madras Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Given > Harper Beye > Simpson Bassong > Kadar Yet we got relegated By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? the root cause was we were poor as a team even if some of the individual parts may have been up to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Given > Harper Beye > Simpson Bassong > Kadar Yet we got relegated By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? the root cause was we were poor as a team even if some of the individual parts may have been up to it. So, have we improved to the point you could reasonably say "the defence is now of Premier League standard"..? Thought not.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Given > Harper Beye > Simpson Bassong > Kadar Yet we got relegated By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? the root cause was we were poor as a team even if some of the individual parts may have been up to it. So, have we improved to the point you could reasonably say "the defence is now of Premier League standard"..? Thought not.. i think that back 4 could survive in the prem if placed in the majority of prem league teams. have we improved....no, but then i didn't think the back 4 was the major problem last season. improvment wasn't really the question was it ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roger Kint Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? Denial? What the hell am in denial about. I have never said anything about us staying up with this defence have i? For the record i dont care which was better, we arent going to replay the 2008/09 season so its fairly irrelevant imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Given > Harper Beye > Simpson Bassong > Kadar Yet we got relegated By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? the root cause was we were poor as a team even if some of the individual parts may have been up to it. So, have we improved to the point you could reasonably say "the defence is now of Premier League standard"..? Thought not.. i think that back 4 could survive in the prem if placed in the majority of prem league teams. have we improved....no, but then i didn't think the back 4 was the major problem last season. As you are one of the main advocates of this "defending as a team" notion, have we addressed the overall problem that was the root cause of our relegation. In terms of quality of personnel we have gone down; have we made up for that by being much more organised tactically? I certainly don't believe this is the case. It's just strikers miss complete sitters in this league like there is no tomorrow. Talking about a much improved defense is a case of papering over the cracks if you ask me. As soon as we are back in the Prem we will be back out of our depth unless we have made very significant improvements to the squad and as a team tactically... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slugsy Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Simpson for me isn't a premiership RB and I still have issues with Colo at that standard as well. Additionally, we lack depth so we may scrape through with those guys but an injury or two - urgh. Perhaps would be okay (I mean bottom half) if we improved our midfield to take some pressure off them as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 As you are one of the main advocates of this "defending as a team" notion, have we addressed the overall problem that was the root cause of our relegation. In terms of quality of personnel we have gone down; have we made up for that by being much more organised tactically? I certainly don't believe this is the case. It's just strikers miss complete sitters in this league like there is no tomorrow. Talking about a much improved defense is a case of papering over the cracks if you ask me. As soon as we are back in the Prem we will be back out of our depth unless we have made very significant improvements to the squad and as a team tactically... You're looking at the big picture, when the idea of the thread was purely the quality of the defence on their own. Behind a competent team, many think they would likely be good enough to avoid relegation. Just as last seasons defence would have been much more so. As a whole they are hopefully forming some kind of understand, Colo is adjusting more to English football & defensively this season has gone well. Whether thats down to the quality of strikers in this league or our defense is debatable, some have missed sitters & some have missed purely because of good defending. Prem teams putting the sitters in doesnt = relegation quality defense either. Obviously as a side if we want to compete, we'd have to improve a lot of areas in the summer thats a given. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest optimistic nit Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Yes, as it most certainly was last season. pretty much that, although bassong was our best defender last season. on paper they definately should be anyway, steven taylor has been premiership class for a few seasons now (not exceptional premiership class mind, but he can hold his own) and enrique is definately good enough. colo has the ability but if he has a season like last season then he wont be good enough. hopefully by next season if we go up he'll be onto his third season in english football and should be able to hold his own. dont know about simpson mind, although i doubt a few of the right backs currently in the PL are much better than him. we really need cover for them though, 1 cb 1 right back and 1 left back ideally but ofcourse only if we sign the players to play in front of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I think that defence would be fine as a base. Obviously you need to bring in some players to to cover and/or challenge for places, but imo the defence is nowhere near our greatest concern. That would be upfront, where we don't have one Premiership quality player right now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Given > Harper Beye > Simpson Bassong > Kadar Yet we got relegated By 1 goal, one of those v Pompey, Fulham, Villa was all we needed. Strange point to make. We conceded 59 in the Prem last season, in 38 matches. We were abysmal, both attacking and defensively. We have lost arguably our three best players from that back 5. What makes you think we will look much better next season, providing we go up, except for the blind hope that we will somehow massively improve elsewhere on the pitch (defensive midfielders who provide real cover, attackers who can hold up the ball effectively and release pressure), which we more than likely won't while Mike Ashley is around? Why do people argue the back 5 is good enough while also arguing that it's not about the back 5, but about the entire team defending and not putting too much pressure on the defense. If defending is not just about the back 5 (which is true), and there is no reason to assume our team defending will be any better (with no investment forthcoming), how can our "defence" (in the broad sense of