Kabak

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

8 minutes ago, chicken said:

Hanley was, but it was also between him and Krul, not just him. Krul could tell him to just smash it out - he clearly calls for it. The error belongs to both of them. Hanley plays the ball as Krul takes a step back increasing the distance between him and the ball. In fairness, we also had more defenders back as well.

How on earth are you apportioning any blame to Krul? He takes a step forwards to get closer to Hanley and give a better angle, Hanley then proceeds to pass the ball four yards away from Krul! 

Sorry but its an easy pass back, Hanley is in a terrible position to clear the ball in this position too, on his weaker foot and going in to the centre of the pitch. 

 

[All the Germans 1,075]

4 hours ago, hogesar said:

I'd be very surprised if Hanley loses his place in a Smith side. I'm sure they'll be speaking about a couple of errors but his general performance levels have been very good.

He should lose his place though, he is not good enough. I do not think his performance has been very good. He is a liability with the ball at his feet.

3 hours ago, chicken said:

Didn't suggest you were per-se, just interesting that Hanley's mistake - which would be considered a 'forced error' is deemed worse than Gibson's which was 'unforced' yet both led to shots on goal. One player should be dropped, the other is in fine form.

I've always liked Gibson and never liked Hanley. I like my footballers to be good... footballers. The days of Terry Butcher throwing his broken body in front of the ball should be long gone. If you make a last ditch tackle, you have failed somewhere else to stop it and / or you were in the wrong position. If you are continuously 'dodgy' with the ball at your feet, you shouldn't be a footballer in the Premier League. That's why Hanley would get nowhere near my team. I never got the media love of John Terry, for Chelsea Carvahlo > Terry and for England Ferdinand > Terry. Edit for clarity, Terry was decent with the ball at his feet, it was his throwing his body around last ditch tackles that meant he was in the wrong position, something that didn't happen anywhere near as often with Ferdinand or Carvalho.

I also like John Stones and always have, despite the fact that everyone else slates him.

Edited November 29, 2021 by All the Germans

[hogesar 9,654]

16 minutes ago, All the Germans said:

He should lose his place though, he is not good enough. I do not think his performance has been very good. He is a liability with the ball at his feet.

I've always liked Gibson and never liked Hanley. I like my footballers to be good... footballers. The days of Terry Butcher throwing his broken body in front of the ball should be long gone. If you make a last ditch tackle, you have failed somewhere else to stop it and / or you were in the wrong position. If you are continuously 'dodgy' with the ball at your feet, you shouldn't be a footballer in the Premier League. That's why Hanley would get nowhere near my team. I never got the media love of John Terry, for Chelsea Carvahlo > Terry and for England Ferdinand > Terry. Edit for clarity, Terry was decent with the ball at his feet, it was his throwing his body around last ditch tackles that meant he was in the wrong position, something that didn't happen anywhere near as often with Ferdinand or Carvalho.

I also like John Stones and always have, despite the fact that everyone else slates him.

He's statistically been our best defender by some margin. 

I also think the fact you seem to rate John Stones so highly suggests you prefer defenders who can't defend but can play like midfielders.

Again, Farke rated Hanley and I'm fairly sure Smith does too, and he will play more games than anyone at CB under Smith this season unless injured.

[Nuff Said 5,111]

3 hours ago, Indy said:

We’ve been a little lucky with Hanley, he’s just prone to a mistake or two, yes he got the winner but for me Omobamdele is the more accomplished defender even at his young age.

Yeah but admit it Indy, you probably think Delia is a more accomplished defender.

[Nuff Said 5,111]

3 hours ago, hogesar said:

Worth noting that Hanley is comfortably our best defender in the air, and is probably the most physical 'presence' we have too, whilst also having more pace than Gibson.

Like I say, i'd be very surprised if Hanley loses his place under Smith

I suspect you will be proved right. It’s similar to the way the armchair managers confidently predicted McLean and Rupp would never get another game now Smith is here.

[Surfer 1,547]

17 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Will be interesting to see where he is on Tuseday. Was rather strange he was not even on the bench for Wolves and was not mentioned by Smith at all.

