Captain
Established Member
I'd take Djourou's consistency over Senderos' whatever everytime.
asajoseph said:Senderos would be the slowest, but he'd be the best reader of the game we have, and he's a great organiser (something we really lacked yesterday) - for me, if Senderos is fit, I take him ahead of Djourou, but he'd seriously have to watch out behind him.jester said:i'd put it down to immaturity/inexperience too, it'll all come in time - he has the raw talent, its clear to see. Its unbelievable when you hear the ages of the players we have. djourou only 19 and has already made a decent number of apps and went to a world cup.asajoseph said:Yeah, maybe.
As for Djourou, I certainly rate him, and for a 19 year-old, he's exceptionally gifted. Whilst he as good for the majority of the game yesterday, there were one or two miskicks, and weak headers from him - nothing to get worried about, but perhaps just a little sign of immaturity.
Question is (maybe for another topic) would you put him in over senderos? I think djourou fits in perfect, he has the pace which is important in our defence, if senderos plays he's the only slow player in the back 4 (one aspect i know, but an important one)
- Åñð®éw - said:why doesnt henry smile anymore?
I saw it in quite the opposite way, Asa. To me Ade won that 50-50 header and sucessfully flicked in on towards Toure. Does the fact that the ball came last off Toure or Random Watford Defender really matter? Not to me. I condsider it more accuate to say that Ade assisted that goal.
Also, to say that our attacks were breaking down becuase of him short passing his teammates on 4 or 5 occasions doesn't hold up to me. I can distinclty remember the supreme Ross & Fab Duo also selling short passes on a couple occasions, and also had half a dozen others intercepted. Does this mean they caused all our attacks to break down too?
In fact, Gilberto was our player on the day who was most guilty of incomplete passing.
This incidently is another factor which is easy to jump the gun on. If a player fails to complete a pass, is it all his fault? For me this isn't necessarily true, especially for our team which is based on off-the-ball movement. More often than not, a player who stands statuesque wating for the ball to come to his feet rather than moving in to receive it, should bear some measure of the blame if the pass fails to be completed.
i mean come on, he gave away the ball 4 or 5 times? so we are supposed to focus on this and forget some of the nicer touches/passing/link play he displayed during the game? then
so we are supposed to focus on this and forget some of the nicer touches/passing/link play he displayed during the game?
Nobody's forgetting it. I said before it wasn't a particularly amazing run - he went square for a striker through on goal, hardly rocket science, and something you'll see kids do in playgrounds - but he did everything he needed to and got the ball in the back of the net, so nothing to complain about there. The point, in bringing it up in the first place though, was that scoring that goal certainly does not mask the poorer all-round display. We would significantly have benefitted from having a striker up front with Henry on saturday who was more comfortable with the ball at his feet, someone who could pass or shoot well.he makes a decent run for his goal and we are supposed to forget that too?
even if he didnt get his head on the ball, which i think he did for the first and not the second, not being there would not have led to goals.
Captain said:Asa, I think you are underestimating the run he made for his goal.
He was on Watford's left back at the time which kept him wide and made the gap for Cesc to pass into. After that he curved his run in field and took the full back with him which gave Henry the space to run into.
He didn't just 'run square' for the pass, that's what Hleb did.
The rest is just a difference of opinion. for my money he was good on saturday but as I said it is irrelevent now.