FAO Panic Buyer

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
134,168
Location
Hollywood CA
This should lock up your brain. The Arse won the double, but didn't really get much help from last summers transfers. Of Jeffers, Van Bronckhorst, Wright, and Campbell - only Sol made an arguable contribution (and a weak one at that) to their fine run of form. So you see, you don't have to panic buy loads of overpriced Italian defenders to be successful. Explain that. ;)
 
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" />
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>This should lock up your brain. The Arse won the double, but didn't really get much help from last summers transfers. Of Jeffers, Van Bronckhorst, Wright, and Campbell - only Sol made an arguable contribution (and a weak one at that) to their fine run of form. So you see, you don't have to panic buy loads of overpriced Italian defenders to be successful. Explain that. ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

Must disagree. Campbell is the defence rock of them this season when Adams and Keown were out for such long time during the season. It would not be obvious to see the contribution of a defender when the team keep winning, but surely Campbell is a very successful purchase for them. Van Bronckhorst and Richard Wright also have provided a very fine backup earlier in the season when Ashley Cole and Seaman were injured (especialy Seaman, who have injured for over half of the season).

Of course, there are a lot of ways to improve a team. Changing tactic or let the new players settle down are some of them. But the most direct way to improve is still by buying good players. In 1998 when Stam and Yorke was signed, they immediately raised the standard of the whole team dramatically during that season, that's the kind of purchase we must try to make in this summer. IMO, people who said we must not change anything are just as gulity as people who said we must shake up the whole squad and sell half of the team.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>This should lock up your brain. The Arse won the double, but didn't really get much help from last summers transfers. Of Jeffers, Van Bronckhorst, Wright, and Campbell - only Sol made an arguable contribution (and a weak one at that) to their fine run of form. So you see, you don't have to panic buy loads of overpriced Italian defenders to be successful. Explain that. ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>


Some corrections.

Campbell has been a great purchase for Arsenal and has been rock-solid for them this season. Van Bronckhorst played well too until he was struck down by injury.

Arsenal's fine run of form is primarily due to the fact that they have no real weaknesses in their team plus ample squad depth in all departments.

We on the other hand are lopsided with weaknesses in the goalkeeper and defence and an under-strength attack plus some of those sitting on the bench can't do the job against the big boys when needed to (eg fortune, chadwick)

Expecting success in the future by hoping against hope that our team will eventually "correct" itself is suicidal.

We need fresh blood (and not necessarily expensive signings) and fresh ideas tactically (cue a qualified assistant manager).
Click to expand...
 
Arsenal's defence is hardly as good as some are making out. Campbell might well of been a good signing, but the Gunner's awesome form has been down to their attack not the defence. We shall see how Campbell 'holds the defence together' when Adams, Keown (maybe) and Dixon leave.
 
Originally posted by lchk:
<strong>


Some corrections.

Campbell has been a great purchase for Arsenal and has been rock-solid for them this season. Van Bronckhorst played well too until he was struck down by injury.

Arsenal's fine run of form is primarily due to the fact that they have no real weaknesses in their team plus ample squad depth in all departments.

We on the other hand are lopsided with weaknesses in the goalkeeper and defence and an under-strength attack plus some of those sitting on the bench can't do the job against the big boys when needed to (eg fortune, chadwick)

Expecting success in the future by hoping against hope that our team will eventually "correct" itself is suicidal.

We need fresh blood (and not necessarily expensive signings) and fresh ideas tactically (cue a qualified assistant manager).</strong><hr></blockquote>

If you've followed Arsenal's season, then you'll note that they've consistently scored in most of their games and their goals allowed number has been higher than their avergage over the past five years. They won the premiership for one reason - consistency. United and Liverpool had their ups and downs, whilst Arsenal kept winning - and the credit for that goes to Henry, Pires, and Ljungberg. Campbell is no rock, Van Brockhorst made a fair contribution when Freddie was out, and of course Jeffers and Wright have been disappointments for different reasons. So there you have it.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

If you've followed Arsenal's season, then you'll note that they've consistently scored in most of their games and their goals allowed number has been higher than their avergage over the past five years. They won the premiership for one reason - consistency. United and Liverpool had their ups and downs, whilst Arsenal kept winning - and the credit for that goes to Henry, Pires, and Ljungberg. Campbell is no rock, Van Brockhorst made a fair contribution when Freddie was out, and of course Jeffers and Wright have been disappointments for different reasons. So there you have it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Are you implying in any way that Arsenal has a weak defence?

If it is, then ours must be truly atrocious

Yes consistency is the main delivery of a league title but we musn't forget that the common denominator to most of our defeats this season has been due to one problem area - a defence which is clearly getting worse and worse.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by lchk:
<strong>

Are you implying in any way that Arsenal has a weak defence?

