Poor game, looked lost at times. I know he will hit us back with two consecutive 8/10 performances now.
5
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 52
- Clean sheets
- 21
- Goals
- 3
- Assists
- 1
- Yellow cards
- 15
- Status
Played very well, what a player.
Great for a few weeks then looks like a cart horse....
He was still best of the backline
He was still best of the backline
Yeah.
2nd half in particular he looked really poor but to be fair he was playing alongside Williams Bailly and Telles who were all putting in genuine 0/10 performances.
Yeah, for sure. When the whole team plays that poorly I'd just take the cop out answer by blaming the tactics and moving on.
Didn’t think he played bad. Distribution is fantastic and great at running down into space.
Thought he did well. At least he was the one i noticed actually doing defensive work in the 2nd half.
Looks like he’s going to have to play 90 minutes 4 times in 7 days ffs. I think Ole would have liked to take him off today but those 2 quick fire goals changed his plans
When we talk about long balls, I think Maguire’s to the side and Lindelof’s to the centre serve totally different purposes.
Maguire’s are part of building up the attack, adds variation, open up, and is low risk of losing possession.
Lindelof’s to the centre can give an immediate goal scoring opportunity. Those long balls also make the opponents CBs staying back a little.
He also do “hockey long balls”. The opponent might win the ball but we immediyely apply press. Every kick off, Lindelof hits a long ball to Rashford. We have created one chance this season and got possession maybe twice out of 25 of those long balls but we still do them. I think it is because we establish the game to their area. We know where the ball will come and immediately apply pressure with many players. It looks like a strategy imo.
Sorry for spelling had few cold ones during the game
The purpose of ball playing is not to play sideways and create goal scoring opportunity once or twice in 5 games but to play progressive passes in full 90 minutes. Ball playing centre backs are expected to be the critical part of the build up play. Thus, their ball playing ability are measured based on what they do in 90 minutes not in one or two moments.
To call it risk of losing possession is just wrong, progressive ball are always consist higher risk than playing sideway passess. Not rocket science. Even the progressive maps show how variety Maguire is. He can aim to Bruno, aim to our no 9, aim to Rashford, aim to Shaw, aim to Fred. Lindelof probably 70% aims to Maguire, 10% to Rashford.
Was defending by himself tonight, did OK. Far from his best performance, but still easily our best defender tonight.
Different schools. City play low risk with lots of sideways and backward passes. Dreadful to watch imo but it seems to work. Imo all our CBs are quite good at progressing with the ball and don’t really understand why you think different. We have been very good at staying calm under pressure and to play through the press. Not many teams have scored goals because of high pressure against us the last two seasons. More often we play out way though and score.
Maguire & Lindelof are playing for Manchester United in the direct play of system where you expect less possession. Why are you comparing our system to Man city system? I think you need to study what our system first before having this conversation. I’m very disappointed how you are trying to defend your point using Pep Guardiola system which complete contrast, you know very well you tried to suit it to your own argument.
I never say our CBs are not quite good at progressing. I’m just saying Maguire does more in progressing than Lindelof. Ball playing is judged based on what they do in the build up in 90 minutes not whether you call pull 9/10 moment once or twice in 5 games.
Looked like he was in a minefield in the second half.
I’m not comparing to Pep’s system. But you need to understand that the large amount of sideway passes we make serve a purpose (both Lindelof and Maguire 40 sideway passes per game compared to around 23 going forward). You don’t need to play “progressive football” every pass. The sideway passes attract press and both Lindelof and Maguire are very good at handle that, then they play through the line and that is how we often create chances. .
Why sideway passes is the key of the argument here? The key should be about progressive ball. Even Maguire, Dias, Stones takes on completed is higher than Lindelof, that’s also part of progressive ball.
You need to understand that sideway passes serve purposes but only depends on the team they are playing. Lindelof is not playing in Man city system, but Man United system. If Maguire plays in man city system then one of his progressive attempted aspect such as the long ball would have been lower than what he’s done in here and he would be making more backwards passes since they tend to play more possession and control while we are programmed to play more direct.
I’m not sure what you are arguing about anymore. Lindelof and Maguire have more or less exactly the same amount of sideway and forward passes. Maybe you can summarise what the point you are trying to make? You want to say that Lindelof is poor on the ball or doesn’t play progressive passes? I don’t follow.
