Kevin Nolan

[Guest VegasToon]

Are people really comparing Dyer to Nolan? 

 

I'd take Nolan every time over that over paid injury room nightmare.

[Wil]

He doesn't have the pace... no-one could disagree.

But he has goals, in the penalty box he is very skilfull at finding space.

He's a good captain, and is important in galvanising team spirit.

Lately, he has also noticebly done well defensively, with last ditch tackles/interceptions etc.

His game is obviously enhanced by Tiote, but who wouldn't be?

The positives outweigh the negatives, and for me he deserves to be a fixture in the team; I would say there is no-one in the current squad more worthy of his midfield spot.

Next season will be different, and will be a big challenge for him if we get new midfielders in.

But he has done a lot for our club, last year and this.

[Yorkie]

Thought Dyer was lightyears ahead of Nolan personally. He was a pretty damn good finisher n'all.

[Ronaldo]

His finishing was abysmal for most of his time here.

[Yorkie]

What? That's just over-the-top. He scored some very good goals and was quite potent in his last season. I loved him up top just off Martins. Think he got eight goals that year.

[Ronaldo]

And the 6 seasons before that? He was a poor finisher, scared to put his foot through the ball.

[JH]

What? That's just over-the-top. He scored some very good goals and was quite potent in his last season. I loved him up top just off Martins. Think he got eight goals that year.

 

 

When fit, he was unstoppable. Thought we'd really hit the jackpot when he had that little spell up top.

[Yorkie]

And the 6 seasons before that? He was a poor finisher, scared to put his foot through the ball.

 

He wasn't one to lash it. He's not as good a finisher as Nolan, he was more 'stylish' with it i guess. Probably failed him on a couple of occassions but he certainly had a good bit of ability infront of goal. The surge of anticipation and optimism every time he was coming back from injury (), especially on here, can't be denied. I doubt you'd get that with Nolan, in spite of his contributions up top.

[Ronaldo]

Of course you wouldn't, Dyer at his best was ten times the player Nolan is.

 

We waited for a long time to do what he did in 06-07, though. His finishing was always his weakness, till it was too late.

[Guest magpie99]

These are two players you cannot possibly compare.

 

Nolan - Slow, Dyer - Quick

Nolan - Goals, Dyer - occasional goals

Nolan - Leadership, Dyer - Spoilt Brat

Nolan - Combatitive, Dyer - not one to have in the trenches with you.

Nolan - rarely misses a game, Dyer - injury prone tosspot

 

In essence, Nolan is a far more complete footballer than Dyer because he recognises his limitations and concentrates on his strengths. Dyer just thought he was the "bees knees".

 

I actually think Nolan is the best captain this club has probably had since the days of Bobby Moncur.

[Taylor Swift]

you're drunk

 

Dyer was a difference maker who'd make us instant contenders for Europe if we had him now, and he could easily play in a title contending team. Nolan is a mid-table player.

[oldtype]

you're drunk

 

Dyer was a difference maker who'd make us instant contenders for Europe if we had him now, and he could easily play in a title contending team. Nolan is a mid-table player.

 

He wouldn't be making us contenders for Europe because he'd be out for six weeks after poking his eye with a training cone.

[Shak]

On his day Dyer was class.

 

Those days were all to rare though, and not just because of injury. Some days he just seemed to go through the motions and the game would pass him by, was a shame because when he had the bit between his teeth he really was a useful player.

[thomas]

Dyer actually averaged a healthy # of appearances per season while he was with us - the thing was he'd always pick up a one or two week knock here or there and the frequency was enough to cultivate the image he was constantly missing for large swaths of games.  http://www.physioroom.com/news/english_premier_league/players/395/kieron_dyer_injury.html ... not 100% accurate I know but as an example of just how frequent that was, if anyone wanted reminding. 

 

Just eyeballing the stats he was avilable for something like ~ 31-32 games per season across all competitions. 

 

That said, in this team, right now, I'd rather have Nolan.  Dyers superiority as an athlete would always be tainted by his attitude and motivation.  We, and I include myself here, have a tendency to overexaggerate the negatives and downplay the positives too much when it comes to our own players.  Nolan has his share of faults and I've been guilty of harping on them too.  But his contribution to the club right now cannot be understated. 

