SEMTEX Posted November 5, 2013 Share Posted November 5, 2013 I respectfully disagree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Who the hell came up with that? Williamson was barely up against him anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/11/06/eve3uhy9.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 fantastic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Says more about how shite Taylor is than how good Williamson is like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 51 apps in 3.26 seasons is bad enough nevermind the rest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettNUFC Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/11/06/eve3uhy9.jpg Cheers, thought there was more than just his fist pumps to why i don't want to see Taylor play for us again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexf Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 my eyes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I think we should put this to a vote. Let's say both will be fit for an important game coming up; Williamson or Taylor? For all those saying Williamson's better I've yet to hear anyone make a case as to why Williamson a better defender other than mentioning his leadership or awareness of his weaknesses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I'd say Williamson simply because he's the hot hand. Taylor hasn't played since the City game and Williamson has performed rather well since joining the starting XI. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 When I said 'fit' I meant both would be match fit, hypothetically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRD Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 All things considered, MYM should be the only permanent fixture in 2 to 3 seasons. The rest are no long-term solutions. Shame that we can't look that far ahead in bringing in better players when it takes time to build up a defensive partnership. For now the form player/ partnership should get the nod. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I'd go with Big Mike until he struggles. He and MYM seem to have a nice balance at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRD Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 The two partnerships that seem to have a decent understanding are Willo-MYM and Taylor-Colo. Anything else out of these two combinations, we are regularly at risk of heart seizures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I think we should put this to a vote. Let's say both will be fit for an important game coming up; Williamson or Taylor? For all those saying Williamson's better I've yet to hear anyone make a case as to why Williamson a better defender other than mentioning his leadership or awareness of his weaknesses. Does somebody want to explain to me what Mike Williamson does better than Taylor, apart from keep his gob shut in the local press? I'll repeat a point I've made before. Despite his power and athleticism, Taylor does not seem to impose himself enough on the game. He tends to back off, staying goalside to avoid getting beaten, relying on blocking rather than intercepting or tackling. In terms of general ability, Williamson probably doesn't have anything over Taylor. (His distribution may be a bit better, but both are poor so I won't labour that point) In fact Taylor is stronger and quicker. But in terms of his style of defending, Williamson is much more pro-active. Crucially, he gets closer to his opponent. He's less worried about making mistakes and takes more initiative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Forgive me Cronky but I thought you just implied that Williamson distributes the ball better than Taylor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I think MYM will be Colo's replacement, but what he needs is an upgrade of Taylor next to him. Someone who is comfortable on the ball but is designated to do the basics very well, can compete with a physical CF, good in the air, will be positionally sound and allow MYM to go out and try to win the ball, covering behind him. Not impossible to find if you are willing to spend the money on it. Unfortunately, we aren't. Sounds exactly like the player Kinnear decided to cancel the transfer for this summer just gone.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DebuchyAndTheBeast Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 It's too early to say whether Willo is the answer to our defensive problems but we've conceded only 5 goals in 4 matches (didn't count Everton) when he was playing and 11 in 6 when he wasn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest palnese Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 It's too early to say whether Willo is the answer to our defensive problems but we've conceded only 5 goals in 4 matches (didn't count Everton) when he was playing and 11 in 6 when he wasn't. It really isn't. He's not the answer and never will be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 The two partnerships that seem to have a decent understanding are Willo-MYM and Taylor-Colo. Anything else out of these two combinations, we are regularly at risk of heart seizures. Colo and Williamson usually do well as a pair too. If Taylor and Williamson are considered the big defenders amongst our group of CBs it's a toss up between the two. Taylor is more aggressive but Mike is probably steadier. I'd go with Wilo until he loses form. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DebuchyAndTheBeast Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 It's too early to say whether Willo is the answer to our defensive problems but we've conceded only 5 goals in 4 matches (didn't count Everton) when he was playing and 11 in 6 when he wasn't. It really isn't. He's not the answer and never will be. I'm only stating the facts. We only conceded 2 goals with Willo against the 3rd and 5th best attacks in the league whereas we shipped in 3 against a Steve Bruce side, without him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRD Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Aye, stats prove that a team's defence is entirely about the defenders, particularly the CBs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Moody Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2491905/Life-perspective-Newcastles-Williamson-talks-balancing-family-life-professional-career-centre-backs-remarkable-resurgence-continues.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 I think we should put this to a vote. Let's say both will be fit for an important game coming up; Williamson or Taylor? For all those saying Williamson's better I've yet to hear anyone make a case as to why Williamson a better defender other than mentioning his leadership or awareness of his weaknesses. It's not just what Williamson has, it's what Taylor doesn't. Rightly or wrongly, I've got it into my head that Taylor makes basic errors (usually in picking up players or being too gung ho) and then blames others. You also have to take injuries into account. Say Taylor has had a run of games and we have an important game, I'd play him. Say Taylor is coming straight back from injury and is fit for an important game as his first game back, I'd go with Williamson. I honestly would. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 I think we should put this to a vote. Let's say both will be fit for an important game coming up; Williamson or Taylor? For all those saying Williamson's better I've yet to hear anyone make a case as to why Williamson a better defender other than mentioning his leadership or awareness of his weaknesses. It's not just what Williamson has, it's what Taylor doesn't. Rightly or wrongly, I've got it into my head that Taylor makes basic errors (usually in picking up players or being too gung ho) and then blames others. You also have to take injuries into account. Say Taylor has had a run of games and we have an important game, I'd play him. Say Taylor is coming straight back from injury and is fit for an important game as his first game back, I'd go with Williamson. I honestly would. Williamson also makes basic errors and is dreadful on the ball. That being said, he's in good form at the moment and even though I wouldnt want to see him in there long term, well played to the lad. I thought he was done here. Seems like a decent honest enough bloke too. 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