I'd still rather have him on the pitch converting 1 in 3 of his boring shots into goals than a flashier player converting less than half that number if the team is struggling to create chances.  But that's just me, and opinions certainly vary.  I'm too old-fashioned, I reckon.  I've never been taught that "striking from anywhere" was a good thing.  Of course, I did play CB...

[mrmojorisin75]

None, and that's why we need to keep that threat of pace until we can strengthen up in the center.

i'll take you back to the threat he carries pace wise (which he rarely uses and would be much more effective if he had decent positioning) is offset by his giving the ball away easy through poor control etc.

 

martins was ok under roeder, fucking hopeless under SA, improved under KK once he got fit to the point where he was VERY dangerous on the break & in the latter half of games, now we're back to kinnear and him being erratic again

 

one good coach among 4 and the lad plays well, hmmmmm...maybe there's more to it?  coaching some might say

 

kk had the sense to come up with a system that suited both their strengths, kinnear appears barely able to come up with a system that suits either

[Tooj]

Since when did we all turn into Sam Allardyce btw? Facts don't give the whole story at all.

 

Of course Martins is going to have a worse ratio than Owen due to the fact he takes a lot of pot shots from outside the box, when I can barely remember Owen since playing for us taking risky shots like Martins does. He normally takes them when he's on the end of something or snatching at a loose ball, rather than striking from anywhere like Oba does.

 

And quite a few times, there's been a simple pass available to him, or he could (well, probably not in Martins case) hold the ball up allowing other players to get into a better position.

 

I never said there wasn't.

[Guest]

I know but it's another argument for why Martins comes off. Instead of holding the ball up, he smacks it into the stand giving them a goal-kick to put us under more pressure.

[gray]

I know but it's another argument for why Martins comes off. Instead of holding the ball up, he smacks it into the stand giving them a goal-kick to put us under more pressure.

 

but just maybe faye might have been a bit further back in case we broke through martins, whereas we will not be countering with viduka. who knows.

[madras]

None, and that's why we need to keep that threat of pace until we can strengthen up in the center.

i'll take you back to the threat he carries pace wise (which he rarely uses and would be much more effective if he had decent positioning) is offset by his giving the ball away easy through poor control etc.

 

martins was ok under roeder, f***ing hopeless under SA, improved under KK once he got fit to the point where he was VERY dangerous on the break & in the latter half of games, now we're back to kinnear and him being erratic again

 

one good coach among 4 and the lad plays well, hmmmmm...maybe there's more to it?  coaching some might say

 

kk had the sense to come up with a system that suited both their strengths, kinnear appears barely able to come up with a system that suits either

due to having viduka out maybe. perhaps when he thinks viduka can last most of a game he'll go to 4-3-3.

 

think of how kinnear'd get slagged off if he went to a more attcking line up when we were under the cosh and clinging on to a lead.

[KaKa]

I actually find it quite infuriating that Owen hardly ever shoots from outside the box even when the opportunity presents itself.

 

Shooting from outside of the box should not be seen as a negative as it keeps defences honest.