the word, i.e. not just the back 5) be considered of Premier League standard? I would argue that without significant investment (unlikely) we run a serious risk of doing worse in terms of goal difference next season than we did last season (-19). Please point to the part of my post which has any relevance to what you are saying? Pot.. Kettle.. What was the relevance of your point exactly..? Did you not understand it? Ok well if we had scored 1 goal against Pompey we would have stayed up due to a 1-0 win. If we scored 1 goal against Fulham we would have stayed up due to a 1-1 draw. If we had scored 1 goal at Villa on the last day we would have stayed up thanks to a 1-1 draw. Not scoring in 6 of our last 8 games is extremely relevant wouldnt you say? I understood your point but it makes you look like you are in denial about the root causes of our relegation and wasn't particular relevant to the discussion about the strength of our defence/back 5, was it? the root cause was we were poor as a team even if some of the individual parts may have been up to it. So, have we improved to the point you could reasonably say "the defence is now of Premier League standard"..? Thought not.. i think that back 4 could survive in the prem if placed in the majority of prem league teams. have we improved....no, but then i didn't think the back 4 was the major problem last season. As you are one of the main advocates of this "defending as a team" notion, have we addressed the overall problem that was the root cause of our relegation. In terms of quality of personnel we have gone down; have we made up for that by being much more organised tactically? I certainly don't believe this is the case. It's just strikers miss complete sitters in this league like there is no tomorrow. Talking about a much improved defense is a case of papering over the cracks if you ask me. As soon as we are back in the Prem we will be back out of our depth unless we have made very significant improvements to the squad and as a team tactically... i never said it was improved. i said it was premiership standard. have we addressed the problem.......no! our midfield is poorer this year than last and last year it was the major reason we went down, even the forwards were more of a problem than the defence . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCONA Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 guess is depends on what is "prem standard" If its having a chance of staying up, then yes it probably is, If its getting near the top half of the table- no chance. Our first 4 defenders are satisfactory, the problem is if there are injuries then we have nowhere near prem standard as cover. And looking past this season, we've never been good in the avoiding injury dept. (!) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 We only conceded 7 more last season, than the season we finished 4th under Sir Bobby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcQuillan Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 We only conceded 7 more last season, than the season we finished 4th under Sir Bobby. That's actually stunning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Problem was we scored 34 fewer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keefaz Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 We only conceded 7 more last season, than the season we finished 4th under Sir Bobby. Aye, but we scored half as many goals. Was the defence ever really the problem? I thought most accepted the fact that we were relegated because Owen et al were abysmal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Unbelievable doesn't seem to think so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCONA Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 We only conceded 7 more last season, than the season we finished 4th under Sir Bobby. That's actually stunning. With the likes of martins, owen etc in the team, its a joke. Last season, midfield was our biggest prob tho, fed the forwards nothing. I do worry though, because although ppl with bad attitudes left, The team now is of such a smaller calibre (people were saying all last season there is no way we can get relegated with our team for a reason). We might have a team to get out of this shit division, just hope we can say out of it. The only good thing is theres currently a fair few poor teams in the prem battling relegation, so hopefully we can rise above them and keep our heads above water Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Seriously though, could you imagine Dabizas, O'Brien, Bramble, Griffin, etc behind that midfield last season? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 We only conceded 7 more last season, than the season we finished 4th under Sir Bobby. Aye, but we scored half as many goals. Was the defence ever really the problem? I thought most accepted the fact that we were relegated because Owen et al were abysmal. half the problem is that many people think the defending is purely down to the defenders. last season the players seemed to take this on board and left all the defending to the back 4. there was a lack of craeativity and basic footballing ability throughout the rest of the team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I think the defence probably are Premier League standard, I don't think those in front of them are though. I think we're a full midfield and a full forward line away from having a team which is Premier (mid) League standard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCONA Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 Our first 4 defenders are satisfactory, the problem is if there are injuries then we have nowhere near prem standard as cover. And looking past this season, we've never been good in the avoiding injury dept. (!) And now taylor might be out for the season. Fu..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzza Posted January 26, 2010 Share Posted January 26, 2010 The defence is fine, we just need back up for when inevitably one or more of them get injured. If this happens we would be easy prey to premiership strikers. The midfield has one player: JONAS The rest is crap. Smith is playing well because this is his level, the prem isn't. If we bought a decent defensive midfielder who was tall aswell (headers to eradicate need for defenders to step up so much and lose position) it would help the team a lot. A right sided JONAS would be nice. Strikers: None of our lot are good enough for the prem, simple as... Buy one good striker and hope that Lovens/Carrol/Ranger step up a grade.... In resumen: Defensive cover + Defensive midfielder + Top Striker (Right sided creative midfielder if Fat boy is feeling generous). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 Has José Enrique missed a league game this season? Yes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 The defence was prem standard last season, and it still is now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 I dread to think where we'd be in the league without it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now