Eh? What are those supposed to be debunking? Nobody doubted he was a nice chap and a good pro, did we? Harry seemed less than certain that his future lay at OT in those snippets.
How good is Chris Smalling?
- Thread starter Plechazunga
- Start date
I've heard many people laugh at Scholesey's view that technique is gifted as opposed to taught, but I don't get the joke myself.
Are we saying the likes of Fletcher or Valencia are not as good as Messi with the ball because they didn't train as hard as him or something?
That's irrelevant to the actual point though. The point is simply that players can't improve their technical skills beyond the age of 21. Which is ridiculous.
Did anyone see Smalling in the CL tie where he headed the ball which was 3 feet of the ground?
Anyone got a Gif?
Anyone got a Gif?
Ah, I suppose that is a slightly different argument. My recollection of the point was that technique can't be taught in training. Introducing age limits is silly, although I do reckon there is only so much that training can do.
This thread is a little bit unfair to Smalling. Really, there should be one thread for Smalling: a future world class centre back? And one title Smalling: a current mid-table wannabe-fullback.
Few people would argue against his talent and contribution at centre back. He is strong, fast, great in the air, reads the game well etc etc. At right back, he still has pace and power, but that's about it. Normally he is difficult to get past, but in attack he is just so hit and miss.
Few people would argue against his talent and contribution at centre back. He is strong, fast, great in the air, reads the game well etc etc. At right back, he still has pace and power, but that's about it. Normally he is difficult to get past, but in attack he is just so hit and miss.
Yeah ok then
Btw, whenever I see a Youtube compilation highlighting other players, be it Ando, O'Shea or whomever, it really strikes me just how good Scholes was, as he orchestrated everything in and around those playing well.
Wes Brown was an infinitely more talented RB than Chris Smalling.
Smalling is so bad I wish for the days of O'Shea and Brown. To think. some people on here actually thought Smalling was a better ball playing CB than Evans.
Smalling is so bad I wish for the days of O'Shea and Brown. To think. some people on here actually thought Smalling was a better ball playing CB than Evans.
Wes Brown's 07/08 season: damn.
Him and Jones at CB would give us a fast aggressive back line rhat is able to play closer to the midfield. It would transform the whole team.
When we played some good stuff in late 2011, in addition to Anderson and Cleverley partnership, I think just as important was no Rio or Vidic in the back line. This was the last time we had pace throughout the team with Smalling, Jones, Evans and Evra at the back, Nani, Anderson, Cleverley and Youn across the middle and Rooney and Welbeck up top.
Those are not even really a bunch of top class players, but it was a team with speed and movement. Since then the likes of Rio, Vidic and Carrick have all come back into the team and we have added Persie, Mata and Fellaini. Despite our success, I would argue that we have not played well at all since that period. We have built a team with the wrong components, and our moves in the last couple of years smacks of a team with no plan/direction.
I say rebuild a quicker team, and that starts with Smalling and Jones. Centrally.
When we played some good stuff in late 2011, in addition to Anderson and Cleverley partnership, I think just as important was no Rio or Vidic in the back line. This was the last time we had pace throughout the team with Smalling, Jones, Evans and Evra at the back, Nani, Anderson, Cleverley and Youn across the middle and Rooney and Welbeck up top.
Those are not even really a bunch of top class players, but it was a team with speed and movement. Since then the likes of Rio, Vidic and Carrick have all come back into the team and we have added Persie, Mata and Fellaini. Despite our success, I would argue that we have not played well at all since that period. We have built a team with the wrong components, and our moves in the last couple of years smacks of a team with no plan/direction.
I say rebuild a quicker team, and that starts with Smalling and Jones. Centrally.
It's such an old argument; nature vs nurture. So many people have tried to prove that it's one or the other when in essence it's probably a mixture of both. If Cristiano Ronaldo had played the same amount of football as i have in my life, he'd still be a better player than me. Would he have reached the heights he has done thus far in his career though? Extremely doubtful. In fact, one of the most common topics of praise for Ronaldo is how hard he's worked to become what he is.
Like @Pexbo told you, Scholesy was really adamant about the age limit more than anything else whereas there's been many cases of players disproving his theory. He was just too stubborn to accept being wrong and that's why he was considered a laughing stock.
