A word on the defence for Nutty!

[a1canary 0]

I and others have been debting with you for some time Nutty on the merits or othewise of our defence. At the crux of my argument has always been our lack of a big commanding centre back in the Malky mould and Grant''s total blindness to this, with the crux of your argument being that we concede not that many goals as it is and that what we have would be good enough if we scored/created more.

So i wonder what you think about Roeder, almost within hours of his appointment, bringing in a 6''4", 15st centre back nicknamed ''Tiny'' !!  For me, Roeder has immediately gone up in my estimation massively just for doing this! We shall have to wait and see what effect this has.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

WOW!!! My name on a thread title![:O] Now I know what it feels like to be Cluck, Wiz or Smudger[:)]

We have had lots of debates where the crux of your argument is unfounded criticisms of Doherty and the crux of my argument was that you were making them up. The threads I remember are ; -

Here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/877032/ShowPost.aspx 

And here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/957612/ShowPost.aspx

And here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1005082/ShowPost.aspx

And here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/990452/ShowPost.aspx

Now I am extremely pleased that we have signed this centreback on loan and I will be even more pleased if he turns out to be better than what we have and then we sign him permanently. I think you will find I made that clear in previous posts.

If I could have chosen a signing this week it would have been a midfield player and I still hope we get one. I am also heartened by Roeder seemingly recognising that we no cover for left back. Do you know how many loans we can have at anytime? We have three now.

When will I, will I be famous............................................................................................... [;)]

 

[Chopper Harris 0]

NigelVery impressed by your encylopedic knowledge of previous threads, but can I suggest you get a life

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="Chopper Harris"]Nigel
Very impressed by your encylopedic knowledge of previous threads, but can I suggest you get a life
[/quote]

You clearly haven''t heard of the search function.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Chopper Harris"]Nigel
Very impressed by your encylopedic knowledge of previous threads, but can I suggest you get a life
[/quote]

[:P] but you''re probably right chopper old son!

 

[a1canary 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

WOW!!! My name on a thread title![:O] Now I know what it feels like to be Cluck, Wiz or Smudger[:)]

We have had lots of debates where the crux of your argument is unfounded criticisms of Doherty and the crux of my argument was that you were making them up. The threads I remember are ; -

Here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/877032/ShowPost.aspx 

And here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/957612/ShowPost.aspx

And here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1005082/ShowPost.aspx

And here  http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/990452/ShowPost.aspx

Now I am extremely pleased that we have signed this centreback on loan and I will be even more pleased if he turns out to be better than what we have and then we sign him permanently. I think you will find I made that clear in previous posts.

If I could have chosen a signing this week it would have been a midfield player and I still hope we get one. I am also heartened by Roeder seemingly recognising that we no cover for left back. Do you know how many loans we can have at anytime? We have three now.

When will I, will I be famous............................................................................................... [;)]

[/quote]

Don''t get me wrong NN - i''ve enjoyed our jousts on this topic.

But thanks so much for reassuring me with your research that the commanding centre back issue IS at the crux of my argument, not Doherty (eventhough i have criticised him a little).  My concluding sentence in the first post reads:

"Either way, we can''t use the words ''long term'' and ''Dion'' in the same sentance, we need competition, and we need that illusive commanding centre back."

In the second thread you agree with me, and again i read my own words "commanding CB in the style of Malky" and not one mention of GD, in the third despite a number of posts between us, i don''t mention doherty once, you do. Only in the last one do i make the suggestion that he is king of giving away free kicks that lead to goals, for which i apologise to later for speculating without facts. Although we still don''t know the answer to that question since the post you refer to only looks at goals conceded whilst the various CBs are on the pitch, not their individual fouls.

I don''t deny that i have had problems with Doherty, or that if we ever got a big new centre back i would have stuck him in in place of GD. But i can say that you have swayed my a little and Shax has got progressively less impressive as this and maybe even last season has gone on so maybe Taylor and Doherty would be the better pairing.

Anyway, now we have our big man and we''ll see how he goes. You watch him give away a penalty on Sunday!!

[nutty nigel 7,902]

I feel you have what 1st Wizard refers to as a selective memory a1[;)] The very first joust we had on this subject was my reply to a thread you started where you  opened with the statement "Doherty is a bl**dy liability, one might want to swap him with thorne and put Dublin at the back"

This was the post that referred to the individual fouls. I researched it last season when I had even less of a life[;)]

I may have missed some but I think these are the goals we have conceded from free kicks:-

Leeds away: penalty Croft. Southend away: Free kick Safri. QPR away: Free kick Shackell. Stoke away: Penalty Ashdown. Leicester home: Free kick Shackell. Southampton away: Free kick Etuhu. Plymouth Home: Free kicks Doherty and Dublin. Blackpool away: Free Kick Dublin.

