Jump to content

Van Dijk


Roo1976

Recommended Posts

Many on here thought Yoshida was Most Improved Player last year too. I'm not saying I agree (I haven't given it any thought), but he obviously did something right to give some that impression. One erroneous pass and he's been cast out :lol:

 

If you think it's "one erroneous pass" you might want to try searching my posting history about his performances.

 

Ironically when people were saying "should have picked Cedric" before kick off I was saying Yoshida might be a better option against Depay. :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think it's "one erroneous pass" you might want to try searching my posting history about his performances.

 

Ironically when people were saying "should have picked Cedric" before kick off I was saying Yoshida might be a better option against Depay. :facepalm:

 

I could see the logic of the decision although I didn't agree with it. If Cedric isn't going to get a game against pacy wingers why buy him? The whole point of playing full back is to nullify wingers who are generally, erm, fast. I think Ron is overthinking his team selections this year and wonder if the poor run in last season has anything to do with it? We look much better when we let other teams worry about us. Although United eventually went on to dominate a large chunk of the game, they were no where near as dynamic as we were in the first 20 or 30 minutes and they only dominated because we sat back and let them play. I'd like to see a settled back 4 of Cedic Fonte van Dijk Bertrand and then mess around with the midfield depending on tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesn't. He also generally only has issues when he is played out of position, especially at RB (rather than LB). In any case, if you think Yoshida's howler on Sunday cost us the game then you are very much mistaken, it just compounded what was an appalling performance by the whole team including Ronald.

 

He does. Literally nearly every single game. I should have been keeping a log.

 

Off the top of my head, against Newcastle he all but tackled Fonte in the box and we escaped with a corner; against Everton he was caught in possession on half way line by Lukaku leading to a goal. I think it was Arnhem home he got caught in possession near the goal-line in the box and just managed to get a toe in to save himself. Another home game he cleared straight to the striker just outside the box when Stekelenburg was telling him to put it out because he had no support. Man U he backpassed it straight to Martial for a goal - though I can't blame him for the tackle on Mata.

 

There are plenty of other occasions too. It was also Everton when he went wrong side for no reason on the halfway line and Lukaku ran unopposed for 30 yards towards the box.

 

As I said, I think using him as a defensive full back was a rational decision compared to Cedric's skillset, which is more than I can say for his back pass choice.

 

Also, we completely stuffed Man U for half an hour in that "appalling performance".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see the logic of the decision although I didn't agree with it. If Cedric isn't going to get a game against pacy wingers why buy him? The whole point of playing full back is to nullify wingers who are generally, erm, fast. I think Ron is overthinking his team selections this year and wonder if the poor run in last season has anything to do with it? We look much better when we let other teams worry about us. Although United eventually went on to dominate a large chunk of the game, they were no where near as dynamic as we were in the first 20 or 30 minutes and they only dominated because we sat back and let them play. I'd like to see a settled back 4 of Cedic Fonte van Dijk Bertrand and then mess around with the midfield depending on tactics.

 

Koeman basically said he picked Yoshida because Cedric was better at going forward but that wasn't what was needed in this match. There will be plenty of matches where having an attacking RB will be key. As it was we scored from a right wing cross, so on that basis you can say he was right that we didn't need Cedric to get crosses in.

 

As for "I'd like to see Bertrand", well yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the sign of a good player. You would have expected that from the captain but Fonte seemed reluctant to push up.

 

Surely holding a high line against a player of the pace of Martial was absolutely asking for trouble? We tend not to push up because we can get caught by a ball into the space behind, and because usually our back 6 (ish) is capable of defending anything in front of them. Could be why Fonte was reluctant to get out. Also, the fact I noticed how high up the pitch we were at one point suggests it's not a usual tactic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He does. Literally nearly every single game. I should have been keeping a log.

 

Off the top of my head, against Newcastle he all but tackled Fonte in the box and we escaped with a corner; against Everton he was caught in possession on half way line by Lukaku leading to a goal. I think it was Arnhem home he got caught in possession near the goal-line in the box and just managed to get a toe in to save himself. Another home game he cleared straight to the striker just outside the box when Stekelenburg was telling him to put it out because he had no support. Man U he backpassed it straight to Martial for a goal - though I can't blame him for the tackle on Mata.

 

There are plenty of other occasions too. It was also Everton when he went wrong side for no reason on the halfway line and Lukaku ran unopposed for 30 yards towards the box.

 

As I said, I think using him as a defensive full back was a rational decision compared to Cedric's skillset, which is more than I can say for his back pass choice.

