Glenn Roeder

[Howaythelads]

Chelsea's Premiership defensive record

 

With John Terry - 9 goals conceded in 18 games

 

Without John Terry - 10 goals conceded in 9 games.

 

Conclusion?

 

They need to replace Drogba with someone who can hold the ball up better.

 

Chelsea already have their general play sorted.

 

In the end you need top class players throughout a team to be good enough to challenge for the title, I don't see anybody saying that isn't the case. What is being discussed here though is the priority for improving the team with a finite budget.

 

If we maintain possession better and offer a greater attacking threat to the opposition we will concede less goals as a result. If/when we then improve individuals at the back and improve our organisation throughout the team AND at the back we will in turn concede even fewer goals.

[Ally]

Hmm don't think i'll read this thread.

[Howaythelads]

Hmm don't think i'll read this thread.

 

That's a good idea, mate. 

 

I'm off, it's been more or less ruined by gejon and the bandwagon jumper. It's just so f****** childish.

[Baggio]

Chelsea's Premiership defensive record

 

With John Terry - 9 goals conceded in 18 games

 

Without John Terry - 10 goals conceded in 9 games.

 

Conclusion?

 

They need to replace Drogba with someone who can hold the ball up better.

 

Chelsea already have their general play sorted.

 

In the end you need top class players throughout a team to be good enough to challenge for the title, I don't see anybody saying that isn't the case. What is being discussed here though is the priority for improving the team with a finite budget.

 

If we maintain possession better and offer a greater attacking threat to the opposition we will concede less goals as a result. If/when we then improve individuals at the back and improve our organisation throughout the team AND at the back we will in turn concede even fewer goals.

 

But next season when everyone is fit we will have two top class strikers, what would be the point in adding another top class striker into the mix when we don't have one single top class LB or CB on our books?

 

We would be able to hold on to possession much better if we had defenders who can actually play with the ball at their feet, the difference Solano has already brought to the back four has been amazing and that is simply because he can comfortable play his way out of defence, the rest of the clowns either boot it long or pass it back to the keeper to boot it long instead, putting us straight back under pressure.

[James]

I think NE5 and HTL really do have a very legitimate point here which is being dismissed out of hand because it is them, and others have equally biased agendas on the other side of a gulf of differing opinions.

 

Of course, defenders are important, and I doubt they will deny that our defence needs improving. Fact however is that throwing money at buying decent defenders does not improve the defence. Have you seen what happens at Real Madrid every year?

 

Alternatively, look at what happens when a highly rated defender playing for a mediocre team makes a step up to a inconsistent, but offensively excellent team, and suddenly looks only half as good.

 

75% of defending is about the team, and not about the ability of the defenders/defensive midfielders. That includes tracking back, winning the ball further up the field, keeping the ball further up the field, and most importantly having more possession of the ball so the opponents have less time to cause any danger.

 

The above reason highlights why Babayaro is so important for us - we may have better defenders than him, but having him at left back over all other players currently in the squad allows us to play better.

 

In my opinion, it is our carelessness in possession which is costing us results. We are better off at the moment with Solano at right-back, and Babayaro at left back, so therefore we need to look at finding more permanent replacements for those two, but at the same time find a way to retain possession for longer at the top of the field. it may mean addressing midfield balance problems, or it may be that we do need a new striker, and I think that is what I would look for -  a decent foil for Martins/Owen who can not only chip ingoals if both were injured, but who will also not gift the ball back to the opposition 19 times out of 20 like Martins and Shola and Sib do.

 

Also, I dont get the comparisons with Chelsea - we are nothing like them. Boularouz is poor, while the rest of the team is pretty handy. Replacing that one weak link is bound to improve their team, while the NUFC team has lots of facets that need smoothing.

[Dragon55544]

I think NE5 and HTL really do have a very legitimate point here which is being dismissed out of hand because it is them, and others have equally biased agendas on the other side of a gulf of differing opinions.

 

Of course, defenders are important, and I doubt they will deny that our defence needs improving. Fact however is that throwing money at buying decent defenders does not improve the defence. Have you seen what happens at Real Madrid every year?

 

Alternatively, look at what happens when a highly rated defender playing for a mediocre team makes a step up to a inconsistent, but offensively excellent team, and suddenly looks only half as good.

