Jamal Lewis to Liverpool

[hertfordyellow 460]

1 minute ago, seanthecanary said:

I think the fact that both Crystal Palace and now Liverpool have tabled bids for him suggests he entitled to think about a move.  Byram only had the shirt because Lewis was injured as well, it's unclear if he as a right footed player would have been chosen at left back otherwise.  If he is here next season, then of course he still needs to prove himself though.

No Lewis had recovered but Byram had done well enough to be preferred against Liverpool and the fixtures leading up to it. My point is, it is made out that staying here is holding him back, I'm saying he hasn't made himself the automatic choice in this team yet so he is most definitely NOT being held back.

[Branston Pickle 3,631]

Byram was playing at l/b when Lewis was fully fit.  That’s a fact.

[seanthecanary 168]

2 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Byram was playing at l/b when Lewis was fully fit.  That’s a fact.

It is a fact, I said though that he only got the chance to play left back when Lewis was injured.  We all know that Farke is not overly keen on bringing players back in when recovered if the replacements have performed well enough.  Hanley started the Championship winning season as a preferred CB, got injured and then slipped down to probably fourth choice by the end.  Lietner was another who got injured and despite playing really well in the first half of the season struggled to get his place back.  I'm not saying Byram didn't warrant keeping his place in the team, he looks a bargain signing to me, I'm saying is it likely he would have displaced Lewis had he himself not got injured?

[hertfordyellow 460]

6 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Byram was playing at l/b when Lewis was fully fit.  That’s a fact.

Yep with Lewis on the bench.
https://www.canaries.co.uk/first-team-squad/Fixtures/first-team/201920/february/newcastle-united-vs-norwich-city-on-01-feb-20/#report
This was the game before his injury.

[seanthecanary 168]

11 minutes ago, hertfordyellow said:

No Lewis had recovered but Byram had done well enough to be preferred against Liverpool and the fixtures leading up to it. My point is, it is made out that staying here is holding him back, I'm saying he hasn't made himself the automatic choice in this team yet so he is most definitely NOT being held back.

Who said we are holding him back?  It's not like when the Crystal Palace or Liverpool bids were rejected that he put his parts on and handed in a transfer request

[hertfordyellow 460]

Just now, seanthecanary said:

It is a fact, I said though that he only got the chance to play left back when Lewis was injured.  We all know that Farke is not overly keen on bringing players back in when recovered if the replacements have performed well enough.  Hanley started the Championship winning season as a preferred CB, got injured and then slipped down to probably fourth choice by the end.  Lietner was another who got injured and despite playing really well in the first half of the season struggled to get his place back.  I'm not saying Byram didn't warrant keeping his place in the team, he looks a bargain signing to me, I'm saying is it likely he would have displaced Lewis had he himself not got injured?

He got his chance, took it and was then the preferred choice. Meaning he had the shirt until his injury. I'm not sure what you are arguing against TBH. 

[seanthecanary 168]

2 minutes ago, hertfordyellow said:

Yep with Lewis on the bench.
https://www.canaries.co.uk/first-team-squad/Fixtures/first-team/201920/february/newcastle-united-vs-norwich-city-on-01-feb-20/#report
This was the game before his injury.

Then I stand corrected 🙂

[hertfordyellow 460]

1 minute ago, seanthecanary said:

Who said we are holding him back?  It's not like when the Crystal Palace or Liverpool bids were rejected that he put his parts on and handed in a transfer request

The multiple posts on the thread saying we are denying him a great opportunity. There is even a separate thread based on this.

[Branston Pickle 3,631]

4 minutes ago, hertfordyellow said:

The multiple posts on the thread saying we are denying him a great opportunity. There is even a separate thread based on this.

To be fair that’s mostly Liverpool apologists. I don’t suppose most of their wonderful supporters had even heard of Lewis before they ‘bid’ for him.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

12 minutes ago, hertfordyellow said:

Yep with Lewis on the bench.
https://www.canaries.co.uk/first-team-squad/Fixtures/first-team/201920/february/newcastle-united-vs-norwich-city-on-01-feb-20/#report
This was the game before his injury.

Jamal lost his place to Byram in November for the Everton game, when Lewis picked up a knee injury - he’d been playing through pain for about a month prior to that.

Bryam performed well and kept his place in the team after that. Bryam then picked up an injury in Feb before the Wolves game and Lewis came back into the team. 

Farke doesn’t tend to drop people if they are performing well and Bryam hadn’t done anything worthy of being dropped (in Farke’s eyes). 

[hertfordyellow 460]

3 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Jamal lost his place to Byram in November for the Everton game, when Lewis picked up a knee injury - he’d been playing through pain for about a month prior to that.