It should be said that the concensus of opinion was that the freekicks given away by Safri against Southend and Doherty against Plymouth were refereeing errors.

According to the official Football League stats Safri and Etuhu give away 50% more freekicks than Doherty and Shackell.

Robinson, Safri and Shackell have 6 yellow cards Etuhu now has 5 where as Doherty has 3. Of course Doherty had a red card against Burnley.

If Doherty is really more guilty of fouling in dangerous areas then he must be bribing the refs too.

I always seem to be drawn into these discussions to defend "The Doc" every time they roll by! In truth I find him at times to be infuriating too. He doesn''t inspire confidence because his body language is awful. He always looks like a mistake waiting to happen or a foul waiting to happen. When they do happen we are waiting for them and we remember them.

The crazy thing is that in all the time people were slating Doherty goals were being given away cheaply by the last line of our defence and yet that culprit never got the same criticisms from the fans.

Sometimes it would be more honest to say "I just don''t like him"!

I stand by every point I made there which is why I am happy that we have made this loan signing. However I will make one more very contentious point on the subject and that is in my opinion our defence was no stronger when we played Dub/Shax than Doc/Shax. Dublin looks a better player I will agree but we never actually defended better and Dublin was probably at fault for more goals.

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I feel you have what 1st Wizard refers to as a selective memory a1[;)] The very first joust we had on this subject was my reply to a thread you started where you  opened with the statement "Doherty is a bl**dy liability, one might want to swap him with thorne and put Dublin at the back"

This was the post that referred to the individual fouls. I researched it last season when I had even less of a life[;)]

I may have missed some but I think these are the goals we have conceded from free kicks:-

Leeds away: penalty Croft. Southend away: Free kick Safri. QPR away: Free kick Shackell. Stoke away: Penalty Ashdown. Leicester home: Free kick Shackell. Southampton away: Free kick Etuhu. Plymouth Home: Free kicks Doherty and Dublin. Blackpool away: Free Kick Dublin.

It should be said that the concensus of opinion was that the freekicks given away by Safri against Southend and Doherty against Plymouth were refereeing errors.

According to the official Football League stats Safri and Etuhu give away 50% more freekicks than Doherty and Shackell.

Robinson, Safri and Shackell have 6 yellow cards Etuhu now has 5 where as Doherty has 3. Of course Doherty had a red card against Burnley.

If Doherty is really more guilty of fouling in dangerous areas then he must be bribing the refs too.

I always seem to be drawn into these discussions to defend "The Doc" every time they roll by! In truth I find him at times to be infuriating too. He doesn''t inspire confidence because his body language is awful. He always looks like a mistake waiting to happen or a foul waiting to happen. When they do happen we are waiting for them and we remember them.

The crazy thing is that in all the time people were slating Doherty goals were being given away cheaply by the last line of our defence and yet that culprit never got the same criticisms from the fans.

Sometimes it would be more honest to say "I just don''t like him"!

I stand by every point I made there which is why I am happy that we have made this loan signing. However I will make one more very contentious point on the subject and that is in my opinion our defence was no stronger when we played Dub/Shax than Doc/Shax. Dublin looks a better player I will agree but we never actually defended better and Dublin was probably at fault for more goals.

[/quote]

Ipso facto, then Nutty, Doherty is actually a better central defender in your view than Dublin, eh? - although  Dublin actually looks a better player to you.

Is this what you really believe - or are you getting lost in your prose in your anxiety to support Doc?

OTBC

 

[ZLF 335]

I for one have long agreed with nutty that our central defe3nce is goodenough for this league - its the muppets around them that have been the problem (last year a lackof keeper and hughes at right back - this year non existant midfield) 

A far as defending Doc is concerned all nutty and I have tried to do is point out the hopelessly blind view of most city fans when it comes to the three centre back uses since last year - doc, shax & Dion.   As far as statistcis go (points won, fewest goals conceeded and fewest mistakes/tackles leading directly to goals) Doc actually comes out the best so yes you can safely say that doc has a better impact on results than Dion does at centre back.  What the stats dont show is that Dion is a better leader (but leading us to more goals conceeded - is that a good thing?) and looks ''stylish'' & ''commanding'' while doc continues to look like a swan on ice rather than a footballer.  Shax seems to sit in the middle of the twoib every respect.  

In reality there no difference between the three.  All have strengths and all have weaknesses.  However as Dion was never going to be able to play 2 games a week and this position more than most is about partnership & consistency the firs choice pair had to be doc and shax.  