 

75% of defending is about the team, and not about the ability of the defenders/defensive midfielders. That includes tracking back, winning the ball further up the field, keeping the ball further up the field, and most importantly having more possession of the ball so the opponents have less time to cause any danger.

 

The above reason highlights why Babayaro is so important for us - we may have better defenders than him, but having him at left back over all other players currently in the squad allows us to play better.

 

In my opinion, it is our carelessness in possession which is costing us results. We are better off at the moment with Solano at right-back, and Babayaro at left back, so therefore we need to look at finding more permanent replacements for those two, but at the same time find a way to retain possession for longer at the top of the field. it may mean addressing midfield balance problems, or it may be that we do need a new striker, and I think that is what I would look for -  a decent foil for Martins/Owen who can not only chip ingoals if both were injured, but who will also not gift the ball back to the opposition 19 times out of 20 like Martins and Shola and Sib do.

 

Also, I dont get the comparisons with Chelsea - we are nothing like them. Boularouz is poor, while the rest of the team is pretty handy. Replacing that one weak link is bound to improve their team, while the NUFC team has lots of facets that need smoothing.

 

Top post, I couldnt agree more.

 

[Baggio]

I think NE5 and HTL really do have a very legitimate point here which is being dismissed out of hand because it is them, and others have equally biased agendas on the other side of a gulf of differing opinions.

 

Of course, defenders are important, and I doubt they will deny that our defence needs improving. Fact however is that throwing money at buying decent defenders does not improve the defence. Have you seen what happens at Real Madrid every year?

 

Alternatively, look at what happens when a highly rated defender playing for a mediocre team makes a step up to a inconsistent, but offensively excellent team, and suddenly looks only half as good.

 

75% of defending is about the team, and not about the ability of the defenders/defensive midfielders. That includes tracking back, winning the ball further up the field, keeping the ball further up the field, and most importantly having more possession of the ball so the opponents have less time to cause any danger.

 

The above reason highlights why Babayaro is so important for us - we may have better defenders than him, but having him at left back over all other players currently in the squad allows us to play better.

 

In my opinion, it is our carelessness in possession which is costing us results. We are better off at the moment with Solano at right-back, and Babayaro at left back, so therefore we need to look at finding more permanent replacements for those two, but at the same time find a way to retain possession for longer at the top of the field. it may mean addressing midfield balance problems, or it may be that we do need a new striker, and I think that is what I would look for -  a decent foil for Martins/Owen who can not only chip ingoals if both were injured, but who will also not gift the ball back to the opposition 19 times out of 20 like Martins and Shola and Sib do.

 

Also, I dont get the comparisons with Chelsea - we are nothing like them. Boularouz is poor, while the rest of the team is pretty handy. Replacing that one weak link is bound to improve their team, while the NUFC team has lots of facets that need smoothing.

 

Lets look at Real madrid, last season they shipped goals and 7 teams finished the season with better defensive records than them, what did they do? They went out and bought a better CB that would improve their defence and now only 1 club has conceded less goals than them in the league.

 

As I've said in my previous post, our problem isn't that we don't have a striker that can hold the ball up, our problem is that we have several technically inept players in the starting 11. Carr, Bramble, Ramage, Taylor, Moore, Babayaro, Butt and Parker are all poor with a football at their feet, not one of our defenders apart from Solano has the ability to bring the ball out from the back which means we continue to aimlessly lump the ball long to the opposition, inviting pressure on ourselves over and over again.

 

Solano has made a massive difference at right back not because he is a great defender but because he is capable of bringing the ball out from the back, we need a LB and at least 1 CB with similar capabilities.

 

Neither Rooney or Saha can retain possession up front for long periods but it doesn't matter as every member of the team is capable of playing football, Ferdinand, Evra and Neville are all excellent on the ball and because of that you never see aimless balls booted forward, this is something we need to aim for.

[madras]

the "carelessness in possession" could soon be remedied up front when martins finishes his adjustment(if you cant see his improvment since he came you haven't been watching) and when we get another forward up there.......martins movement will also look better with another forward.

 

at last some are relising that defending isn't just down to the defence but runs through the team and good defending starts off as soon as we lose the ball,wherever on the pitch.

[Dinho lad]

Sir Alex Ferguson said it long time ago:Good defenders wins you titles and trophies

 

How dare you say that? You're talking to NE5 here. 

