Kieron Dyer

[Rich]

Bolton didn't do too badly under Allardyce, and they were miles fucking slower than us, barring Anelka (last season) and Diouf before that.

 

Pace is a useful attribute in the right areas (either side of Viduka, predominantly, and at full-back if we're being greedy) but it's not the be-all and end-all.

 

People just get tetchy when everything seems to be going well, if we lose to Villa they'll have something tangible to "worry" about again.

[Baggio]

Okay I'll bite, nothing better to do:

 

You're forgetting/purposefully omitting that the player himself wanted to go, though, and we still got big money for him.

 

So there was nothing we could have done anyway, except get the best price possible.

 

Quite a major oversight, if you ask me, if it was actually unintentional. :parky:

 

Actually lad I didn't mention anything about the reason for him leaving the club, simply pointing out how hypocritical some people seem over the whole thing (not you, I mean in general) and that he's been a big part of the success the club has had in recent years.

 

I'm not looking for a bite out of anyone, perhaps I should stick with the stock reply of the majority of the idiots on here and wish he breaks his legs etc, if it'll keep you happy.

 

You know that's not what I meant at all.

 

And, as proven, there are idiots who have hated Dyer whether he's been good or bad, injured or fit, scoring or not-scoring, that's never been my game and it never will be. It's also not what I was getting at. I don't see people like that as being hypocrites, they've stuck to their bong-eyed line from day one. Personally I think we might miss him on the park for the reasons you mention, but he had to go now, so there's no point crying over spilt milk.

 

But we've replaced a player who didn't want to be here with a player who does, the quality difference between them as players is minimal if you ask me and is far less clear-cut than you're making it out to be, but the attitude thing could play a major role in determining how well they do for their respective clubs. Dyer was a spent force here, but might recapture something like his best form at West Ham and good luck to the lad, but surely Smith is a step in the right direction for a number of other reasons, not just his playing ability?

 

You're looking at things as very black and white here, no pun intended, more goes into how well players do at club's than your opinion on who the better one is. Smith isn't the better of the two, in your opinion, but you're ignoring the fact that he might be exactly what Allardyce wants in his team for how he wants us to play. I don't see a role for Dyer in the 4-3-3/4-5-1 thing, personally, especially a Dyer who didn't want to be here a minute longer.

 

My original point was that a lot of people saw KD as the last piece of the past that needed to go and now he's gone I'd assume it will do nothing but increase the feelgood factor around the club, be it right or wrong. Like I said, I can appreciate both sides of the argument, but at the end of the day more people wanted him gone than wanted him to stay so we've got happier fans and a replacement who will hopefully be given a chance to show what he can do.

 

Smith is Dyer's replacement, if you ask me. You're right on that.

 

I would say Dyer could play either side of Viduka in a 4-3-3 or as the attacking midfielder, where can Smith play? You could say he'd be a good option as a midfielder as he gets stuck in and helps defensively but we're looking to pick up a far better midfielder in Faye for £2 million, the majority of people who are happy with Smith are the same people who raved about Parker because he got stuck in and look how that turned out.

 

As I've said, if we had replaced Dyer with a better player then I'd have no problem with that, to replace him with an inferior player who's main attribute is that he gets stuck in isn't something I'll be shouting from the rooftops about.

[Baggio]

Bolton didn't do too badly under Allardyce, and they were miles f****** slower than us, barring Anelka (last season) and Diouf before that.

 

Pace is a useful attribute in the right areas (either side of Viduka, predominantly, and at full-back if we're being greedy) but it's not the be-all and end-all.

 

People just get tetchy when everything seems to be going well, if we lose to Villa they'll have something tangible to "worry" about again.

 

I'm hoping we won't be playing the same long ball shite that Bolton did tbh, they also had better midfielders than Smith in Campo and Speed.

 

Seriously then mate where does Smith fit in as far as a 4-3-3 formation goes? Would he be in you starting 11?

[ChezGiven]

Okay I'll bite, nothing better to do:

 

You're forgetting/purposefully omitting that the player himself wanted to go, though, and we still got big money for him.

 

So there was nothing we could have done anyway, except get the best price possible.

 

Quite a major oversight, if you ask me, if it was actually unintentional. :parky:

 

Actually lad I didn't mention anything about the reason for him leaving the club, simply pointing out how hypocritical some people seem over the whole thing (not you, I mean in general) and that he's been a big part of the success the club has had in recent years.

 

I'm not looking for a bite out of anyone, perhaps I should stick with the stock reply of the majority of the idiots on here and wish he breaks his legs etc, if it'll keep you happy.