 

Also, we completely stuffed Man U for half an hour in that "appalling performance".

 

Brilliant log, pal :lol:

 

And each time, your cherrypicked examples have been shown to be moronic exaggerations (your Arnhem example is still pi€€ poor, as demonstrated at the time) and you fail to hold a similar mirror up to other players.

 

Yoshida isn't amazing and I certainly wouldn't want to rely on him as an every week starter. He is liable for a good gaffe. But not with the same frequency as you imply all while putting in some good shifts. But hey, you and several others have been gunning for him ages and simpletons need scapegoats.

 

#toddlerswithmachetes

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely holding a high line against a player of the pace of Martial was absolutely asking for trouble? We tend not to push up because we can get caught by a ball into the space behind, and because usually our back 6 (ish) is capable of defending anything in front of them. Could be why Fonte was reluctant to get out. Also, the fact I noticed how high up the pitch we were at one point suggests it's not a usual tactic.

 

Most teams have pacy players though don't they? It isn't so much about a high line but compressing the team so that the other team don't have room to play. There was a big gap left through the defence staying deep that United exploited. In the first half we gave them no room or time on the ball. If the defence stay deep then the rest of the team have to play deeper too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brilliant log, pal :lol:

 

And each time, your cherrypicked examples have been shown to be moronic exaggerations (your Arnhem example is still pi€€ poor, as demonstrated at the time) and you fail to hold a similar mirror up to other players.

 

Yoshida isn't amazing and I certainly wouldn't want to rely on him as an every week starter. He is liable for a good gaffe. But not with the same frequency as you imply all while putting in some good shifts. But hey, you and several others have been gunning for him ages and simpletons need scapegoats.

 

#toddlerswithmachetes

 

You really do need to stop calling people "simpletons" when they don't agree with you Sherlock. Apart from not being PC, it really does nothing for your own posting persona. It has nothing to do with finding a scapegoat, it is a fact that he does make more errors than most that lead to goals against. Even you admit that he is "liable for a good gaffe." Sorry but that really isn't good enough if you want to compete in the Premiership. I think most of us would be happy for him as a back up on the bench, but not as a regular starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quote, there. :facepalm:

 

So, "moronic", "p155 poor" and "simpleton".

 

Stay classy.

 

Well, whenever we attempt to discuss stats, it goes over your head; or break down particular footage, you go curiously quiet. On the other hand, it appears that you do understand some things....

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Koeman basically said he picked Yoshida because Cedric was better at going forward but that wasn't what was needed in this match. There will be plenty of matches where having an attacking RB will be key. As it was we scored from a right wing cross, so on that basis you can say he was right that we didn't need Cedric to get crosses in.

 

As for "I'd like to see Bertrand", well yeah.

 

But aren't decent full backs supposed to be able to defend and attack nowadays - and at the very least defend? From what I have seen of Cedric I thought he was ok. Can we afford to have specialist players at the back (not that Yoshi is a specialist but don't say that too loudly as a certain other poster will take offence).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really do need to stop calling people "simpletons" when they don't agree with you Sherlock. Apart from not being PC, it really does nothing for your own posting persona. It has nothing to do with finding a scapegoat, it is a fact that he does make more errors than most that lead to goals against. Even you admit that he is "liable for a good gaffe." Sorry but that really isn't good enough if you want to compete in the Premiership. I think most of us would be happy for him as a back up on the bench, but not as a regular starter.

 

Ditto pal. Maybe you'd like to look over your own posting style "don't say that too loudly" - sly and cattish, all while trying to take the moral high ground. Seems to be a running modus operandi of yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think it's "one erroneous pass" you might want to try searching my posting history about his performances.

 

Ironically when people were saying "should have picked Cedric" before kick off I was saying Yoshida might be a better option against Depay. :facepalm:

 

No, I know you're renowned for your denigration of Yoshida. I'm talking about the guys who see the erroneous pass and label his a "Championship" player because of *that*. You probably formed that opinion long ago :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hadn't seen Barney Ronay's description of VVD's performance:

 

poor old Virgil van Dijk, the Southampton centre-half danced into the ground during Martial’s match-winning performance at St Mary’s, appeared to have all the natural spring and speed off the mark of a solid-walnut late-Victorian writing bureau.