[Howaythelads]

I think NE5 and HTL really do have a very legitimate point here which is being dismissed out of hand because it is them, and others have equally biased agendas on the other side of a gulf of differing opinions.

 

Of course, defenders are important, and I doubt they will deny that our defence needs improving. Fact however is that throwing money at buying decent defenders does not improve the defence. Have you seen what happens at Real Madrid every year?

 

Alternatively, look at what happens when a highly rated defender playing for a mediocre team makes a step up to a inconsistent, but offensively excellent team, and suddenly looks only half as good.

 

75% of defending is about the team, and not about the ability of the defenders/defensive midfielders. That includes tracking back, winning the ball further up the field, keeping the ball further up the field, and most importantly having more possession of the ball so the opponents have less time to cause any danger.

 

The above reason highlights why Babayaro is so important for us - we may have better defenders than him, but having him at left back over all other players currently in the squad allows us to play better.

 

In my opinion, it is our carelessness in possession which is costing us results. We are better off at the moment with Solano at right-back, and Babayaro at left back, so therefore we need to look at finding more permanent replacements for those two, but at the same time find a way to retain possession for longer at the top of the field. it may mean addressing midfield balance problems, or it may be that we do need a new striker, and I think that is what I would look for -  a decent foil for Martins/Owen who can not only chip ingoals if both were injured, but who will also not gift the ball back to the opposition 19 times out of 20 like Martins and Shola and Sib do.

 

Also, I dont get the comparisons with Chelsea - we are nothing like them. Boularouz is poor, while the rest of the team is pretty handy. Replacing that one weak link is bound to improve their team, while the NUFC team has lots of facets that need smoothing.

 

Top post, T27. I could have highlighted all of it but picked just 3 points for differing reasons. The first bit highlighted because it's a shame certain people feel the need and can't just stick to football and debate the points properly. It's obvious who they are. The second point because it's the key to the whole thing and the third because it struck me as being a bit strange as well.

 

I agree about Solano and Babayaro as well. For some reason it's currently the fashion to think Babayaro is totally crap. Well he's not the greatest but he's nowhere near as bad as some make him out to be.

[Guest Bellers]

To be honest I really couldn't care who it is making the point. Yes, I agree it is a legitimate point, but in the context of the thread I disagree with it. We do need to retain possession much better than we currently do, but this is not the priority.

 

A new defence is the priority. The amount of goals we lose due to individual errors is shocking, yes the midfield keeping the ball would reduce the amount of pressure on the defence and therefore the chance of an individual error being made, but we are still going to constantly let silly goals if we don't plug the gaping gap in our rear guard. You can keep as much possession as you want but these individual errors are still going to cost the team points.

 

Once more if the defence bothered to distribute the ball into the midfield rather than smashing it up field, we will see more of the ball in midfield hence reducing the pressure on defence.

 

Really, it's a case of weighing up which solution will cost us less goals. Buying more forwards will help retain possession, but what happens when we do lose the ball? It's inevitable. The back line is so inconsistant they're liable to lose concentration at any moment which will send us straight back to square one and the age old problem of the defence costing us points. If we buy new defenders yes they will be under the same amount of pressure as our current defence, but they are far less likely to make the current shambolic mistakes the current defence make, therefore reducing the amount of goals we concede.

 

Yes, both buying methods will save us from conceding a certain amount of goals, but I think buying significantly better defenders will save more goals than buying forward players which can keep more possession. Eventually both type of players will need to be bought if we are to challange at the top of the leage, but currently the priority has to be pluging the gap in the back line.

 

[NUFC06]

To be honest I really couldn't care who it is making the point. Yes, I agree it is a legitimate point, but in the context of the thread I disagree with it. We do need to retain possession much better than we currently do, but this is not the priority.

 

A new defence is the priority. The amount of goals we lose due to individual errors is shocking, yes the midfield keeping the ball would reduce the amount of pressure on the defence and therefore the chance of an individual error being made, but we are still going to constantly let silly goals if we don't plug the gaping gap in our rear guard. You can keep as much possession as you want but these individual errors are still going to cost the team points.

 

Once more if the defence bothered to distribute the ball into the midfield rather than smashing it up field, we will see more of the ball in midfield hence reducing the pressure on defence.

