So just how important are Hanley and McLean to us?

[cambridgeshire canary 7,798]

Beacause despite all the stick they have got from time to time its fair to say we have not exactly been playing well since they got injured..

Which given there did seem to be a few people celebrating them being injured does seem a little poor in hindsight..

[Google Bot 3,933]

How important are two first team players?, To do the math, it's 18% of the starting 11 out.... On top of the existing injuries.

Chop 18% off your leg when it's already a little gammy, and see how you get on.

[hogesar 10,762]

I don't disagree that this summer we should be looking to improve in both positions (especially since Hanley's injury is going to mean no pre-season for him in all likelihood) but with the current squad we have, they've both been big losses.

Sorensen's defending has been well documented but Omo has made more mistakes than Hanley in his recent appearances; I get he's a youth product and is younger so currently gets a free pass on this but he makes those mistakes without having the raw natural defensive capabilities of Hanley.

Losing both, plus Gibson, has weakened us. I'd be surprised if anyone denied that now, albeit some perhaps thought that before watching us without them..

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

They have both played for the majority of the season in an uninspiring team. Have we missed them? Maybe slightly, are they great players at this level? Certainly not. 

[Barham Blitz 869]

The issue is to lose both Hanley and Gibson at the same time.  I'm no particular fan of Hanley but without either of them we then lack an experienced head and voice at the back with two relatively quiet youngsters.

This is then compounded by losing Kenny at the same time with his natural replacement in Lunghi already having to fill in at centre back. Which then puts more pressure on that inexperienced pairing by removing some of the effective shielding in front of them.

So the problem is the perfect storm of the three of them being out at the same time.  Personally I believe we'd be fine with any one or possibly even two of the three missing but not all three.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Barham Blitz

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

When I see this sort of discussion, I wonder if people have been watching the same games as me.

 

Hanley is a top class CB at Championship level, dominant in the air and overall very commanding.  With him playing, it's very rare that we are troubled by a cross or a high ball into the box.  McLean is a very good Champs level midfielder, athletic and strong in the air (attributes we are lacking in midfield otherwise) who's done well at the DM role this season.

 

If we had Hanley and McLean playing, do we concede 5 goals against Boro and does the QPR player get all the time he wants to control the ball on his chest and volley it home from 5 yards out ?  Absolutely no way.

 

It's true both of them are lacking at Prem level, but frankly that applies to much of our current squad.

 

I think we've missed them (and Gibson) big time.

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

Of course they are important to us, they are both quality players at this level, I don't know how anyone can say different.

The wider and more important issue is why we gambled on leaving ourselves with lack of cover in those positions, or not shuffled the pack to mitigate the impact better.

Let's not beat around the bush about Sorensen either. He has been flakey all season regardless of where he plays. He clearly isn't a CB and his positioning against QPR ultimately cost us a win.

[cambridgeshire canary 7,798]

5 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Of course they are important to us, they are both quality players at this level, I don't know how anyone can say different.

The wider and more important issue is why we gambled on leaving ourselves with lack of cover in those positions, or not shuffled the pack to mitigate the impact better.

Let's not beat around the bush about Sorensen either. He has been flakey all season regardless of where he plays. He clearly isn't a CB and his positioning against QPR ultimately cost us a win.

Really does feel like we have had issues at centreback for years and yet nothing ever seems to be done about it.

[Don’t be Krul 452]

31 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I don't disagree that this summer we should be looking to improve in both positions (especially since Hanley's injury is going to mean no pre-season for him in all likelihood) but with the current squad we have, they've both been big losses.

Sorensen's defending has been well documented but Omo has made more mistakes than Hanley in his recent appearances; I get he's a youth product and is younger so currently gets a free pass on this but he makes those mistakes without having the raw natural defensive capabilities of Hanley.

Losing both, plus Gibson, has weakened us. I'd be surprised if anyone denied that now, albeit some perhaps thought that before watching us without them..

