UEFA EURO 2016 Qualifiers and International Friendlies ** spoilers ** [3rd - 9th September 2014]

He's a better player than Allen already.

What do you mean by already? He's a few months older than Allen. I wouldn't say he's better (nor particularly worse) either. I think they're slightly different players. Delph is a more dynamic player that can get forward better, closer in style to Henderson, but I think Allen's technically better and tactically smarter.

Like I've said about Henderson in the past, if Delph can start adding more goals to his game then he could become an excellent player.
 
Thought we were fantastic last night, that means qualification is essentially done.

Joined the England supporters club after the World Cup, first away day is Scotland in November. Can't wait.
 
Wasn't impressed with Stones tbh. I have never heard of him, but surely he is not a right back?...Offered nothing going forward in a system that really needed attacking fullbacks and was caught out of position on a few occasions. Don't we have any decent rightbacks? What about that Spurs guy?
 
He's more of a cb than a rb, it's a good move from Hodgson really since Baines is so attacking, gives England more solidity at the back than having 2 very attacking fb's, he's naturally not inclined to get that far forward.
 
I don't think he's 'suddenly good' but then i've never been of the opinion that Welbeck is as bad as he is made out to be on here sometimes.

He's a tireless worker and more than capable, he's no world beater but I think he will do quite a good job at Arsenal, I think he will suit them.

I have never doubted that he is a useful player but he is not top quality in any aspect of his game other than his workrate. At a top side you should expect more from a player taking up a valuable starting spot up front.

I've always maintained that Welbeck has it in him to be a very good player (and usually been laughed at for it).

I have never seen anything to suggest he will be a very good player. Sturridge has always looks much better than Welbeck in all areas of his game bar his speed / work rate. I never understood how we stood by Welbeck and played him as Sturridge was being passed from club to club without being given a chance.
 
I have never doubted that he is a useful player but he is not top quality in any aspect of his game other than his workrate. At a top side you should expect more from a player taking up a valuable starting spot up front.



I have never seen anything to suggest he will be a very good player. Sturridge has always looks much better than Welbeck in all areas of his game bar his speed / work rate. I never understood how we stood by Welbeck and played him as Sturridge was being passed from club to club without being given a chance.

The problem with Sturridge is he is greedy and not a good enough finisher, he needs to many chances to score which has cost us at international level a few times. Welbeck on the other hand looks a better finisher to me but also isn't a greddy git so will pass to players in better positions. Ideally you'd combine the two players and have one awesome striker but until we can do that this debate will run and run.
 
The problem with Sturridge is he is greedy and not a good enough finisher, he needs to many chances to score which has cost us at international level a few times. Welbeck on the other hand looks a better finisher to me but also isn't a greddy git so will pass to players in better positions. Ideally you'd combine the two players and have one awesome striker but until we can do that this debate will run and run.

Not really sure how much more you could get wrong about Sturridge tbh

21 goals from 42 shots on target and 43 shots off target in 29 appearances last year - better than or comparable to pretty much everyone at the top of the EPL scoring charts.

Please do continue with the lazy stereotyping of him though.
 
Wasn't impressed with Stones tbh. I have never heard of him, but surely he is not a right back?...Offered nothing going forward in a system that really needed attacking fullbacks and was caught out of position on a few occasions. Don't we have any decent rightbacks? What about that Spurs guy?

He was exceptionally poor to be honest, not sure how he's in the squad as is. He looked really very good at CB last year while Jag was out injured for Everton. I mean he looked great and in basically his first real run of games and at a young age. But yesterday at right back, if a player got within about 10 yards of him while he was facing up the pitch he was turning around and passing back instantly. He was painfully timid, no drive to go forwards down the right in the slightest. That might be understandable, even at times a manager might ask that of him, but he was refusing to just pass forward be it to midfield or down the right, he looked scared and completely over his depth.

Again we should be calling up Shaw(when fit) Cole and Baines and trying one of them on the right. Johnson is awful, Walker is even more useless and Stones isn't close to a right back.
I can't say I remember how he played against Leicester for Everton at right back but... based on last nights game it wouldn't have been good.


AS for Welbeck... score a couple simple goals, the exact kind that Giroud already scores for us... suddenly a great buy. Even though he played pretty much as Giroud would, messed up a fair amount, worked relatively hard, got two tap ins, nothing in his performance stood out as being something almost any striker could do and for Arsenal to move forwards we actually needed to buy a striker that could do things that most strikers can't...

