Whoscored. Duels attempted and recoveries are from Football Critic.Have you a link for that ?
Whoscored. Duels attempted and recoveries are from Football Critic.Have you a link for that ?
Again, if Lindelof was all over him and he ended up goal side, it flies in the face of the pretence he was left for dead; while Bailly, who neither got within touching distance or goal side, somehow got the better of it.To be fair I need to watch the incident again but Lindelof was all over him and should have conceded a yellow/free kick. Bailly comes out favourbly if just a little as he was rusty and against a faster player.
We all come into this loaded with preconceptions and opinions as we're watching 1000's of minutes to form an opinion on a player's game.
Lindelof being 'average' would be my definition of you giving him benefit of the doubt (and thus loaded). My opinion along with others is that he was thoroughly uninvolved and therefore a net negative. It's not average, it's below that.
If Vidic had played like Lindelof today, I would say 'average off game' because this would be below par. For Lindelof, it's par for the course.
Again, if Lindelof was all over him and he ended up goal side, it flies in the face of the pretence he was left for dead; while Bailly, who neither got within touching distance or goal side, somehow got the better of it.
You're saying it's fine to be unreasonable because you don't rate him. That's entirely different to seeing confirmation bias. Course he was involved. Ridiculous to suggest otherwise.
Good call @A-man. Weird not to count that.
CheersWhoscored. Duels attempted and recoveries are from Football Critic.
@GifLord can you link the Lindelof 1-vs-1 Almiron?
Let's see it again but I first thought he was left for dead and managed to get goal side because he was fouling him and got away with it. Almiron not going down, then checking his run and immediatedly getting dispossesd by Fred didn't go in his favour. Bailly did indeed get within touching distance, he was literally shoulder to shoulder just before Isak took a loose/wider touch (due to Bailly's pressure?) and Maguire cleared:
if by being on the pitch, a few passes and clearances etc then of course he was involved just like how Martial was involved i.e that's not an endorsement.
It's a figure of speech to say he was largely annonymous compared to his defensive partner.
Some others have pointed out (anecdotally) that it's remarkable how Lindelof is not involved in our set pieces. I mean what was he doing pushing out for that short corner?
He can't be left for dead while simultaneously fouling him. Those two statements are incompatible. Unless he's a Jedi of course.
Yes his defensive partner had more defending to do. Lindelof didn't do anything particularly good, he didn't do anything particularly bad either. By definition, that makes him average. If DDG went 45 minutes without touching the ball, it would be a bit ridiculous to say he was below average, no? When called upon, Lindelof did what he had to do. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not his fault Newcastle are shite. When did you think he shirked his responsibility? When did he not press the matter enough for you?
@GifLord can you link the Lindelof 1-vs-1 Almiron?
Let's see it again but I first thought he was left for dead and managed to get goal side because he was fouling him and got away with it. Almiron not going down, then checking his run and immediatedly getting dispossesd by Fred didn't go in his favour. Bailly did indeed get within touching distance, he was literally shoulder to shoulder just before Isak took a loose/wider touch (due to Bailly's pressure?) and when Maguire cleared:
If by being on the pitch, a few passes and clearances etc then of course he was involved just like how Martial was involved i.e that's not an endorsement.
It's a figure of speech to say he was largely annonymous not just compared to his defensive partner but in general. Someone can verify the stats someone posted up earlier but I'm sure even with the inconsistencies shown in the clip posted by Giflord above, it's going to be proportionately fair for or against likewise.
Some others have pointed out (anecdotally) that it's remarkable how Lindelof is not involved in our set pieces. I mean what was he doing pushing out for that short corner?
That wouldn't be left for dead, then. I'm perfectly happy with fouling in situations like these. I wish we did more of it. Everyone else seems to.Ah I realise what you mean. 'Left for dead' meaning in this case, I think he would have had a clear run had it not been for the fouling, which Almiron was a bit unfortunate not to get (coupled with Fred's immediate cover). Let's see the clip again.
Speaking of dramitising, I'm glad you acknowledged Bailly's pace to recover from his own situation where he was clearly within touching distance.
As for the bolded, yes. Too much posturing outside his own penalty box. Not enough pressing, ball carrying or progressive passing. A lot of it was 5-10 yard square passes or it going back to where it came from. Took little responsibility.
We're not playing against peak Barca/City/Liverpool so yes he has to impose himself on the game just like how Martial didn't. By that I don't mean flying tackles and madman harrying, just more quality and nuance. You shouldn't reduce your level to what's in front of you, it's not enough as we need everyone raising their game.
The stats tell one story.
got a time stamp?
That wouldn't be left for dead, then. I'm perfectly happy with fouling in situations like these. I wish we did more of it. Everyone else seems to.
Yes, correct. Bailly caught him at the last. That's not dramatising but I applaud the effort to equalize the two.
Ah, so no actual instances, just vague, empty notions. It's what I expected.
You want 15/20 yard passes into the space to take advantage of the clever movement of Martial and James? That's what everyone else was doing of course.
