Sean Longstaff

[Gallowgate Toon]

I'd personally not start him against Forest because I think Tonali-Bruno gives us a lot more flexibility to change shape/approach in games as well as more options on the ball. Longstaff does have a decent weapon against lower teams which is his timing for runs into the box, but without Trippier commanding that side in possession I'm not sure he'd even be picked out that often.

 

Plus, Tonali's set pieces look really good. An unfashionable but very important tool against deep sides.

[Smal]

there are things that stand out in Longstaff's game imo. His running power is much better than the average PL player, and his ability to make recovery runs and get back behind the ball is very good and is missed when he's not in the team. He is also really good at making runs beyond the opposition defence at the right time. Basically his understanding of what Howe wants him to do is as good as any player in our squad if not better.

 

Tonali clearly has the attributes to at least match these parts of Sean's game imo but it's possibly going to take time to coach it into his game.

[80]

3 minutes ago, Andy said:

 

The only strong argument I've seen for Longstaff improving us is the win% argument, but that's really only valid if you choose to ignore every single other variable that could possibly determine the outcome of a football match. It's the whole correlation/causation thing. 

...And as I found after Heron helpfully did the work showing the games and minutes Longstaff and Tonali had played in, 7 of the points in that unbeaten period came from us turning around losses and draws after Longstaff had been subbed off the pitch.

[Lush Vlad]

15 minutes ago, Andy said:

 

The only strong argument I've seen for Longstaff improving us is the win% argument, but that's really only valid if you choose to ignore every single other variable that could possibly determine the outcome of a football match. It's the whole correlation/causation thing. 

Kind of agree. I think his off the ball work at both ends of the pitch and his engine do get overlooked. But that is why I think he is great for games like the last two at home. Not so much as against, say an Everton or a Forest (I know they’re doing well. More their style). 

[80]

8 minutes ago, Gallowgate Toon said:

I'd personally not start him against Forest because I think Tonali-Bruno gives us a lot more flexibility to change shape/approach in games as well as more options on the ball. Longstaff does have a decent weapon against lower teams which is his timing for runs into the box, but without Trippier commanding that side in possession I'm not sure he'd even be picked out that often.

 

Plus, Tonali's set pieces look really good. An unfashionable but very important tool against deep sides.

I'm inclined to agree, and if it was a cup final I'd say to do it, but I can see the sense in rewarding Longstaff for squad morale reasons plus not wanting to interfere with the chemistry of something that's only just started working well. A bit like us not immediately dropping Bruno in when we first signed him. 

 

Also, Longstaff just genuinely looked like his old self for the first time in ages. If we can somehow get him back to being a competent, contributive footballer on regular basis then that's going to be helpful to us, either as a squad member or a transfer fee.

[Alberto2005]

1 hour ago, STM said:

 

You accept it would be mental for him not to start the next game though right?

 

You also accept that we are clearly a better side when he's involved?

I'd like to see Tonali given a run in the center first before deciding that.

 

I don't believe our last two results are purely down to Sean Longstaff playing no, but the balance does seem better when he plays.

 

You could also argue Joelinton from the LW gives us better balance aswell.

[TRon]

44 minutes ago, Andy said:

 

The only strong argument I've seen for Longstaff improving us is the win% argument, but that's really only valid if you choose to ignore every single other variable that could possibly determine the outcome of a football match. It's the whole correlation/causation thing. 

 

Agree. Tonali played against Chelsea when we won 2-0 alongside Longstaff. Does that mean Bruno is the problem?

 

I think Joelinton and Willock were equally important on the left so selective stats don't really tell the story.

[STM]

2 hours ago, Alberto2005 said:

I'd like to see Tonali given a run in the center first before deciding that.

 

I don't believe our last two results are purely down to Sean Longstaff playing no, but the balance does seem better when he plays.

 

You could also argue Joelinton from the LW gives us better balance aswell.

 

Joelinton going left is massive but I feel there is a lot of mental gymnastics going with regards to refusing to admit that Longstaff, while not as talented, actually plays for the team and that the team benefits when he's in the side.

 

However, I would 100% like to see Tonali in Brunos position and Bruno where Longstaff is. If that worked, we could go to another level.