If it is, then ours must be truly atrocious

Yes consistency is the main delivery of a league title but we musn't forget that the common denominator to most of our defeats this season has been due to one problem area - a defence which is clearly getting worse and worse.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wrong again. We lost the league because we couldn't score when we had to.

Man Utd 0 - 1 West Ham
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 2 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal

So how many defenders would we have needed to score more than one goal in the above 7 fixtures. Two ...three perhaps ? Would buying Nesta, Canavaro etc helped us there ? You place too much emphasis on the amount of mistakes our defence has made and too little on our inability to score goals when it counts.
Click to expand...
 
When you were occasionally here, Raoul, C1 and myself have been hoping for 1 year that we could get Campbell.
Be it Nesta or Hyppia's brother, Kuffour or Lucio or someone unknown from Norway,Spain, Holland or any part of the world, we need at least 1 very good defender.
Our weakness is the defence, I'd like Fergie to address that.
 
The point made about scoring is valid. Maybe had Keane, Scholes etc. not had to spend so much time shoring up the defence and their talents directed more on the opposing goalposts, we would have scored in these matches.

I've said for a while you cannot play the sloppy football we played before xmas losing 6 matches (When have we done it before since '91 and are we expected to do it again? - are we feck!) and expect to win the PL. Those 6 matches (and Boro) cost us 18/21pts. Thats the nub of the problem.

Say what you like about the Arse, I wouldn't get carried away just yet.
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Wrong again. We lost the league because we couldn't score when we had to.

Man Utd 0 - 1 West Ham
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 2 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal

So how many defenders would we have needed to score more than one goal in the above 7 fixtures. Two ...three perhaps ? Would buying Nesta, Canavaro etc helped us there ? You place too much emphasis on the amount of mistakes our defence has made and too little on our inability to score goals when it counts.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes I agree that an inability to score in those games cost us dearly.

But you yourself has said that our strikers are among the most deadly in the world so surely what you have just mentioned is a clear paradox to what you believe about our strikers?

And what about the defence not doing their part - we could have at least earned some draws in those games eg defeats to West Ham, Bolton, Arsenal caused by carelessness from our defenders.

Let's not forget that we still managed to score loads in a large number of our games this season even in the draws.

Which brings me to the next point, how about our draws? Couldn't our defence have shut out a few of those goals eg the 2-2 draw with Derby caused by two stupid defensive mistakes?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Wrong again. We lost the league because we couldn't score when we had to.

Man Utd 0 - 1 West Ham
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 2 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal

So how many defenders would we have needed to score more than one goal in the above 7 fixtures. Two ...three perhaps ? Would buying Nesta, Canavaro etc helped us there ? You place too much emphasis on the amount of mistakes our defence has made and too little on our inability to score goals when it counts.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Look at these results that clearly show how United's defense played subpar.

Man Utd 2 : 2 Blackburn
Man Utd 3 : 4 Newcastle
Man Utd 1 : 2 Bolton
Man Utd 1 : 3 Liverpool
Man Utd 1 : 3 Arsenal
Man Utd 0 : 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 2 : 2 Derby

There is no explanation for giving up 2 goals to Blackburn, 3 to Liverpool, and 2 goals to Derby. Newcastle actually have attacking qualities, yet allowing 4 goals is ridiculous. Maybe a United goal changes the result, but in most of these matches, a solid back 4 would have changed the outcome. Losing to Bolton is mind-boggling. The offense stalled, but the defense leaked. The Chelsea match clearly showed the class of United's defense- subpar.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Wrong again. We lost the league because we couldn't score when we had to.

Man Utd 0 - 1 West Ham
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 2 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal

</strong><hr></blockquote>

The first three games came before the team had never been able to settle into a consistent pattern.

The game against Liverpool came in the middle of a good run, but we reverted to one up front.

The cup game you can't really count, because they are a one-off.

That leaves Boro when Ole was injured, and Arsenal, when Ruud was "rested".

I think that places the onus nicely back on the defence. ;)
Click to expand...
 
We need to regain the mentaility of 'we can't be beat'.

The figures prove it: Not only is our record of 9 defeats appalling but our record of only drawing 5 games all season is equally bad.

We have to convert losses into draws and for that we have to defend better. We can't hide from it any longer.

Our defensive squad was old, inconsistent, injury-prone, careless and lacking class. I am glad to see Fergie is beginning to address it (thanks though to Ronny & Dennis).
 