Bryam performed well and kept his place in the team after that. Bryam then picked up an injury in Feb before the Wolves game and Lewis came back into the team. 

Farke doesn’t tend to drop people if they are performing well and Bryam hadn’t done anything worthy of being dropped (in Farke’s eyes). 

This is a good summary. What it tells you is his place isn't nailed down based on last season. Aarons name was one of the first on the teamsheet, its not the same for Lewis.

[seanthecanary 168]

1 hour ago, hertfordyellow said:

This is a good summary. What it tells you is his place isn't nailed down based on last season. Aarons name was one of the first on the teamsheet, its not the same for Lewis.

I agree that Aarons seems to be a nailed on. Genuine question but do you think that it's justified? Given how well Byram played, should he not be under pressure for his place? Did he perform considerably better than Lewis that ones place is up for debate and the others isn't? I ask because my perception is that Aarons looked that he was handling the Premier League better but the stats don't necessarily back that up. They are both attacking full backs, one has a single goal and the other a single assist, neither has both. Aarons has more interceptions and blocks but not to any degree that can't be explained by playing more. Lewis had more successful tackles. Is my perception wrong because like I said, Aarons did seem the more impressive?

Edited August 11, 2020 by seanthecanary

[hertfordyellow 460]

1 hour ago, seanthecanary said:

I agree that Aarons seems to be a nailed on. Genuine question but do you think that it's justified? Given how well Byram played, should he not be under pressure for his place? Did he perform considerably better than Lewis that ones place is up for debate and the others isn't? I ask because my perception is that Aarons looked that he was handling the Premier League better but the stats don't necessarily back that up. They are both attacking full backs, one has a single goal and the other a single assist, neither has both. Aarons has more interceptions and blocks but not to any degree that can't be explained by playing more. Lewis had more successful tackles. Is my perception wrong because like I said, Aarons did seem the more impressive?

That is the general perception. I think Byram looked better than both of them when defending although he did miss some great opportunities when attacking. I think the youngsters both made errors in the last 12 games but the system meant they were chasing back without too much support so its a little unfair to say they were below par.

We know Byram can play well at left back and McCallum has just been promoted with Coventry so is likely already Championship standard. Lewis will have competition if he stays thats for sure. How he deals with it will be interesting.

[nutty nigel 7,506]

6 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Jamal lost his place to Byram in November for the Everton game, when Lewis picked up a knee injury - he’d been playing through pain for about a month prior to that.

Bryam performed well and kept his place in the team after that. Bryam then picked up an injury in Feb before the Wolves game and Lewis came back into the team. 

Farke doesn’t tend to drop people if they are performing well and Bryam hadn’t done anything worthy of being dropped (in Farke’s eyes). 

Byram made a big difference defending set plays where Lewis was often targeted. 

Jamal still has plenty of time to improve that part of his game.

[seanthecanary 168]

3 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Byram made a big difference defending set plays where Lewis was often targeted. 

Jamal still has plenty of time to improve that part of his game.

Both Lewis and Aarons could do with improving that part of their game. Even if they make massive strides though, I still don't really want to see them put in positions at set plays where they are up against Craig Dawson and Virgil Van ****

[nutty nigel 7,506]

4 minutes ago, seanthecanary said:

Both Lewis and Aarons could do with improving that part of their game. Even if they make massive strides though, I still don't really want to see them put in positions at set plays where they are up against Craig Dawson and Virgil Van ****

I think Max is much stronger than Jamal and they're both younger than Byram. They will both be physically stronger as they get older.

It's the old argument about zonal marking I guess. Man to man would see us choosing who goes up against these players. Zonal I guess the attacking team can target weaker players.

@Bethnal Yellow and Green could explain why that is better than me but interestingly teams still prefer zonal.

 

[NorthCarolinaYellow 197]

Am I the only one who thought we looked fairly considerably stronger in defense with Byram starting at LB? Right-footed or not, if healthy he is my first choice LB and not Lewis.

[seanthecanary 168]

9 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I think Max is much stronger than Jamal and they're both younger than Byram. They will both be physically stronger as they get older.

It's the old argument about zonal marking I guess. Man to man would see us choosing who goes up against these players. Zonal I guess the attacking team can target weaker players.

@Bethnal Yellow and Green could explain why that is better than me but interestingly teams still prefer zonal.

 

Yes, I would be interested to understand the statistics behind zonal and why so many employ it. I understand the theory of it but I just think back to the Dawson goal and maybe it blinkers me but.... The commentator called it before it happened, Dawson vs Lewis is a mismatch and therefore a danger. I can't help but think our CBs were in an area that overlaps (partially) with what you would assume a keeper of Krul's ability and stature can deal with. 