Irrespective of whether Kabak is ill or not, I believe DS said he only wanted one central defender on the bench. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

I do think Smith would like to keep Hanley in the team, but I don't think he can continue making calamitous errors which lead to goal-scoring opportunities. That's two in two games. 

I'd rather have Omobamidele if that's going to keep being the case, for all the 'experience' of Hanley the errors he is getting himself caught up in are the ones an 'experienced' defender should never be getting themselves in (or very rarely).

[cambridgeshire canary 6,693]

1 minute ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

I do think Smith would like to keep Hanley in the team, but I don't think he can continue making calamitous errors which lead to goal-scoring opportunities. That's two in two games. 

I'd rather have Omobamidele if that's going to keep being the case, for all the 'experience' of Hanley the errors he is getting himself caught up in are the ones an 'experienced' defender should never be getting themselves in (or very rarely).

The main issue with taking Hanley out is he one of the most experienced and senior players here, and of course our captain.

 

Who do you give it to when he's gone? Gibson? Krul? I know Gibson has had it but I would rather see Krul get the armband.

[Van wink 2,994]

17 hours ago, Matt Juler said:

He's recovering from glandular fever, something that can knock you out for a few weeks. 

Thanks Matt, was wondering what was going on. He could be recovering for months.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

Just now, cambridgeshire canary said:

The main issue with taking Hanley out is he one of the most experienced and senior players here, and of course our captain.

Who do you give it to when he's gone? Gibson? Krul? I know Gibson has had it but I would rather see Krul get the armband.

1 shocking error per game doesn't scream experienced and senior to me...

Hanley being captain doesn't particularly make him undroppable for me. Krul or Gibson could have it and that would be fine.

Gibson has improved in his past 3 games IMO after looking a bit lost earlier in the season, his passing between the lines a few times of Saturday was excellent. I know he got caught out once on Saturday but that felt like an unfortunate ricochet as much as it did an error (although I haven't seen it back), certainly not in the same bracket of Hanley getting caught out as the last man back two games in a row. 

I think on the balance of the season so far Omobamidele has been better than Hanley, I'd also fancy us to be finishing this season with Omobamidele as first choice. I suppose Smith is managing him a bit more carefully given his age and keeping selection choices what he would see as lower risk on paper, but Omo plays with a maturity beyond his years and is less culpable of turning into a pub-standard player randomly during games so I wouldn't see playing him over Hanley as much of a risk at all to be honest! Its surely a matter of time if Hanley can't cut it out.

[king canary 7,599]

40 minutes ago, hogesar said:

He's statistically been our best defender by some margin. 

 

You say this a lot but it would be good to put a source to these stats- is it just the whoscored overall rating? If so I wouldn't put much stock in it as the algorithm is somewhat opaque and central defenders are known to be one of the tougher positions to analyse statistically. For example Hanley was statistically MOTM v Southampton but I doubt you'd find a match report that agreed. 

Just saying 'he's statistically our best defender' is meaningless without context.

[Indy 3,296]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

Yeah but admit it Indy, you probably think Delia is a more accomplished defender.

To be honest I think she can think and react quicker! But about the same level as Hanley. I just don’t rate him, we look more complete when he’s not playing, that first half v Southampton he could have cost us a couple goals, their goal he’s totally outmuscled and that’s his strength! Unlike others I don’t think he’s that great. He’s been lucky to have played alongside very good defenders who have covered him when needed. Just my opinion.

Its noticeable the improvement in that midfield has certainly made us a lot more solid.

Edited November 29, 2021 by Indy

[hogesar 9,654]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

I suspect you will be proved right. It’s similar to the way the armchair managers confidently predicted McLean and Rupp would never get another game now Smith is here.

McLean is probably our best "all round midfielder" (except maybe Normann, although his pass % is dreadful) - he's decent at most aspects of being a CM but doesn't excel in any of them, which I think some fans struggle with. Unless it's blindingly obvious some won't see but it appears all our recent managers and teammates do see it, thankfully, I guess.

