Dele Alli - Performance Thread 2017/18

InLevyITrust said:
Lingaurd had an absolute stinker yesterday, it’s funny how perspectives are, Dele wasn’t much better TBF. But at club level Dele’s goal scoring and assisting is pretty good. He also shows for the ball constantly and tries to keep the ball moving forward with 1 and 2 touch stuff. Also his runs off the ball into the box often go unnoticed but create space.
Click to expand...

If Lingard had a stinker then Alli was off the scale of shitness.

Lingard was the most productive attacking player and was involved in all the big chances the team created. His movement and workrate was higher than Alli and Sterling who were both pretty poor.
 
TheReligion said:
If Lingard had a stinker then Alli was off the scale of shitness.

Lingard was the most productive attacking player and was involved in all the big chances the team created. His movement and workrate was higher than Alli and Sterling who were both pretty poor.
Click to expand...

Lingard fluffed 3 quality chances, the first one a sitter put on a plate for him by Dele. Dele should have been taken off after he picked up the knock, it was plain to see. I think you will find Kane was the most productive player :D.
 
I really liked the first half hour of England, I think it is a team designed for that dizzying game, very intense and I think he contributed a lot. I liked a lot his match. Very dynamic and omnipresent. Then he seemed injured although he continued to play, which I did not understand very well
 
InLevyITrust said:
Lingard fluffed 3 quality chances, the first one a sitter put on a plate for him by Dele. Dele should have been taken off after he picked up the knock, it was plain to see. I think you will find Kane was the most productive player :D.
Click to expand...

Please don't tell me you're trying to argue Alli performed better than Lingard?

If so you need to take the rose tinted specs off.. and look at the player ratings for the game from the media.
 
It seems having a high work rate is a barometer for being a good player these days. Like Wilshere before, I think he is fast becoming the most over-rated English player. That isn't to say he is a bad player, but he needs to do a lot more in an England shirt.
 
0le said:
It seems having a high work rate is a barometer for being a good player these days. Like Wilshere before, I think he is fast becoming the most over-rated English player. That isn't to say he is a bad player, but he needs to do a lot more in an England shirt.
Click to expand...

Alli didn't have a high work rate yesterday
 
InLevyITrust said:
Lingaurd had an absolute stinker yesterday, it’s funny how perspectives are, Dele wasn’t much better TBF. But at club level Dele’s goal scoring and assisting is pretty good. He also shows for the ball constantly and tries to keep the ball moving forward with 1 and 2 touch stuff. Also his runs off the ball into the box often go unnoticed but create space.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. Our best play went through Lingard and Alli. They were a nuisance for Tunisia and had it not been for poor finishing we'd have been 3 or 4 up inside 30 minutes. I think both noticeably dropped off in the 2nd half and that was due to the injury Alli suffered with Lingard compensating by playing a little deeper.
 
Should have come off when he got injured. Didn't look comfortable on the pitch after.
 
Di Maria's angel said:
Rubbish. Our best play went through Lingard and Alli. They were a nuisance for Tunisia and had it not been for poor finishing we'd have been 3 or 4 up inside 30 minutes. I think both noticeably dropped off in the 2nd half and that was due to the injury Alli suffered with Lingard compensating by playing a little deeper.
Click to expand...

He missed a sitter, and fluffed another 2 good chances, that’s what I mean by a stinker. Can have all the play though the two of them all day long but what matters is putting the ball in the back of the net. It’s a funny old game, “Kane done nothing but score 2 goals, poor game” and “Linguard has all the play, played well” goals win matches, especially in scrappy poor games like yesterday.
 
InLevyITrust said:
He missed a sitter, and fluffed another 2 good chances, that’s what I mean by a stinker. Can have all the play though the two of them all day long but what matters is putting the ball in the back of the net. It’s a funny old game, “Kane done nothing but score 2 goals, poor game” and “Linguard has all the play, played well” goals win matches, especially in scrappy poor games like yesterday.
Click to expand...
You don't have to score to play well. Goals are a bonus with Lingard, everything went through his movement.
 
PepsiCola said:
Should have come off when he got injured. Didn't look comfortable on the pitch after.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too. Alli can be frustratingly inconsistent at the best of times but he started yesterday's game really well. The first ten minutes he was at the heart of everything England did well on the ball. Then he tailed off and by the second half he was a passenger. Whether that was down to his knock or his inconsistency I don't know, but he should have come off the pitch sooner.
 
InLevyITrust said:
He missed a sitter, and fluffed another 2 good chances, that’s what I mean by a stinker. Can have all the play though the two of them all day long but what matters is putting the ball in the back of the net. It’s a funny old game, “Kane done nothing but score 2 goals, poor game” and “Linguard has all the play, played well” goals win matches, especially in scrappy poor games like yesterday.
Click to expand...

