Birkir Bjarnason

[Stevo985]

10 hours ago, bobzy said:

Whelan was a better player than BB. I find it zero coincidence that Whelan hasn’t played for 3 games and they’ve been arguably our best 3 performances of the season.

That isn’t to say that Bjarnason is the answer, but I’d much rather have him next season than Whelan. By a very long way.

 

Edit: 2 and a half games

Whelan played, and played well, during our best run of form this season. So quickly forgotten after a couple of mistakes.

Bjarnasson has looked like a drunk competition winner for 12 months, puts in a good 45 minutes and is suddenly good enough for the Premier League.

He's **** toilet. If he puts in some more performances like the Forest one then I'll change my opinion. But I stand by my opinion that he was crap vs Barnsley, and if it wasn't for opinion of him suddenly changing after the Forest game he'd have been slated. If Whelan had played like that he'd have been slated.

Whelan is the scapegoat of choice at the moment (clearly displayed by when he came on vs Barnsley, BB tried to pass to him and kicked it out of play, and the crowd immediately got on Whelan's back ), and Bjarnasson is clearly benefitting from not being Glenn Whelan.

 

There is absolutely no chance Bjarnasson will be playing in the prem next season. If he is then we have serious problems. We should have sold him this month and taken what we can get for him.

If Whelan is fully fit he should be starting ahead of BB. Hopefully Jedinak will be back properly soon and we'll have no need for either Whelan or BB.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Stevo985

[bobzy]

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Whelan played, and played well, during our best run of form this season. So quickly forgotten after a couple of mistakes.

...

Whelan is the scapegoat of choice at the moment (clearly displayed by when he came on vs Barnsley, BB tried to pass to him and kicked it out of play, and the crowd immediately got on Whelan's back ), and Bjarnasson is clearly benefitting from not being Glenn Whelan.

Not for me.  Haven't rated him the entire time he's been here.  At no point has he been "good".  He does some things well (tackle, anticipate the ball) but he slows down any momentum we have and makes the midfield go backwards then long. 

Just lost his legs and is no longer good enough - nothing to do with "being a scapegoat".

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

There is absolutely no chance Bjarnasson will be playing in the prem next season. If he is then we have serious problems. We should have sold him this month and taken what we can get for him.

If Whelan is fully fit he should be starting ahead of BB. Hopefully Jedinak will be back properly soon and we'll have no need for either Whelan or BB.

Bjarnason is incredibly limited but offers more than Whelan as a squad member - particularly as he can play in a number of positions.

I think DM is a problem for us if we go up.  The "serious problems" would be if we're relying on either Glenn Whelan at 35 (he's already shot) or Mile Jedinak at 34.  We'll be completely overrun.  Bjarnason, again, will be more useful than either of them - and he's not the answer either.

[Stevo985]

29 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Not for me.  Haven't rated him the entire time he's been here.  At no point has he been "good".  He does some things well (tackle, anticipate the ball) but he slows down any momentum we have and makes the midfield go backwards then long. 

Just lost his legs and is no longer good enough - nothing to do with "being a scapegoat".

Bjarnason is incredibly limited but offers more than Whelan as a squad member - particularly as he can play in a number of positions.

I think DM is a problem for us if we go up.  The "serious problems" would be if we're relying on either Glenn Whelan at 35 (he's already shot) or Mile Jedinak at 34.  We'll be completely overrun.  Bjarnason, again, will be more useful than either of them - and he's not the answer either.

Whelan got MOTM 3 games in a row during our good run earlier in the season (well, I think it was 3. Was at least 2).

It's a stretch to say he's never been good.

 

Being able to play in multiple positions is not an asset when you're atrocious in all of them.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Stevo985

[Rob182]

I’m struggling to agree with a lot of your post there Stevo. At least from my point of view, anyway. I wasn’t one of the people scapegoating Whelan. I’m often one of the people defending him in the stands, and even vocally congratulating him when he does something good, to try to show others that he’s not as shit as they make out. On top of that, I didn’t see the Forest game, so didn’t see Bjarnason’s performance.

 

Now I’m someone who likes Bjarnason in this new role, even from just seeing his one performance against Barnsley. Not because I don’t like Whelan, not because of the Forest game, but because I liked what I saw against Barnsley. He may play in that position again and be crap, or he might continue to do the things that I enjoyed seeing at the weekend - energy, interceptions, a willingness to release the ball quickly, a fairly effective attempt at ‘playing it simple’ and also consistently tracking back to help defend.

[bobzy]

Just now, Stevo985 said:

Whelan got MOTM 3 games in a row during our good run earlier in the season. 

Being able to play in multiple positions is not an asset when you're atrocious in all of them.