I'm bored of this merry-go-round. As far as I'm concerned, your desperation to find fault is precisely what I mean. I'm sure you'll think otherwise. Have a nice evening.
Lindelof against Newcastle
0 Duels attempted
0 Aerials duels attempted
0 tackles attempted
0 interceptions
3 clearances
3 recoveries
0 blocks
For Maguire
12 duels attempted
6/6 aerial duels won
2 tackles attempted
1 interception
3 clearances
11 recoveries
1 block
One man defence.
Thank you @GifLord
Just for me to understand the whoscored stats better. What would you call the situation with Lindelof in the clip provided from GifLord?
It is apparently not registered as duel or aerial, and I checked the logger, it is not regged as clearance. For me this is a duel. What do you think?
Yes, he is. One of the fastest players in the league actually, very atypical sort of #10. Lindelof was still poor in that situation imoIs Almiron even quick? I don’t recall him looking fast previously. I know Lindelof is relatively slow but he got horribly exposed in that incident.
This does my head in. They are not remotely similar. There's no partnership as well. It is just Maguire doing the majority of the defending and having to make do with Lindelof beside him.It’s very obvious now that Maguire and Lindelof are just too similar so that the partnership doesn’t work well, because they have the similar flaws and not able to complement each other.
You can’t make it up. Lindelof does well to defend against a pacey player. He shouldn’t have touched him etc
The same people praising Bailly’s recovery pace and physicality are now criticising Lindelof for showing recovery pace and physicality.
I hope so.To be fair, I think those people are playing a bit tongue in cheek with ivaldo due to his incredibly ott criticism of a pretty nothing situation in the week.
Your are quick to point out how he ended up goal side and Bailly didn't but ignore the fact that if Almiron had a bit of sense he would have gained a free kick and a yellow for Lindelof, while Bailly caught up to Isak without fouling him.And Lindelof still ended up goal side while Bailly didn't. So, as I said, it's utter nonsense to deem Bailly had recovered from his mistake while Lindelof was left for dead.
Thank you @GifLord
Just for me to understand the whoscored stats better. What would you call the situation with Lindelof in the clip provided from GifLord?
It is apparently not registered as duel or aerial, and I checked the logger, it is not regged as clearance. For me this is a duel. What do you think?
Eh? Ive mentioned it at least twice in this thread.Your are quick to point out how he ended up goal side and Bailly didn't but ignore the fact that if Almiron had a bit of sense he would have gained a free kick and a yellow for Lindelof, while Bailly caught up to Isak without fouling him.
IMO they both did fairly well considering their limitations (lindelof's pace compared to Almiron) but you criticized Bailly to an extent for a nothing situation just like the one from yesterday.
It's quite incredible isn't it?I hope so.
They are pretty similar circumstances though you could argue Bailly being in the centre of the pitch and making his mistake was a bit more of a worry both defenders dealt with the situation.
Agendas gonna agenda though.It's quite incredible isn't it?
I imagine RAB has realized the blatant double standards in play here and is desperate for a way to justify it. We both know if it wasn't highlighted when Bailly did it the Lindelof incident would have been a damning indictment. But as they've already praised Bailly for worse, it becomes a bit awkward.
So true. 'Too passive' springs to mind.Agendas gonna agenda though.
Do agree had we not seen Bailly do it with Maguire mid week it would be spun as “Lindelof was too reactive and slow to deal with it so Fred had to save him.”
People are clutching by suggesting he shouldn’t hold onto the player. What happened to wanting a physical CB?
Contrary Bailly turning and chasing him down the middle between himself and Maguire was probably the deciding factor and good on that occasion, allowing Maguire to catch up.. Not sure about Lindelof, since haven't seen the incident again, but I feel he did good slowing Almiron for Fred to catch up abd lucky Almiron didn't fall down.I hope so.
They are pretty similar circumstances though you could argue Bailly being in the centre of the pitch and making his mistake was a bit more of a worry both defenders dealt with the situation.
Good call @A-man. Weird not to count that.
That is weird. Its absolutely an aerial duel and one in which he did good.
I think Lindelof is a huge weak link but he didn't do anything really wrong today.
I find it strange to not register that as a aerial, clearance or duel but I’ve seen this before. Like @Ekeke wrote it could be because the opponent didn’t challenge enough, didn’t jump etc. People tend to forget that these stats have a large portion of subjectivity in them. I suspect that if ten trained people would analyse this situation they would end up with different results.I'd say its a header/aerial and if its not considered a duel maybe its because his opponent doesnt jump and compete properly for it, he stays on the floor allowing a clear headed clearance. Maybe its even a foul with Lindelof going down clutching his chest
Think it’s a really fair assessment of him and the othersThere's an Athletic article on Lindelof. Would be interesting to see what a 'neutral' thinks.
It's quite incredible isn't it?
I imagine RAB has realized the blatant double standards in play here and is desperate for a way to justify it. We both know if it wasn't highlighted when Bailly did it the Lindelof incident would have been a damning indictment. But as they've already praised Bailly for worse, it becomes a bit awkward.