Originally posted by MrMarcello:
<strong>Look at these results that clearly show how United's defense played subpar.
Man Utd 2 : 2 Blackburn
Man Utd 3 : 4 Newcastle
Man Utd 1 : 2 Bolton
Man Utd 1 : 3 Liverpool
Man Utd 1 : 3 Arsenal
Man Utd 0 : 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 2 : 2 Derby
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Irrelevant. If we won half the matches I listed, we'd be celebrating the league right now, irrespective of how many goals we let in. The important point being that our attack has failed us just as many times as our defending has.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Irrelevant. If we won half the matches I listed, we'd be celebrating the league right now, irrespective of how many goals we let in. The important point being that our attack has failed us just as many times as our defending has.</strong><hr></blockquote>


That's right - always try to outscore the opposition even though our defenders and keepers are letting 4 or 5 in at the other end.

Reminds me of the scores they used to get in the early days of football - are you fan of the 2-3-5 system? <img src="graemlins/smirk.gif" border="0" alt="[Smirk]" />
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Irrelevant. If we won half the matches I listed, we'd be celebrating the league right now, irrespective of how many goals we let in. The important point being that our attack has failed us just as many times as our defending has.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Strange then that the attack failed for the listed games, following a change in the system/personnel.

And tbh, if we'd won the league Arsenal would also be able to point at games they should have won - Charlton at home comes to mind.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Wrong again. We lost the league because we couldn't score when we had to.

Man Utd 0 - 1 West Ham
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 2 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal

So how many defenders would we have needed to score more than one goal in the above 7 fixtures. Two ...three perhaps ? Would buying Nesta, Canavaro etc helped us there ? You place too much emphasis on the amount of mistakes our defence has made and too little on our inability to score goals when it counts.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Errrm... Wasn't the 0-2 score vs Boro a fa-cup match?
<img src="confused.gif" border="0">
Click to expand...
 
Who here is unaware that Sol campbell earns 130,000 ponds a week at highbury? :D
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Irrelevant. If we won half the matches I listed, we'd be celebrating the league right now, irrespective of how many goals we let in. The important point being that our attack has failed us just as many times as our defending has.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think you should be a more reasonable fan with more football knowledge than saying such kind of agrument. Every top team manager should set the target to "score as many as possible, concede as few as possible", except, if his name is Kevin Keegan. It is because no team can score several goals in every match, no matter how strong is their attack. (Of course, except if you try the 2-3-5 formation suggested by lchk). Therefore a team must build with balance and contain world class player in every department. Sometimes you need to win 4-3, sometimes 1-0. Only a team which can win BOTH high-scoring and low-scoring games can be truly successful.

Fergie also admitted that the early season's defensive lapse cost us the title (see <a href="https://www.redcafe.net/news/story.php3?id=20020507082250)." target="_blank">https://www.redcafe.net/news/story.php3?id=20020507082250).</a> This time I think he is right and I hope he can really start to solve our defence problem which have hindered us for so many years.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Irrelevant. If we won half the matches I listed, we'd be celebrating the league right now, irrespective of how many goals we let in. The important point being that our attack has failed us just as many times as our defending has.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You sure you're not a Man City fan? ;) Do you remember how many goals Andy Cole scored for Newcastle that year? And they still didn't win the league.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by kemo:
<strong>Who here is unaware that Sol campbell earns 130,000 ponds a week at highbury? :D </strong><hr></blockquote>


Didn't you know that he was free?
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
 
Exactly. Players like Nesta with higher values and cheap wages in the long run are cheaper investments. Campbells wage swill stop the Gooners signing big. Just wait and see. The guys we are cahsing save for rivaldo dont earn up to or more than 60,000 a week! :D
 
Originally posted by Neil Thomson:
<strong>
You sure you're not a Man City fan? ;) Do you remember how many goals Andy Cole scored for Newcastle that year? And they still didn't win the league.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Did you know that Man City scored 89 goals in the old first division during the 30s and still got relegated?

This should "lock your brain up", Raoul! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" />
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by lchk:
<strong>

Did you know that Man City scored 89 goals in the old first division during the 30s and still got relegated?

This should "lock your brain up", Raoul! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Lauging won't validate your imbalanced arguement. Having a good defence would've helped, but it would not have won us the league this year. Not only couldn't we score goals against our rivals (2 goals in fixtures against Arsenal and Liverpool combined), but we didn't generate sufficient goals against West Ham, Bolton, and Boro either. Having a world class defence wouldn't have made up for not scoring enough goals when it counted.
Click to expand...
 