 

Really, it's a case of weighing up which solution will cost us less goals. Buying more forwards will help retain possession, but what happens when we do lose the ball? It's inevitable. The back line is so inconsistant they're liable to lose concentration at any moment which will send us straight back to square one and the age old problem of the defence costing us points. If we buy new defenders yes they will be under the same amount of pressure as our current defence, but they are far less likely to make the current shambolic mistakes the current defence make, therefore reducing the amount of goals we concede.

 

Yes, both buying methods will save us from conceding a certain amount of goals, but I think buying significantly better defenders will save more goals than buying forward players which can keep more possession. Eventually both type of players will need to be bought if we are to challange at the top of the leage, but currently the priority has to be pluging the gap in the back line.

 

 

Thank you O0

 

Even Drogba,Henry,Kuyt losses possession so its not about this...

Its about having quality in your defence

The best defenders and the best goalkeepers are the one who makes less mistakes

We need quality there and this will improve our squad

When you see the likes of Ramage,Carr,Moore,Bramble...they are just not good enough

Martins is class player

We need something like this in the defence

[NE5]

I think NE5 and HTL really do have a very legitimate point here which is being dismissed out of hand because it is them, and others have equally biased agendas on the other side of a gulf of differing opinions.

 

Of course, defenders are important, and I doubt they will deny that our defence needs improving. Fact however is that throwing money at buying decent defenders does not improve the defence. Have you seen what happens at Real Madrid every year?

 

Alternatively, look at what happens when a highly rated defender playing for a mediocre team makes a step up to a inconsistent, but offensively excellent team, and suddenly looks only half as good.

 

75% of defending is about the team, and not about the ability of the defenders/defensive midfielders. That includes tracking back, winning the ball further up the field, keeping the ball further up the field, and most importantly having more possession of the ball so the opponents have less time to cause any danger.

 

The above reason highlights why Babayaro is so important for us - we may have better defenders than him, but having him at left back over all other players currently in the squad allows us to play better.

 

In my opinion, it is our carelessness in possession which is costing us results. We are better off at the moment with Solano at right-back, and Babayaro at left back, so therefore we need to look at finding more permanent replacements for those two, but at the same time find a way to retain possession for longer at the top of the field. it may mean addressing midfield balance problems, or it may be that we do need a new striker, and I think that is what I would look for -  a decent foil for Martins/Owen who can not only chip ingoals if both were injured, but who will also not gift the ball back to the opposition 19 times out of 20 like Martins and Shola and Sib do.

 

Also, I dont get the comparisons with Chelsea - we are nothing like them. Boularouz is poor, while the rest of the team is pretty handy. Replacing that one weak link is bound to improve their team, while the NUFC team has lots of facets that need smoothing.

 

thank you ...... well said. Shame others don't read and interpret posts simply because - as you say - it is me and HTL. The comparison with Chelsea is a joke. It is obvious to anyone who watches Newcastle that we do not have enough threat and movement as a team, and we give the ball away when we move forward due to sloppiness and lack of quality in the attacking positions.

 

I made a post that was clipped - the last bit was a comment along the lines of if we were playing Craig Bellamy [or Shearer] up front with Martins we would have more points due to keeping possession better, defending from the front and conceding less goals accordingly. This is not rocket science, and I believe it to be the case.

 

This is a tactical view taken from the point of watching how the team are performing as a team.

 

 

[NE5]

Sir Alex Ferguson said it long time ago:Good defenders wins you titles and trophies

 

How dare you say that? You're talking to NE5 here. 

 

you're miles behind as usual, MartinsKluivertRivaldoHenrydinho

 

 

[Baggio]

I'm not arguing for the sake of it, if I agreed with you I'd say so but on this subject I just can't see your point of view.

 

The comparison to what happened at Chelsea is simple and straightforward.

 

If a club like Chelsea who has possibly the best striker in the league at holding the ball up well, shifts far more goals when their best defender is replaced with an inferior one, doesn't that tell you know matter how good your striker is at holding up the ball, if your defenders are not good enough then you will continue to ship goals?

 

It's pretty obvious.

 

BTW Alan Shearer was one of the best players I've seen at holding the ball up, yet we still conceded just as many goals with him as without him, now consider how much better defensively we looked when Woodgate was in the team compared to when he was out.

 

Which one do you think made the biggest impact on how we done at the back?