Edited August 11, 2020 by seanthecanary

[NorthCarolinaYellow 197]

I think we all like Lewis as a player and a person, and truly do want him to stay, but let's be honest that he had moments where he was dire on set pieces in particular.

[seanthecanary 168]

19 minutes ago, NorthCarolinaYellow said:

Am I the only one who thought we looked fairly considerably stronger in defense with Byram starting at LB? Right-footed or not, if healthy he is my first choice LB and not Lewis.

I also thought we looked defensively stronger with him at right back as well as at left back though. I was very impressed with what I saw of him in the aspect of actual defending. I would determine that Lewis and Aarons are better footballers but Byram is better purely at defending. 

Edited August 11, 2020 by seanthecanary

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

14 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I think Max is much stronger than Jamal and they're both younger than Byram. They will both be physically stronger as they get older.

It's the old argument about zonal marking I guess. Man to man would see us choosing who goes up against these players. Zonal I guess the attacking team can target weaker players.

@Bethnal Yellow and Green could explain why that is better than me but interestingly teams still prefer zonal.

 

I saw a study of set piece defending in the Premier League, and basically every team uses zonal to some extent. It is especially beneficial If you are limited to how many players who are good in air. Zonal allows you to put the best headers  of the ball in the locations that are most dangerous. 

Norwich are a particularly small team - when McClean is your third best header of the ball you know you are probably in trouble from set plays. 

Going man to man won’t help - it would probably make things worse - as opposing teams would be able to create some really terrible match ups for Norwich. For example say, you are against Liverpool and put Hanley on Virgil and Zimmermann on Gomez, Liverpool would get those two to run to the far post taking Norwich’s best headers off with them - that would then leave the area that is most dangerous - which is just outside the 6 yard box between the goal posts - defended by Norwich’s least effective headers. By putting Hanley and Zimmermann to mark the danger zone, you are increasing your chances of winning the ball in that area. That’s the theory at least - it does still rely on people doing their jobs of course. 

The issue for Norwich isn’t zonal marking, but the execution of the system (combined with a general lack of physical players). Jamal and Aarons aren’t any worse in the air than the average full back (Aarons is actually very good at winning headers against taller opposition) but they offer suffer by being put in bad match ups due to a general lack of big guys in the Norwich team. 

[nutty nigel 7,506]

Thanks Beth. 

I could never have explained that. Probably because it makes perfect sense🙃

 

[ron obvious 1,495]

2 hours ago, NorthCarolinaYellow said:

I think we all like Lewis as a player and a person, and truly do want him to stay, but let's be honest that he had moments where he was dire on set pieces in particular.

Possibly even more than that was when he always tried to play his way out of a tight spot. you can't always do that in the PL.

Edited August 11, 2020 by ron obvious

[norfolkngood 1,086]

1 hour ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

 

. For example say, you are against Liverpool and put Hanley on Virgil and Zimmermann on Gomez, Liverpool would get those two to run to the far post taking Norwich’s best headers off with them - that would then leave the area that is most dangerous - which is just outside the 6 yard box between the goal posts - defended by Norwich’s least effective headers. By putting Hanley and Zimmermann to mark the danger zone, you are increasing your chances of winning the ball in that area. That’s the theory at least - it does still rely on people doing their jobs of course. 

 

That is Exactly the Problem we have the Danger area marked But that leaves everywhere else open with the players we have 

like Bethnal said everybody uses it one way or other just they have better headers of the ball in the weaker areas 

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

As a small addition on the Dawson goal, you will actually see that there is quite a clever, pre-planned ‘trick’ (by Deeney) to take Tettey out of the key area* (where he correctly started) and leave a one-on-one for Dawson to get a run at. 

In effect the mistake was Tettey’s as acting ‘as a lamp-post’ and simply blocking a run / forcing somebody wider (buying a half second) / covering an area is key to zonal. He should have retained his station. The area he vacated got exposed and it looks awful when a goal comes in that way - big guy on the run, small guy static and isolated at back post - scorching an imprint on all watching.

The equation is how many times does that happen per season vs how many times you’d suffer vs poor man-to-man match ups (which we’d have a lot of).

Don’t forget that ‘putting a man on the posts’ is Zonal. That’s been a staple for many decades, so it really isn’t one pure system vs another pure system. Some combination is typically always used. 

A clear danger is when an impression is created, others smell blood and make it an even higher strategic priority, investing ever greater time resources on it.