 

:lol:

 

Am sure he'll get better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see the logic of the decision although I didn't agree with it. If Cedric isn't going to get a game against pacy wingers why buy him? The whole point of playing full back is to nullify wingers who are generally, erm, fast. I think Ron is overthinking his team selections this year and wonder if the poor run in last season has anything to do with it? We look much better when we let other teams worry about us. Although United eventually went on to dominate a large chunk of the game, they were no where near as dynamic as we were in the first 20 or 30 minutes and they only dominated because we sat back and let them play. I'd like to see a settled back 4 of Cedic Fonte van Dijk Bertrand and then mess around with the midfield depending on tactics.

 

And we will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought VVD looked alright on Sunday myself. Showed plenty of spring as he drove forwards for our first goal.

 

Thought he was shaky under pressure; often reacting to -rather than anticipating- situations. Not sure how much that was due to poor communication. Still he wasn't as bad as Fonte and Yoshida.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really do need to stop calling people "simpletons" when they don't agree with you Sherlock. Apart from not being PC, it really does nothing for your own posting persona. It has nothing to do with finding a scapegoat, it is a fact that he does make more errors than most that lead to goals against. Even you admit that he is "liable for a good gaffe." Sorry but that really isn't good enough if you want to compete in the Premiership. I think most of us would be happy for him as a back up on the bench, but not as a regular starter.

 

Be happy then, because he is. The reason he has largely been playing is because VVD wasn't available. It was Yoshida or Caulker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought he was shaky under pressure; often reacting to -rather than anticipating- situations. Not sure how much that was due to poor communication. Still he wasn't as bad as Fonte and Yoshida.

He seemed very nervous, and lacking in confidence. Looked very slow, and the cramp would suggest his fitness is not all that it could be, last player we had the suffered cramp regularly was Luke Shaw. Was surprised how often Fonte was having to cover for him especially in the first half. I'm sure he will be OK but needs more time, though I don't for one minute think it was because Man U were a step up on SPL, they should have been one of his easiest games of the season they were so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ditto pal. Maybe you'd like to look over your own posting style "don't say that too loudly" - sly and cattish, all while trying to take the moral high ground. Seems to be a running modus operandi of yours.

 

Well there is an interesting critique. You obviously give this a lot of thought "pal" and I would guess that I am not on your Christmas card list, oh well. It would be nice if more people tried the moral high ground rather than grub around in the gutter calling names. I don't see any making Yoshida a scapegoat but I do see people saying that they think he is error prone (including you).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The club claimed Clyne decided to leave when we brought Soares in but I don't believe it to be anything other than arse covering after they publicly stated they were hopeful on Clyne signing a new deal and then he did what any sane person would do and join the bigger club for more money.

 

First time I have heard that. Not saying you are wrong, just don't remember seeing it mentioned before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's from a Les Reed interview on the clubs YouTube channel earlier this summer. May even have been one of #TheMarch videos. In it he says words to the effect of 'once we signed Soares it became clear Clyne was not going to sign his new contract'. Will try and find an exact link tomorrow or Thursday if you really doubt it.

 

Ta. I'll have a looksy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies for going back to the original post, but i do worry about some fans expectations of our new players.

 

Whilst everyone is entilted to their own opinion, judging someone after 2 games is a tad hasty. I would suggest waiting at least till Christmas. It took Wanyama and, to some extent Forster, quite some time to make the step up from the Scottish league.

 

I've been impressed with VVD'S communication and on field leadership I.e pushing the line up. He seems very vocal, I think one day he will make a good Captain.

 

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's from a Les Reed interview on the clubs YouTube channel earlier this summer. May even have been one of #TheMarch videos. In it he says words to the effect of 'once we signed Soares it became clear Clyne was not going to sign his new contract'. Will try and find an exact link tomorrow or Thursday if you really doubt it.

 

Are you sure he didn't actually say something more like "we signed Soares once it became clear Clyne was not going to sign his new contract". Same words, different order.

 

Being that Les's words are picked apart on here I can't believe if he had said that then it wouldn't already be covered on here numerous times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure he didn't actually say something more like "we signed Soares once it became clear Clyne was not going to sign his new contract". Same words, different order.

 

Being that Les's words are picked apart on here I can't believe if he had said that then it wouldn't already be covered on here numerous times.

 

That's almost it, verbatim. He says, "when it was clear that Nathaniel was not going to sign a new contract, we had to step that up up a bit..."(whilst talking about signing young RBs being on the agenda).

 

Ties In with my general recollection of the events. Factually, it checks out too. Soares signed 18/06/15, the process took around one month, suggesting mid-to-late May origins. Offers for Clyne were made public around the end of May (arguably contact beforehand).