I mean, I pay absolutely zero attention to whoever wins MOTM - but would be curious to know which games and who decided the award?!

You think Bjarnason has been atrocious recently?

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, bobzy said:

I mean, I pay absolutely zero attention to whoever wins MOTM - but would be curious to know which games and who decided the award?!

You think Bjarnason has been atrocious recently?

The Blues game and the game after I'm certain he got MOTM. He was very good in those games too.

I've edited my post above. I THINK he got it the game after as well but can't be sure.

I think Bjarnasson was very good in his 45 minutes against Forest.
I think he's been atrocious in pretty much every game he played before that.

And I don't think he was good on Saturday. In fact i think he was poor and was given the benefit of the doubt because his name isn't Glenn Whelan.

 

If Whelan is fit he should be playing ahead of BB. He's a better player.

Edited January 23, 2018 by Stevo985

[bobzy]

2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

The Blues game and the game after I'm certain he got MOTM. He was very good in those games too.

I've edited my post above. I THINK he got it the game after as well but can't be sure.

I think Bjarnasson was very good in his 45 minutes against Forest.
I think he's been atrocious in pretty much every game he played before that.

And I don't think he was good on Saturday. In fact i think he was poor and was given the benefit of the doubt because his name isn't Glenn Whelan.

 

If Whelan is fit he should be playing ahead of BB. He's a better player

Who gave him MOTM?

 

Edit:  As you've edited.  Bjarnason has played very well as a DM and poorly in his only games as a DM - yet is "atrocious" in that position.

I happen to think those "atrocious" performances have been better than anything Whelan has offered us in the same role.  The contrast between first half against Forest and second half (even though we didn't score second half) was HUGE and largely, if not entirely, down to having someone who can actually move with a football in the DM position.  It opens up the pitch for us and enables us to be more attacking.

Edited January 23, 2018 by bobzy

[Stevo985]

6 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Who gave him MOTM?

 

Sky.

FYI here is your opinion after the Blues game:

On 10/29/2017 at 14:00, bobzy said:

Been very critical of him, but this was the perfect type of game for him. Scrappy, limited quality and a chance to put yourself about - he did that brilliantly.

You'll see the comments after that game and the games that followed were, in the majority, very positive.

But apparently he's never been good?

 

Like I said, a lot of revisionism going on here.

 

Scapegoat of the moment for sure.

[bobzy]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

Sky.

FYI here is your opinion after the Blues game:

You'll see the comments after that game and the games that followed were, in the majority, very positive.

But apparently he's never been good?

 

Like I said, a lot of revisionism going on here.

 

Scapegoat of the moment for sure.

There's nothing revisionist about that?

In a scrappy game of terrible quality, he was able to put himself about and did it brilliantly.  I even say I've been "very critical of him" in the very post you're quoting.  I haven't changed my opinion - read what I'm saying rather than quibble over the use of "good".

Bjarnason is limited and isn't our answer as a DM, but he allows us to open up the game and become a better attacking force.  Whelan doesn't do that, has never done that and never will do that.  He didn't do it in a terrible game against Blues and that was him at his very best. 

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, bobzy said:

There's nothing revisionist about that?

In a scrappy game of terrible quality, he was able to put himself about and did it brilliantly.  I even say I've been "very critical of him" in the very post you're quoting.  I haven't changed my opinion - read what I'm saying rather than quibble over the use of "good".

Bjarnason is limited and isn't our answer as a DM, but he allows us to open up the game and become a better attacking force.  Whelan doesn't do that, has never done that and never will do that.  He didn't do it in a terrible game against Blues and that was him at his very best. 

Fair enough. 

I'd say saying a player "did brilliantly", and then claiming he has never been good, is contradictory.

In my opinion you;re underrating Whelan. And 45 minutes vs Forest does not a good player make. It will take a lot more to convince me that Bjarnasson is any good.

As I said, hopefully Jedinak is back properly, and we won't need either of them.

[bobzy]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

Fair enough. 

I'd say saying a player "did brilliantly", and then claiming he has never been good, is contradictory.

Did that brilliantly.  i.e: put himself about.  My God, man, you've just trawled through to find the quote and aren't even quoting it properly!   That said, he probably has been good for us at some points - so I'll retract.

Glenn Whelan would be a decent midfielder at a lower-half Championship club who are expected to scrap and fight in a game.  For a side pushing for automatic promotion, he has no impact on the game in a positive sense.  He's not good enough for us.  Bjarnason has been far more effective at doing that as a DM than Whelan has ever been for us.

For me, I'd sooner see us continue with Bjarnason and attacking football.
For you, you'd sooner see Whelan back in the starting eleven.

Got to love those football opinions 

[brummybloke]

The big diffetence is when BB has had it he is releasing it to the more gifted players quocker. Looking forwards and sideways firat and backwards last.

