leon barnett

[chicken 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]All of our center back partnerships were susceptible through the middle last season, whatever combination of barnett, whitbread or ward was used we conceded too many soft goals down to lapses in concentration and poor positioning, something malky/fleming were not. Flem had some prem experience, just as barnett does now.

We let in 77 goals last time and I think most fans would feel that the champ winning defence was stronger overall. On the basis we failed to invest and shore up last time we need to do improve at the back this time too. Concede in the champs you will concede more in the prem...[/quote]

Not sure I would agree with that.

When we won the championship we played a different formation with Damien Francis and Gary Holt as the central midfielders. Both of them were pretty good at the defensive side of the game, obviously Holt was more of a defensive midfielder anyway.

We had a very experienced team back then, but on an individual basis our current defence is probably better. That''s no disrespect to Fleming and Malky but for me Ward, Bennett and Whitbread are all better all-round players than Malky.

I think the most amazing thing is that if you look at the most frequently played players in the defence last season: R. Martin, Ward, Whitbread, Bennett, Drury and Tierney. How many were new?

You had R.Martin and Drury plus Whitbread who had hardly kicked a ball. That much change in a defensive line up is always going to cause some teething problems. Lets not forget a new keeper as well.

Infact one thing that Lambert has seemed to be incredibly successful at is getting a team to gel quickly.

I think I remember saying around Feb that it wasn''t our lack of goals that was holding us back at that point, it was our start to the season and having to revert to Nelson or Askou when Bennett was injured or Ward suspended. Then Whitbread came back and it seemed to help tighten the defence.

Fleming and Malky had been playing together for years by the time we won the league, Drury had been part of it for a while too and Edworthy was an old hand who had the t-shirt already. So I wouldn''t say a better defence, just a more settled one.

[Yellowbeagle 0]

 

"I''m not disputing the fact that Lambert rates Ward but how do we know he was Lambert''s first choice as throughout the whole season we had CB injuries, when Whitbread was injured Barnett was fit, when Barnett got injured Whitbread was then able to take his place; Ward''s presence in the team could therefore have also been the result of lack in competition for places due to injuries."

 

I know injuries played their part, but there were a couple of occassions when Ward came straight back into the side, with both Whitbread and Nelson making way even though both had played pretty well the match before and were not injured, this usually happens when a manager considers the player out to be first choice. Not saying it will definetly be Ward to start in the prem, I happen to prefer Whitbread as a player, just calling it as i saw it last season.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Yellowbeagle"]

I know injuries played their part, but there were a couple of occassions when Ward came straight back into the side, with both Whitbread and Nelson making way even though both had played pretty well the match before and were not injured, this usually happens when a manager considers the player out to be first choice.

[/quote]

Bingo.

[i,coopius 0]

there was definitely one occasion ward came in for whitbread,  but wasn''t this 3 or 4 games after he''d returned from injury and just played 2 games in something like 4-5 days. i seem to remember this being a lambert/culverhouse excuse some time last season

[Phillip J Fry 0]

Pace is only necessary if two things happen:1) The defenders are not in a good enough position when players run at them. Drury in his younger days was a perfect example of this. Whilst not fast enough to keep up with the fastest players, more often than not, his positioning was so good it didn''t really matter. If your defence take up good enough positions thrn runners won''t break through and pace is not needed to get you out of the bag. Stoke''s defence are also a good example of this, I would say none of them are faster than anything Norwich have got, but there positioning was so good they didn''t need the pace and were incredibly succesful.2) You don''t have to worry about Pace if they don''t have the ball long enough to get them involved. Starve them of possesion and jeep the ball. If you want to do this you need your best passers in defence. However, Norwich won''t be able to keep the ball for 80% of the game so they can try another tactic and just put pressure whenever the other team have the ball. If there defence can''t pass the ball to their fast player because Grant Holt''s charging them down then theres nothing to worry about.I think that a few people are being hard on Barnett in terms of his ditribution, he''s obviously the weakest CB when it comes to that but he''s not bad and he''s far from Nelson levels of passing (I liked Nelson by the way).I also think people are being hard on Ward defensively. He''s a very good defender in my opinion, who relies less on tackling and more on interceptions and forcing the play back into the oppositions half. Let us not forget that Ward, who is right footed, often played as a left centre back whilst Whitbread was injured and that definitely affected his performances.Based on current players I would continue with a Ward/Whitbread partnership, as they are far from defensively niave and are great passers.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="Gareth"]Pace is only necessary if two things happen:1) The defenders are not in a good enough position when players run at them. Drury in his younger days was a perfect example of this. Whilst not fast enough to keep up with the fastest players, more often than not, his positioning was so good it didn''t really matter. If your defence take up good enough positions thrn runners won''t break through and pace is not needed to get you out of the bag. Stoke''s defence are also a good example of this, I would say none of them are faster than anything Norwich have got, but there positioning was so good they didn''t need the pace and were incredibly succesful.2) You don''t have to worry about Pace if they don''t have the ball long enough to get them involved. Starve them of possesion and jeep the ball. If you want to do this you need your best passers in defence. However, Norwich won''t be able to keep the ball for 80% of the game so they can try another tactic and just put pressure whenever the other team have the ball. If there defence can''t pass the ball to their fast player because Grant Holt''s charging them down then theres nothing to worry about.I think that a few people are being hard on Barnett in terms of his ditribution, he''s obviously the weakest CB when it comes to that but he''s not bad and he''s far from Nelson levels of passing (I liked Nelson by the way).I also think people are being hard on Ward defensively. He''s a very good defender in my opinion, who relies less on tackling and more on interceptions and forcing the play back into the oppositions half. Let us not forget that Ward, who is right footed, often played as a left centre back whilst Whitbread was injured and that definitely affected his performances.Based on current players I would continue with a Ward/Whitbread partnership, as they are far from defensively niave and are great passers. [/quote]Dear God, was that post full of errors! I''m ashamed of myself now