 

You know that's not what I meant at all.

 

And, as proven, there are idiots who have hated Dyer whether he's been good or bad, injured or fit, scoring or not-scoring, that's never been my game and it never will be. It's also not what I was getting at. I don't see people like that as being hypocrites, they've stuck to their bong-eyed line from day one. Personally I think we might miss him on the park for the reasons you mention, but he had to go now, so there's no point crying over spilt milk.

 

But we've replaced a player who didn't want to be here with a player who does, the quality difference between them as players is minimal if you ask me and is far less clear-cut than you're making it out to be, but the attitude thing could play a major role in determining how well they do for their respective clubs. Dyer was a spent force here, but might recapture something like his best form at West Ham and good luck to the lad, but surely Smith is a step in the right direction for a number of other reasons, not just his playing ability?

 

You're looking at things as very black and white here, no pun intended, more goes into how well players do at club's than your opinion on who the better one is. Smith isn't the better of the two, in your opinion, but you're ignoring the fact that he might be exactly what Allardyce wants in his team for how he wants us to play. I don't see a role for Dyer in the 4-3-3/4-5-1 thing, personally, especially a Dyer who didn't want to be here a minute longer.

 

My original point was that a lot of people saw KD as the last piece of the past that needed to go and now he's gone I'd assume it will do nothing but increase the feelgood factor around the club, be it right or wrong. Like I said, I can appreciate both sides of the argument, but at the end of the day more people wanted him gone than wanted him to stay so we've got happier fans and a replacement who will hopefully be given a chance to show what he can do.

 

Smith is Dyer's replacement, if you ask me. You're right on that.

 

I would say Dyer could play either side of Viduka in a 4-3-3 or as the attacking midfielder, where can Smith play? You could say he'd be a good option as a midfielder as he gets stuck in and helps defensively but we're looking to pick up a far better midfielder in Faye for £2 million, the majority of people who are happy with Smith are the same people who raved about Parker because he got stuck in and look how that turned out.

 

As I've said, if we had replaced Dyer with a better player then I'd have no problem with that, to replace him with an inferior player who's main attribute is that he gets stuck in isn't something I'll be shouting from the rooftops about.

 

Why does he have to be a replacement for Dyer's playing ability. He only implied in the quote that if we lost a player then he needs replacing in the squad becuase we didnt/dont have a big squad so people leaving need replacing. Nowhere has Big Sam said that Smith will play the role that Dyer was going to. The replacement quote was about squad size. He got smith becasue he was available, not because he thought 'oooh he's just like Kieron lets snap him up'. 

 

Smith is reasonably flexible, can play across the midfield and do a job in attack. He's no right-back i'll give you that.

[Rich]

Baggio

 

You're still glossing over the fact that Dyer wanted to leave, man, which is a major aspect of this debate. Of course Dyer *could* play either side of Viduka, or in the middle three, but how is it relevant when he was itching to move, the fans had turned against him, his head "wasn't right" and he wasn't being selected in squads?

 

If we're simply arguing about the quality of his replacement here, then fair enough.

 

I personally think you're doing Smith a disservice and over-hyping Dyer out of proportion, when in reality he was excellent for about 3-5 games a season and invisible for a fair few others, when he was fit, of course. The Manchester United fans I know (not a massive number, admittedly) aren't happy that he's gone, especially now Ronaldo and Rooney are missing for a bit and Saha is injured, they were gutted even before that.

 

Smith's attitude and work-rate does get the most press, but he's a canny player in his own right apart from that and I'm hoping he proves it this season and proves people like yourself completely wrong. I think the complete opposite to you, that he's a better/more consistent performer than Dyer (maybe he won't be unplayable on those rare occasions like Dyer was) but I think he'll shock a few people with how good he is on the ball/with how much he offers to our general play

 

Allardyce obviously rates him massively and the lad can - and will - play anywhere in the front six to an acceptable degree, he's more versatile than Dyer, less injury prone and he wants to play for this football club. Massive advantages in their own right. He's slower, aye, and he's scored less goals than Dyer recently, but the quality gap is minimal at best, either way.

[ChezGiven]

Bolton didn't do too badly under Allardyce, and they were miles f****** slower than us, barring Anelka (last season) and Diouf before that.

 

Pace is a useful attribute in the right areas (either side of Viduka, predominantly, and at full-back if we're being greedy) but it's not the be-all and end-all.

 

People just get tetchy when everything seems to be going well, if we lose to Villa they'll have something tangible to "worry" about again.

 

I'm hoping we won't be playing the same long ball shite that Bolton did tbh, they also had better midfielders than Smith in Campo and Speed.

