Dan Burn

[jackflap]

Obviously Howe has done an incredible job but he's not infallible and like everyone is bound to have his blind spots. Think he certainly is guilty of being too loyal to certain players but loyalty is a fine line. Thought we saw it against Liverpool early in the season when his subs felt telegraphed and led to us losing control of the game. Similarly with Burn at the minute it's getting to the point where I'm sure opposition managers are setting out to expose him and we've being slow to react accordingly. Not having Joelinton in there has significantly weakened our left hand side as well and we need a better one on one defender to make up for it.

[Erikse]

5 minutes ago, jackflap said:

Obviously Howe has done an incredible job but he's not infallible and like everyone is bound to have his blind spots. Think he certainly is guilty of being too loyal to certain players but loyalty is a fine line. Thought we saw it against Liverpool early in the season when his subs felt telegraphed and led to us losing control of the game. Similarly with Burn at the minute it's getting to the point where I'm sure opposition managers are setting out to expose him and we've being slow to react accordingly. Not having Joelinton in there has significantly weakened our left hand side as well and we need a better one on one defender to make up for it.

 

Which would be counter productive, because it would be at the expense of other players. More "loyalty" to Burn = less "loyalty" for Tino. He could've been loyal to Tino after his spell in the team, but he dropped him at the first opportunity.

 

 

Edited February 4 by Erikse

[Away Toon]

The only real problem with Dan Burn is Eddie Howe.

[Nine]

26 minutes ago, Erikse said:

 

Then why was he picked to play against "his worst nightmare"? Personally I don't have a personal agenda against Burn, what I have a problem with is the decision to allways play him over Tino.

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Nine said:

It would be nice if it was as straightforward as - Burn is slow and Tino isnt so we would perform better overall with Tino starting. But it’s not, the back 3 we shift into when Trippier goes forward and the aerial capability is what Burn does better than Tino would right now. Ironically the biggest issue is not what Burn is or isn’t capable of it’s that the current midfield selection leaves us exposed especially against pace. Burn was a big part of the best defence in the league last season because we were covered by Joe and Willock. 

 

 

 

 

[SAK]

Think some folk are being harsh on Burn, he’s a useful player but has to used against the right opposition. Against speed merchants like Bailey and Ogbenne he’ll struggle but that’s for Howe to see and make the appropriate selection.

[BUJ]

5 minutes ago, SAK said:

Think some folk are being harsh on Burn, he’s a useful player but has to used against the right opposition. Against speed merchants like Bailey and Ogbenne he’ll struggle but that’s for Howe to see and make the appropriate selection.

Howe at the opportunity to make the appropriate selection at half time yesterday. He didn't. It cost us in all likely hood the win. 

[Erikse]

5 minutes ago, Nine said:

 

 

 

It's a bit contradictive to mention his strengths as a reason to pick him against Luton, right after you pointed out how he was up against his biggest weakness.

[SAK]

28 minutes ago, BUJ said:

Howe at the opportunity to make the appropriate selection at half time yesterday. He didn't. It cost us in all likely hood the win. 

Fair enough but that’s not on Dan Burn.

[Nine]

1 hour ago, Erikse said:

 

It's a bit contradictive to mention his strengths as a reason to pick him against Luton, right after you pointed out how he was up against his biggest weakness.

Howe obviously feels the side functions better with Burn in rather than without, you don’t think he realises that Burn lacks pace? There are more aspects to consider than just Burns pace being exploited, my point is the value Burn adds usually offsets the weaker parts of his game. So it does make sense to pick him.

 

 

Edited February 4 by Nine

[Tsunami]

Ogbene did Burn inside the first couple of minutes. He absolutely rinsed him over 20 yards and started at least 5 yards behind Burn.  We did nothing to protect Burn, did nothing at HT to address it and did nothing after their 3rd. Why Burn was where he was for the 4th, I've no idea.

 

Eddie had a howler with Burn yesterday. He could see what was happening, he was chatting with Tindale for long periods from around 20 minutes. He’d seen similar at Villa a few days before and acted as soon as Watkins scored (he could have acted sooner).

 

We have Forest away next, we saw Burn get roasted up here by Elanga (?) a few weeks ago. He can’t possibly pick Burn. 

[PauloGeordio]

38 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

Ogbene did Burn inside the first couple of minutes. He absolutely rinsed him over 20 yards and started at least 5 yards behind Burn.  We did nothing to protect Burn, did nothing at HT to address it and did nothing after their 3rd. Why Burn was where he was for the 4th, I've no idea.

 

Eddie had a howler with Burn yesterday. He could see what was happening, he was chatting with Tindale for long periods from around 20 minutes. He’d seen similar at Villa a few days before and acted as soon as Watkins scored (he could have acted sooner).