23 minutes ago, king canary said:

You say this a lot but it would be good to put a source to these stats- is it just the whoscored overall rating? If so I wouldn't put much stock in it as the algorithm is somewhat opaque and central defenders are known to be one of the tougher positions to analyse statistically. For example Hanley was statistically MOTM v Southampton but I doubt you'd find a match report that agreed. 

Just saying 'he's statistically our best defender' is meaningless without context.

I really hope you're giving me slightly more credit than just a WhoScored overall rating 😄

Hanley makes more tackles per game, more interceptions per game, wins more aerial duels per game, more blocks per game and joint most clearances per game than any of our other central defenders. He also only makes the second least amount of fouls (Gibson at 02 vs Hanley 0.5). On top of that he's also actually scored a goal from a set piece.

Now, if Hanley was ONLY making more tackles per game then i'd say that's a possible outlier, and could be down to poor positioning requiring a tackle in the first place, or similar.

But we're talking about him being top of pretty much every demonstrative defensive statistic. I've just listed five.

Like I've said, I really don't think Smith will be dropping him anytime soon, unless he becomes culpable individually for several goals.

[All the Germans 1,075]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

He's statistically been our best defender by some margin. 

I also think the fact you seem to rate John Stones so highly suggests you prefer defenders who can't defend but can play like midfielders.

Again, Farke rated Hanley and I'm fairly sure Smith does too, and he will play more games than anyone at CB under Smith this season unless injured.

Lies, lies etc...

I prefer footballers who can play football. If you cannot properly control or pass a football under pressure, you shouldn't be in the Premier League, regardless of position.

I never said Smith will drop him. I just said that in my opinion, we should drop him. He is not good enough with the ball for this level.

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I really hope you're giving me slightly more credit than just a WhoScored overall rating 😄

Hanley makes more tackles per game, more interceptions per game, wins more aerial duels per game, more blocks per game and joint most clearances per game than any of our other central defenders. He also only makes the second least amount of fouls (Gibson at 02 vs Hanley 0.5). On top of that he's also actually scored a goal from a set piece.

Now, if Hanley was ONLY making more tackles per game then i'd say that's a possible outlier, and could be down to poor positioning requiring a tackle in the first place, or similar.

But we're talking about him being top of pretty much every demonstrative defensive statistic. I've just listed five.

Like I've said, I really don't think Smith will be dropping him anytime soon, unless he becomes culpable individually for several goals.

There is definitely a place for stats, but exactly as you have suggested if you are in the correct position, making an opposition midfielder play a ball out wide, away from your man you get nothing, whereas if you are giving your man too much space allowing the pass / cross, you then have to intercept / block / tackle / header and you 'get' statistics.  If you are in the right place, the ball doesn't come near you (as much) as you will have done your job properly to begin with by making it not a viable pass / cross. I am not saying that is always the case with Hanley and I think his defending is passable at this level (but not good - something I would say about all of our defenders).

Defending isn't my problem with him. I think with the ball, he is a liability and comfortably worse than Gibson, Omo and Kabak. Defending he is OK and no worse than the rest.

Put him in the middle of a three and told to kick / header / foul everything that comes near you and then give the ball to people either side who can actually use it, he may be OK. Asking him to play out from the back is almost guaranteeing you will give the opposition an excellent chance, every game.

PS I like McLean and Rupp for what it's worth!

[king canary 7,599]

32 minutes ago, All the Germans said:

There is definitely a place for stats, but exactly as you have suggested if you are in the correct position, making an opposition midfielder play a ball out wide, away from your man you get nothing, whereas if you are giving your man too much space allowing the pass / cross, you then have to intercept / block / tackle / header and you 'get' statistics.  If you are in the right place, the ball doesn't come near you (as much) as you will have done your job properly to begin with by making it not a viable pass / cross. I am not saying that is always the case with Hanley and I think his defending is passable at this level (but not good - something I would say about all of our defenders).

This exactly.

Stats struggle with central defenders because so much of the role is what you do when you don't have the ball or interact with the player who has it. There is no stat for positioning, cutting off passing lanes, marking a man who doesn't get the ball precisely because you've marked him well etc etc.

