|
Post by Marked Ox on Feb 4, 2011 12:43:44 GMT
Yes, defenders have made mistakes at set-pieces leading to a goal being conceded. Likewise, the very same can be said about the forwards and midfielders defending set-pieces making mistakes which have led to goals being conceded. Therefore it is the whole team that is making mistakes defending set-pieces not just defenders. So to single out the defenders when there are also 4/5 other midfielders/forwards back defending set-pieces is unreasonable and misses a significant part of the problem. Or is it the defenders' fault if a midfielder or forward miss their clearance/header which leads to a goal?
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Feb 4, 2011 13:54:56 GMT
I stick by my points raised in my two initial posts.
Please go back and read them again - and try to understand what i am saying.
If Clarke is so brilliant why have we conceded for 23 games?
Yes - i agree that he makes some superb saves.
But he is also at fault for a lot of the goals in my opinion. How about the Cheltenham goal for starters. What was he doing so far off his line? His positioning at set pieces is often poor as well - in relation to where his defenders are. He gets to close to them. I personally have very little confidence in him in these situations.
And his basic motivational/organisational skills are rubbish.
If i was Clarke i would actually be embarrassed to be still playing after conceding for so long. Eastwood must be pulling his hair out.
|
|
|
Post by yellowdog on Feb 4, 2011 14:09:13 GMT
I don't feel that Eastwood is the better option but I do think that if Clarkey has some serious competition his game would naturally improve. It is not all down to him but he needs to be more commanding & more communicative to his back four
|
|
|
Post by headingtonoldboy on Feb 4, 2011 14:15:56 GMT
I now know what to buy salaghaf this Christmas... a frontal labotomy and 2 rolls of rubber wallpaper.
|
|
|
Post by headingtonoldboy on Feb 4, 2011 14:18:58 GMT
I stick by my points raised in my two initial posts. Please go back and read them again - and try to understand what i am saying. If Clarke is so brilliant why have we conceded for 23 games? Yes - i agree that he makes some superb saves. But he is also at fault for a lot of the goals in my opinion. How about the Cheltenham goal for starters. What was he doing so far off his line? His positioning at set pieces is often poor as well - in relation to where his defenders are. He gets to close to them. I personally have very little confidence in him in these situations. And his basic motivational/organisational skills are rubbish. If i was Clarke i would actually be embarrassed to be still playing after conceding for so long. Eastwood must be pulling his hair out. So are you saying that its Clarke's fault in EVERYONE of the last 23 games in which we have conceded?
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Feb 4, 2011 14:37:47 GMT
I stick by my points raised in my two initial posts. Please go back and read them again - and try to understand what i am saying. If Clarke is so brilliant why have we conceded for 23 games? Yes - i agree that he makes some superb saves. But he is also at fault for a lot of the goals in my opinion. How about the Cheltenham goal for starters. What was he doing so far off his line? His positioning at set pieces is often poor as well - in relation to where his defenders are. He gets to close to them. I personally have very little confidence in him in these situations. And his basic motivational/organisational skills are rubbish. If i was Clarke i would actually be embarrassed to be still playing after conceding for so long. Eastwood must be pulling his hair out. So are you saying that its Clarke's fault in EVERYONE of the last 23 games in which we have conceded? When have i said that? Read what i have said again. Then come back to me when you feel a little more open minded and less emotionally charged. I said that he is a good keeper but is lacking in certain departments. Especially the motivation and organisation of the back 4. I suggest that we should try Eastwood for at least 1 game to see if he can help improve the situation that we find ourselves in. i.e. a pathetic defensive record this season. I think that most of you are simply allowing your heart to rule your head.