 

 

[Guest alex]

Just look at Thursday tbh. Playing part-timers. Concede one with poor/nonexistant marking and then nearly concede an identical goal a bit later. And (according to Five) that was 17 games we've now gone without a clean sheet. We need defenders.

[Dinho lad]

Sir Alex Ferguson said it long time ago:Good defenders wins you titles and trophies

 

How dare you say that? You're talking to NE5 here. 

 

you're miles behind as usual, MartinsKluivertRivaldoHenrydinho

 

 

 

 

[Rich]

Can't help but feel that people are simplifying football to an unacceptable degree here and the debate, as usual, is doing nowt else but circles.

 

Can we not simply agree that having quality defenders AND quality strikers (as well as quality everywhere else on the pitch, and in the dugout, and in the board-room) would equate to a better performance from the club/team? It's absolutely basic logic here... are we really trying to decide whether having good defenders or good strikers equals less goals conceded?

 

How could we ever prove that beyond reasonable doubt?

 

There are arguments to be made on both sides of the coin with this - and I must agree that the Chelsea example can be used here - Chelsea are a far worse team when Terry is missing, as they are when Drogba is missing, when they are BOTH missing they look nothing like the team that they do normally. Of course it helps if you have top-class defenders in the team and of course it helps if you have forwards who are elementary at relieving pressure from the defence.

 

It all depends on how you view the game and what type of a stance you have on how football should be played. There is no definitive method here, as proven by the numerous managers/coaches/teams who have tried an infinite number of set-ups and players with varying degrees of success.

 

Some teams will emphasise defence and be successful, others will concentrate on attacking and scoring more than the opponent. At the current time with NUFC as far as I see NEITHER our defence or our attack is performing to a completely acceptable level... but what are we aiming for here? Perfection?

 

The debate is so mightily complex that I can't, quite frankly, be arsed to delve into all the different levels of it - but there are other things to consider here than quite simply buying defenders or buying strikers, things like:

 

¤ Having a settled pair of centrebacks that don't change with every match, this would arguably greatly improve our defensive ability (even if it was just Taylor and Onyewu). Defending is drill, etc. It's very hard to defend properly as individuals, which is basically what we've been doing for the past seasons. Other teams enjoy CB pairings that are together in almost every game (think Henchoz and Hyypia from a few years back, Campbell and Toure at their peak with Arsenal, etc.) Who have we really had that have played THIS many games together?

 

¤ Having fullbacks who don't change with every match, much the same as the CB issue.

 

Some of the best defenders in the world haven't exactly been great footballers and some of the greatest strikers in the world haven't been the best at holding up the football, these two factors are not the be-all-and-end-all of why we concede goals.

 

I've waffled so much I haven't even been able to get into stuff like: who the opposition is, whether a team is at home or away, whether a team has injuries, etc. For people to make blanket statements like "Chelsea concede more when Terry is missing" or "Chelsea score less when Drogba is injured" takes nothing into account of the circumstances in which games are played.

 

There are so many contributing factors to shipping goals that you simply cannot debate it at such a simplistic level and achieve any joy or any agreement.

 

Basically, instead of all of that above I should have simply said: this debate is pure wank.

[Rich]

Chelsea's Premiership defensive record

 

With John Terry - 9 goals conceded in 18 games

 

Without John Terry - 10 goals conceded in 9 games.

 

Conclusion?

 

They need to replace Drogba with someone who can hold the ball up better.

 

Chelsea already have their general play sorted.

 

In the end you need top class players throughout a team to be good enough to challenge for the title, I don't see anybody saying that isn't the case. What is being discussed here though is the priority for improving the team with a finite budget.

 

If we maintain possession better and offer a greater attacking threat to the opposition we will concede less goals as a result. If/when we then improve individuals at the back and improve our organisation throughout the team AND at the back we will in turn concede even fewer goals.

 

This is what I mean, I'm not sure how anyone can argue with this particular post?

[Howaythelads]

Can't help but feel that people are simplifying football to an unacceptable degree here and the debate, as usual, is doing nowt else but circles.

 

Can we not simply agree that having quality defenders AND quality strikers .....<snipped>

 

That's what some of us are saying, tbh, although I'm saying we also need a quality central midfielder to replace Parker. Some don't agree because as well as an injury prone Owen, we have Sibierski, Ameobi and Dyer, you know.

[Howaythelads]

Chelsea's Premiership defensive record

 

With John Terry - 9 goals conceded in 18 games

 

Without John Terry - 10 goals conceded in 9 games.