I remember Russell Martin used to look excellent statistically often because he was making tackles that looked excellent but came about because of his own poor positioning and reading of the game. 

Here is an excellent quote from Xabi Alonso...

Xabi Alonso told the Guardian that he was surprised to see so many young players at Liverpool herald "tackling" as one of their strengths. "I can't get into my head that [soccer] development would educate tackling as a quality, something to learn, to teach, a characteristic of your play," he said. "How can that be a way of seeing the game? I just don't understand [soccer] in those terms. Tackling is a last resort and you will need it, but it isn't a quality to aspire to, a definition." To Alonso, tackling happens when something goes wrong, not right.

[hogesar 9,654]

6 minutes ago, king canary said:

This exactly.

Stats struggle with central defenders because so much of the role is what you do when you don't have the ball or interact with the player who has it. There is no stat for positioning, cutting off passing lanes, marking a man who doesn't get the ball precisely because you've marked him well etc etc.

I remember Russell Martin used to look excellent statistically often because he was making tackles that looked excellent but came about because of his own poor positioning and reading of the game. 

Here is an excellent quote from Xabi Alonso...

Xabi Alonso told the Guardian that he was surprised to see so many young players at Liverpool herald "tackling" as one of their strengths. "I can't get into my head that [soccer] development would educate tackling as a quality, something to learn, to teach, a characteristic of your play," he said. "How can that be a way of seeing the game? I just don't understand [soccer] in those terms. Tackling is a last resort and you will need it, but it isn't a quality to aspire to, a definition." To Alonso, tackling happens when something goes wrong, not right.

But i'm not JUST talking about tackling here. And it's not like we're regularly seeing Hanley completely out of position but the rest of the defence keeping a perfect line either.

I'm talking about winning aerial duels, tackling, intercepting, blocking and clearing. Some of the core fundamentals of defending. If someone's going to tell me all of those stats are conveniently the best we have at CB purely because Hanley is, somehow, awful off the ball and completely out of position, then I'm going to say you have a pre-conceived prejudice against Hanley and aren't judging on merit.

[Nuff Said 5,111]

5 hours ago, king canary said:

This exactly.

Stats struggle with central defenders because so much of the role is what you do when you don't have the ball or interact with the player who has it. There is no stat for positioning, cutting off passing lanes, marking a man who doesn't get the ball precisely because you've marked him well etc etc.

I remember Russell Martin used to look excellent statistically often because he was making tackles that looked excellent but came about because of his own poor positioning and reading of the game. 

Here is an excellent quote from Xabi Alonso...

Xabi Alonso told the Guardian that he was surprised to see so many young players at Liverpool herald "tackling" as one of their strengths. "I can't get into my head that [soccer] development would educate tackling as a quality, something to learn, to teach, a characteristic of your play," he said. "How can that be a way of seeing the game? I just don't understand [soccer] in those terms. Tackling is a last resort and you will need it, but it isn't a quality to aspire to, a definition." To Alonso, tackling happens when something goes wrong, not right.

But surely for a central defender, by the time they are called into action, there’s a good chance it’s gone beyond “positioning” and “reading of the game”? When a cross or an opponent with the ball gets into the box you are going to have to take action and often that has to include tackling. 
 

On top of which, it doesn’t matter how good your positioning is if your teammates in front of you can’t stop the opposition. The amount of time you have to take action can be as much a symptom of how good the rest of your team are defensively. If you want statistics to be used correctly, it works multiple ways.

[Besthorpe-48 102]

I remember going to Griffin Park in 2009 when the Norwich centre backs were Gary Doherty and Michael Spillane who was substituted for Jon otsomebor 

 Now we are talking about Christoph zimmerman being our 5th best centre back. Get a life lads grant Hanley and Ben Gibson are different class as we will find out tomorrow 

 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

8 hours ago, hogesar said:

McLean is probably our best "all round midfielder" (except maybe Normann, although his pass % is dreadful) - he's decent at most aspects of being a CM but doesn't excel in any of them, which I think some fans struggle with. Unless it's blindingly obvious some won't see but it appears all our recent managers and teammates do see it, thankfully, I guess.