His marking was poor tonight, Roma had so much space with very few challenges.
I don't know why are you so all over the place and trying to argue with it, I'm just making a point that Maguire makes more progressive ball than Lindelof as the stats show us that. Progressive ball from our ball playing centre back is critical in our system build up play. The build up play is not judged based on few moment but based on the whole 90 minutes.
Progressive ball is counted as moving the ball in progressive manner, can be as long passes, can be as passing through the line, can be as drive the ball forward by carrying/dribbling it to dangerous area, can be as another way by takes on opposition player to penetrate through their defense and etc.
You should stick with that discussion rather than trying to go far from that argument and start using City to defend your argument as it is irrelevant to our system of play that plays direct.
Last edited:
I disagree with this.
If you get to put crosses in without pressure on about 10 occasions then a half decent centre forward will find space a couple of times.
Bailly was not great today but it was not his or Maguire's fault. Telles had a historically bad performance. Up there with Evra's debut at all time bad left back performances.
A strange night for the CBs. Didn't help that they were getting peppered with crosses from positions and with a quality that is very difficult to defend. Tactically a lot went wrong that made it very hard for him and Bailly to deal with things, but they didn't seem especially alert either. Dzeko is very good in the box and we seemed to have massive issues defending the flanks which I think is where the damage was done. Maybe Maguire should have been switched on to what was happening as our captain, but it's very hard to judge something like that from TV.
Ok Maguire is statistically our best progressive ball player from a quantitatively point of view. I have no problems with that.
quantitatively point of view
You could at least explain that rather than wasting our discussion time with Man City & backward passes that are irrelevant.You told me had the most amount of progressive balls at the club. That is a quantitative measure as in contrast to qualitative measures.quantitatively point of view
Qualitative measures should be measured based on overall not based on few moment. For instance, ball playing centre back who does 7 or 8/10 quality in 50 attempts is more in qualitative than the one who does 5 or 6/10 in 49 attempts but 9/10 once right?
Thought he was okay, certainly much better than the rest of the defence bar DDG.
I would say both our CBs are pretty consistent at a high level when it comes to ball handling . Statistically, Maguire has the most forward passes but he has played the most minutes of all players in the team, and per game him and Lindelof have almost identical passing stats. The main difference are the long balls where Maguire hits about 2-3 more per match, all down the line while Lindelof tries to reach the forward in the box. I don't see any problem with this. It is good MAguire reaches down the sideline. It is good Lindelof sometimes create immidiate chances plus push back their defence with those balls.
Why is this has anything to do with your false definition of qualitative for ball playing?
Making progressive ball is not just about passes but it’s about carrying the ball forward through control/dribble and passes. That’s how to judge the qualitative based on overall ability. Look at every aspect what they offer not just one aspect.
The original stats that I showed you in different thread shows a stats per 90 minutes, I’m not sure why you are now making excuses of ‘’playing most minutes‘’ will make any difference for ‘’per 90 minutes stats’?
That original stat was not just conclude that Maguire made more forward passes & double of the long passes but also conclude he made triple of the takes on completed all per 90 min than Lindelof. Do you even know what takes on completed means? If you notice Dias also made triple more takes on than Lindelof per 90 min and Stones made 5x more takes on than Lindelof.
If you look their forward carries, Lindelof is nowhere near among the top list. Stones & Dias are the best ones for this aspect while Maguire is on the list (Below picture taken in 16th April 2021). Not saying Lindelof is bad but if we combine all of the stats I have given you, it shows that overall Maguire is better in term of ball playing ability than Lindelof. Better ability reflects to better qualitative in their overall ball playing game.
Last edited:
As I mentioned, the stats you present are quantitative. Like metres of ball carrying. Yes we all know Maguire often moves forward with the ball. Some like it, but some has also criticised him for it because they think he moves so slowly and it doesn’t add anything. I’m not saying it’s good or bad, but this is the problem with quantitative stats: it doesn’t tell you anything about the quality.Why is this has anything to do with your false definition of qualitative for ball playing?
Making progressive ball is not just about passes but it’s about carrying the ball forward through control/dribble and passes. That’s how to judge the qualitative based on overall ability. Look at every aspect what they offer not just one aspect.