Where grant went wrong was not getting a centre back cover sooner;  injuries & suspensions are inevitable and starting the season with only Dion as cover was never acceptable.    Murray is good enough,  just as there other three are - for this league.  

Taylor is a decent player and will play well in thechamps.  In particular he is decent cover while doc out injured, but he is not really solving a problem - we now have 4 who can play centre back and only 1 is injured.

As we only have a limited transfer kitty I would rather keep doc and spend the cash on the middle of the park as that is where our real lack of ability has and will continue to hutr the club.    

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Ipso facto, then Nutty, Doherty is actually a better central defender in your view than Dublin, eh? - although  Dublin actually looks a better player to you.

Is this what you really believe - or are you getting lost in your prose in your anxiety to support Doc?

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Bly - Zipper seems to understand what I mean and possibly made it clearer than me in his post. A better defender? Maybe....  Doherty probably gets in more blocks and loses his man less but against that Dublin is a louder voice, a better organiser and leader and more of an attacking threat. They are both strong in the air and probably win the same amount of headers but Dublin heads the ball further clear. As Zipper says.. there''s not much between any of them.

Now I know you will have seen the game today so I will make a similar contentious point in that Dublin looked a far better player first half than Hartson did second half. However, ''the pieman'' was probably more effective. He is not pretty or elegant but for the second game running he created a goal.

Ipso - facto - green grow the rushes o [:P]

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Ipso facto, then Nutty, Doherty is actually a better central defender in your view than Dublin, eh? - although  Dublin actually looks a better player to you.

Is this what you really believe - or are you getting lost in your prose in your anxiety to support Doc?

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Bly - Zipper seems to understand what I mean and possibly made it clearer than me in his post. A better defender? Maybe....  Doherty probably gets in more blocks and loses his man less but against that Dublin is a louder voice, a better organiser and leader and more of an attacking threat. They are both strong in the air and probably win the same amount of headers but Dublin heads the ball further clear. As Zipper says.. there''s not much between any of them.

Now I know you will have seen the game today so I will make a similar contentious point in that Dublin looked a far better player first half than Hartson did second half. However, ''the pieman'' was probably more effective. He is not pretty or elegant but for the second game running he created a goal.

Ipso - facto - green grow the rushes o [:P]

[/quote]

Nutty. I think that both you and Zipper are missing the psychological impact on (1) the opposing team, (2) our own defensive unit (all 11!!!) and the crowd of having an awkward, stumbling, non-confident looking at the hearrt of our spine.

No, I don''t think that ''any two of them are good enough for this league''.

The way to get out of this league (upwards) is to have a stronger spine than most of the rest. I would characterise this as: goalkeeper, a central defender, a defensive midfielder, a creative midfielder, a class striker.

 If I were Roeder, I would move on Doherty & Shackell plus a 2/3 of the midfielders in January and concentrate on getting that spine really strong.  

Otherwise the rest of the spine pool -with a bit more competition - are ''good enough for this league'' - in particular the goalkeepers and the strikers (if we include Dublin & Hartson).

''Good enough for this league'' --- tell that to Forbes & Stringer and their worthy successors.

OTBC

 

 

[Buncey 1]

Shackell and Taylor have the makings of a Fleming and Malkay partnership. Wonderful stuff today by them apart from the two goals.

[ZLF 335]

[quote user="Fellas"]Shackell and Taylor have the makings of a Fleming and Malkay partnership. Wonderful stuff today by them apart from the two goals.
[/quote]

 

LOL!

[Buncey 1]

Yes I know.. But hey, it''s ipswich, and been a long time since we kept a clean sheet against them. The second goal was just plain unlucky for us and the first was a good move but we could have done better.Been a long time since I had full confidence in our back 4, today I did. Although I was bricking it when haynes came on...

[NCFC_Shaun 0]

[quote user="Fellas"]Yes I know.. But hey, it''s ipswich, and been a long time since we kept a clean sheet against them. The second goal was just plain unlucky for us and the first was a good move but we could have done better.

Been a long time since I had full confidence in our back 4, today I did. Although I was bricking it when haynes came on...
[/quote]

 

then i was laughing wen shackell managed to hurt him, and play a fair challenge on him down the n&p end ... good, tactical play by shackell

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Nutty. I think that both you and Zipper are missing the psychological impact on (1) the opposing team, (2) our own defensive unit (all 11!!!) and the crowd of having an awkward, stumbling, non-confident looking at the hearrt of our spine.

No, I don''t think that ''any two of them are good enough for this league''.