[STM]

1 hour ago, TRon said:

 

Agree. Tonali played against Chelsea when we won 2-0 alongside Longstaff. Does that mean Bruno is the problem?

 

I think Joelinton and Willock were equally important on the left so selective stats don't really tell the story.

 

Of course Bruno isn't the problem but it's extra proof that Longstaff isn't the problem either.

 

Nobody suggests Bruno is shite, Longstaff gets called shite all of the time though.

[TRon]

1 minute ago, STM said:

 

Of course Bruno isn't the problem but it's extra proof that Longstaff isn't the problem either.

 

Nobody suggests Bruno is shite, Longstaff gets called shite all of the time though.

 

Shite was always hyperbole for Longstaff though, unfortunately you are always going to get that on social media. I was specifically addressing this idea that we can't win without Longstaff. I think a lot of the more sensible commentators have said that the midfield mix didn't look right this season, especially given the lack of pace at CB. I don't think it's that individuals are bad players, we just need to get the balance right so they compliment each other.

[STM]

8 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

Shite was always hyperbole for Longstaff though, unfortunately you are always going to get that on social media. I was specifically addressing this idea that we can't win without Longstaff. I think a lot of the more sensible commentators have said that the midfield mix didn't look right this season, especially given the lack of pace at CB. I don't think it's that individuals are bad players, we just need to get the balance right so they compliment each other.

 

I agree with that.

 

I suppose my point is that our balance always looks better with Longstaff (and I don't rate him as a great player with the ball).

 

I think we've also seen the importance of Willock too.

 

I don't think we could swap Tonali and Longstaff in Saturdays set up, unless we moved Bruno into Longstaffs position.

 

For whatever reason, Tonali 8 and Bruno as a 6 hasn't worked.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Not to push the negative angle but he’s below average among PL midfielders in almost everything and he’s dire on anything related to passing. 
 

His movement is decent as you can see by those runs he makes into the channels, even if it rarely results in anything. 
 

He’s decent at blocks and OK at tackles. I can’t find stats on running but I don’t see him as particularly fast or athletic, so I doubt his ground coverage is better than Tonali. He does pop up to recover the ball from time to time, but mostly when somebody else has made the meaningful challenge or recovery.
 

He is just a CM though, so not everything can be captured with stats. 

 

FWIW I think his ability is probably decent and his intelligence is good. I just don’t see any convincing argument that he’s key to us having a better team.

 

 

Edited November 5 by AyeDubbleYoo

[PopeandGlory]

Personally think it’s absolutely bonkers that people are seriously suggesting Longstaff should start ahead of Tonali, in any match, because he’s perceived to have an “engine”.

 

Makes as much sense as selling Isak and buying Delap because he would “put himself about”.

 

Might as well sell Bruno and get Oliver Skipp in too.

[Elbel1]

On 03/11/2024 at 09:48, Guybrush said:

 

This is atrocious. At the risk of sounding like a bullying advert, people need to realise they're directing criticism at a real person.

 

Hate owt like this, me.

Fully agree unless the criticism is directed at Steve Bruce.

Starting to think I'm still not fully over his reign of terror.

[RodneyCisse]

39 minutes ago, PopeandGlory said:

Personally think it’s absolutely bonkers that people are seriously suggesting Longstaff should start ahead of Tonali, in any match, because he’s perceived to have an “engine”.

 

Makes as much sense as selling Isak and buying Delap because he would “put himself about”.

 

Might as well sell Bruno and get Oliver Skipp in too.

Id love Delap tbh, but as a second striker.

[TRon]

54 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Not to push the negative angle but he’s below average among PL midfielders in almost everything and he’s dire on anything related to passing. 
 

His movement is decent as you can see by those runs he makes into the channels, even if it rarely results in anything. 
 

He’s decent at blocks and OK at tackles. I can’t find stats on running but I don’t see him as particularly fast or athletic, so I doubt his ground coverage is better than Tonali. He does pop up to recover the ball from time to time, but mostly when somebody else has made the meaningful challenge or recovery.
 

He is just a CM though, so not everything can be captured with stats. 