Edited by Donatello
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure he didn't actually say something more like "we signed Soares once it became clear Clyne was not going to sign his new contract". Same words, different order.

 

Being that Les's words are picked apart on here I can't believe if he had said that then it wouldn't already be covered on here numerous times.

 

That was what i was thinking. There was no way it wouldn't have been covered many times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies for going back to the original post, but i do worry about some fans expectations of our new players.

 

Please don't apologise, the page above is pure primary school.

 

In a way going down with cramp will bring him up short a bit, although I'm sure he already realises he has to raise his game physically. When he's eventually in a more stable, first choice defence will be a better time to judge him.

 

You'd think, judging by some posters, that we were absolutely abysmal yet we scored two good goals and nearly two more. One of their's we absolutely gifted, and for all our sitting back it wasn't just our choice: MU have some very talented players as their third goal showed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's almost it, verbatim. He says, "when it was clear that Nathaniel was not going to sign a new contract, we had to step that up up a bit..."(whilst talking about signing young RBs being on the agenda).

 

Ties In with my general recollection of the events. Factually, it checks out too. Soares signed 18/06/15, the process took around one month, suggesting mid-to-late May origins. Offers for Clyne were made public around the end of May (arguably contact beforehand).

 

It still shows that we were interested in Cedric even with Clyne so he wouldn't have been first choice this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's from a Les Reed interview on the clubs YouTube channel earlier this summer. May even have been one of #TheMarch videos. In it he says words to the effect of 'once we signed Soares it became clear Clyne was not going to sign his new contract'. Will try and find an exact link tomorrow or Thursday if you really doubt it.

 

It was nearer "we stepped up our signing of Cedric when it became clear Clyne wasn't going to sign...".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'd think, judging by some posters, that we were absolutely abysmal yet we scored two good goals and nearly two more. One of their's we absolutely gifted, and for all our sitting back it wasn't just our choice: MU have some very talented players as their third goal showed.

Sue, we were worse than absolutely abysmal for about 50 minutes. The fact we gifted them one only goes to emphasise the fact. ManU were also absolutely abysmal and they showed nothing to the contrary, their 45 pass goal (or whatever it was) was only due to the fact that our players had completely switched off, and despite this it took Man U 45 passes to get the goal. As I feared with our last 5-10 minutes, it has allowed us to gloss over what was a truly appalling performance. Don't get me wrong we were very good until we took the lead, that is what makes it so galling that we could then descend to the level we did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sue, we were worse than absolutely abysmal for about 50 minutes. The fact we gifted them one only goes to emphasise the fact. ManU were also absolutely abysmal and they showed nothing to the contrary, their 45 pass goal (or whatever it was) was only due to the fact that our players had completely switched off, and despite this it took Man U 45 passes to get the goal. As I feared with our last 5-10 minutes, it has allowed us to gloss over what was a truly appalling performance. Don't get me wrong we were very good until we took the lead, that is what makes it so galling that we could then descend to the level we did.

 

I'm fairly sure your "absolutely abysmal" was Saints comfortably containing. It wasn't like Man U's goals came from any kind of pressure - the first was so out of the blue the linesman forgot to flag for offside, the second we gave them from nothing and the first 40 passes of the third showed no threat whatsoever to the goal.

 

Now admittedly you can say "we should have been trying to get the ball back" for that period, but even then there's an argument that says the other team having the ball and passing it around without threatening the goal isn't really a problem, we're beyond the old school "not having the ball = chasing and getting tired" theory. Had they not managed to find a throughball, chuck a stepover and got lucky with a rebound those first 40 passes could have just been Saints asserting their organisational skill in preventing any kind of threat and getting a bit of recovery time in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It still shows that we were interested in Cedric even with Clyne so he wouldn't have been first choice this season.

 

Yes, the plan was Clyne + young RB. As it transpired, Clyne left, and we weren't prepared (/other targets weren't feasible at the time) to rush through the process of adding another 'expensive' RB (Soares having been on the radar for a while)...hence the stop-gap Martina.

 

P.S I'm assuming you meant Soares/young RB wouldn't have been first choice.

Edited by Donatello
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, Saints "looking good" is mostly just stopping things happening before they do. And occasionally scoring. We occasionally scored twice, it was just the other bit where a bad official's decision, a terrible defensive decision and basically a lucky rebound counted as goals.

 

As I mentioned, there are very fine margins between the 40-pass comfortable containment and the key-pass-later conceding a goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...