 

Seriously then mate where does Smith fit in as far as a 4-3-3 formation goes? Would he be in you starting 11?

 

Seen the analysis in the Guardian today about 'average length of pass' comparing last season to last week? Average length of pass for us last season was 12.4m, the av lop last week at Bolton was 17.9m.

[Rich]

Bolton didn't do too badly under Allardyce, and they were miles f****** slower than us, barring Anelka (last season) and Diouf before that.

 

Pace is a useful attribute in the right areas (either side of Viduka, predominantly, and at full-back if we're being greedy) but it's not the be-all and end-all.

 

People just get tetchy when everything seems to be going well, if we lose to Villa they'll have something tangible to "worry" about again.

 

I'm hoping we won't be playing the same long ball shite that Bolton did tbh, they also had better midfielders than Smith in Campo and Speed.

 

Seriously then mate where does Smith fit in as far as a 4-3-3 formation goes? Would he be in you starting 11?

 

I don't pick the team, Allardyce does, and I'm assuming Smith will be one of his first names on the team-sheet, aye, even when we have everyone fit. More-so than Dyer would have been.

 

Personally I'm not sure if I would have picked Dyer OR Smith myself, given a full-strength squad and either the 4-4-2/4-3-3 formation.

 

Milner (Dyer would be pushing for this role), Geremi, Barton, N'Zogbia/Emre, Viduka, Owen would probably be my front-six in a 4-4-2.

 

Geremi, Barton, Emre (Smith would be pushing for this role), Owen, Martins, Viduka would probably be my front-six in a 4-3-3.

 

No room for Dyer, or his replacement Smith, which sounds about right to me. It's very like-for-like in my eyes ability-wise, the attitude is the major thing and will see Smith being a success here, IMO.

[Shak]

Bolton didn't do too badly under Allardyce, and they were miles f****** slower than us, barring Anelka (last season) and Diouf before that.

 

Pace is a useful attribute in the right areas (either side of Viduka, predominantly, and at full-back if we're being greedy) but it's not the be-all and end-all.

 

People just get tetchy when everything seems to be going well, if we lose to Villa they'll have something tangible to "worry" about again.

 

I'm hoping we won't be playing the same long ball s**** that Bolton did tbh, they also had better midfielders than Smith in Campo and Speed.

 

Seriously then mate where does Smith fit in as far as a 4-3-3 formation goes? Would he be in you starting 11?

 

One of the 3 CM spots, could play any of the roles to a good standard.

 

Wouldn't be in my first 11 if everyone was fit, but then neither would Dyer. I reckon you're looking at this  too simplistically, Smith isn't a like-for-like replacement for Dyer , don't think anyone said he was. But, like Dyer, he'll be able to play a few places when called upon. He'll be a damn sight more consistent than Dyer as well.

 

I do think we'll add another wide player, someone with pace (which is why I'd be happy with Diouf) but even then it's not a pressing concern.  We have Milner, Martins, Duff, N'Zogbia who I believe will be effective there, possibly Owen as well.

[Ronaldo]

Baggio

 

You're still glossing over the fact that Dyer wanted to leave, man, which is a major aspect of this debate. Of course Dyer *could* play either side of Viduka, or in the middle three, but how is it relevant when he was itching to move, the fans had turned against him, his head "wasn't right" and he wasn't being selected in squads?

 

If we're simply arguing about the quality of his replacement here, then fair enough.

 

I personally think you're doing Smith a disservice and over-hyping Dyer out of proportion, when in reality he was excellent for about 3-5 games a season and invisible for a fair few others, when he was fit, of course. The Manchester United fans I know (not a massive number, admittedly) aren't happy that he's gone, especially now Ronaldo and Rooney are missing for a bit and Saha is injured, they were gutted even before that.

 

Smith's attitude and work-rate does get the most press, but he's a canny player in his own right apart from that and I'm hoping he proves it this season and proves people like yourself completely wrong. I think the complete opposite to you, that he's a better/more consistent performer than Dyer (maybe he won't be unplayable on those rare occasions like Dyer was) but I think he'll shock a few people with how good he is on the ball/with how much he offers to our general play

 

Allardyce obviously rates him massively and the lad can - and will - play anywhere in the front six to an acceptable degree, he's more versatile than Dyer, less injury prone and he wants to play for this football club. Massive advantages in their own right. He's slower, aye, and he's scored less goals than Dyer recently, but the quality gap is minimal at best, either way.

 

indeed

 

let's not forget that Smith is 2 years younger and is certainly more robust to age than the little twat

[Rich]

Also, I can live with so-called/stereotyped "long ball shite" if it results in more 3-1 away wins and a 6th place finish.

