Not charge at in?
5
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 52
- Clean sheets
- 21
- Goals
- 3
- Assists
- 1
- Yellow cards
- 15
- Status
Why though? If he wins it then great we keep another attack going, if he gets passed he catches him up and tackles him.Not charge at in?
you’re acting like they countered and scored when he didn’t even get a shot away
That's why they call playing a high defensive line, high risk. There's risk associated with playing that way. But you have to credit Bailly for allowing us to play a high line. He did dive in but recovered the situation in tandem with Maguire. I don't see any problem with it because I want to see us approach games in a proactive manner.
And that’s my point. That “poor-ish” bit of defending and the flat out woeful touch in the first minute (when Henderson saved his arse) are the sort of things Lindelof would get crucified for if he had done them. There’s definitely double standards at play here.
Indulge me here. Bailly stands his ground. He doesn't run away, he doesn't dive in. He realizes that he's the last man and Isak might be able to take a touch before he covers the 5 yards. Explain to me the repercussions of him NOT getting beaten.
What? He’s still alongside him pushing further out and would likely clear up the danger even without Maguire.
”beat all end up” and ”saved”, that is some impressive hyerbole.
Of course there is. As there is playing deep. But there's a right way and a wrong way of doing it. Just because there's risks associated with playing a high line doesn't mean every piece of bad defending can be excused because it's risky. City play with a high line too. They don't over commit to the ball when it isn't there to be won though, particularly when they are the last defender. I want a proactive style of play too. But I want us to do it properly.
He wasn’t the last man though was he? He’s 2v1 with maguire.
im sure if he was alone he would do it differently. making up hypotheticals won’t help you.
the simple answer is no chance was created, no shot and no free kick. Well defended in my eyes!
Double standards go both ways, I’ve admitted why I have my bias, both make mistakes, neither are perfect but there’s a reason even the Swedes rated fexking Granqvist over Lindelöf and that his passive / wesk style.
As impressive as seeing nothing wrong with a player getting turned and the having to chase back 30 yards?
I see nothing here. Poor-ish hey.
Last edited:
I think we have very different understanding of how a CB should defend. Isak is quick enough to give Bailly issues if he squares him up - why would he just give him possession and allow him to run at him, he's fast but he's not an idiot. Maguire is alongside him and so he's gone to win the ball as is closest to Isak.
You've lost me with the bit about Luiz and keepers, all that happened here is we lost possession cheaply, it fell kindly for Isak, Bailly realised he couldn't make the tackle and so readjusts his run, catches up with the player and Maguire does the rest. If this was the dying minutes of a high stakes game I'd probably prefer him to just wipe Isak out if I'm thinking critically but I find it strange you think this is so bad.
I mean it’s Bailly, so I’m not sure he knows that himself.
Hypotheticals are pointless though, as with Pogue saying “if it was Mbappe”, we know ourselves from playing that we’ll take certain risks against players that we wouldn’t with others. Bailly knew he had Maguire there and nothing to worry about with Isak.
Yes. He was. There is exactly 0 outfield players between Bailly and the goal. Combined with the assertion he ran, what was it, 5 yards with the ball before being tackled? The suspension of disbelief is really quite something here.
Hang about. He's too quick if Bailly gives himself a few yards, but not if Bailly bets beaten and he gets beyond him. You understand the issue we have here yes?
As impressive as seeing nothing wrong with a player getting turned and the having to chase back 30 yards?
I didn’t say nothing was “wrong”, just that it’s not the big deal you’re making out. It wasn’t a slightly dangerous situation yet you’re making out he was “saved” and “beat all ends up”.
Maguire is right next to him?! Are you being purposely obtuse? Watch your own video you posted.
it must really hurt that we kept a clean sheet tonight and didn’t look in trouble once
Please read the post and think logically. I shouldn't need to explain basic physics to you.
Oh please do. I can't wait to see you try.
He isn't next to him. Do you understand what 'last defender even means?' Bailly is on the half way line, Maguire is in their half.Maguire is right next to him?! Are you being purposely obtuse? Watch your own video you posted.
it must really hurt that we kept a clean sheet tonight and didn’t look in trouble once
I get you struggle with distance, what with thinking the space between our box and their half is 4 yards (this still blows my mind, by the way), but you're not going to get any change out of straight up lying.
Didn’t think you’d actually take the distance literally, was more a figure of speech.
by the way, if you think Bailly is the last man maguire is actually into our half first
for somebody that is so bothered about being correct the fact you can’t see maguire is literally alongside Bailly in the whole motion, that is staggering to me!stop the video at 9 seconds, maguire last man.
no shot, no goal, clean sheet
To be fair he’s exaggerating to make a point against a series of really bad takes from people who are determined to argue Bailly doesn’t put a foot wrong. Which is just silly.