 

Conclusion?

 

They need to replace Drogba with someone who can hold the ball up better.

 

Chelsea already have their general play sorted.

 

In the end you need top class players throughout a team to be good enough to challenge for the title, I don't see anybody saying that isn't the case. What is being discussed here though is the priority for improving the team with a finite budget.

 

If we maintain possession better and offer a greater attacking threat to the opposition we will concede less goals as a result. If/when we then improve individuals at the back and improve our organisation throughout the team AND at the back we will in turn concede even fewer goals.

 

This is what I mean, I'm not sure how anyone can argue with this particular post?

 

Cheers. I think you're probably the only person who read it properly.

[NE5]

Can't help but feel that people are simplifying football to an unacceptable degree here and the debate, as usual, is doing nowt else but circles.

 

Can we not simply agree that having quality defenders AND quality strikers (as well as quality everywhere else on the pitch, and in the dugout, and in the board-room) would equate to a better performance from the club/team? It's absolutely basic logic here... are we really trying to decide whether having good defenders or good strikers equals less goals conceded?

 

How could we ever prove that beyond reasonable doubt?

 

There are arguments to be made on both sides of the coin with this - and I must agree that the Chelsea example can be used here - Chelsea are a far worse team when Terry is missing, as they are when Drogba is missing, when they are BOTH missing they look nothing like the team that they do normally. Of course it helps if you have top-class defenders in the team and of course it helps if you have forwards who are elementary at relieving pressure from the defence.

 

It all depends on how you view the game and what type of a stance you have on how football should be played. There is no definitive method here, as proven by the numerous managers/coaches/teams who have tried an infinite number of set-ups and players with varying degrees of success.

 

Some teams will emphasise defence and be successful, others will concentrate on attacking and scoring more than the opponent. At the current time with NUFC as far as I see NEITHER our defence or our attack is performing to a completely acceptable level... but what are we aiming for here? Perfection?

 

The debate is so mightily complex that I can't, quite frankly, be arsed to delve into all the different levels of it - but there are other things to consider here than quite simply buying defenders or buying strikers, things like:

 

¤ Having a settled pair of centrebacks that don't change with every match, this would arguably greatly improve our defensive ability (even if it was just Taylor and Onyewu). Defending is drill, etc. It's very hard to defend properly as individuals, which is basically what we've been doing for the past seasons. Other teams enjoy CB pairings that are together in almost every game (think Henchoz and Hyypia from a few years back, Campbell and Toure at their peak with Arsenal, etc.) Who have we really had that have played THIS many games together?

 

¤ Having fullbacks who don't change with every match, much the same as the CB issue.

 

Some of the best defenders in the world haven't exactly been great footballers and some of the greatest strikers in the world haven't been the best at holding up the football, these two factors are not the be-all-and-end-all of why we concede goals.

 

I've waffled so much I haven't even been able to get into stuff like: who the opposition is, whether a team is at home or away, whether a team has injuries, etc. For people to make blanket statements like "Chelsea concede more when Terry is missing" or "Chelsea score less when Drogba is injured" takes nothing into account of the circumstances in which games are played.

 

There are so many contributing factors to shipping goals that you simply cannot debate it at such a simplistic level and achieve any joy or any agreement.

 

Basically, instead of all of that above I should have simply said: this debate is pure wank.

 

An excellent phrase. Defending is drill, attacking is flair.

 

And so correct.

 

Defenders can be coached, to a degree, the main qualities needed being committment, communication, and courage. And playing together, to get an understanding. One thing I forgot to mention, is that I think if we had been able to play a pair of centre backs - and a whole back four - together for a reasonable time, we would have a better defensive record. However, watching Newcastle play, the quality of our passing when we are moving forward is too often sloppy and results in us being put back under pressure immediately. They are trying to pass and move - which is why I think the right things are being done and their is hope, but the quality is not enough. It has happened far too often. Retaining possession of the ball enables the defenders to move forward together and keep their shape and discipline.

 

Its not a case of do you build from the back or the front, its about looking at what you need.

 

 

[Baggio]

Can't help but feel that people are simplifying football to an unacceptable degree here and the debate, as usual, is doing nowt else but circles.