That is before you realise Wenger has said he was already looking at Welbeck pre-injury to replace Podolski in a wide position(yes where he has Walcott, his love child who is near undroppable when fit, and spent £30mil on Sanchez, and wants to fit Cazorla and Ozil into the team....), when Giroud is back from injury Welbeck may be pushed back out wide.


As for Sturridge, better goals/shots ratio than Suarez, and most other players in the league. I cringe when someone bangs on about players having to finish any chance they get at "international level"... aside from international level football being quite some way below club level football in any decent league, no... no top strikers have a 1:1 ratio, or even close. At his best Messi hit about a 1 in 3 in a single season, most seasons it's somewhere between 1 in 3-5. Sturridge is in that bracket, as are most/all top strikers.

The best strikers who score a lot in internationals, shoot a lot too. Sturridge isn't selfish, he shoots, it's his job to shoot. If every played passed it because they might miss, no one would ever shoot. If you never shoot and only ever let one player shoot... then the defence has one player to mark. Everyone has too shoot a fair amount to remain unpredictable. The teams where everyone is afraid to shoot... fail.
 
Not really sure how much more you could get wrong about Sturridge tbh

21 goals from 42 shots on target and 43 shots off target in 29 appearances last year - better than or comparable to pretty much everyone at the top of the EPL scoring charts.

Please do continue with the lazy stereotyping of him though.

Can only comment on what I've seen and as I don't follow Liverpool I can only go on his England performances where rightly or wrongly he appears to me and many others to be selfish and not as clinical as he needs to be. Could be another case of the Gerards where he is amazing in the red shirt but nothing like as effective in the white. Only time will tell but anyone who thinks his England performances have confirmed him as an international level performer must be watching a different game to me!

He was exceptionally poor to be honest, not sure how he's in the squad as is. He looked really very good at CB last year while Jag was out injured for Everton. I mean he looked great and in basically his first real run of games and at a young age. But yesterday at right back, if a player got within about 10 yards of him while he was facing up the pitch he was turning around and passing back instantly. He was painfully timid, no drive to go forwards down the right in the slightest. That might be understandable, even at times a manager might ask that of him, but he was refusing to just pass forward be it to midfield or down the right, he looked scared and completely over his depth.

Again we should be calling up Shaw(when fit) Cole and Baines and trying one of them on the right. Johnson is awful, Walker is even more useless and Stones isn't close to a right back.
I can't say I remember how he played against Leicester for Everton at right back but... based on last nights game it wouldn't have been good.


AS for Welbeck... score a couple simple goals, the exact kind that Giroud already scores for us... suddenly a great buy. Even though he played pretty much as Giroud would, messed up a fair amount, worked relatively hard, got two tap ins, nothing in his performance stood out as being something almost any striker could do and for Arsenal to move forwards we actually needed to buy a striker that could do things that most strikers can't...

That is before you realise Wenger has said he was already looking at Welbeck pre-injury to replace Podolski in a wide position(yes where he has Walcott, his love child who is near undroppable when fit, and spent £30mil on Sanchez, and wants to fit Cazorla and Ozil into the team....), when Giroud is back from injury Welbeck may be pushed back out wide.


As for Sturridge, better goals/shots ratio than Suarez, and most other players in the league. I cringe when someone bangs on about players having to finish any chance they get at "international level"... aside from international level football being quite some way below club level football in any decent league, no... no top strikers have a 1:1 ratio, or even close. At his best Messi hit about a 1 in 3 in a single season, most seasons it's somewhere between 1 in 3-5. Sturridge is in that bracket, as are most/all top strikers.

The best strikers who score a lot in internationals, shoot a lot too. Sturridge isn't selfish, he shoots, it's his job to shoot. If every played passed it because they might miss, no one would ever shoot. If you never shoot and only ever let one player shoot... then the defence has one player to mark. Everyone has too shoot a fair amount to remain unpredictable. The teams where everyone is afraid to shoot... fail.

You really want England to play three left backs at right back before looking at dedicated options? I'd much Rather see Nathaniel Clyne or Callum Chambers given a go there first both of whom have played right back consistently well in the premiership and for my money are better in the position that Johnson, Stones and Walker.