[ChezGiven]

Also, I can live with so-called/stereotyped "long ball shite" if it results in more 3-1 away wins and a 6th place finish.

 

Its not called long-ball its called 'direct' when he is your own manager. 

[Shak]

I'd rather efffective long balls than a string of short completed passes that get us nowhere and are ultimately followed by a panicked hoof forward.

[Rich]

Also, I can live with so-called/stereotyped "long ball shite" if it results in more 3-1 away wins and a 6th place finish.

 

Its not called long-ball its called 'direct' when he is your own manager. 

 

Bolton have played far better football than we have for the last 3 years like, unless I've been watching the wrong teams during that spell.

 

We played some of the most "direct" football I've seen with Ferdinand and/or Shearer up front under Keegan and Robson, I don't remember too many people complaining then.

[Rich]

I'd rather efffective long balls than a string of short completed passes that get us nowhere and are ultimately followed by a panicked hoof forward.

 

Exactly, since Robson we've been jack of all trades and master of none, which will never get you anywhere.

[Baggio]

Baggio

 

You're still glossing over the fact that Dyer wanted to leave, man, which is a major aspect of this debate. Of course Dyer *could* play either side of Viduka, or in the middle three, but how is it relevant when he was itching to move, the fans had turned against him, his head "wasn't right" and he wasn't being selected in squads?

 

If we're simply arguing about the quality of his replacement here, then fair enough.

 

I personally think you're doing Smith a disservice and over-hyping Dyer out of proportion, when in reality he was excellent for about 3-5 games a season and invisible for a fair few others, when he was fit, of course. The Manchester United fans I know (not a massive number, admittedly) aren't happy that he's gone, especially now Ronaldo and Rooney are missing for a bit and Saha is injured, they were gutted even before that.

 

Smith's attitude and work-rate does get the most press, but he's a canny player in his own right apart from that and I'm hoping he proves it this season and proves people like yourself completely wrong. I think the complete opposite to you, that he's a better/more consistent performer than Dyer (maybe he won't be unplayable on those rare occasions like Dyer was) but I think he'll shock a few people with how good he is on the ball/with how much he offers to our general play

 

Allardyce obviously rates him massively and the lad can - and will - play anywhere in the front six to an acceptable degree, he's more versatile than Dyer, less injury prone and he wants to play for this football club. Massive advantages in their own right. He's slower, aye, and he's scored less goals than Dyer recently, but the quality gap is minimal at best, either way.

 

Have you read anything I've said?

 

I've said Dyer wanted to leave however we've replaced him with IMO an inferior player, Barton, Geremi, Butt and Emre are all better midfielders than him and Martins, Viduka and Owen are better up top, which means he's a substitute at best, I'd say Dyer would be on the bench too but he's the perfect player for me to have on the bench, he's someone that can come on and cover every position in the attacking 3rd of the pitch, Smith can too but he's not the sort of player who will take advantage of 'tired legs' in the way that Dyer would, him being the perfect sub is the reason he's always on the bench for England.

 

As for your 3-5 good games a season comment, I find that complete shite if I'm honest with you, he's a player that's performed under a good manager but who's average under a shit one, you could say the same about the majority of players but with Allardyce's main attribute supposed to be getting the best out of players then I think it's a shame he's going (Yes, I do realise he wants to go)

 

Tbh I don't really care what Man Utd fans think of him leaving, Chelsea fans were gutted when Parker left as were Portsmouth fan when Faye came here, it really does mean nothing as some fans have a soft spot for grafters.

[Baggio]

I'd rather efffective long balls than a string of short completed passes that get us nowhere and are ultimately followed by a panicked hoof forward.

 

That's sort of stating the obvious, mate.

[Guest Pie]

Also, I can live with so-called/stereotyped "long ball s****" if it results in more 3-1 away wins and a 6th place finish.

 

Its not called long-ball its called 'direct' when he is your own manager. 

 

Bolton have played far better football than we have for the last 3 years like, unless I've been watching the wrong teams during that spell.

 

We played some of the most "direct" football I've seen with Ferdinand and/or Shearer up front under Keegan and Robson, I don't remember too many people complaining then.

Did we shite.

[Guest alex]

We actually did play pretty direct football in the first half of the 96/97 season when Ferdinand and Shearer played upfront together. There was often a big gap between attack and midfield. Very effective, but direct. There were some exceptions to that but it was a lot more direct than we had seen before under KK's teams.