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Feb 4, 2011 14:38:45 GMT
I don't feel that Eastwood is the better option but I do think that if Clarkey has some serious competition his game would naturally improve. It is not all down to him but he needs to be more commanding & more communicative to his back four Agree 100%
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Feb 4, 2011 14:40:51 GMT
I don't feel that Eastwood is the better option but I do think that if Clarkey has some serious competition his game would naturally improve. It is not all down to him but he needs to be more commanding & more communicative to his back four Agree 100% Eastwood too may not be perfect, but he is the only other option we currently have. Competition is key - and you never know, with Eastwood between the sticks for a few games we just might keep some clean sheets. The confidence of the back 5 must be at an all time low. Eastwood will be keen and eager - and he might just have some good man management skills.
|
|
|
Post by headingtonoldboy on Feb 4, 2011 14:57:20 GMT
So are you saying that its Clarke's fault in EVERYONE of the last 23 games in which we have conceded? When have i said that? Read what i have said again. Then come back to me when you feel a little more open minded and less emotionally charged. I said that he is a good keeper but is lacking in certain departments. Especially the motivation and organisation of the back 4. I suggest that we should try Eastwood for at least 1 game to see if he can help improve the situation that we find ourselves in. i.e. a pathetic defensive record this season. I think that most of you are simply allowing your heart to rule your head. This is just the way I interpreted your post. If this isn't what you meant then I apologise. Having read your original post again, I see where you are coming from but I still dont agree.
|
|
|
Post by John Lennon on Feb 4, 2011 16:15:09 GMT
If it wasnt for Clarke, we would have conceded a lot more
|
|
|
Post by oufcrealist on Feb 4, 2011 17:16:31 GMT
Yes, defenders have made mistakes at set-pieces leading to a goal being conceded. Likewise, the very same can be said about the forwards and midfielders defending set-pieces making mistakes which have led to goals being conceded. Therefore it is the whole team that is making mistakes defending set-pieces not just defenders. So to single out the defenders when there are also 4/5 other midfielders/forwards back defending set-pieces is unreasonable and misses a significant part of the problem. Or is it the defenders' fault if a midfielder or forward miss their clearance/header which leads to a goal? Dear oh dear! I am not talking about set piece mistakes. I am talking about other individual errors made that have led to plenty of goals being conceded. Tonkin alone has made some big blunders that have led to goals this season, Wright at least a couple.
|
|
|
Post by windows on Feb 4, 2011 17:33:10 GMT
Batt is out, Purkiss is more of a defender, play sangare at the back with wrirght and worley , hopefully he will win some headers at set pieces , play a winger ,drop Mclean to the bench, The wingerc should make the chances for the strikers.Forget the pretty football we need to keep a clean sheet and start winning again.
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Feb 4, 2011 19:10:37 GMT
I stick by my points raised in my two initial posts. Please go back and read them again - and try to understand what i am saying. If Clarke is so brilliant why have we conceded for 23 games? Yes - i agree that he makes some superb saves. But he is also at fault for a lot of the goals in my opinion. How about the Cheltenham goal for starters. What was he doing so far off his line? His positioning at set pieces is often poor as well - in relation to where his defenders are. He gets to close to them. I personally have very little confidence in him in these situations. And his basic motivational/organisational skills are rubbish. If i was Clarke i would actually be embarrassed to be still playing after conceding for so long. Eastwood must be pulling his hair out. You raise 2 good points. First off, Eastwood is clearly a talent and perhaps he needs a game or two to keep him interested, he's not somebody we want to lose. Secondly, Clarke is not a particular organiser. However, we made up for that last season by having Beast in the side, a proper number 6 John Terry/Matt Elliot/whoever else organising figure. They are in fact a better option since they are actually a defender. This year, we have a 22? and 24? year old pairing. Worley in time will be an organiser, but he's very young. Wright, however, is our vice captain. Now to me, that suggests he should be a leader/motivator/organiser. That isn't apparent