Never said Sturridge should have a 1:1 ratio just that from an England perspective he misses too many chances, I also agree he shouldn't pass when he has a decent shooting opportunity like you say strikers have to shoot if they want to score but if he is running up a blind alley and there are options on I'd rather see him take one than have yet another shot when his chances of scoring are tiny!
 
Last edited:
... no top strikers have a 1:1 ratio, or even close. At his best Messi hit about a 1 in 3 in a single season, most seasons it's somewhere between 1 in 3-5. Sturridge is in that bracket, as are most/all top strikers.

Ronaldo:

Most goals scored in a season in all competitions for Real Madrid: 60 goals
Most goals scored in a single La Liga season for Real Madrid: 46 goals

Messi:

Most goals scored in La Liga in a season: 50 goals
Most consecutive La Liga matches scored in: 21 matches 33 goals

Tell us again how no-one has even close to a 1:1 ratio :)
 
You are going to get told now that Ronaldo isn't a striker and a war and peace length post, rather than just saying "oh yeah I was wrong"
 
Ronaldo:

Most goals scored in a season in all competitions for Real Madrid: 60 goals
Most goals scored in a single La Liga season for Real Madrid: 46 goals

Messi:

Most goals scored in La Liga in a season: 50 goals
Most consecutive La Liga matches scored in: 21 matches 33 goals

Tell us again how no-one has even close to a 1:1 ratio :)

Well done mate, I said shots to goals ratio, not goals to games ratio, so you can go and cry in a dark room at your attempt to make me look wrong based on your inability to read accurately.

The embarrassing thing is the discussion was talking about Sturridge's inability to finish needing too many chances, and that how "at international level" you need to be able to do that... implying other strikers have very low goals/shots ratios. There was no hint and no mention anywhere of goals/games ratio but were strictly talking about chances and needing to finish them.

Shall we re-evaluate your Ronaldo and Messi numbers to hilarious effect.. okay.


In Messi's 50 goals in 36 games season he scored 50 goals in 198 shots with 99 on target. Does that look 1:1 to you... should we get a calculator out of accuracy or just round these numbers for you.

Well shots on target is 1:2 ratio bang on, goals to shots is just a hair under 1:4 ratio.

Ronaldo's best season.. 46 goals 37 games, 264 shots 102 on target. So shots on target is about 1:2.6 and goals to shot ratio is about 1:5.7.

Wow, two best players/highest scorers in the world with ratios of 1:4 and 1:5.7......... i feel totally put in my place by how completely wrong I was.


I guess I'll just quote myself for completeness

As for Sturridge, better goals/shots ratio than Suarez, and most other players in the league. I cringe when someone bangs on about players having to finish any chance they get at "international level"... aside from international level football being quite some way below club level football in any decent league, no... no top strikers have a 1:1 ratio, or even close.


You are going to get told now that Ronaldo isn't a striker and a war and peace length post, rather than just saying "oh yeah I was wrong"

Piling on because you also can't read, adding another incorrect stat and suggestiong I wouldn't be able to admit I was wrong. I presume then that you will post to say you were wrong?
 
Last edited:
You really want England to play three left backs at right back before looking at dedicated options? I'd much Rather see Nathaniel Clyne or Callum Chambers given a go there first both of whom have played right back consistently well in the premiership and for my money are better in the position that Johnson, Stones and Walker.

Realistically they aren't left backs to me, but fullbacks. Chambers is entirely unproven and absolutely hasn't played right back consistently well. For Arsenal he's played CB and last season was basically his first season. Clyne has looked particularly impressive and I'm not sure if he's carrying an injury or why he hasn't been called up. He was awesome against Liverpool in the first game of the season, did everything Johnson can't do. But he's still just one right back. If you have 3 top left backs and no one available at right back, or even one player available(who is unlikely to play every game) then benching two top or potentially top left backs to play Johnson who is just crap or Stones is just daft.

I'd prefer to take 4 fullbacks and play the best two, no matter which is their preferred side, than take 1-2 left backs, leave one out of the team and put in "dedicated" right backs like Johnson and Walker because somehow being dedicated is more important than being good.

Clichy at 30 played right back for the first time and looked instantly at ease with the position. Liverpool play Johnson at left back, though admittedly to match his level at right back all he had to do was be crap at left back :p

I'm not really sure why Clyne hasn't been called up yet, he's 23, not 19 or something and those ahead of him in the pecking order have for years been inept.
 
Back
Top Bottom