The way to get out of this league (upwards) is to have a stronger spine than most of the rest. I would characterise this as: goalkeeper, a central defender, a defensive midfielder, a creative midfielder, a class striker.

 If I were Roeder, I would move on Doherty & Shackell plus a 2/3 of the midfielders in January and concentrate on getting that spine really strong.  

Otherwise the rest of the spine pool -with a bit more competition - are ''good enough for this league'' - in particular the goalkeepers and the strikers (if we include Dublin & Hartson).

''Good enough for this league'' --- tell that to Forbes & Stringer and their worthy successors.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Bly - throughout the last year whenever I have posted on this subject I have always said that Doherty as not good as the better defenders I have seen over the years. I have also said that I would be more than happy to see us buy better. But what I have said is that he is no worse than any of our other defenders and would not be my priority to be replaced. Now purely from a defending point of view I would say he has been our best central defender since we were relegated in 2005. But that won''t be good enough to get him into the hall of fame and neither has our defending been good enough to get out of this division. I agree he doesn''t inspire confidence in the stands but it seems his team mates do have confidence in him. And one final stat to look at from the current season is that in the ten games before Docs injury finally saw him off we conceded 12 goals and in the four games since he has been out we conceded 8. There is no doubt Doherty would have been crucified on here if he had been part of the defending that gave away those two goals yesterday.

 

[a1canary 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I feel you have what 1st Wizard refers to as a selective memory a1[;)] The very first joust we had on this subject was my reply to a thread you started where you  opened with the statement "Doherty is a bl**dy liability, one might want to swap him with thorne and put Dublin at the back"

This was the post that referred to the individual fouls. I researched it last season when I had even less of a life[;)]

I may have missed some but I think these are the goals we have conceded from free kicks:-

Leeds away: penalty Croft. Southend away: Free kick Safri. QPR away: Free kick Shackell. Stoke away: Penalty Ashdown. Leicester home: Free kick Shackell. Southampton away: Free kick Etuhu. Plymouth Home: Free kicks Doherty and Dublin. Blackpool away: Free Kick Dublin.

It should be said that the concensus of opinion was that the freekicks given away by Safri against Southend and Doherty against Plymouth were refereeing errors.

According to the official Football League stats Safri and Etuhu give away 50% more freekicks than Doherty and Shackell.

Robinson, Safri and Shackell have 6 yellow cards Etuhu now has 5 where as Doherty has 3. Of course Doherty had a red card against Burnley.

If Doherty is really more guilty of fouling in dangerous areas then he must be bribing the refs too.

I always seem to be drawn into these discussions to defend "The Doc" every time they roll by! In truth I find him at times to be infuriating too. He doesn''t inspire confidence because his body language is awful. He always looks like a mistake waiting to happen or a foul waiting to happen. When they do happen we are waiting for them and we remember them.

The crazy thing is that in all the time people were slating Doherty goals were being given away cheaply by the last line of our defence and yet that culprit never got the same criticisms from the fans.

Sometimes it would be more honest to say "I just don''t like him"!

I stand by every point I made there which is why I am happy that we have made this loan signing. However I will make one more very contentious point on the subject and that is in my opinion our defence was no stronger when we played Dub/Shax than Doc/Shax. Dublin looks a better player I will agree but we never actually defended better and Dublin was probably at fault for more goals.

 [/quote]

Come on N, you''re a reasonable guy - if you can''t see, from the evidence you have provided yourself, that my main argument has always been our lack of a big commanding centre back, then you are being more selective than anyone. I am not denying that i haven''t had problems with Doherty, and i''ve even admitted that you have swayed my opinion on him a little, but i think you should accept also that a malky-esque (and so far taylor-esque) addition to our centre back line represents an strengthening and improvement of our 1st XI team, regardless of who makes way for him.

[Mook 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

Come on N, you''re a reasonable guy - if you can''t see, from the evidence you have provided yourself, that my main argument has always been our lack of a big commanding centre back, then you are being more selective than anyone. I am not denying that i haven''t had problems with Doherty, and i''ve even admitted that you have swayed my opinion on him a little, but i think you should accept also that a malky-esque (and so far taylor-esque) addition to our centre back line represents an strengthening and improvement of our 1st XI team, regardless of who makes way for him.

[/quote]

 "so far Taylor-eque"??

I think you''re showing a little blinkered-ness here A1! Taylor could have got a block in for their first goal, watch the highlights - when the pass is delayed, he looks back at the ball and slows his run letting the Ippo striker get half a yard. Ball wacthing! Big mistake for a centre back. Plus, for someone who''s 6''4", he didn''t look as commanding in the air as I''d have hoped. There was also another hesitation near the end of the game when Hayes got in at the back post, another error that we were very fortunate that Marshall kept out.