The original stats that I showed you in different thread shows a stats per 90 minutes, I’m not sure why you are now making excuses of ‘’playing most minutes‘’ will make any difference for ‘’per 90 minutes stats’?
That original stat was not just conclude that Maguire made more forward passes & double of the long passes but also conclude he made triple of the takes on completed all per 90 min than Lindelof. Do you even know what takes on completed means? If you notice Dias also made triple more takes on than Lindelof per 90 min and Stones made 5x more takes on than Lindelof.
If you look their forward carries, Lindelof is nowhere near among the top list. Stones & Dias are the best ones for this aspect while Maguire is on the list (Below picture taken in 16th April 2021). Not saying Lindelof is bad but if we combine all of the stats I have given you, it shows that overall Maguire is better in term of ball playing ability than Lindelof. Better ability reflects to better qualitative in their overall ball playing game.
Maguire is good with the ball. He has good passing and is very resistant to press. The downside is he a bit slow on the ball and his passes also has poor drive sometimes. Wouldn’t say either of the two CBs is better than the other overall.
Your point of being better qualitative is only based on one aspect alone which is wrong.
The quantitative on the stats I used is only number to show that the player does it in consistent basis per 90 minutes, I’m not using it as a base/fundemental to measure qualitative and you shouldn’t looking it that way.
However what you need to focus is the variety what the player offers in consistent basis per 90 minutes, the stats I provided you is to show Maguire offers more variety in his ball playing abilities. And those variety weren’t done based on moment but based on consistent basis which shows why he offers more quality as he is more full package than Lindelof in ball playing ability.
‘’Some has also criticised him for it’’ but in reality there are some also defending it and praised it. And also, using that statement we can also say the same about some has also criticised Lindelof for not being more progressive as Maguire in consistent basis. You listened to what those ‘’some people‘’ because it suits your argument but when people mentioned that Pau Torres is better than Lindelof on the ball, you didn’t want to listen because it doesn’t suit your argument. Come on mate, that’s not how it works if you want to strengthen your point.
Last edited:
The same apply for any player. Quantitative stats don’t tell much about the quality. Look, I think Maguire is good on the ball and also adds to our build up, not even sure what you’re arguing about? Torres is another case, I think it is difficult to draw conclusions when they play in so different leagues. For me it is not enough that a random guy on a forum, who has watched Torres 4 times, says he is superior in the ball. I’ve read that Bailly is our best CB 100s of times but I still don’t agree.
Where did I say the qualitative stats tell about the quality? I never say that, I said it's only to show if the player does it in consistent basis.
The variety in what the player does is what reflects to player's quality. Maguire offers more variety in his ball playing ability, thus his quality as ball playing is better than Lindelof, agree with this?
The stats we are talking about are basically the average over the season and has nothing to do with consistency. Then you need to calculate the variation/std dev.
Maybe his variation on the ball is better, hard to say. Quality wise they are pretty equal imo, both good, about 8/10 in that aspect imo.
The stats that I showed in Torres’s thread show per 90 games not average over the season.
How is a player who offers more variety on his ball playing ability on consistent basis is not better quality than the one who offers less variety on consistent basis? You need to explain that logic of yours mate.
It’s still an average but divided in to 90 min chunks, and that has nothing to do with consistency.They add up all passes etc from all games, divide by minutes played and multiply by 90.
I don’t know how to explain it but variation doesn’t necessarily mean higher quality.
If one player does a lot of different things of average quality and another few different things but all with high quality.
Imo. Maguire has good long balls to Shaw and sometimes to the winger. They don’t create anything dangerous but are good variation and open up and takes us through the press. He plays short balls through press well and is press resistant. He advances well with the ball but often too slow imo (has improved in this area though) and rarely creates anything substantial by doing it. Lindelof plays through press well and often use quick short passing instead of longer balls. His aerial long balls are always in to the box and often fail, but when successful they create a goal scoring chance. His passes have a better drive than Maguires and he is a little faster on the ball (but could also improve that). He is also good at at advancing with the ball but does it too seldom. Again, I rank both high when it comes to ball handling.