No pre-season for Hanley? If he makes a return in 2023 I'll be astonished

[Indy 3,471]

To be honest I was hoping for a marked improvement, the reality those behind them two are no better, younger with potential but no improvement, it could be argued that with game time they will, but for me you can just lump the entire squad together this season, all have failed to give their all, take responsibilty, take the lead and let the fans down. So can't say I really miss either McLean or Hanley they're really no better.

[king canary 8,757]

More important than they should be.

[lake district canary 4,830]

Hanley and McLean - do we miss them? Yes. Simples.

Are they important going forwards? Yes, probably.

Should we be looking to upgrade them? Yes, definitely.

The bottom line is that the squad needs developing. Hopefully that can be largely done from within with young players coming through the system, but we need experienced heads too as it develops and both players will have their part to play in that.

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

1 minute ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Really does feel like we have had issues at centreback for years and yet nothing ever seems to be done about it.

The main issue being injuries. Klose, Zimmermann, Hanley, Omobamidele, Gibson, I've probably missed one, have all had long term injuries. We've tried to fill in with the likes of Amadou, Tettey, Byram, Sorensen. 4 CBs isn't enough let alone 3.

[Indy 3,471]

7 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

The main issue being injuries. Klose, Zimmermann, Hanley, Omobamidele, Gibson, I've probably missed one, have all had long term injuries. We've tried to fill in with the likes of Amadou, Tettey, Byram, Sorensen. 4 CBs isn't enough let alone 3.

Zimmerman on his day and fit was such an elegant player, great defender. Also the last real leader at the back.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,791]

I fear a basic lack of understanding by many fans is evident here. Hanley is our most consistent centre back. That’s why he is always on the team sheet when fit. Not one but three different managers have said the same. Not to mention two international managers. 
Similar with Kenny. 
Do they make mistakes? Of course especially as much our play involves them. The number or touches they have make mistakes more likely . 
Should we have better? Yes. But we have failed to recruit better. 

[Indy 3,471]

The key for me is that they're all good on their day, even Hernandez looks like Giggs on his day, but they all fail to have any consistency to be top class players, as seen in the premier league. No doubt we have missed that creative genius we had with Wes, Maddison, Beundia those we have are not near that class, then Tettey was never replaced and makes our back line vulnrable to conceding daft goals. But with the premier league seasons most on here would have expected us to have certainly bough in better than Hanley & McLean by now and because we havn't they get unwarranted stick for not being replaced by now. Maybe they are the best we have! Scary

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,830]

Evidently we miss both massively - which in itself is a damning indictment of the squad and recruitment because for a team that's spent 2 of the last 3 season in the PL to have Kenny and Grant as anything other than good squad players or bench backups - let alone major misses from the starting xi - is truly criminal. 

[Walcombe canary 82]

They will be missed. Always told " No substitute for experience "

But also that Andy O & Jacob S have had little time to partner each other

Teams that have success, generally have the least injuries. 

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

We've been cr@p most of the season with them.

Both departmemts of the team need upgrading, particularly midfield

[nutty nigel 7,902]

It does make you wonder why they took so much of the blame when they were playing. 

[AJ 1,359]

They are two of our key/best players and probably part of an ever decreasing pool of players that would possibly get into PL sides at the moment, along with maybe Sara and Aarons.  

[shefcanary 2,955]

1 hour ago, It's Character Forming said:

Hanley is a top class CB at Championship level, dominant in the air and overall very commanding.  With him playing, it's very rare that we are troubled by a cross or a high ball into the box. 

Just how many headed goals have we conceded in his absence - none!

McLean is a very good Champs level midfielder, athletic and strong in the air (attributes we are lacking in midfield otherwise) who's done well at the DM role this season.

How many crosses in the air have we missed.

And don't tell me Hanley would have scored a header from a corner, because Mr Threepenny head can't direct his header. 

If we had Hanley and McLean playing, do we concede 5 goals against Boro and does the QPR player get all the time he wants to control the ball on his chest and volley it home from 5 yards out ?  Absolutely no way.