[Taylor Swift]

I can't even believe we're having this discussion. Dyer was unplayable on his day. He was so good at exploiting spaces in midfield and running the other team ragged. I remember hin ripping apart Leeds at least 3 times, two of which were away games (4-3, 3-0). He could easily have been one of the best midfielders of his generation if not for injuries, and we were a Bellamy hamstring injury away from winning the title. Remember, 8 seasons ago, we were on top of the Premiership at this stage of the season. That was the team that Dyer was a part of. Nolan is not his stratosphere.

[thomas]

Great, he's a better athlete who's not available to play almost 40% of the time.  That's great.  We can all agree on that, no one's even arguing it. 

 

Convince me as to why that's preferable to a Kevin Nolan who is available 98% of the time.  Keep all answers grounded in reality, i.e. no perfect-world scenarios or starting sentences with "Well if he wasn't injured all the time..." or "On his day...".  Base all answers on the reality of Dyers attitude,physical health and consistency of play over the last 15 years. 

 

P.S. IMO Dyer was good but not a world beater.  Walcott and Lennon are both better examples of the type of player he could/should have become and both of them, on their worst days, are better than he would have ever become. 

[Guest magpie99]

You only have to ask West Ham United just how good Kieron Dyer has been for them.

[ATB]

Nolan or Dyer today: Nolan

 

Nolan or Dyer 5-6 years ago: Dyer

 

 

Are you fucking kidding me or what? embarrassing dissociation.

[Taylor Swift]

Dyer was better than Lennon. He played in a more influential position and had a bigger impact on matches. I'm not sure about Walcott yet.

 

I think people underrate Dyer because he had a rep as injury prone, but like you said, he averaged about 33 games a season across all comps and about 25 in the league for a team that finished 4th and 3rd for two consecutive seasons. I know he was injured for quite a bit during the season we nearly won it but he still played a part and showed his class.

 

His finishing was always suspect. He never thumped it. Hell, the winner against Feyenoord should have been him thumping it in, not trying to pass the ball into the corner and having it saved. But for all his faults, he was an excellent player, someone who's better than most of the players we have in our squad now. He's actually the type of midfielder that, with a decent strikeforce, would push us over the top. And by over the top, I mean on a level pretty comparable with Spurs, which would mean challenging for the top 4.

[Taylor Swift]

No one is saying they prefer the Dyer of today. We are discussing the Dyer that we had vs the Nolan that we have.

[oldtype]

Averaging 23.75 league appearances per season is pretty horrible. That's on a similar level to the likes of Ledley King. You don't want your best players missing approximately 30% of the season.

 

Nobody's denying that Dyer would be a great player if he was not a crock, not an inconsistent headcase, and not a selfish bastard.

 

But he is, he is, and he is.

 

Given the choice of having Nolan or the Bobby-era Dyer in our team right now, I'd take Nolan.

[Shak]

Apisith, I liked Dyer more than most but I really think you're overrating him quite a bit.

 

Yes he had a few great games for us but more often than not he just ran around the place like a headless chicken while you sat there waiting for him to finally do something useful with the fucking ball in the final third. No doubt his running and energy were an asset to the side, but his actual end product was very much lacking and I could never think of him as a top player as a result.

[Hughesy]

The good old Dyer debate.  I reckon there are just a series of debates on a loop in this place:

 

Was Dyer good?

 

Was Robert good?

 

Is Nolan good?

 

Is Jonas good?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

It has been pretty loopy TBF.

[Andy]

Apisith, I liked Dyer more than most but I really think you're overrating him quite a bit.

 

Yes he had a few great games for us but more often than not he just ran around the place like a headless chicken while you sat there waiting for him to finally do something useful with the fucking ball in the final third. No doubt his running and energy were an asset to the side, but his actual end product was very much lacking and I could never think of him as a top player as a result.

 

Indeed. I liked Dyer but his influence on Robson's team was nowhere near as significant as Robert/Bellamy/Shearer/Solano/Speed... He was a good outlet, much like a better version of Guttierez, but his end-product was infuriating and he rightly used to be torn to shreds for it on here.