Maguire is hands down a better passer, ball carrier and more progressive with the ball. That shouldn't even be up for debate. It's an absolutely mental elevating and overrating of Lindelof's ability. Other than long passes, which he has been very good with and showing clean technique, in terms of frequency and quality he is a clear level below Maguire.
People always say 'Lindelof is intelligent at covering Maguire and therefore does less risky stuff being the last man'. Well that's your evidence there, he does less risky stuff such as playing through the lines and ball carrying because even with all the ability and technique you might think he has, he's so safe he just doesn't show it enough. Some call it 'being smart and safe', some call it being passive.
Funny how quantitative stats are used to hype up how great defensively Lindelof is with 'dribbled past' and not making mistakes i.e no proactive closing/pressuring of the ball etc but when stats are used to show he doesn't pass as progressively, it's down to a 'subjective' opinion and the default assumption is 'well, actually they are both of equal quality'
Next, we're going to be told Lindelof is as good as Maguire aerially ffs.
Well you entered a debate about it so obviously there is one.Maguire is hands down a better passer, ball carrier and more progressive with the ball. That shouldn't even be up for debate. It's an absolutely mental elevating and overrating of Lindelof's ability. Other than long passes, which he has been very good with and showing clean technique, in terms of frequency and quality he is a clear level below Maguire.
People always say 'Lindelof is intelligent at covering Maguire and therefore does less risky stuff being the last man'. Well that's your evidence there, he does less risky stuff such as playing through the lines and ball carrying because even with all the ability and technique you might think he has, he's so safe he just doesn't show it enough. Some call it 'being smart and safe', some call it being passive.
Funny how quantitative stats are used to hype up how great defensively Lindelof is with 'dribbled past' and not making mistakes i.e no proactive closing/pressuring of the ball etc but when stats are used to show he doesn't pass as progressively, it's down to a 'subjective' opinion and the default assumption is 'well, actually they are both of equal quality'
Next, we're going to be told Lindelof is as good as Maguire aerially ffs.
I’ve never said quantitative stats are useless, just that some people don’t understand what they tell you.
If I say Brandon Williams is a better attacking full back than Shaw and someone replies/queries, does that make it a 'debate'? There's a debate because you're choosing to overrate and elevate Lindelof's ability in this particular comparison and discredit the stats by @UNITED ACADEMY with ambigious 'this doesn't tell us the full story' when in all honesty, it just doesn't suit your belief.
That's fine, it's all an opinion anyways but some are more creditable than others.
Let's break it down to a simply yes or no.
Do you believe Lindelof's ball playing ability e.g his actual impact on the game, in frequency of delivery, difficulty and execution is equal to Maguire aka our default playmaker from the back?
Wow, there's being a fan and then there's an absolute wild take. Fair enough, if that's the hill you choose.
Comparing Lindelof to Maguire in ball playing/progressing is akin to comparing McT to Fred. They both have had their contributions but one is way out infront of the other. Insane.
One has more direct goal involvements but the other is statistically and by the eye test, obliterates the other in actual game involvement.
It's not people don't understand, it's about whether you are willing to understand it. You are not willing to do it because all the stats I gave you don't suit your argument. We are not talking 5-10 games of average here, we are talking about 30+ games of average per 90 minutes. It's not possible to have high number based on those overall 30+ games if you are not consistent enough. For example, you only give me clips of 4-5 Lindelof's long passes that directly to forward's chance creation, the stats of chances created or key passes don't show high number because he doesn't do it in consistent basis in those 30+ games.
When I gave you the variety of progressive ball that Maguire made in total earlier in this thread, you chose to ignore them but only focus on one aspect of his passing style to Shaw. This is where my argument started, why are you focussing on one aspect to judge the quality of player's ball playing? And you couldn't give me an explanation for it.
If you combine that information with the information of the one game stats as sample, and the information of the per 90 mins stats. It gives you understanding the more variety what Maguire offers in his ball playing ability.
This is what you don't understand. Ball playing centre back's main task is not to create chance but to build up the play from the back, to dictate, to supply the ball progressively to your attackers or your creative players. Creating chances is not their job, that's why their chances created numbers are relatively low. Even Lindelof's chance created total are equal to Maguire in this league, it doesn't reflect to quality of ball playing ability. Thus, it's wrong to judge quality of ball playing ability based on that because chances created is for our front four and full backs jobs. Agree?
- Status