 

Can we not simply agree that having quality defenders AND quality strikers (as well as quality everywhere else on the pitch, and in the dugout, and in the board-room) would equate to a better performance from the club/team? It's absolutely basic logic here... are we really trying to decide whether having good defenders or good strikers equals less goals conceded?

 

How could we ever prove that beyond reasonable doubt?

 

There are arguments to be made on both sides of the coin with this - and I must agree that the Chelsea example can be used here - Chelsea are a far worse team when Terry is missing, as they are when Drogba is missing, when they are BOTH missing they look nothing like the team that they do normally. Of course it helps if you have top-class defenders in the team and of course it helps if you have forwards who are elementary at relieving pressure from the defence.

 

It all depends on how you view the game and what type of a stance you have on how football should be played. There is no definitive method here, as proven by the numerous managers/coaches/teams who have tried an infinite number of set-ups and players with varying degrees of success.

 

Some teams will emphasise defence and be successful, others will concentrate on attacking and scoring more than the opponent. At the current time with NUFC as far as I see NEITHER our defence or our attack is performing to a completely acceptable level... but what are we aiming for here? Perfection?

 

The debate is so mightily complex that I can't, quite frankly, be arsed to delve into all the different levels of it - but there are other things to consider here than quite simply buying defenders or buying strikers, things like:

 

¤ Having a settled pair of centrebacks that don't change with every match, this would arguably greatly improve our defensive ability (even if it was just Taylor and Onyewu). Defending is drill, etc. It's very hard to defend properly as individuals, which is basically what we've been doing for the past seasons. Other teams enjoy CB pairings that are together in almost every game (think Henchoz and Hyypia from a few years back, Campbell and Toure at their peak with Arsenal, etc.) Who have we really had that have played THIS many games together?

 

¤ Having fullbacks who don't change with every match, much the same as the CB issue.

 

Some of the best defenders in the world haven't exactly been great footballers and some of the greatest strikers in the world haven't been the best at holding up the football, these two factors are not the be-all-and-end-all of why we concede goals.

 

I've waffled so much I haven't even been able to get into stuff like: who the opposition is, whether a team is at home or away, whether a team has injuries, etc. For people to make blanket statements like "Chelsea concede more when Terry is missing" or "Chelsea score less when Drogba is injured" takes nothing into account of the circumstances in which games are played.

 

There are so many contributing factors to shipping goals that you simply cannot debate it at such a simplistic level and achieve any joy or any agreement.

 

Basically, instead of all of that above I should have simply said: this debate is pure w***.

 

An excellent phrase. Defending is drill, attacking is flair.

 

And so correct.

 

Defenders can be coached, to a degree, the main qualities needed being committment, communication, and courage. And playing together, to get an understanding. One thing I forgot to mention, is that I think if we had been able to play a pair of centre backs - and a whole back four - together for a reasonable time, we would have a better defensive record. However, watching Newcastle play, the quality of our passing when we are moving forward is too often sloppy and results in us being put back under pressure immediately. They are trying to pass and move - which is why I think the right things are being done and their is hope, but the quality is not enough. It has happened far too often. Retaining possession of the ball enables the defenders to move forward together and keep their shape and discipline.

 

Its not a case of do you build from the back or the front, its about looking at what you need.

 

 

 

 

Good post.

 

Do you agree with my post about the defenders and certain midfielders we have not being technically good enough? That for me is the big problem.

 

As a team I think we defend quite well, the wingers get back and help the fullbacks, the CM's drop back to help the CB's and Martins, Dyer and Sib seem to do a lot of closing down, however I think Glen Roeder said it best when he said "Newcastle don't concede good goals" which was spot on, a lot of goals we concede are down to individual errors and it's the reason our back line is a laughing stock, most of the errors are down to players not being comfortable on the ball and panicking under pressure.

 

You look at the individuals I mentioned earlier and none of them look comfortable on the ball, if you look at how Wenger has Arsenal set up you'll see that nearly all of his players are comfortable passing the ball around and being in possession, even players I don't particularly rate like Flamini are good on the ball.

 

This for me is something we should aim for, it doesn't have to be expensive either, I think a CB who can bring the ball out from the back would be a huge boost to us retaining possession and would cut out the need for the aimless long balls we continue to play from the back, which continue to put us under more pressure.

 

 

[Guest JamesD]

craig moore...

[Howaythelads]

craig moore...

 

Decent player though not top class. Good organiser.