from his game, maybe he like the rest of the defence is simply low in confidence, after all, worley wright and clarke kept plenty of clean sheets at the start of the season. To me, the order of importance in organising goes wright, then clarke, then worley. It is never in the job description of goalkeepers to be leaders and motivators. You don't often see them. They should have a presence, but that's different from being a leader. If you look at Joe Hart, Brad Friedel, Petr Cech, some of the premiership's top goalkeepers, they are not leaders, motivators or even really organisers. Correct me if I'm wrong, I only watched him once or twice and I was very young, but I don't think Phil Whitehead was particularly any of these things either. What is worth mentioning is that Turley was a leader and a motivator, and maybe you might be connecting the two. Turley had a big downside here because of his tendency to get in people's faces that didn't always help the team, but he kept them organised for the most part. The point I'm trying to make is, the point about needing an organiser is one to address, but it isn't an excuse to change the goalkeeper, particularly not one as good as Clarke. He's going through a shaky patch, but he's the best we've had in years and you can't afford to take him out when he's as good as he is considering our defensive record. On top of which, if you want a leader/motivator/organiser (which as I have stated is the captain/vice-captain's job), you do not put in a 21 year old keeper who's limited experience primarily involved having his confidence torn to shreds by Bradford's rubbish defence and heavily criticising fanbase. If you were to make a point that Eastwood should get a game to keep Clarke on his toes, then that's a different matter, but not one I would recommend immediately. As for the mistakes... he wasn't at fault for the goal at Cheltenham, Wright was, I'm sure you must have seen that. And I also don't understand how he can be standing too close to defenders from set pieces, it's not like he really has a choice about that. Opposing teams put players on the goalkeeper, meaning that defenders have to get back and mark them. The only way he can avoid that is by standing in the middle of a crowded penalty area, and I'm sure you don't advocate that. I do agree it's bizzare that we haven't kept a clean sheet for so long, but it's obvious that he's extremely good, and I think people's reactions towards your post indicate that. You can't simply go no clean sheets + Clarke playing in all the games = Clarke isn't good, that's a classic causal fallacy (obvious not the Clarke bit). If we change him now, it has to be for somebody both experienced and very good, and with an eye to put him back in, otherwise his confidence will be shattered. Eastwood isn't that person (don't make the mistake of thinking I'm attacking Eastwood, I like him a lot, but he isn't that person).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2011 19:15:32 GMT
Batt is out, Purkiss is more of a defender, play sangare at the back with wrirght and worley , hopefully he will win some headers at set pieces , play a winger ,drop Mclean to the bench, The wingerc should make the chances for the strikers.Forget the pretty football we need to keep a clean sheet and start winning again. i swear we won just two games ago, bit drastic really. How is sangare, wright and worley going to fit into one defence?
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Feb 4, 2011 19:18:06 GMT
Presumably Wright to left back?
|
|
|
Post by windows on Feb 4, 2011 20:17:34 GMT
Put sangare in front of or play wright as a sweeper .We have to find out how good sangare is sooner or later.I suspect Gillingham will use a few high balls they have a couple of brutes up front.Stop the crosses by keep the fullbacks tighter.Let the winger and midfield do the attacking.I suspect the opposition team talk would be stifle the midfield ,man tight on Mclean high balls just in front of goalkeeper they will concede.Well they are my thoughts .
|
|
|
Post by browny on Feb 4, 2011 20:17:54 GMT
Perfect, put our best central defender to left back
Should we move Worley to the right wing while we are at it ?
I am amazed we have two pages to discuss dropping Clarkey to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by windows on Feb 4, 2011 20:33:23 GMT
No leave clarke in goal, stiffen the defence as above, clean sheet clarkes confidence back, easy as that.
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Feb 4, 2011 20:59:20 GMT
Pretty much agreed there windows. Wright is a left back though, browny, if I'm not much mistaken he spent most of his career so far there. The problem is as far as I can tell is that he doesn't have much of an attacking impetus.