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Crofts Number 1 Wizard"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Steve 9-2"]I suspect that Barnett & de laet will be first choice, then Whitbread and Ward will be 4th choice. Ward is another Spencer Prior in that he will be play ell for 85 mins then miss a tackle in the middle of the pitch and lead to us conceding a goal. Last year we looked most solid at the back when Whitbread and Barnett played together. I can see where you are coming from though - I can remember Barnett being singled out by Hansen on MoTD when in the Prem for some awful defending in his WBA days. Hopefully he has improved somehat since then!We simply won''t be able to sign a quality ball playing but still decent defensively centre half.[/quote]I think that you and the vast majority of fans are very wrong on this Steve, but that''s a really nice post of yours.It is interesting to hear that Alan Hansen slated Barnett.I think we played our best football last season when Ward and Whitbread played centre half for us.  5-1 away at Ipswich, 6-0 at home to Scunthorpe, a great draw away at Elland Road and win at Leicester.  The clean sheet and victory at Portsmouth etcBarnett was awful in one of his last games for us - Burnley away - although this probably had something to do with the 3 centre half system employed that day.We only lost the one game when Ward played alongside Whitbread - the big collapse at Swansea.

[/quote]

Ins''t it possible you are wrong?

[/quote]Nope!However after watching the season dvd this evening, I may revise what I think slightly.  Ward is still the best, but Barnett may be better than Whitbread (a close call on that me thinks).

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="211203"]

Overall I think Barnett is our best CB from last year and having him back is like a new signing.  I always felt with him on the pitch he gave a level of security that we didn''t have otherwise (ignoring games against toothless teams like Scunthorpe, 1p5wich etc).

 

Also I don''t think we were bad at Swansea.  Their goals were two brilliant strikes from outside the box, plus the 3rd was in injury time when we were pushing everyone forward.  If Holt had taken the great chance he had just before the first goal I think it would have been a different outcome, and I certainly wouldn''t accept we were outplayed.

[/quote]If Barnett is so good then why did we lose to the likes of Crystal Palace at home with him in the team?  That''s a far worse result than Swansea away (where we had many chances and failed to convert any of them) and Whitbread was shocking at the back that day and Pacheco didn''t do anything like get stuck in enough and so that''s why he was substituted around half-time.  Losing to Palace at home must be our worst result of the season surely?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Yellowbeagle"]

I know some people dont rate Ward, but the fact is that Ward was Lamberts first choice centre back over the course of the season, so whether we rate him or not Lambert obviously does. Barnett i would expect to come back in but i wouldnt at all be surprised if it''s Ward who partners him on the opening day of the season.

 

As for conceding those goals, that had as much to do with how we went at teams as to do with defensive problems, we could probably have closed out more games and been less attacking but we might well not have got promoted or been so exciting. I for one hope we go at the prem teams, not suddenly try and become all cagey.

[/quote]Very well said... [Y]  Ward appears to be Lambert''s first choice at centre half and I agree with him 100%.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="chicken"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]All of our center back partnerships were susceptible through the middle last season, whatever combination of barnett, whitbread or ward was used we conceded too many soft goals down to lapses in concentration and poor positioning, something malky/fleming were not. Flem had some prem experience, just as barnett does now.