I don't think it is tbh.
It is beyond ridiculous, Didier Drogba is the best example I can think of. He used to be in his early 20s a brute of a player with skills but very inconsistent with his controls, flicks, passes. The older he became and the better he became at technical elements of football. Drogba in his early and late 20s are two very different people, hell just ask any Chelsea about his first season and his last couple.
I never really rated the likes of Philip Neville, Wes Brown and the O'Shit guy however they all were better RBs then Smalling.
Are you for real?
Never believed the hype surrounding him and he proved me right outside OT. However he was a better RB then Smalling
The oshit thing is a joke. He was a great servant but a poor player. He would have never touched a united shirt if he wasnt a homegrown talent
Last edited:
A great servant but a very very average player (lets not use the S word once again).
Aye, 400 appearances and 11 major honours, purely out of some misplaced sense of loyalty.
It was a characteristic of SAF teams to have a substantial number of quality players backed by average players who filled the gaps and performed the dirty work. As SAF got better in his job the amount of quality players decreased while the number of 'workhorses' increased. We are currently reaping the fruit of such strategy.
Honours mean little. If one had to judge that way then OShea > Gerrard.
Oh well I'm used to some fans puppy eyes towards certain homegrown talent who always seem on the cusp of brilliance only to mysteriously turn average once they leave OT. So let just agree to disagree.
Last edited:
No, let's not agree to disagree. Instead, let's recognise that the suggestion that a footballer who played 400 times for the strongest side in England (hence the major honours) was 'poor' is a load of old cock.
He wasn't a poor player. Wasn't good enough to start for us but he was quite versatile and a decent backup for a few positions. That is the reason why he got so many games for us. An O'Shea (2005-2009) would have been ideal now for us, being great backup for both Rafael and Evra.
Made an excellent impression on me with his start here, which won't be easily forgotten. Seems like a confidence issue more than anything (and that could be said for most of the team).
I said in the first season after he left, when we faced yet another playing Carrick at CB crisis, that selling him was a mistake. It feels even more the case now. People talk about how he would have held back our young defenders, but does anyone really feel Chris Smalling's career has been boosted by spending three years mostly at right back? It's Rio who has held Smalling back, and he who should have been sold.
Yea, I suppose that makes it silly.
I think Scholesy's cut-off point for the age beyond which technique cannot be improved was actually 16.
He was demented.
He was demented.
You're being wise after the fact here.
When O'Shea and Brown were let go we were all expecting Fabio and Rafael to nail down positions on both flanks. For various different reasons this didn't happen but there would have been an awful lot of moaning on here if Rafael and his brother were stuck out on loan or in the reserves, while O'Shea and Brown kept getting games at fullback well into their thirties.
Getting games in central defence is a different issue. I think Rio's back was a real concern at the time so it would have looked as though there would be loads of chances for Jones, Smalling and Evans to get games in their preferred positions. Especially with Brown and O'Shea no longer an option.
It's a funny one tbh. I think the issue is ascertaining what exactly is achieved by intense training. Do you actually 'learn' the skills, or do you 'learn to use the skills'?.
I think that technique is largely nature. Sometimes I think that when say, Vidic, fails to play a certain pass or control a high ball, and people say 'he isn't that sort of player' that it is a bit strange. Theoretically, regardless of position, if you play football near enough every day for your whole life, you should be able to do step-overs, bend a ball, etc. As I said in an earlier post, it is obvious that someone like Fletcher will never be able to do with a ball what Quaresma can. I doubt that is down to him simply not being bothered to practise his football.
Also, I see your Cristiano Ronaldo example of hard work and offer your the other Ronaldo. Ronaldo never improved as a footballer throughout his entire career in my opinion. He was literally the best striker in the world from the moment he came onto the professional stage, and if there was a way of measuring it, I would say possibly even before then! Ronaldo simply got older, but I suppose this is why he is called a phenomenon. Even as a teenager there wasn't the 'he needs to learn to do this or that'. He was the leading scorer in top leagues as a teenager. Also, there is a notion that Cristiano isn't as naturally gifted as the likes of Ronaldo or Messi anyway. Even with great players, I think there is an apparent difference between God given talent and developed ability. If you watch Messi and Ronaldo, in my view, it is clear that one is a product of extreme hard work and one is a product of being blessed with the greatest gift.