|
|
|
Post by yellowsubmarine on Feb 4, 2011 22:07:38 GMT
Perfect, put our best central defender to left back Should we move Worley to the right wing while we are at it ? I am amazed we have two pages to discuss dropping Clarkey to be honest. Worley at right wing? Are you insane? We need Worley in defence alongside 9 other defenders or we'll never keep a clean sheet again... Some people need to get a grip! Yes we are conceding too many goals but playing Wright out of position will not solve that. Wilder needs to spend more time working on set pieces and players need to take responsibility for individual errors. But please don't change the way we're playing as I'm really enjoying it! We're on the verge of having a very good AND entertaining team if the fans can show a little patience
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Feb 4, 2011 23:33:21 GMT
When have i said that? Read what i have said again. Then come back to me when you feel a little more open minded and less emotionally charged. I said that he is a good keeper but is lacking in certain departments. Especially the motivation and organisation of the back 4. I suggest that we should try Eastwood for at least 1 game to see if he can help improve the situation that we find ourselves in. i.e. a pathetic defensive record this season. I think that most of you are simply allowing your heart to rule your head. This is just the way I interpreted your post. If this isn't what you meant then I apologise. Having read your original post again, I see where you are coming from but I still dont agree. OK We must agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by salaghaf on Feb 4, 2011 23:47:50 GMT
I stick by my points raised in my two initial posts. Please go back and read them again - and try to understand what i am saying. If Clarke is so brilliant why have we conceded for 23 games? Yes - i agree that he makes some superb saves. But he is also at fault for a lot of the goals in my opinion. How about the Cheltenham goal for starters. What was he doing so far off his line? His positioning at set pieces is often poor as well - in relation to where his defenders are. He gets to close to them. I personally have very little confidence in him in these situations. And his basic motivational/organisational skills are rubbish. If i was Clarke i would actually be embarrassed to be still playing after conceding for so long. Eastwood must be pulling his hair out. You raise 2 good points. First off, Eastwood is clearly a talent and perhaps he needs a game or two to keep him interested, he's not somebody we want to lose. Secondly, Clarke is not a particular organiser. However, we made up for that last season by having Beast in the side, a proper number 6 John Terry/Matt Elliot/whoever else organising figure. They are in fact a better option since they are actually a defender. This year, we have a 22? and 24? year old pairing. Worley in time will be an organiser, but he's very young. Wright, however, is our vice captain. Now to me, that suggests he should be a leader/motivator/organiser. That isn't apparent from his game, maybe he like the rest of the defence is simply low in confidence, after all, worley wright and clarke kept plenty of clean sheets at the start of the season. To me, the order of importance in organising goes wright, then clarke, then worley. It is never in the job description of goalkeepers to be leaders and motivators. You don't often see them. They should have a presence, but that's different from being a leader. If you look at Joe Hart, Brad Friedel, Petr Cech, some of the premiership's top goalkeepers, they are not leaders, motivators or even really organisers. Correct me if I'm wrong, I only watched him once or twice and I was very young, but I don't think Phil Whitehead was particularly any of these things either. What is worth mentioning is that Turley was a leader and a motivator, and maybe you might be connecting the two. Turley had a big downside here because of his tendency to get in people's faces that didn't always help the team, but he kept them organised for the most part. The point I'm trying to make is, the point about needing an organiser is one to address, but it isn't an excuse to change the goalkeeper, particularly not one as good as Clarke. He's going through a shaky patch, but he's the best we've had in years and you can't afford to take him out when he's as good as he is considering our defensive record. On top of which, if you want a leader/motivator/organiser (which as I have stated is the captain/vice-captain's job), you do not put in a 21 year old keeper who's limited experience primarily involved having his confidence torn to shreds by Bradford's rubbish defence and heavily criticising fanbase. If you were to make a point that Eastwood should get a game to keep Clarke on his toes, then that's a different matter, but not one I would recommend immediately. As for the mistakes... he wasn't at fault for the goal at Cheltenham, Wright was, I'm sure you must have seen that. And I also don't understand how he can be standing too close to defenders from set pieces, it's not like he really has a choice about that. Opposing teams put players on the goalkeeper, meaning that defenders have to get back and mark them. The only way he can avoid that is by standing in the middle of a crowded penalty area, and I'm sure you don't advocate that. I do agree it's bizzare that we haven't kept a clean sheet for so long, but it's obvious that he's extremely good, and I think people's reactions towards your post indicate that. You can't simply go no clean sheets + Clarke playing in all the games = Clarke isn't good, that's a classic causal fallacy (obvious not the Clarke bit). If we change him now, it has to be for somebody both experienced and very good, and with an eye to put him back in, otherwise his confidence will be shattered. Eastwood isn't that person (don't make the mistake of thinking I'm attacking Eastwood, I like him a lot, but he isn't that person). You make some interesting points LLC. One i agree with is that the back 5 are probably low in confidence. For Clarke in particular i see no reason why he should not benefit from a rest for a game or two. Eastwood may only be 21 but i am sure that a couple of gamea would do him good. He looks a confident chap and he will only gain experience one way: by playing. What's the worst that can happen? We do not keep a clean sheet! People should not fear change. Wilder is unsentimental and changes things when needed. I predict Eastwood will get a game sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Feb 5, 2011 0:24:39 GMT
When you drop a keeper you're always in danger of shattering their confidence, something that isn't quite the same for most outfield players. That isn't what we want to do to a keeper already low on confidence. Most keepers pick up a knock at some point during the season, and I don't see any reason that this shouldn't be the case, so as long as Eastwood is ready to pick up the reigns then, I think the merits of giving Eastwood a game are outweighed by the problems of dropping Clarke now. You may be right though, Wilder is an unsentimental man and he likes to make changes. I can see him heading straight over to Eastwood if he thinks it's a good idea, which seems understandable. Part of me will always worry what happens to Clarke's confidence if he's dropped, and the worst that can happen if Eastwood has a bad game is we get trounced and he loses his confidence too. That would be disastrous. I still hope he gets a chance at the club, but I just don't think now is the time.