We would have conceded more unless Sorenson was played in CDM, even with Kenny. That was where the issue was. With Sorenson in that role we have won every game - think on that.

I think we've missed them (and Gibson) big time.

I'll allow we missed all three together. As Barham Blitz rightly says to lose all at the same time has been the issue, especially without a natural CB to step in. But I don't accept that losing two games without all three proves they are good enough. Just how many games had we won with all three since the beginning of February before they got injured. That is what matters. 

 

[shefcanary 2,955]

2 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

Of course they are important to us, they are both quality players at this level, I don't know how anyone can say different.

How many games in the two months leading up to their injuries had we won?

[Segura 100]

I get the feelings here - Grizzly, Gibbo and Macca have been cornerstones of a team that has underwhelmed for two seasons. As such people naturally wonder what alternative options might produce.

I'm just a dumb old buh with little football knowledge, but I think the key here is that the aforementioned players have played consistently at a Prem/Champs level for some time.

They may well have declined of late but there is a reason why they play regularly and for me the last two games have brought this to light.

Sometimes it really is a case of be careful what you wish for.

[shefcanary 2,955]

1 hour ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Should we have better? Yes. But we have failed to recruit better. 

Absolutely, that is all I have ever said. A travesty that they were still part of the squad this year. Mr Webber ....?

[nutty nigel 7,902]

4 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Absolutely, that is all I have ever said. A travesty that they were still part of the squad this year. Mr Webber ....?

That is all you have ever said???

You're awesome Sheff.

Edited April 21, 2023 by nutty nigel
😎🙃

[shefcanary 2,955]

3 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

That is all you have ever said???

You're awesome Sheff.

Cheers Fella! Here's to a busy summer.

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

9 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

 

sorry @shefcanary but I think this is cherry picking.  I think Hanley is generally a commanding defender, we don't just miss him winning headers.  OK we've not conceded from a header, but the QPR player was able to control the ball on his chest in the 6-yard box which is much worse than conceding a header IMO !

The acid test of missing Hanley, Gibson and McLean is conceded a lot of poor goals against Boro and a poor goal against QPR.

 

I would agree that there is a knock on effect of Sorensen having to play at CB which means he can't play at DM.  Which is part of missing Hanley....

We'd all like an upgrade on Hanley, McLean and Gibson.  But I think they're fully "good enough" in the Championship to win the league if the rest of the team around them perform.  That's not where our problems have been this season.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Apparently they were the best in the championship when Smith was the problem...

[hogesar 10,762]

39 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Hanley is a top class CB at Championship level, dominant in the air and overall very commanding.  With him playing, it's very rare that we are troubled by a cross or a high ball into the box. 

Just how many headed goals have we conceded in his absence - none!

McLean is a very good Champs level midfielder, athletic and strong in the air (attributes we are lacking in midfield otherwise) who's done well at the DM role this season.

How many crosses in the air have we missed.

And don't tell me Hanley would have scored a header from a corner, because Mr Threepenny head can't direct his header. 

If we had Hanley and McLean playing, do we concede 5 goals against Boro and does the QPR player get all the time he wants to control the ball on his chest and volley it home from 5 yards out ?  Absolutely no way.

We would have conceded more unless Sorenson was played in CDM, even with Kenny. That was where the issue was. With Sorenson in that role we have won every game - think on that.

I think we've missed them (and Gibson) big time.

I'll allow we missed all three together. As Barham Blitz rightly says to lose all at the same time has been the issue, especially without a natural CB to step in. But I don't accept that losing two games without all three proves they are good enough. Just how many games had we won with all three since the beginning of February before they got injured. That is what matters.

Come on, this is poor from you!

How many headed goals have we conceded is soooooo lazy. What about all the initial headers and flick-ons we've not won that's allowed the other team to build dangerous attacks?

Mclean statistically wins more in the air than any of our other midfielders in every single game. 

To say we'd have conceded more with Mclean and Hanley playing is absolute nonsense - with them two in the team we've never conceded the amount of easy chances for the opposition throughout the season despite playing against better teams in better form than Boro.