You're talking in abstract terms here. Scholesy was talking about "technique". Which someone recently defined as the ability to make the ball do what you want. So if we think about first touch, or accuracy of passing. Does anyone seriously believe that these aren't things you can improve as you develop and mature as a footballer?
Yeah he was simply fantastic. In fact throughout his career he was constantly wanted by Real and Barcelona and once he left United for erm Sunderland he became one of the finest CB the EPL ever seen. Happy now?
Records and statistics need to be taken with a pinch of salt. Sebastiano Rossi played 240 times with AC Milan and won 12 major honours. He still holds the record for the longest streak without conceding a goal a goal in Serie A history (yeah ahead of legends such as Dino Zoff, Walter Zenga and Gianluigi Buffon). That's enough to conclude that he was a hell of a keeper.
Unfortunately what statistics do not show is the fact that the keeper played in the best team of his generation, defended by possibly the strongest defense in football history. Even Foster would look great when he's got the likes of Tassotti, Baresi and Maldini in front of him. No wonder why Rossi's career declined when AC Milan started their decline.
Last edited:
He was pretty average, the typical player who looks decent when surrounded with better players. His versatility was a big plus though.
To be perfectly honest, O'Shea wasn't anything above average. A lot like Phil Neville, he looked very promising early on - both at left back, from some reason - but that promise was never fulfilled. Easy to forget that now but his thread his was always full of people complaining of his awful passing. He did a job. For the most part, nothing more and nothing less.
I'm torn tbh. I mean, it sounds silly to suggest it cannot be developed over time. But then it also sounds silly to imply that all you need is a fit lad who is game and then you can essentially make him whatever you want.
In fact, I'm almost leaning towards supporting Scholesey's seemingly ridiculous age theory. I mean, you could sell Steve Sidwell to Barcelona now and he can train with them every day without ever likely becoming a top midfielder. That said, if you had sent the same Steve Sidwell to La Masia when he was 10 years old, then you may have a chance. Which in itself still contradicts my initial point about the talent being God given and not trained!
I have no fecking clue.
this.
I had high hopes for him. In his first season he reminded of Thuram. Its quite a shame it didn't turned out that way.
To be honest, in 2003, screw Thuram, we were thinking we had the new Maldini on our hands.
All you're saying is "older people have less chance of becoming better players because they have less time".
That's logically correct an completely besides the actual point being made.
The point Scholesey was making making was that past a certain age (16 or 21, it's irrelevant though) a player cannot improve his technical ability. Which is nonsense.
The example of Drogba is perfect. When he arrived at Chelsea despite costing £24m, I heard lots of commentators say how it was obvious his education came at a Ligue 2 club compared to Henry who came through the famed Clairefontaine academy because of their "touch".
Fast forward a couple of years and Drogba's touch was as good as anyone's. He became a world class striker. Which completely debunks Scholeseys terrible theory.
Well forget what the commentators said, it is obvious that Drogba had it in him. It was probably a mental thing, he was likely just erratic and needed to take more care. It is also likely overplayed and I'm sure there are plenty of examples of brilliant technique from Drogba in his Marseilles days too. Paul McShane was educated at the 'famed United academy' and has no such touch to speak of.
And if the line you summarized as my point is 'logically correct' anyway, it would actually support Scholesey's argument. Perhaps after 16, 21 or whenever - the idea is that a player does not have enough time to develop his skills to a world class level. In my view, this development can only be done if the tools are already there to work with in the first place. Again, this is why Vidic and Fletcher are not technical geniuses, despite, I imagine, having trained very hard in their 20s (just like Drogba did).
And also, even after his full bloom, Drogba was still not technically as good as Henry. It was clear from a young age, even when both players were 'raw' that Henry was the technically superior of the two. Drogba did very well to close the gap, or at least close the relevance of the gap - but as good as he was, he was no footballing genius. Henry was, and such a trajectory could possibly been predicted for him from the time he was 10.
I think it is too blunt to say a player cannot improve his technique per se. But every player goes to training every day and not all are equal (obviously)