Jump to content

Birkir Bjarnason


Barney_avfc

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, blandy said:

How far did they run, how many runs did they make, chases did they do, players closed down, tackles made shots at goal? what as their role in the side? Grrr. Stats. :angry:

Not sure how far. I'd wager hourihane covered much more ground from what I saw. He also created much more chances with his delivery from set pieces.

Bjarnason is an attacking midfield player. He didn't really help create anything, he didn't really cause problems. His involvement in the game was the sort that Westwood and Gardner used to put in. Barely involved at all. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Not sure how far. I'd wager hourihane covered much more ground from what I saw. He also created much more chances with his delivery from set pieces.

Bjarnason is an attacking midfield player. He didn't really help create anything, he didn't really cause problems. His involvement in the game was the sort that Westwood and Gardner used to put in. Barely involved at all. 

 

 

He hit the bar from a rocket shot on the edge of the box so that's certainly causing a threat .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Eastie said:

He hit the bar from a rocket shot on the edge of the box so that's certainly causing a threat .

It wasn't like he did much for it, he didn't create it. It was a great pass from Lansbury and if anything he should have done better. He was not a threat during that game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

It wasn't like he did much for it, he didn't create it. It was a great pass from Lansbury and if anything he should have done better. He was not a threat during that game. 

Just disputing your comment that he did nothing of note and wasn't involved - he actually came closest to scoring for us and given a run of games all 3 new midfielders will be fine signings in my opinion as will hogan and bree .

We have made good signings and need to give them time to settle .

its hard enough intergrating 1 new player mid season and we have 5 of them

Edited by Eastie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Eastie said:

Just disputing your comment that he did nothing of note and wasn't involved - he actually came closest to scoring for us and given a run of games all 3 new midfielders will be fine signings in my opinion as will hogan and bree .

We have made good signings and need to give them time to settle .

its hard enough intergrating 1 new player mid season and we have 5 of them

I think he probably will be a good signing once we sort out what position he is going to play and he gets up to speed. 

I just strongly disagree he was one of our best players yesterday and for me he shouldn't be starting yet. 

I think it's unfair on him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DCJonah said:

I think he probably will be a good signing once we sort out what position he is going to play and he gets up to speed. 

I just strongly disagree he was one of our best players yesterday and for me he shouldn't be starting yet. 

I think it's unfair on him. 

Probably wouldn't have started had Jedi been fit .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I think he probably will be a good signing once we sort out what position he is going to play and he gets up to speed. 

I just strongly disagree he was one of our best players yesterday and for me he shouldn't be starting yet. 

I think it's unfair on him. 

I'd say he was the most improved player, but he had set the benchmark a little low. I think he's a decent midfielder for a couple of million in an area where we were short. He does appear to lack any pace though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, smg said:

Right so he's finished then, three games and he is shit. When will the booing start ?. Perhaps if supporters got behind players they would perform to a higher level more consistently ? Given their 'reputations' before signing have Hourihane or Lansbury lived up to their hype after three games or are they allowed more time because we really want to like them ? 

I'll always support them from the terraces, but this is a forum where we discuss players etc.  Should we all turn into Liverpool fans and state how everything is fine and all our players are great? 

This guy currently isn't at a level to play for Villa and where we want to be.  Bruce has hung him out to dry by chucking him straight in, bringing on this criticism.  Personally I've seen nothing from him to suggest he has something, but yeah, I'm not gonna conclude that based on 3 games.

Lansbury actually looks like a player, I had my doubts, but in fairness he does look good. Makes me wonder why I was so content defending players like Westwood all these years.  But this signing should be the reason why we should demand more.  There are decent footballers out there.

Hourihane - a slow start, but he has a good dead ball delivery, and yesterday he was involved in some of our play. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DCJonah said:

He touched the ball 38 times and attempted 24 passes. 

For comparison to his fellow midfield players. 

Lansbury touched the ball 93 times and attempted 68 passes.

Hourihane touched the ball 86 times and attempted 55 passes. 

Both literally did double what he did. Compared to them two he wasn't in the game. IMO he was the weak link in midfield and was a let down again. 

I don't want to turn this into the westwood thread, but number of passes doesn't necessarily prove anything.

You could make 3 passes all game but if they set up 3 goals you'll have done much better than a guy who made 100 but achieved nothing.

Plus you're disregarding all the other things mdifielders have to do.

 

I don't think Thor was great, and I don't think he was better than Lansbury, for example. But the stats you've posted don't really prove anything apart from what they say at face value, they touched the ball more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I don't want to turn this into the westwood thread, but number of passes doesn't necessarily prove anything.

You could make 3 passes all game but if they set up 3 goals you'll have done much better than a guy who made 100 but achieved nothing.

Plus you're disregarding all the other things mdifielders have to do.

 

I don't think Thor was great, and I don't think he was better than Lansbury, for example. But the stats you've posted don't really prove anything apart from what they say at face value, they touched the ball more.

Agreed but we know he didn't set up any goals. We know hourihane created more chances. We don't need stats for that. 

I was just showing how the other two midfield players were so much more involved than him. IMO he was the weak link of the three and not even close to be one of our better players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Agreed but we know he didn't set up any goals. We know hourihane created more chances. We don't need stats for that. 

I was just showing how the other two midfield players were so much more involved than him. IMO he was the weak link of the three and not even close to be one of our better players. 

Fair enough. I still don't think your stats prove anything, but I do agree with your assessment that he wasn't our best player. 

 

He was definitely improved since last week though. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
2 minutes ago, Alakagom said:

That could be said about the best player of champshionship until he came to us. Basel fans said he was out of form lately, I think there's no point judging him until next season. 

If you lose the ability to control a ball or pass 5 yards form isn't your only problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â