We let in 77 goals last time and I think most fans would feel that the champ winning defence was stronger overall. On the basis we failed to invest and shore up last time we need to do improve at the back this time too. Concede in the champs you will concede more in the prem...[/quote]

Not sure I would agree with that.

When we won the championship we played a different formation with Damien Francis and Gary Holt as the central midfielders. Both of them were pretty good at the defensive side of the game, obviously Holt was more of a defensive midfielder anyway.

We had a very experienced team back then, but on an individual basis our current defence is probably better. That''s no disrespect to Fleming and Malky but for me Ward, Bennett and Whitbread are all better all-round players than Malky.

I think the most amazing thing is that if you look at the most frequently played players in the defence last season: R. Martin, Ward, Whitbread, Bennett, Drury and Tierney. How many were new?

You had R.Martin and Drury plus Whitbread who had hardly kicked a ball. That much change in a defensive line up is always going to cause some teething problems. Lets not forget a new keeper as well.

Infact one thing that Lambert has seemed to be incredibly successful at is getting a team to gel quickly.

I think I remember saying around Feb that it wasn''t our lack of goals that was holding us back at that point, it was our start to the season and having to revert to Nelson or Askou when Bennett was injured or Ward suspended. Then Whitbread came back and it seemed to help tighten the defence.

Fleming and Malky had been playing together for years by the time we won the league, Drury had been part of it for a while too and Edworthy was an old hand who had the t-shirt already. So I wouldn''t say a better defence, just a more settled one.[/quote]Very good post Chicken... [Y]I agree that we are not as bad at the back as the majority of our fans would have you believe.I think that we need to get the balance between attack and defence right in midfield (which we done very rarely last season) and that we could do with a new goalkeeper.  A lot of fans seem to have forgotten Ruddy''s errors and how this effected confidence in the back four.  Yes he pulled off some fine saves for us, but he also made too many errors for me to feel confident about him being our first choice goalkeeper in the Prem.

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="211203"]

Overall I think Barnett is our best CB from last year and having him back is like a new signing.  I always felt with him on the pitch he gave a level of security that we didn''t have otherwise (ignoring games against toothless teams like Scunthorpe, 1p5wich etc).

 

Also I don''t think we were bad at Swansea.  Their goals were two brilliant strikes from outside the box, plus the 3rd was in injury time when we were pushing everyone forward.  If Holt had taken the great chance he had just before the first goal I think it would have been a different outcome, and I certainly wouldn''t accept we were outplayed.

[/quote]

If Barnett is so good then why did we lose to the likes of Crystal Palace at home with him in the team?  That''s a far worse result than Swansea away (where we had many chances and failed to convert any of them) and Whitbread was shocking at the back that day and Pacheco didn''t do anything like get stuck in enough and so that''s why he was substituted around half-time.  Losing to Palace at home must be our worst result of the season surely?
[/quote]

 

I''m sorry but that really is an idiotic thing to say. Just think about what you have written for a minute.

[alysha 0]

[quote user="GJP"][quote user="Yellowbeagle"]

I know injuries played their part, but there were a couple of occassions when Ward came straight back into the side, with both Whitbread and Nelson making way even though both had played pretty well the match before and were not injured, this usually happens when a manager considers the player out to be first choice.

[/quote]

Bingo.

[/quote]

Fair enough I think it''s fair to say Lambert rated Ward above Nelson but I don''t think any conclusions can be drawn from Ward replacing Whitbread in the starting line up in a couple of games, as Lambert said on numerous occasions that Whitbread was doing great but we must remember how long he had been out for and that if possible he may rest him when given the chance. I''m not saying Ward wasn''t Lambert''s first choice, but nothing demonstrates to me that he was.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Webbo118"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="211203"]

Overall I think Barnett is our best CB from last year and having him back is like a new signing.  I always felt with him on the pitch he gave a level of security that we didn''t have otherwise (ignoring games against toothless teams like Scunthorpe, 1p5wich etc).

 

Also I don''t think we were bad at Swansea.  Their goals were two brilliant strikes from outside the box, plus the 3rd was in injury time when we were pushing everyone forward.  If Holt had taken the great chance he had just before the first goal I think it would have been a different outcome, and I certainly wouldn''t accept we were outplayed.

[/quote]If Barnett is so good then why did we lose to the likes of Crystal Palace at home with him in the team?  That''s a far worse result than Swansea away (where we had many chances and failed to convert any of them) and Whitbread was shocking at the back that day and Pacheco didn''t do anything like get stuck in enough and so that''s why he was substituted around half-time.  Losing to Palace at home must be our worst result of the season surely?[/quote]

 

I''m sorry but that really is an idiotic thing to say. Just think about what you have written for a minute.