Personally I just think he gets picked over Rupp as he's left footed so gives some balance to the side, we also have our left sided centre back in Ben Gibson.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

52 minutes ago, Besthorpe-48 said:

I remember going to Griffin Park in 2009 when the Norwich centre backs were Gary Doherty and Michael Spillane who was substituted for Jon otsomebor 

Thought I'd have a quick look at this as didn't sound right (the vast majority of Spillane's games under Lambert were not at centre back).

Looks like it was actually Doherty and Berthel Askou at centre back, Spillane (and then Otsemober) at right back.

Spillane must have played alright as he soon signed for Brentford! 

[Yobocop 1,096]

You have to laugh at some peoples supposed knowledge of the game 

Hanley is a fantastic captain and centre back and I don’t remember him losing a header on Saturday 

[hogesar 9,654]

8 hours ago, Yobocop said:

You have to laugh at some peoples supposed knowledge of the game 

Hanley is a fantastic captain and centre back and I don’t remember him losing a header on Saturday 

I get some decided he wasn't good enough two years ago (injured for a lot as well in a side that couldn't defend whatsoever anyway) but to pass off all the stats I've shown as basically meaning he must have been out of position or lacking awareness is stretching it a little bit.

Hes been very good this season.

[king canary 7,599]

17 hours ago, hogesar said:

But i'm not JUST talking about tackling here. And it's not like we're regularly seeing Hanley completely out of position but the rest of the defence keeping a perfect line either.

I'm talking about winning aerial duels, tackling, intercepting, blocking and clearing. Some of the core fundamentals of defending. If someone's going to tell me all of those stats are conveniently the best we have at CB purely because Hanley is, somehow, awful off the ball and completely out of position, then I'm going to say you have a pre-conceived prejudice against Hanley and aren't judging on merit.

What I find frustrating in these discussions is how binary they always end up- I'm not saying he's awful off the ball and constantly out of position. I don't think he's actually a bad player. I do, however, think he has weaknesses that get exploited at this level which is largely why he's spend his career kicking around the Championship.

He's excellent in the air, he's willing to throw himself into blocks and is undoubtedly a proper grafter. However he's not the most comfortable with the ball at his feet and he's prone to some questionable decision making and switching off in key moments. Those are the kind of things it is hugely tough to reflect in any statistical analysis so you need to combine it with what you see on the pitch.

The big thing for me is since Smith has come in the defenders who struggled under Farke suddenly look better (Gibson and Aarons particularly) but Hanley, to me, looks the same- solid but prone to mental errors. This doesn't mean he's awful but in my opinion he's the weakest link in our back 4 right now and I wouldn't be shocked if a fully fit Kabak or Omobamidele step up to take his place at some point.

[king canary 7,599]

12 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

But surely for a central defender, by the time they are called into action, there’s a good chance it’s gone beyond “positioning” and “reading of the game”? When a cross or an opponent with the ball gets into the box you are going to have to take action and often that has to include tackling. 
 

On top of which, it doesn’t matter how good your positioning is if your teammates in front of you can’t stop the opposition. The amount of time you have to take action can be as much a symptom of how good the rest of your team are defensively. If you want statistics to be used correctly, it works multiple ways.

I totally agree, stats need context that you can't get just from looking at numbers, which I why I'm skeptical of the initial claim 'he's our best defender statistically' and this context is particularly important when it comes to positions like central defence. 

 

[7HAR1980 102]

19 hours ago, hogesar said:

McLean is probably our best "all round midfielder" (except maybe Normann, although his pass % is dreadful) - he's decent at most aspects of being a CM but doesn't excel in any of them, which I think some fans struggle with. Unless it's blindingly obvious some won't see but it appears all our recent managers and teammates do see it, thankfully, I guess.

I really hope you're giving me slightly more credit than just a WhoScored overall rating 😄

Hanley makes more tackles per game, more interceptions per game, wins more aerial duels per game, more blocks per game and joint most clearances per game than any of our other central defenders. He also only makes the second least amount of fouls (Gibson at 02 vs Hanley 0.5). On top of that he's also actually scored a goal from a set piece.