|
|
|
Post by tatabanya on Feb 5, 2011 0:46:53 GMT
You raise 2 good points. First off, Eastwood is clearly a talent and perhaps he needs a game or two to keep him interested, he's not somebody we want to lose. Secondly, Clarke is not a particular organiser. However, we made up for that last season by having Beast in the side, a proper number 6 John Terry/Matt Elliot/whoever else organising figure. They are in fact a better option since they are actually a defender. This year, we have a 22? and 24? year old pairing. Worley in time will be an organiser, but he's very young. Wright, however, is our vice captain. Now to me, that suggests he should be a leader/motivator/organiser. That isn't apparent from his game, maybe he like the rest of the defence is simply low in confidence, after all, worley wright and clarke kept plenty of clean sheets at the start of the season. To me, the order of importance in organising goes wright, then clarke, then worley. It is never in the job description of goalkeepers to be leaders and motivators. You don't often see them. They should have a presence, but that's different from being a leader. If you look at Joe Hart, Brad Friedel, Petr Cech, some of the premiership's top goalkeepers, they are not leaders, motivators or even really organisers. Correct me if I'm wrong, I only watched him once or twice and I was very young, but I don't think Phil Whitehead was particularly any of these things either. What is worth mentioning is that Turley was a leader and a motivator, and maybe you might be connecting the two. Turley had a big downside here because of his tendency to get in people's faces that didn't always help the team, but he kept them organised for the most part. The point I'm trying to make is, the point about needing an organiser is one to address, but it isn't an excuse to change the goalkeeper, particularly not one as good as Clarke. He's going through a shaky patch, but he's the best we've had in years and you can't afford to take him out when he's as good as he is considering our defensive record. On top of which, if you want a leader/motivator/organiser (which as I have stated is the captain/vice-captain's job), you do not put in a 21 year old keeper who's limited experience primarily involved having his confidence torn to shreds by Bradford's rubbish defence and heavily criticising fanbase. If you were to make a point that Eastwood should get a game to keep Clarke on his toes, then that's a different matter, but not one I would recommend immediately. As for the mistakes... he wasn't at fault for the goal at Cheltenham, Wright was, I'm sure you must have seen that. And I also don't understand how he can be standing too close to defenders from set pieces, it's not like he really has a choice about that. Opposing teams put players on the goalkeeper, meaning that defenders have to get back and mark them. The only way he can avoid that is by standing in the middle of a crowded penalty area, and I'm sure you don't advocate that. I do agree it's bizzare that we haven't kept a clean sheet for so long, but it's obvious that he's extremely good, and I think people's reactions towards your post indicate that. You can't simply go no clean sheets + Clarke playing in all the games = Clarke isn't good, that's a classic causal fallacy (obvious not the Clarke bit). If we change him now, it has to be for somebody both experienced and very good, and with an eye to put him back in, otherwise his confidence will be shattered. Eastwood isn't that person (don't make the mistake of thinking I'm attacking Eastwood, I like him a lot, but he isn't that person). You make some interesting points LLC. One i agree with is that the back 5 are probably low in confidence. For Clarke in particular i see no reason why he should not benefit from a rest for a game or two. Eastwood may only be 21 but i am sure that a couple of gamea would do him good. He looks a confident chap and he will only gain experience one way: by playing. What's the worst that can happen? We do not keep a clean sheet! People should not fear change. Wilder is unsentimental and changes things when needed. I predict Eastwood will get a game sooner rather than later. No no no. Eastwood is an unknown entity. The worst that could happen would be us seeing an out of depth goalkeeper shipping 5 goals that Clarkey would have not let happen. Don't fool yourself by thinking that any keeper can do what Clarke does, because they cant. From what I have heard he is our most saleable asset with clubs looking at him pretty frequently, hence the recent contract extension (and pay rise). I am pretty sure if you asked the back four to choose their decision for the keeper for Gillingham it would be our no 1, which shows his leadership skills enough for me. And in this 23 game period we have shuffled around so so much. In the recent games where we have had a settled back 4 we have been winning games. Fine, we have been conceding but our record with a batt worley wright tonkin back 4 is a hell of a lot better than with anything else. This team will, and has, reap rewards. if we lose 2-1 on Sat, my mentality will not change. Play the best back 4 at the club. Look at the player ratings for the Cheltenham game; who gets the plaudits???