 

FWIW I think his ability is probably decent and his intelligence is good. I just don’t see any convincing argument that he’s key to us having a better team.

 

 

 

 

 

I think the acid test of this is, which of the teams do you think he would fit into if he left Newcastle?

 

A. Arsenal/Man City/ Liverpool

 

or

 

B. Bournemouth/Brentford/Everton

 

 

 

[STM]

45 minutes ago, PopeandGlory said:

Personally think it’s absolutely bonkers that people are seriously suggesting Longstaff should start ahead of Tonali, in any match, because he’s perceived to have an “engine”.

 

Makes as much sense as selling Isak and buying Delap because he would “put himself about”.

 

Might as well sell Bruno and get Oliver Skipp in too.

 

That's a good story but nobody thinks he should play just because of an engine.

 

He should play because he does the job that the team needs. 

 

I'm absolutely for Tonali playing ahead of Longstaff, provided that the team performs well with him there. 

[timeEd32]

Some Longstaff vs. Tonali stats (all per 90) that I think highlight how different they are. I was going to exclude cup games, but Tonali played as a 6 v Chelsea and Longstaff was a 6 for Wimbledon so seems fine to leave in to get a bigger sample. It doesn't change much anyway.

• Longstaff is first on the team in tackles won with 2.03 per 90 (Joelinton is second at 1.54). Tonali is 9th (1.00)
  • Longstaff's tackles are distributed evenly - 30% in the defensive third, 40% in the middle, 30% in the attacking third
  • 89% of Tonali's tackles have occurred in the middle third. He has one in the defensive third and none in the attacking third.
• Longstaff is second in total blocks and first in blocked passes. Tonali is 11th (comparable to Bruno).
• Tonali is first in interceptions. Longstaff is 4th just ahead of Bruno and Joelinton.
• As a result Longstaff is first in tackles won + interceptions and Tonali is second (Bruno third).
• Tonali averages a few more touches per game, but very similar overall. Longstaff has more in the defensive third, while Tonali has more in the middle and attacking third.
• Tonali is 4th in attempted take-ons. He hasn't been very good at them (only 30% success; Bruno 70% for comparison), but Longstaff has only attempted one, which is less than every player who has played as much as him except Pope and Burn.
• Tonali has been dispossessed less than any other midfielder/forward, but Longstaff fares well in this area also. Our other midfielders - Bruno, Joelinton, and Willock - have been dispossessed the most.
• Tonali is third in fouls drawn behind Bruno and Gordon; Longstaff is 13th.
• Tonali is second in loose balls recovered (Tino is first). Longstaff is 9th. 

You'd think they have two entirely different positions / roles.

[STM]

2 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

 

I think the acid test of this is, which of the teams do you think he would fit into if he left Newcastle?

 

A. Arsenal/Man City/ Liverpool

 

or

 

B. Bournemouth/Brentford/Everton

 

 

 

 

Sounds like a good arguement but Willock and Tonali don't get into any of them top teams either.

 

Its pointless concocting little hypotheticals to prove why we all should hate Longstaff, especially since nobody is saying he's a great player and more that he doesn't deserve the sheer unjustified shite he gets during match's.

 

We should upgrade Longstaff but we still haven't. If Tonali comes into the starting 11 and completely out- performs Longstaff, great, but it hasn't happened yet and I don't think he will because I'm not sure that's where Tonali should be playing.

[STM]

5 minutes ago, timeEd32 said:

Some Longstaff vs. Tonali stats (all per 90) that I think highlight how different they are. I was going to exclude cup games, but Tonali played as a 6 v Chelsea and Longstaff was a 6 for Wimbledon so seems fine to leave in to get a bigger sample. It doesn't change much anyway.