Wheelan for what ever reason has got into the habit of sideways /backwards first and forwards slowly.

 

Whelan was just what we needed, solid reliable and a battler. Its just this habit he has got now of being negative for negatoves sake which i think is his main weakness.

 

We have 2 ball playing CBs and a player in front who will carry it a bit further before passing. That means our players are on the front foot not checking back all the time.

 

It also explains why we look better gping forwards as its as a unit rather than it going back and a long ball hopibg for a single player to create something.

 

Its a team game and while BB has in general been dog dirt (and if everyone was honest they would admit it) he seems to have found his place in this team at least for now which works for the team.

 

So keep it up BB 

 

 

Shit samsung s7 edge messages do not auto correct any more for some reason

Edited January 23, 2018 by brummybloke
Spelling

[TheMelvillan]

20 hours ago, Delphinho123 said:

I'd take his energy and enthusiam in the defensive midfield role over Whelans tidy backwards passes. I've said it before, but Whelan is too slow for this league. Really enjoying BB playing that role, he's not always pretty but he gives 100% and puts it about as much as possible. 

according to my missus he is always pretty

[Stevo985]

12 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Did that brilliantly.  i.e: put himself about.  My God, man, you've just trawled through to find the quote and aren't even quoting it properly!   That said, he probably has been good for us at some points - so I'll retract.

Glenn Whelan would be a decent midfielder at a lower-half Championship club who are expected to scrap and fight in a game.  For a side pushing for automatic promotion, he has no impact on the game in a positive sense.  He's not good enough for us.  Bjarnason has been far more effective at doing that as a DM than Whelan has ever been for us.

For me, I'd sooner see us continue with Bjarnason and attacking football.
For you, you'd sooner see Whelan back in the starting eleven.

Got to love those football opinions 

I didn't trawl through to find your quote. I went back to the date of the Blues game to make sure I'd got the MOTM correct and your quote was there.

I think the difference is you seemingly think that Whelan in the side produces defensive football, and Whelan out of the side doesn't.

I don't agree with that at all. We've produced some fine performances with Whelan in the side.

 

 

When all is said and done, forget the comparison with Whelan. The bottom line is Bjarnasson isn't good enough for the Championship, and there's no way he'll be making a step up to the Premier League.

[bobzy]

3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

When all is said and done, forget the comparison with Whelan. The bottom line is Bjarnasson isn't good enough for the Championship, and there's no way he'll be making a step up to the Premier League.

Given his recent performances, I disagree.

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Given his recent performances, I disagree.

Cool.

I think that's very generous. 45 good minutes followed by a poor 90 doesn't make up for 12 months of shit in my book.

he'll be back on the bench once the other two DMs are fully fit.
I wouldn't be surprised to see him back on the bench for the next game in fact.

[bannedfromHandV]

49 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

I’m struggling to agree with a lot of your post there Stevo. At least from my point of view, anyway. I wasn’t one of the people scapegoating Whelan. I’m often one of the people defending him in the stands, and even vocally congratulating him when he does something good, to try to show others that he’s not as shit as they make out. On top of that, I didn’t see the Forest game, so didn’t see Bjarnason’s performance.

 

Now I’m someone who likes Bjarnason in this new role, even from just seeing his one performance against Barnsley. Not because I don’t like Whelan, not because of the Forest game, but because I liked what I saw against Barnsley. He may play in that position again and be crap, or he might continue to do the things that I enjoyed seeing at the weekend - energy, interceptions, a willingness to release the ball quickly, a fairly effective attempt at ‘playing it simple’ and also consistently tracking back to help defend.

As opposed to the power of mime?

[omariqy]

Bjarnasson is obviously good enough for the Championship. He has played excellently against top teams at both international level and champions league. It's just that he has not show the best of himself for us. Whelan had a spell for 3 games where he was very good. However, Whelan is a limited player. He does well at things that a team needs when they are scrapping not when they need to play on the front foot and get the amount of points we need to. I am not saying Bjarnasson is the answer but so far he is offered a more mobile option and done a decent job. He was very good against Forest and decent against Barnsley. It's his shirt to lose now. 

[Taxahunter]

With the way we played the ball out from our backline against Barnsley, we need a more mobile DM than Whelan. Whelan is to stationary and to negative in the way he plays, BB was playing it forward to Adomah, Grealish and Hourihane

[VILLAMARV]

Utility player in ok if unspectacular performance shocker

His extra mobility highlights the deficiency in the other two imo. Doesn't mean for me that when everyone is fully fit he isn't 3rd choice again though.

He might however be more use than Lansbury and or Onomah in the middle. Work rate goes a long way. He's miles behind those two in technical ability though imo.