Ok, fair enough. It’s good to acknowledge our biases. My personal preference in a CB is a more understated style.
Ivaldo’s too, and I get that, I really do. As I say, neither is perfect.
Running half the length of the pitch and referring to it as four yards is no more a figure of speech than saying 'Ghengis Khan killed 7 people.Didn’t think you’d actually take the distance literally, was more a figure of speech.
by the way, if you think Bailly is the last man maguire is actually into our half first
You've got to looking at your screen upside down to think Bailly doesn't start off as the last man. I don't think I can continue arguing with someone with such a warped sense of reality as you. I'm out. Enjoy the rest of your evening/day.
I would like to see more proactivity, I just want to see it done the right way. We need to create Baillof.
A last man is a sole lone defender. Not a pair of centre backs!
yes I think you need to give this one up
until next time! I’m sure we’ll be having lots more fun with the ice man this weekendI don't get why it would be difficult to understand but if I must: momentum = mass × velocity . p = m × v
Your third option is Bailly sitting off him which would allow Isak to run at him directly. That's exactly what you want to avoid as a CB even if you're fast because the attacker gets the advantage. I also completely believe he is right to go the man in that scenario, the idea of allowing a striker possession as a CB and knowing your partner is not that fast is a bit loco.
In an ideal world one of our CMs is a bit deeper or Bailly is a bit closer and makes the tackle or just makes soft foul to avert the danger but you're making out he's made some huge error when it's such a minor incident in the game and is actually proof of the benefits of having a fast CB. Recovery pace is king in football.
Yeah, definitely. Been the story of the post-Fergie era. We’ve had a load of CBs with a load of great qualities but never anyone who’s the complete package.
Rio and Vidic are talked about as silk and steel caricatures but people forget that the “weak” elements of each of their games was not far off the stronger elements of their successors. If Bailly was as composed as Vidic and Lindelof as strong/good in the air as Rio they’d both be twice the player they are.
.
We need a CB who knows when to be physical and when to be passive. Hopefully Marcel Bout will have the answer.
I agree with this post.
We need a CB who knows when to be physical and when to be passive. Hopefully Marcel Bout will have the answer.
Who?
My pet hate
So what happened is Bailly committed to a challenge, Isak ran PAST him, meaning he is CLOSER to the goal than Bailly. Bailly then has to turn, and catch up.I don't get why it would be difficult to understand but if I must: momentum = mass × velocity . p = m × v
Your third option is Bailly sitting off him which would allow Isak to run at him directly. That's exactly what you want to avoid as a CB even if you're fast because the attacker gets the advantage. I also completely believe he is right to go the man in that scenario, the idea of allowing a striker possession as a CB and knowing your partner is not that fast is a bit loco.
In an ideal world one of our CMs is a bit deeper or Bailly is a bit closer and makes the tackle or just makes soft foul to avert the danger but you're making out he's made some huge error when it's such a minor incident in the game and is actually proof of the benefits of having a fast CB. Recovery pace is king in football.
The alternative is Bailly doesn't commit to the challenge, Isak doesn't run past him, meaning he isn't closer to the goal. Bailly doesn't have to turn after running momentarily in the wrong direction.
Thinking Bailly has a better chance of keeping up with Isak doesn't only fly in the face of physics, it defies common sense. It's why slower defenders back off. It's why running towards a runner to take the baton off them is a bad idea. You might think Bailly taking that risk is a good idea, but you truly cannot think it somehow helps him in a footrace against Isak.
He has played for us for a year and a half! That's enough time to get it right.
I feel like this is something that makes sense when you're writing it but just doesn't work in reality on a football pitch. FYI I'm struggling to follow the bolded but because your own video literally proves he did just that...
I'm not trying to be condescending here but just think of your option in practise, what happens once Bailly has stayed where he is and Isak is running at him full speed. Even if Bailly is essentially sprinting full speed away from Isak (therefore they not being at a momentum disadvantage) he will have to change his momentum at some point to make a tackle and will give Isak the advantage.
As said, for me a minor incident and it's fair to say maybe Bailly could have committed a foul or been closer to win the tackle but it would just be criticism for criticism's sake.
Happy with Maguire today. Two good games in a row. Yes!
He is just so good in some games, and look worth every penny. Get him a fit Bailly-like CB next to him, next season please.
Well, that would cost 80m, thank you.
Bailly certainly messed up at the beginning of that, allowing Isak to turn and get past him far too easily. However it's also Bailly's pace and pressure which forces Isak wide enough and into making a poor touch which gives Maguire an easy tackle, and if Maguire doesn't make that tackle Bailly has still forced Isak wide enough that Bailly is between him and the goal and he's unlikely to score.
Bailly made the original mistake, but he'd already mostly fixed it himself rather than Maguire saving him. That's not to downplay Maguire as he did do well.
- Status