Dan Burn

[STM]

He's been class at CB. Two superb performances. 

[Vinny Green Balls]

Reminding us why we liked him so much when he first got here. Was really solid when he played CB his first four months here.

[Gallowgate Toon]

So happy he's getting some redemption now.

[Sufi]

Just now, Gallowgate Toon said:

So happy he's getting some redemption now.

Same. Remember him being boo’d and fans chanting for Tino a month or two ago. He went from looking slow at LB compared to those pacey wingers to having some surprising recovery speed playing down the middle. Still in his prime at 31 id love to see him become even more of a local legend than he already is. 

[Kid Icarus]

MOTM for me. Bruno probably as good, but I thought Burn was more or less immaculate.

[gbandit]

I think he’ll have a much tougher game with the way Spurs set up, not only because they have better players than Everton and Fulham. However, his weakness which is pace won’t be exposed to anywhere near the level it can be at LB. Think his days playing at LB should be over but he’s a very capable CB who should still be getting a lot of game time for us 

[Checko]

His defending's always been solid and he's ok on the ball for a CB. Plus he's very tall. Basically he's a perfectly good CB with a great attitude who doesn't tend to do dumb shit.

 

I don't think he has the agility or acceleration to cope with quick premier league wingers so at FB he has to either give them a massive cushion and let them do what they want or get rinsed, and his on the ball play is substandard for a premier league fullback. But, you know, he is 6' 7" and 32 in a month.

 

Hopefully he just carries on being very tall and good at CB.

 

 

 

Edited April 6 by Checko

[80]

Him replacing Botman has been of massive benefit to our defence. Says as much about Botman playing like he's been gelded since his initial ACL, but still, full marks to Burn.

[OverThere]

He was mint today, everything you would want in a CB. Don't be moving him back to LB

[Myleftboot]

We are desperate for a quality left back this summer.

[Holmesy]

I think what the last 2 games have shown is is that despite Lewis Hall not being the complete article, the Dan Burn at LB experiment should never be repeated. It has been a shit idea for a while and seemingly grossly unfair on a very talented CB. I’m so pleased he’s been given the chance (through unplanned circumstance rather than by design) to remind us what a quality player he is in his natural position. A definite candidate for MOTM in both recent games

[Yorkie]

6 minutes ago, Holmesy said:

I think what the last 2 games have shown is is that despite Lewis Hall not being the complete article, the Dan Burn at LB experiment should never be repeated. It has been a shit idea for a while and seemingly grossly unfair on a very talented CB. I’m so pleased he’s been given the chance (through unplanned circumstance rather than by design) to remind us what a quality player he is in his natural position. A definite candidate for MOTM in both recent games

 

Experiment.  You're an experiment. 

[Holmesy]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

 

Experiment.  You're an experiment. 

A bad one, gone very wrong

[Theregulars]

Yup, that’s Howe shown.

[Infatuation Junkie]

Motm

 

CB = solid.

 

Best place for him IMHO

[Pata]

He's been fine at LB too despite the mass hysteria. Had a poor 10 minutes against fresh Bailey and then poor games against Luton and Nottingham but that's pretty much it.

[Theregulars]

People have moved onto Longstaff as misery flavour of the month. 

[Holmesy]

5 minutes ago, Pata said:

He's been fine at LB too despite the mass hysteria. Had a poor 10 minutes against fresh Bailey and then poor games against Luton and Nottingham but that's pretty much it.

I’ll politely disagree. He has clearly been our weakest link for a long time this season. 

It’s too early to say we’ve become more defensively solid because it’s only two games, but in those two games we’ve conceded 1 goal, 0.5 per game. Our average for the past 10 or so games (with Burn at LB) has been 2.46 ish per game. 
It looks like the combination of a proper LB and BDB now at CB has eradicated a lot of our defensive frailty. Nothing else has really changed.
We were under the cosh today, as we have been in a lot of games lately, and yet we kept a clean sheet this time. 

[Pata]

I would guarantee we would be even more solid if we had BDB at LB and BDB at LCB simultaneously. Putting any improvement down to not having him at LB is disrespecting him badly. 

 

Very happy that he's done so well at CB though, makes things a lot simpler in the summer window.

[HawK]

5 hours ago, KaKa said:

The Schar and Botman partnership was unreal just after the takeover.

 

Think he was always meant to be a rotation option at centre back, however Targett being a crock, and missing out on left back targets meant he ended up at left back.

 

With Botman being out so long, going to be very useful having him back at CB.

 

Tbh, the best bit about having him fill in at centre back, is he's not playing full back.

[Pata]

Just now, Holmesy said:

The stats just don’t back that up at all. And we can’t really be more solid defensively than not conceding. 

But I’m at risk of sounding like a broken record so let’s just agree to disagree. 
 

 

The stats are from a two game sample size that conveniently cuts out the three goals conceded against West Ham ffs.

[ponsaelius]

49 minutes ago, Holmesy said:

A bad one, gone very wrong

 

Burn played pretty much half his football at Brighton as a left back, even sometimes left wing back. I mean he was their starting left back when we actually signed him. It is not a wild experiment to play him there.

 

 

Edited April 6 by ponsaelius

[madras]

2 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

 

Burn played pretty much half his football at Brighton as a left back, even sometimes left wing back. I mean he was their starting left back when we actually signed him. It is not a wild experiment to play him there.

 

 

 

Not sure he was there starting LB when we signed him but he had played there a hell of a lot there and at his other clubs.

[Holmesy]

4 minutes ago, Pata said:

 

The stats are from a two game sample size that conveniently cuts out the three goals conceded against West Ham ffs.

I’m not sure I follow - Burn played LB for most of that game didn’t he?! 
Granted, it’s too early to say that this is a trend (as I said in an early post ??) and we’re now defensively solid, but there has visibly been a difference defensively in addition to the numbers. We’ll see, harder tests lie ahead but I feel much more confident with Lewis at LB than I have with Burn for most of this season.

When you’re conceding 3 goals per game, something is badly wrong. We’re weaker at RB, the keeper is the same, one of the CBs is the same. What else has changed? 

[ponsaelius]

Just now, madras said:

Not sure he was there starting LB when we signed him but he had played there a hell of a lot there and at his other clubs.

 

Yeah it was perhaps the season before, when they had White and Dunk. White had gone by then and Cucurella was at left back.

 

But he has certainly played more or less both positions equally at Brighton. The idea it's some crazy idea to play him there is a nonsense (even though I also prefer him centrally).