[Guest Pie]

We actually did play pretty direct football in the first half of the 96/97 season when Ferdinand and Shearer played upfront together. There was often a big gap between attack and midfield. Very effective, but direct. There were some exceptions to that but it was a lot more direct than we had seen before under KK's teams.

We played some direct football Alex but its stretching it to say its some of the most direct seen. Maybe he wasnt about when Reilly, Cunningham, Pingel or Rob McDonald were here. We still used Rob Lee, Ginola and Beardsley constructively rather than pumping it over their heads. It was direct by KK standards but miles away from the Bolton sides Sam put together.

[Rich]

Baggio

 

"Have you read anything I've said?"

 

Right then, *woop woop*, hypocrisy alert:

 

1) I said "excellent" for 3-5 games a season and invisible for a fair few as well, nothing about having 3-5 "good" games.

 

2) I thought this might have shown you I had actually read your post: "If we're simply arguing about the quality of his replacement here, then fair enough." Leading me into discussing my thoughts on what you call an "inferior" replacement - did you miss them 3 paragraphs where I was trying to have a debate with you by addressing your concerns?

 

3) I haven't seen you acknowledge that Dyer wanted to leave in any of your posts in this thread today... have you written it in white writing? Apologies if you're talking about a post from another day/in another thread, I don't read everything posted.

 

4) However, I'm sure I do recall a post from you commenting on Bolton's fans' reactions to Faye's departure as well, odd from someone who doesn't pay attention to what opposition fans think of a player leaving.

 

You've now been broken down to admitting that both Smith and Dyer would be substitutes, but Dyer would be a better option from the bench. Bit of a come-down, if you ask me, and a lot nearer the truth of the matter at hand. Not a great difference between the players at all, except Dyer might be a better option from the bench because of his pace, which has been sort of my point all along.

[Guest alex]

We actually did play pretty direct football in the first half of the 96/97 season when Ferdinand and Shearer played upfront together. There was often a big gap between attack and midfield. Very effective, but direct. There were some exceptions to that but it was a lot more direct than we had seen before under KK's teams.

We played some direct football Alex but its stretching it to say its some of the most direct seen. Maybe he wasnt about when Reilly, Cunningham, Pingel or Rob McDonald were here. We still used Rob Lee, Ginola and Beardsley constructively rather than pumping it over their heads. It was direct by KK standards but miles away from the Bolton sides Sam put together.

I agree, I was taking the middle ground really.

[Rich]

We actually did play pretty direct football in the first half of the 96/97 season when Ferdinand and Shearer played upfront together. There was often a big gap between attack and midfield. Very effective, but direct. There were some exceptions to that but it was a lot more direct than we had seen before under KK's teams.

 

This is what I was getting at under Keegan, sorry if the wording was confusing. From what I've seen on videos since, a lot of our goals come from having the power of Ferdinand and Shearer up front.

 

Even before then we used Ferdinand as a target man and weren't afraid to knock balls up for him to contest.

 

My point was back then we were masters of an "attractive" way of playing that style of football, which was actually brilliant to watch.

 

It happened to a lesser degree under Robson when Shearer was aging and we had Bellamy up beside him, the big-man/little-man combination was the focal point of what was, essentially, a direct gameplan with some flair sprinkled in thanks to Nobby and Robert.

[Rich]

We actually did play pretty direct football in the first half of the 96/97 season when Ferdinand and Shearer played upfront together. There was often a big gap between attack and midfield. Very effective, but direct. There were some exceptions to that but it was a lot more direct than we had seen before under KK's teams.

We played some direct football Alex but its stretching it to say its some of the most direct seen. Maybe he wasnt about when Reilly, Cunningham, Pingel or Rob McDonald were here. We still used Rob Lee, Ginola and Beardsley constructively rather than pumping it over their heads. It was direct by KK standards but miles away from the Bolton sides Sam put together.

I agree, I was taking the middle ground really.

 

Some of the most direct I've personally seen from a Newcastle side, Pie, not "ever seen". I'm not the oldest.

 

Direct isn't necessarily bad, is it? Especially when it's done well.

 

And direct certainly doesn't equate to "long ball".

[ChezGiven]

Dyer was shit in the air and couldnt tackle.

[McCormick]

feel like a broken record. i quite agree with baggio (i think it is) that when we "replaced" dyer we didnt bring in someone who shares the same strengths ie. not a like for like trade. we lost a player with burning pace, good passing and with a calm finisher... yes he gets paid double of what he deserves. yes he doesnt put the effort in. yes hes a generally unlikeable person.. but its obvious that him living leaves a void in our midfield. right now we must have the slowest grittiest midfield in the league, where are the "flashy skills" players, the ones who can change the game in an instant?