Now, if Hanley was ONLY making more tackles per game then i'd say that's a possible outlier, and could be down to poor positioning requiring a tackle in the first place, or similar.

But we're talking about him being top of pretty much every demonstrative defensive statistic. I've just listed five.

Like I've said, I really don't think Smith will be dropping him anytime soon, unless he becomes culpable individually for several goals.

What's Hanley's game time stats compared to our other cb's?

[All the Germans 1,075]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

I get some decided he wasn't good enough two years ago (injured for a lot as well in a side that couldn't defend whatsoever anyway) but to pass off all the stats I've shown as basically meaning he must have been out of position or lacking awareness is stretching it a little bit.

Hes been very good this season.

Literally no-one has done that. We have just stated that stats, whilst useful, need context as well instead of just saying most tackles = best defender.

I think both King and myself have been quite balanced? He is not awful but he has limitations. The limitation that I can't get over his is lack of ability with the ball at his feet.

He hasn't been very good this season. He's been OK.

[Capt. Pants 4,221]

Proof in the pudding in so far as the Gibbo/Hanley combo is concerned is what happens when we lose a game before Smith changes it.

Despite 'stats' Hanley looks like the weakest link. Will be interesting to see if Smith goes with the stats or gut feel. Of course as long as we avoid defeat no changes will be made, but there isn't a huge margin of error there.

A lot of people were surprised when big Andy lost his place and I don't think they are all wrong.

[king canary 7,599]

21 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Proof in the pudding in so far as the Gibbo/Hanley combo is concerned is what happens when we lose a game before Smith changes it.

Despite 'stats' Hanley looks like the weakest link. Will be interesting to see if Smith goes with the stats or gut feel. Of course as long as we avoid defeat no changes will be made, but there isn't a huge margin of error there.

A lot of people were surprised when big Andy lost his place and I don't think they are all wrong.

I think on pure performance levels he didn't deserve to lose his place but it is also totally understandable that a new manager looking to make a team more solid will lean on experience and leadership in the short term.

I agree we're unlikely to see a change unless results turn. I wouldn't shake the apple cart when we've conceded 1 goal in 2 games and generally kept our opponents at arms length outside of a couple of moments. 

[hogesar 9,654]

2 hours ago, 7HAR1980 said:

What's Hanley's game time stats compared to our other cb's?

He's played the most hasn't he? He's been the one regularly picked so far by both Farke and Smith. Why do you ask?

 

2 hours ago, king canary said:

What I find frustrating in these discussions is how binary they always end up- I'm not saying he's awful off the ball and constantly out of position. I don't think he's actually a bad player. I do, however, think he has weaknesses that get exploited at this level which is largely why he's spend his career kicking around the Championship.

He's excellent in the air, he's willing to throw himself into blocks and is undoubtedly a proper grafter. However he's not the most comfortable with the ball at his feet and he's prone to some questionable decision making and switching off in key moments. Those are the kind of things it is hugely tough to reflect in any statistical analysis so you need to combine it with what you see on the pitch.

 

I'm not trying to make it binary. I'm simply saying that (and i'm not directing necessarily at you) that if you look back over the course of this season Hanley is regarded by some as our worst CB. I don't think our worst CB would have literally the best defensive stats all round, one or two maybe, but 5 or 6 measurable critiques? 

All I'm trying to say is a mistake which leads to a chance / goal always gets remembered, whereas an equally bad mistake where someone maybe covers for them (Hanley has on several occasions saved Gibsons blushes in both clearances and in behind when Gibsons been done for pace) obviously doesn't get remembered - and then it's almost like all the positive bits of Hanleys play gets ignored.

The other problem is we don't have fullbacks who are great in the air, nor do we have any midfielders other than McLean. So taking out Hanleys ability in the air would be a massive issue for the starting 11 in my book, where, looking at our other CB's, there some distance away on that front.

[sgncfc 1,225]

Ferdinand made mistakes - in fact he was odds-on for at least one howler every game (check out some of his England appearances, for instance). Van Dijk makes mistakes. In both cases their positional awareness generally got them out of trouble but the bigger  issue is how quickly they and their teammates recover from errors.