Surely having a good defence gives a team the platform to attack?
Had we been more frugal at the back we would have picked up more points in all the games mentioned above.
As it was - we gave often gave away silly goals, then pushed forward chasing the game and got caught again at the back.
The main point then - we did score enough goals, attack is not the problem - but by having a sound defence we will have a better platform to score even more in those vital games.
Had Roy Keane not spent so much time covering the defence he could have been put to better use further up the pitch.
Again - a strong defence would have helped Veron. He's not a defensive midfielder, but how many times did he get caught out trying to help out the defence? It shouldn't be his job to tidy up at the back.
If we had a defence (and keeper) the midfielders were comfortable with and could trust then they would have been more comfortable themselves.
Someone to bring the ball out from defence would have been a great addition to the squad.
As it was, they always looked nervous on the ball (save Blanc - but perhaps a little too comfortable for me). That nervousness spread to midfield. Mistakes were made. Goals were conceded.
When confidence in the defence is missing we can score all the goals in the world but still concede too many to win the league.
All great buildings are erected on firm foundations. Unfortunately our foundations were regularly found to be crumbling...
 
Originally posted by the reporter:
<strong>Surely having a good defence gives a team the platform to attack?
Had we been more frugal at the back we would have picked up more points in all the games mentioned above.
As it was - we gave often gave away silly goals, then pushed forward chasing the game and got caught again at the back.
The main point then - we did score enough goals, attack is not the problem - but by having a sound defence we will have a better platform to score even more in those vital games.
Had Roy Keane not spent so much time covering the defence he could have been put to better use further up the pitch.
Again - a strong defence would have helped Veron. He's not a defensive midfielder, but how many times did he get caught out trying to help out the defence? It shouldn't be his job to tidy up at the back.
If we had a defence (and keeper) the midfielders were comfortable with and could trust then they would have been more comfortable themselves.
Someone to bring the ball out from defence would have been a great addition to the squad.
As it was, they always looked nervous on the ball (save Blanc - but perhaps a little too comfortable for me). That nervousness spread to midfield. Mistakes were made. Goals were conceded.
When confidence in the defence is missing we can score all the goals in the world but still concede too many to win the league.
All great buildings are erected on firm foundations. Unfortunately our foundations were regularly found to be crumbling...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Absolutely right. Why was Fergie allowed to spend the entire transfer kitty (RVN was the previous season's expenditure) on one player with nothing left to spend on the defence or did he think that money would be made available to buy defenders and the Plc pulled the plug. What happened to the Fergie ruthlessness, as in the Jim Leighton case, when Barthez's performances were diabolically bad ?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Julian Denny:
<strong>

Absolutely right. Why was Fergie allowed to spend the entire transfer kitty (RVN was the previous season's expenditure) on one player with nothing left to spend on the defence or did he think that money would be made available to buy defenders and the Plc pulled the plug. What happened to the Fergie ruthlessness, as in the Jim Leighton case, when Barthez's performances were diabolically bad ?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Glad you agree with me - wonder if we can provoke Raoul into backing down on his assertion that the attack let us down more than the defence?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by cheeky munkee:
<strong> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laugh Out Loud]" /> @ the huge hole Raoul is digging himself into!</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'll happily continue. ;)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

I'll happily continue. ;) </strong><hr></blockquote>

There's an old shovel round at my gran's. I'll pop round there and get it for you if you like... oh, sorry, you don't need any more help, do you ;)
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>

Lauging won't validate your imbalanced arguement. Having a good defence would've helped, but it would not have won us the league this year. Not only couldn't we score goals against our rivals (2 goals in fixtures against Arsenal and Liverpool combined), but we didn't generate sufficient goals against West Ham, Bolton, and Boro either. Having a world class defence wouldn't have made up for not scoring enough goals when it counted.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Quite possibly a world class defense keeps the scoreline 0-0 or 1-1. In that case, United have 5-10 more points, and possibly, another championship. And we all know United have in the past kept games at the scoreline only to sneak in a late goal and salvage 3 points. How many times could that have happened this season if the defense wasn't so shaky?
Click to expand...
 
Man Utd 0 - 1 West Ham
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal

All who think our defence is crap...explain these results. tap tap...I'm waiting.
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal
</strong><hr></blockquote>


we can't score against all out defensive teams... Arsenal, Liverpool and Boro came with a plan to shut us out..and they succeeded <img src="graemlins/annoyed.gif" border="0" alt="[Annoyed]" />

maybe another striker's needed, someone's who different to Ole and Ruud.. maybe a Henry or Ronaldo type foward??
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Raoul:
<strong>Man Utd 0 - 1 West Ham
Man Utd 1 - 2 Bolton
Man Utd 0 - 3 Chelsea
Man Utd 0 - 1 Middlesboro
Man Utd 0 - 1 Liverpool
Man Utd 0 - 1 Arsenal

All who think our defence is crap...explain these results. tap tap...I'm waiting.</strong><hr></blockquote>


West Ham - defensive error lost game
Bolton - defensive error lost game
Chelsea - horrible defense
Boro - defensive lapse lost game
Pool - late goal, thanks to leaky D
Arsenal - where were the defenders when Barthez made that save?

True a goal would have changed things, but in many of those matches, the defense was porous. Keane was always helping at the back.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.