• Longstaff is first on the team in tackles won with 2.03 per 90 (Joelinton is second at 1.54). Tonali is 9th (1.00)
  • Longstaff's tackles are distributed evenly - 30% in the defensive third, 40% in the middle, 30% in the attacking third
  • 89% of Tonali's tackles have occurred in the middle third. He has one in the defensive third and none in the attacking third.
• Longstaff is second in total blocks and first in blocked passes. Tonali is 11th (comparable to Bruno).
• Tonali is first in interceptions. Longstaff is 4th just ahead of Bruno and Joelinton.
• As a result Longstaff is first in tackles won + interceptions and Tonali is second (Bruno third).
• Tonali averages a few more touches per game, but very similar overall. Longstaff has more in the defensive third, while Tonali has more in the middle and attacking third.
• Tonali is 4th in attempted take-ons. He hasn't been very good at them (only 30% success; Bruno 70% for comparison), but Longstaff has only attempted one, which is less than every player who has played as much as him except Pope and Burn.
• Tonali has been dispossessed less than any other midfielder/forward, but Longstaff fares well in this area also. Our other midfielders - Bruno, Joelinton, and Willock - have been dispossessed the most.
• Tonali is third in fouls drawn behind Bruno and Gordon; Longstaff is 13th.
• Tonali is second in loose balls recovered (Tino is first). Longstaff is 9th. 

You'd think they have two entirely different positions / roles.

 

This is an excellent post. It highlights that basically Longstaff plays more conservative and it benefits the team. Which comes back to the balance arguement.

[PopeandGlory]

27 minutes ago, STM said:

 

That's a good story but nobody thinks he should play just because of an engine.

 

He should play because he does the job that the team needs. 

 

I'm absolutely for Tonali playing ahead of Longstaff, provided that the team performs well with him there. 

 

What job does Longstaff do that the team needs that Tonali hasn’t or couldn’t?

 

I’m not sure the above stats show too much difference other than Tonali is miles better with the ball as they are instructed to play in different ways by Howe.

 

If you asked Tonali to play more defensively, I’m not sure you’d see that much difference in those defensive stats.

 

 

Edited November 5 by PopeandGlory

[PopeandGlory]

23 minutes ago, STM said:

 

This is an excellent post. It highlights that basically Longstaff plays more conservative and it benefits the team. Which comes back to the balance arguement.

 

Does it truly benefit the team? Last season we were dreadful defensively and Longstaff was a major factor in that.

 

If we’re using a sample size of 6 games to say Longstaff contributes more, why are we ignoring the rest of his career that suggests he’s a very average bottom half PL player who has the occasional purple patch or game in him.

[TRon]

38 minutes ago, STM said:

 

Sounds like a good arguement but Willock and Tonali don't get into any of them top teams either.

 

Its pointless concocting little hypotheticals to prove why we all should hate Longstaff, especially since nobody is saying he's a great player and more that he doesn't deserve the sheer unjustified shite he gets during match's.

 

We should upgrade Longstaff but we still haven't. If Tonali comes into the starting 11 and completely out- performs Longstaff, great, but it hasn't happened yet and I don't think he will because I'm not sure that's where Tonali should be playing.

 

Willock isn't really good enough either and I'm a fan. Tonali I think is an excellent player, the question is if he fits into our team, or the PL as a whole. I think if he leaves he finds a CL club, probably back in Italy. These are very broad generalisations but it's just about where we want to be at the end of the day and which players will ultimately be there. Longstaff might well have a place as a squad player, just don't see him starting in a top 4 side regularly.

[et tu brute]

5 hours ago, STM said:

 

You accept it would be mental for him not to start the next game though right?

 

You also accept that we are clearly a better side when he's involved?

Don't accept that as to me, playing Tonali in Longstaff's position and Bruno further forward would make us a lot better and give more creativity. As for the first part, everyone was saying it would be mental not to start Tonali after the Chelsea game. I think a lot of people forget how poor Longstaff has been in a lot of games. End of the day it's the manager's decision and he will be judged on everything at the end of the season. 

 

 

Edited November 5 by et tu brute

[et tu brute]

9 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

Willock isn't really good enough either and I'm a fan. Tonali I think is an excellent player, the question is if he fits into our team, or the PL as a whole. I think if he leaves he finds a CL club, probably back in Italy. These are very broad generalisations but it's just about where we want to be at the end of the day and which players will ultimately be there. Longstaff might well have a place as a squad player, just don't see him starting in a top 4 side regularly.

He wouldn't even get near their squads never mind the first team.