A further more basic point: if you are worse than the opposition you likely have to defend more. If you defend more you likely give away more fouls in dangerous places and more set pieces generally. If you defend more of them, you may well concede more from them: 

This is why ‘ the mini-League’ typically are very athletic, bigger, very disciplined, tight tactically and focus closely on defending. It can also be observed that this approach condemns then to that very ‘mini-League’ ghetto somewhat ad infinitum. Or until they get relegated or take the risk of becoming more expansive and becoming a more possession-dominant team that creates more active problems for all opposition (including the best), rather than just going for sit-back-deep-and-hope-for-a-break football against the better sides. 

I would suggest it is also why we had some good results against the better sides with our style and also why Burnley (for example) found it relatively hard to dominate us when we were very poor and they had the opportunity to dominate the game (as a top team would). They are simply not set up or drilled that way. 

Parma

*as I recall the footage Deeney physically moves Tettey away from the key area (off the ball). Purists look away now: Tettey should have had more than enough experience to collapse in a heap / shout / flail / scream for help from the ref. This might well have engaged VAR in our favour. We were generally very passive at this kind of thing. In stark contrast to everyone else. 

Edited August 12, 2020 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[Well b back 3,175]

23 hours ago, seanthecanary said:

It is a fact, I said though that he only got the chance to play left back when Lewis was injured.  We all know that Farke is not overly keen on bringing players back in when recovered if the replacements have performed well enough.  Hanley started the Championship winning season as a preferred CB, got injured and then slipped down to probably fourth choice by the end.  Lietner was another who got injured and despite playing really well in the first half of the season struggled to get his place back.  I'm not saying Byram didn't warrant keeping his place in the team, he looks a bargain signing to me, I'm saying is it likely he would have displaced Lewis had he himself not got injured?

I will contest that, firstly putting that in reverse Lewis only only got a chance again when Byram was injured and Byram had already become 1st choice after the Man City game until he was unfortunately injured. I would say 50 / 50 at best who starts if they are both fit. Byram is a much better ‘ defender ‘ Lewis gets forward more.

Had Byram not have been injured, Lewis would probably not played again last year and we may have even been saying £10 m for our back up left back wow that’s a good price.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

15 minutes ago, Well b back said:

I will contest that, firstly putting that in reverse Lewis only only got a chance again when Byram was injured and Byram had already become 1st choice after the Man City game until he was unfortunately injured. I would say 50 / 50 at best who starts if they are both fit. Byram is a much better ‘ defender ‘ Lewis gets forward more.

Had Byram not have been injured, Lewis would probably not played again last year and we may have even been saying £10 m for our back up left back wow that’s a good price.

That's not true.

The next time Aarons, Lewis and Byram were all fit was the Palace game in September - the first choice full backs for that game were Aarons and Lewis so Byram was dropped back to the bench. Lewis and Aarons were first choice until Lewis' injury in November. 

I'd place a pretty larger wager that should Lewis and Byram both be fit and available, Lewis would be starting on the first day of the season. 

[Branston Pickle 3,631]

The ‘inside story’ article on this is quite interesting (obviously from one side of the fence, but even so) - does seem that the ‘negotiation’ side of things was somewhat lacking.  For all the media getting fed the lines and getting on the bandwagon, it does appear Lewis was a smokescreen, they knew full well their offer would be rejected.  I’d be rather peed of at them if I were Jamal and his representatives.

Edited August 12, 2020 by Branston Pickle

[seanthecanary 168]

31 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

The ‘inside story’ article on this is quite interesting (obviously from one side of the fence, but even so) - does seem that the ‘negotiation’ side of things was somewhat lacking.  For all the media getting fed the lines and getting on the bandwagon, it does appear Lewis was a smokescreen, they knew full well their offer would be rejected.  I’d be rather peed of at them if I were Jamal and his representatives.

Yeah, if its true, it's not even like they tried to unsettle him and get him to hand a transfer request to get their target cheaper. It's worse than that, they got his hopes up only to use him as a pawn for leverage in a different transfer. Again, if true

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

I think it was a case of Liverpool having two left back options they liked, although seemingly the Greek fella a bit more than Lewis. The offer was a bit of a last minute, let's see if we can get that Lewis chap cheaply. Norwich might have replied 'No to £8m, but what about £12m?' and Liverpool might have then switched to Lewis. It seems they got a straight reply of 'No' which suggested the price wouldn't be even close to their offer.

I don't think you throw an offer to another club just to boost a different negotiation (you can just start some rumours saying you have done so). The Liverpool interest in Lewis was genuine, but they weren't prepared to spend as more on him as the player they eventually signed. Liverpool don't have an issue with homegrown players in their squad, so there isn't that much additional value in Lewis holding that status to them.