I said he make 3 mistakes in a game that several members incredibly decided was a good example of why he should be starting instead of Lindelof. Then you and others took great offense to this, and tried your damned hardest to turn it into a positive. He got done on the half way line but, no, apparently, that was GOOD defending. There was NOTHING wrong with it. Indeed, at first you couldn't even see a fault in it:It was a nothing incident, Lindelöf showed decent pace, there was never any danger.
It’s only brought up because you spent 2 days slagging Bailly for a similar nothing incident and some posters were desperate to see if YOU had double standards or not.
What are you seeing here? That’s good teamwork from the pair, never any danger and easily dealt with.
Another myth that he's faster than Maguire, Lindelof is painfully slow too but on top of that his weak physique means he can hardly ever win any race shoulder to shoulder. Lindelof really has got nothing any top CB should have for a top team. Just because this time we didn't concede after his mistake, means he had a fine game and should stay. History will repeat itself until we buy injury free CB or two who are not shite because quite simply anyone can replace him who has two legs and a head on shoulders. Reading this thread I'd even take 36 year old Cahill over him any day, in fact any EPL player from this year. Such a shame that teams like City or Leicester are able to replace their players quickly and we have to wait for many years to prove that a player one is not good enough. Can you ever imagine Darmian or Lindelof playing for teams like Bayern, Barcelona or Madrid, How many games such average players managed to play for us it's painful.Is Almiron even quick? I don’t recall him looking fast previously. I know Lindelof is relatively slow but he got horribly exposed in that incident.
I said he make 3 mistakes in a game that several members incredibly decided was a good example of why he should be starting instead of Lindelof. Then you and others took great offense to this, and tried your damned hardest to turn it into a positive. He got done on the half way line but, no, apparently, that was GOOD defending. There was NOTHING wrong with it. Indeed, at first you couldn't even see a fault in it:
He was turned on the half way line and had to chase him to the edge of our box man. 'Never any danger' though. It's blatantly clear with your self confessed bias that you're downplaying the incident as much as you possibly can. You can accuse me of making it out for more than it is, sure, but the only reason it's highlighted in the first place is because this is the sort of thing he routinely gets blasted for.
This after examining every single aspect of Lindelofs game under a microscope for the last 2 months. The hypocrisy would be harder to spot if it was licking your face. And no, it's very sweet of you to say that this was all because of me. The endless pages of petty criticisms of Lindelof shows this is standard practice. Nice try though!
You see, you don't even know how this situation arose, you're just making convenient assumptions because that's what you do.It is because of you though, in this instance. I’m not trying anything.
You went to great lengths to point out what a big mistake a nothing incident was, posting gifs and everything, and you’re still doing it now.
Neither was any danger, so it’s a strange bias from me to say I thought Lindelöf showed good pace and defended the situation fine. You’ve just made up your own bias that ”had you not pointed out Bailly’s mistake in the week, people would have been all over this”.
I call that bollocks, it’s was another nothing incident, not worthy of any debate and was only brought up because of your putting that Bailly incident under the microscope.
But sure, pretend you aren’t completely responsible for this debate about two nothing incidents.
You see, you don't even know how this situation arose, you're just making convenient assumptions because that's what you do.
I hadn't mentioned the specific incident at first. Another poster brought it up as an example of good defending, and what we've been missing. They mentioned the time stamp, they compared it to Lindelof, and they said it would be a goal if Lindelof was playing. Despite that you state I'm the one who is exaggerating the danger there, when the person who I originally replied to requesting the gif had said it would be a goal if Lindelof was playing in his place. Sounds like a pretty dangerous situation he's portraying, right?
So no, it's not some strange bias I has brought up. Someone had, quite literally, already made that comparison. I would give you the benefit of doubt because the conversation crossed multiple threads, but I see you make no attempt to actually ascertain where it started. RABs gonna RAB.
Was let down (Maguire) by his CB partner tonight and stepped up. Excellent performance.
Yes totally let down. That's why we conceeded 4.
Yeah...
And the origin of the gif came in response to the following:Feck me @ivaldo mate.....
That’s how it started in that thread, you slagging Bailly, another poster questioning why when we had a clean sheet and you posting that as ”proof”.
Now I don’t know if you had something else going on in another thread, but the entire debate in THAT thread started there. How can the rest of us know if you actually took that over from another debate? You used it here as an example of shit defending and how he let Maguire down.
That debate is the reason the shitty nothing Lindelöf/Newcastle incident was brought up.
So yes, two nothing incidents from two defenders that you caused mass debate over.
.Everything you need to know about our central defence was summed up around 23 rd min. They had a counter, Maguire was on way back after making a run forward with the ball. Their player breaks at pace from half way line, Bailly sticks with him for pace, doesn't make a challenge, stays up, forces him to his right and by that time Maguire has caught up and nips in with the touch. If that was Maguire and Lindelof as a pair, that's a goal or at the very least a shot on target, simple as.