|
|
|
Post by realist on Feb 5, 2011 11:21:59 GMT
Have you actually thought we just might not be good enough. ??
|
|
|
Post by browny on Feb 5, 2011 19:25:05 GMT
Perfect, put our best central defender to left back Should we move Worley to the right wing while we are at it ? I am amazed we have two pages to discuss dropping Clarkey to be honest. Worley at right wing? Are you insane? We need Worley in defence alongside 9 other defenders or we'll never keep a clean sheet again... Some people need to get a grip! Yes we are conceding too many goals but playing Wright out of position will not solve that. Wilder needs to spend more time working on set pieces and players need to take responsibility for individual errors. But please don't change the way we're playing as I'm really enjoying it! We're on the verge of having a very good AND entertaining team if the fans can show a little patience Absolutely and todays clean sheet was well earned. Any idea of playing Jake Wright anywhere other than at centre back is insane thought. He was again outstanding today.....as was Worley
|
|
|
Post by Marked Ox on Feb 6, 2011 10:55:31 GMT
Yes, defenders have made mistakes at set-pieces leading to a goal being conceded. Likewise, the very same can be said about the forwards and midfielders defending set-pieces making mistakes which have led to goals being conceded. Therefore it is the whole team that is making mistakes defending set-pieces not just defenders. So to single out the defenders when there are also 4/5 other midfielders/forwards back defending set-pieces is unreasonable and misses a significant part of the problem. Or is it the defenders' fault if a midfielder or forward miss their clearance/header which leads to a goal? Dear oh dear! I am not talking about set piece mistakes. I am talking about other individual errors made that have led to plenty of goals being conceded. Tonkin alone has made some big blunders that have led to goals this season, Wright at least a couple. Dear oh dear! I was talking about set-pieces, hence the comment 'The whole team is the problem defending set-pieces!'.
|
|
|
Post by behindthegoal on Feb 20, 2011 15:33:39 GMT
Thought I'd revive this thread...drop Clarke???......silly op
|
|
|
Post by onlyme on Feb 20, 2011 18:03:02 GMT
Thought I'd revive this thread...drop Clarke???......silly op Only just became aware of this thread and have not bothered to read all the comments on here - but even when we were conceding goals to have done so would have been total nuts. Madness I tell you. Would quite like the person who started all this off to pop back on here and give a more up to date opinion. Perhaps he's missed the fact that we've kept clean sheets in the last 3 away games. More likely he hasn't.
|
|
|
Post by longliveclarkey on Feb 20, 2011 18:15:57 GMT
Very, very easy to criticise retrospectively. While I 100% didn't agree with salaghaf's opinion, unsurprisingly, let's not look back and call him stupid. None of us could see the future at that point, and to be fair, Clarke had made a couple of gaffes. Nothing any worse than anyone else, but when a defence is lacking in confidence it's easy to look to the goalkeeper as the source of the problem (although i don't think it was in this case). Salaghaf was just doing what plenty of other fans have done and stated an opinion - why is it any more ridiculous than criticising Wright, a man who many consider the centre-back messiah incarnate? Plenty of people have done just that and had no such response.
|
|