 

We have Forest away next, we saw Burn get roasted up here by Elanga (?) a few weeks ago. He can’t possibly pick Burn. 

Burn starts  Hope not, but we’ll see soon enough.

 

 

Just read this. Burn definitely starts. 

 

 

Edited February 4 by PauloGeordio

[Gallowgate Toon]

Really depends on the tactics for Forest, tbf. If the plan is to sit deeper and work counters, Burn is fine. If we're going to try and dominate and pen them in, he should be taken out of the firing line for it because they're a big counter threat.

[1964]

With a midfield three of miley, longetaff and Bruno there is a distinct lack of pace and physicality.  That exposed Burn as much as anything yesterday,  he had few friends 

[Conjo]

11 minutes ago, PauloGeordio said:

Burn starts  Hope not, but we’ll see soon enough.

 

 

Just read this. Burn definitely starts. 

 

 

 

 

Nice bit of deflection. Not a word about his performance yesterday (unless not included in the quote above).

[gbandit]

If Burn starts against Forest then Howe will deserve proper criticism for it. I love Howe and he’s absolutely the manager to take us forward but Tino is who should be starting as our LB now 

[Kanji]

I’ve no issue with Burn and the slating of Burn is fucking stupid. The issue is our manager continues to place him up against extremely rapid right wingers and we don’t have the armor of Willock, Joelinton, Tonali or a rested/rotated Gordon to help him with pacy wingers. If the other team is playing a less direct pacy winger then that is fine. Tino has literally marked top world class wingers out of the game for the most part with very good 1 v 1 defending and has excellent recovery pace. 

[Taylor Swift]

I thought Burn was bought as a center back and he was excellent there. Just because he played well at LB after doesn’t mean he should still play there. In hindsight the Hall signing was a huge mistake, we really need a natural LB. 

[Myleftboot]

4 hours ago, Away Toon said:

The only real problem with Dan Burn is Eddie Howe.

Yeah I think if they knew the Luton  winger was like shit of a stick they shouldn’t have played burn up against him.

[alexf]

  

On 04/02/2024 at 11:22, Nine said:

It would be nice if it was as straightforward as - Burn is slow and Tino isnt so we would perform better overall with Tino starting. But it’s not, the back 3 we shift into when Trippier goes forward and the aerial capability is what Burn does better than Tino would right now. Ironically the biggest issue is not what Burn is or isn’t capable of it’s that the current midfield selection leaves us exposed especially against pace. Burn was a big part of the best defence in the league last season because we were covered by Joe and Willock. 

 

 

 

 

It is simply this. With the current lack of any other midfield options and with no pace across the rest of the back 4, he simply shouldn't start ahead of Tino unless we can protect him properly with a Willock or Joelinton type on the left side. 
What we lose in Burn's height for set pieces we gain in Tino's recovery pace and the increased attacking threat down the left side. Which historically has been known to pin back wingers deeper in their own half and helps take pressure off our defence. 

 

 

Edited February 5 by alexf

[The College Dropout]

On 04/02/2024 at 15:51, Tsunami said:

Ogbene did Burn inside the first couple of minutes. He absolutely rinsed him over 20 yards and started at least 5 yards behind Burn.  We did nothing to protect Burn, did nothing at HT to address it and did nothing after their 3rd. Why Burn was where he was for the 4th, I've no idea.

 

Eddie had a howler with Burn yesterday. He could see what was happening, he was chatting with Tindale for long periods from around 20 minutes. He’d seen similar at Villa a few days before and acted as soon as Watkins scored (he could have acted sooner).

 

We have Forest away next, we saw Burn get roasted up here by Elanga (?) a few weeks ago. He can’t possibly pick Burn. 

This is the thing with Eddie.  He acts after the fact. I didn’t watch the Villa game but you said he acted fast - it was still after we conceded a goal.  
 

He’s a - the same horses for all courses type manager. And he’s reactive with subs. I think we are close to Burn not being the main LB horse. I would like for Howe to pick players depending on opposition but that’s not his style. 

[Ghandis Flip-Flop]

16 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

This is the thing with Eddie.  He acts after the fact. I didn’t watch the Villa game but you said he acted fast - it was still after we conceded a goal.  
 

He’s a - the same horses for all courses type manager. And he’s reactive with subs. I think we are close to Burn not being the main LB horse. I would like for Howe to pick players depending on opposition but that’s not his style. 

As opposed to being a clairvoyant manager? is the reason Pep is so much better than everyone else, down to pre match seances like?

[Kanji]

Again, Burn's inclusion whilst Livramento is fit rests soley on the manager for putting him in that position. It's a match-up issue - you don't match-up Steph Curry with Bol Bol; you don't place a linebacker on Tyreek Hill. 

[huss9]

despite having him and and botman in there, the still easily outjumped us twice for their first goal.

[Guest]

[buzz]

Who could have foreseen this?!