Perfectly set up to praise Alli when he ghosts through a game and pops up with a goal or assist. Then you can talk about how he's so productive for a midfielder.

Only Sterling and Kane should be judged by end product, because that's what they are there for. Alli and Lingard were alright for a 30 minute period and poor for the rest of it. They are there to run the team, not make the highlights.
 
Cassidy said:
Missing easy chances should count against you though, I thought he played ok, his finishing let him down
Click to expand...
But he's not in for his goal output. I agree it should count against him but not to the point that it can he said he didn't play well.
He and Sterling's movement carried England yesterday imo. Kane and Alli looked a bit lost when they drifted along the lines. Lingard was so good in those opening 30 minutes that a goal could have solidified it as the best 30 minutes of his career imo
 
cyberman said:
But he's not in for his goal output. I agree it should count against him but not to the point that it can he said he didn't play well.
He and Sterling's movement carried England yesterday imo. Kane and Alli looked a bit lost when they drifted along the lines. Lingard was so good in those opening 30 minutes that a goal could have solidified it as the best 30 minutes of his career imo
Click to expand...

He is an attacking player taking up attacking positions so goals/assists are important. Thats the difference IMO because for a top team they wouldn't say he played well if he missed all those chances. Notice I am not saying he was poor.
 
breakout67 said:
Perfectly set up to praise Alli when he ghosts through a game and pops up with a goal or assist. Then you can talk about how he's so productive for a midfielder.

Only Sterling and Kane should be judged by end product, because that's what they are there for. Alli and Lingard were alright for a 30 minute period and poor for the rest of it. They are there to run the team, not make the highlights.
Click to expand...

You can’t say that when a player has a clear chance to score though, they aren’t expected to contribute with all the goals but when presented by clear chances you do expect them to score. I’m not praising Dele... I thought he was pretty shit bar the first 20mins or so.


cyberman said:
But he's not in for his goal output. I agree it should count against him but not to the point that it can he said he didn't play well.
He and Sterling's movement carried England yesterday imo. Kane and Alli looked a bit lost when they drifted along the lines. Lingard was so good in those opening 30 minutes that a goal could have solidified it as the best 30 minutes of his career imo
Click to expand...

I don’t think England were that great at all yesterday, I think they were alert and I think Tunisia were still asleep in the first 20-30mins, they were a shambles at the back.
 
I thought he had a very good first half but then a quiet second half. Although England games are always a blur to me.
 
Cassidy said:
He is an attacking player taking up attacking positions so goals/assists are important. Thats the difference IMO because for a top team they wouldn't say he played well if he missed all those chances. Notice I am not saying he was poor.
Click to expand...
Gotta disagree there buddy, not all attacking players are there for their goals. If they were, Sterling wouldn't be an England starter and Vardy wouldn't be on the bench.
The likes of Iniesta routinely missed chances to the point Terry had a better goal record up until he left Chelsea but he had plenty of great games!
 
cyberman said:
Gotta disagree there buddy, not all attacking players are there for their goals. If they were, Sterling wouldn't be an England starter and Vardy wouldn't be on the bench.
The likes of Iniesta routinely missed chances to the point Terry had a better goal record up until he left Chelsea but he had plenty of great games!
Click to expand...

Notice I said goals and assists plus Iniesta effected games with his dribbling and passing. Maybe I am remembering wrong but I don't remember him being a poor finisher, he just didn't get into goal scoring positions often from what I remember (I could be wrong)

My point was that if you are getting into those positions often then your output in terms of goals/assists count in your performance, otherwise why are you getting into those positions?

So I wasn't saying that attacking players have to score goals, I was saying that if you are getting into those positions where you are getting chances, then your effectiveness to finish those chances counts to your performance.
 
InLevyITrust said:
You can’t say that when a player has a clear chance to score though, they aren’t expected to contribute with all the goals but when presented by clear chances you do expect them to score. I’m not praising Dele... I thought he was pretty shit bar the first 20mins or so.
Click to expand...

Isn't the whole point of the setup to feed Kane with Sterling as a runner? I don't think he missed 3 sitters either. He missed 1 sitter and 2 other chances that the best players in the world would finish. Unless you think Lingard should be expected to match the quality of someone like Griezmann?

I thought England were pretty shite. There was a massive overrating of a good 20 minute period. Tunisia could barely string a pass together and would have been torn apart by a better team.
 
breakout67 said:
Isn't the whole point of the setup to feed Kane with Sterling as a runner? I don't think he missed 3 sitters either. He missed 1 sitter and 2 other chances that the best players in the world would finish. Unless you think Lingard should be expected to match the quality of someone like Griezmann?

I thought England were pretty shite. There was a massive overrating of a good 20 minute period. Tunisia could barely string a pass together and would have been torn apart by a better team.
Click to expand...