[/quote]Why?  It was a far worse result than losing away at Swansea (as most teams did last season).  Oh and Barnett''s performance in the Palace game wasn''t good either.Don''t get me wrong, I don''t think Barnett is a poor player, but what I do believe is that those who think that he is far superior to Ward and Whitbread are viewing his performances through rose tinted spectacles and are talking out of their backsides!It is good that there is now starting to be some debate about our centre halves though.

[shefcanary 2,407]

Hasn''t Sir Alex already decreed it is De Laet and ANOther for the centre half birth?

[Evesham Canary 0]

[quote user="icoopius"]there was definitely one occasion ward came in for whitbread,  but wasn''t this 3 or 4 games after he''d returned from injury and just played 2 games in something like 4-5 days. i seem to remember this being a lambert/culverhouse excuse some time last season[/quote]bingo!!

[Evesham Canary 0]

I quite like all of our centre halfs and I am not really looking to slate any of them. ...However, I seem to recall that Barnett was MoM on numerous occasions and was in most people''s thoughts for Player of the Year until he got injured.As I said earlier, for me Ward was responsible for a number of goals we conceded last year - he does have a habit of not being strong enough in the middle of the pitch when going for 50/50''s, the goal at home to Bristol City being a prime example. Equally, Ward was very good at times - he was simply brilliant against Swansea at home and he does have the ability to use the ball much better than Barnett.I am pretty happy with the CB options - I agree with Smudger that a lot of problems (certainly in the first half of the season) stemmed from ruddy and the lack of confidence he was giving the team. We were also a very attacking team at times - Fox was our "defensive" midfielder and he is not a particular destructive player. This led to us being a bit open at times.At the end of the day we conceded just shy of 60 league goals last year and we always looked like we would concede in most games even if it was just the one. Last year we always looked like scoring a few but next year we are likely to score less and concede more....a sobering thought!

[alysha 0]

[quote user="Steve 9-2"]I quite like all of our centre halfs and I am not really looking to slate any of them. ...However, I seem to recall that Barnett was MoM on numerous occasions and was in most people''s thoughts for Player of the Year until he got injured.

As I said earlier, for me Ward was responsible for a number of goals we conceded last year - he does have a habit of not being strong enough in the middle of the pitch when going for 50/50''s, the goal at home to Bristol City being a prime example. Equally, Ward was very good at times - he was simply brilliant against Swansea at home and he does have the ability to use the ball much better than Barnett.

I am pretty happy with the CB options - I agree with Smudger that a lot of problems (certainly in the first half of the season) stemmed from ruddy and the lack of confidence he was giving the team. We were also a very attacking team at times - Fox was our "defensive" midfielder and he is not a particular destructive player. This led to us being a bit open at times.

At the end of the day we conceded just shy of 60 league goals last year and we always looked like we would concede in most games even if it was just the one. Last year we always looked like scoring a few but next year we are likely to score less and concede more....a sobering thought!
[/quote]

good post [Y]

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Steve 9-2"]

As I said earlier, for me Ward was responsible for a number of goals we conceded last year -
[/quote]

Your post was pretty decent to be fair but just wanted to comment on that particular line...

 

We let in 58 league goals last season and Ward would have been at fault for some but I doubt that in percentage terms he would have been any worse than the other centrebacks. Perhaps because he played that many more games than Barnett or Whitbread he appears to have been more error prone.

 

 

[ZLF 274]

[quote user="Steve 9-2"]At the end of the day we conceded just shy of 60 league goals last year and we always looked like we would concede in most games even if it was just the one. Last year we always looked like scoring a few but next year we are likely to score less and concede more....a sobering thought![/quote]

I agree with Chickens comments, particularly with the extremely lucky run with injuries/suspensions our back line had in the champs winning side and recognise that there is a difference in familiarity. Where both sides are similar is that both started the season conceding goals regularly but improved as the season progressed (in 03/04 we conceded games per goal faster in the opening 7-9 games than any of the previous 5 seasons so were hardly solid!)

However the fact remains that we only conceded 39 goals in 03/04, with 77 let in the following one; this season it was 58, 50% more, yet our more attacking style of play only saw us score 4 more goals this season. If it lets in that many in this season it will let in more in the prem.

Its good we are discussing and I accept people have differing views, mine is that by sticking with same centre backs we will have a goals against column that is too large to avoid relegation.

[Muddy funster 0]

ZLF - couldn''t have put it better myself.