Fair enough if you think we need someone commanding, but Taylor was still making elementary mistakes. Plus I didn''t see him organising anyone. No - not Malky-esque yet I think!

[nutty nigel 7,902]

I agree Mook.

Taylor impressed me because I think he is mobile for such a big guy and he looks inspiring. But, and this is addressed to you a1 my friend, if it had been Doherty defending for those two goals would fans have been so forgiving? He also made a good run and got in a good header that was deflected into the goal. Doherty has made good runs and got in good headers all season that have been deflected wide or blocked.

10 games and 12 goals conceded with the Doc against 4 games and 8 conceded without him - you decide!

 

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

There is no doubt Doherty would have been crucified on here if he had been part of the defending that gave away those two goals yesterday.

[/quote]

This is the key point for me. Taylor has been painted by some as our saviour for the simple fact that he''s tall and looks a bit like Malky.....if you take your glasses off and squint a little.

However, we conceded two goals on Sunday and the defending for both was absolutely woeful. On both occasions Taylor was way too slow to react to the situation in front of him, which led to Lee getting his shot away for the first goal and Clarke (?) getting the cross in for the second.

Now if it had have been Gary Doherty in those two situations he would have been described as ''slow'', ''clumsy'', ''useless'', ''Donkerty'' etc. So what''s the difference [*-)].

[ZLF 335]

Taylor seemed just OK to me - played very similarly to those we have had at the club recently - holds himself like Flem, passes OK, clamboures over people like Doc,  scored with a header like dion/malky - but is he signioficantly better than we have - not yet.

As far as Dion inpsiring confidence or giving leadership if if does not change the points gained or goals conceeded its not worth a bag of beans.  Does his extra leadership mean the shirkers relinquish some of their own responsibility cos Dion does it for them,  or where is the extra confidence if results dont change. 

[a1canary 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I agree Mook.

Taylor impressed me because I think he is mobile for such a big guy and he looks inspiring. But, and this is addressed to you a1 my friend, if it had been Doherty defending for those two goals would fans have been so forgiving? He also made a good run and got in a good header that was deflected into the goal. Doherty has made good runs and got in good headers all season that have been deflected wide or blocked.

10 games and 12 goals conceded with the Doc against 4 games and 8 conceded without him - you decide!

 [/quote]

I give up! I said ''so far'' to qualify the comment. Roeder recognised his contribution to the game but yes, he may turn out to be rubbish. But Nutty and anyone else, please acknolwedge and stop skirting round admitting the fact that a ''malky-esque'' defender IS what we need at CB. Linvoy-esque? Will that do? Forget Taylor, i agree no judegement can be made on him yet. But we need someone who marshalls and commands the back line - ADMIT THAT PLEASE!! Or tell me outright that you don''t agree and that you think Shackell and Doherty already do it. Then the arguments can really begin!!!

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="a1canary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

I agree Mook.

Taylor impressed me because I think he is mobile for such a big guy and he looks inspiring. But, and this is addressed to you a1 my friend, if it had been Doherty defending for those two goals would fans have been so forgiving? He also made a good run and got in a good header that was deflected into the goal. Doherty has made good runs and got in good headers all season that have been deflected wide or blocked.

10 games and 12 goals conceded with the Doc against 4 games and 8 conceded without him - you decide!

 [/quote]

I give up! I said ''so far'' to qualify the comment. Roeder recognised his contribution to the game but yes, he may turn out to be rubbish. But Nutty and anyone else, please acknolwedge and stop skirting round admitting the fact that a ''malky-esque'' defender IS what we need at CB. Linvoy-esque? Will that do? Forget Taylor, i agree no judegement can be made on him yet. But we need someone who marshalls and commands the back line - ADMIT THAT PLEASE!! Or tell me outright that you don''t agree and that you think Shackell and Doherty already do it. Then the arguments can really begin!!!
[/quote]

Roeder would certainly recognise his contribution to the game as he brought him here and it was his debut. I have recognised his contribution to the game too .. if...you...read...my...post! [;)] I agree we need someone to command the back line but I don''t agree Taylor did that on Sunday. However, I do agree that he may well become that if he stays here long enough. It was, afterall, his first game.

Now a1, we have conceded 1.2 goals per game when Doherty plays and 2 goals per game when he is injured. Including Sunday. So we miss him when he is not there, he is NOT the problem that he is perceived to be. ADMIT THAT PLEASE!!! Or tell me outright the stats lie and you still  think he is a "bl**dy liability. Then the arguments can really begin? ... carry on! [;)]

''Carry on Doc''... they could make the movie [~]