I agree with overrating the first 20mins Tunisia could barely stand up straight. Maybe a little harsh on Lingard, I do like him, but the first chance should of went in, and the high dropping ball he should have at least hit the target, the last one he was unlucky with the run of the ball.
 
Last edited:
breakout67 said:
Perfectly set up to praise Alli when he ghosts through a game and pops up with a goal or assist. Then you can talk about how he's so productive for a midfielder.

Only Sterling and Kane should be judged by end product, because that's what they are there for. Alli and Lingard were alright for a 30 minute period and poor for the rest of it. They are there to run the team, not make the highlights.
Click to expand...

They really aren’t. Quite the opposite in fact. They are there to fill gaps when defending and spring quickly when we win the ball back. They are there for overloads and late runs from deep, not to make 80 passes and control the tempo of the game
 
Anyone still trying to argue this guy is better than Lingard? The whole forum slated me when I said Alli is no better than Lingard about a year or so ago.

Now who looks the better player?
 
BringNaniBack said:
Anyone still trying to argue this guy is better than Lingard? The whole forum slated me when I said Alli is no better than Lingard about a year or so ago.

Now who looks the better player?
Click to expand...

What exactly are you basing this on? Dele played the majority of the first game injured and hasn't featured since. Also Dele is 22 and Lingard is 25, Dele had more league goals and more assists in the season past. I rate Lingard but I find the comparison to Dele a bit odd as 3 years is a long time development wise.
 
BringNaniBack said:
Anyone still trying to argue this guy is better than Lingard? The whole forum slated me when I said Alli is no better than Lingard about a year or so ago.

Now who looks the better player?
Click to expand...
Fair is fair.
Alli is a better pretend striker but Lingard is the better overall player.
His movement is the best that the World Cup has seen so far which is ridiculous, it's the World Cup.
 
Seems a bit silly to try to argue which one is the better player. When both were fully fit for the first 30 mins against Tunisia the combination provided some of the best attacking football I have ever seen from England (been watching since 1994).

Yes I know it was against Tunisia but I’m excited to see how the combination performs against Colombia. The link up play between the two was a joy to behold. Such a nice change from the Lampard & Gerrard era.
 
  • Like
Reactions: golden_blunder
BringNaniBack said:
Anyone still trying to argue this guy is better than Lingard? The whole forum slated me when I said Alli is no better than Lingard about a year or so ago.

Now who looks the better player?
Click to expand...

Yeah Alli is still the better player, you were rightfully slated.
 
BringNaniBack said:
Anyone still trying to argue this guy is better than Lingard? The whole forum slated me when I said Alli is no better than Lingard about a year or so ago.

Now who looks the better player?
Click to expand...
Are you judging them now on 3 games when Alli was injured?
 
I don't think you can compare the two. If Lingard keeps up his rate of progression then I don't think we can have to many complaints. Obviously Lingard plays deeper anyway so he won't get as many assists/goals. We look to Pogba for that kinda thing. But Alli is a good player in his own right. Time will tell not opinions.
 
cyberman said:
Fair is fair.
Alli is a better pretend striker but Lingard is the better overall player.
His movement is the best that the World Cup has seen so far which is ridiculous, it's the World Cup.
Click to expand...

Not sure about that. Mbappé was better against the Argies.
 
Looks out of depth playing cm in front of a back 3. A bit like De Bruyne for Belgium.
 
Looks like he's carrying a knock, although his performances when fully fit for England have tended to be just as shite so who knows.
 
Been shite, has a very punchable face, probably isnt getting as much criticism because Sterling has been worse somehow.
 
I get why Lingard's in the team - he's always involved in England's best attacks, he links-up decently with others, and has proved to be a goal threat even though he's by no means a clinical finisher.

I get why Sterling's in the team - he's our only player who can dribble in attack (bar Rashford who is still too inconsistent), he's very strong at shielding the ball which helps us play in tight situations, and is a threat on the counter.

I don't get why Alli's in the first team. I don't see him offering anything. It's not like I rate Lingard and Sterling that highly either but you see what they contribute even if they lack the end product. Alli lacks it and just seems to do nothing of note. I don't think Loftus-Cheek has been that good either but I think, in his last couple of appearances for England, he's shown more than Alli.
 
Spurs fans seriously thought(and some probably still do) he was a better player than Pogba.

Laughable.
 
Never really rated him. Still dont rate him. Hes very meh in pretty much every game I see from him. Occasionally come up with moments of quality like good dribbles or good movement to get a goal, and has a decent scoring record with that. Definitely never rated him as a midfielder, while hes not dynamic enough to be a main forward (second striker) imo. Hes kind of like a muller-lite. But that's only someone who will only ever be good enough for a squad player role at a top club.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.