Birkir Bjarnason

[carewjust4u]

One is a defensive-midfielder, one is a center-midfielder.

Jedinak is superior in; Defensive Position, Intercepting, Heading, Holding the ball up and tackling.

Bjarny is superior in; carrying the ball through midfield, forward passing, and shooting.

My point being, you cannot compare them to one another...it completely depends on the opposition's game-plan as to which is more effective. Tonight for example, QPR will be playing a lot of balls in the air, so having Jedinak heading the ball right back into their half will be more effective. (in my opinion)
 

[terrytini]

2 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I think some fans, not necessarily anyone here but some, confuse running around a lot with effectiveness. Mile Jedinak reads the game better than almost anyone in this league not named John Terry, which makes up for Birkirs athletic edge. 

In the same way Jores Okore isn't a better centre half than Terry, this doesn't make Birkir Bjarnason a better defensive mid than Jedi. He can, at times, be rather headless. 

I gave it a like for the point being made but also wanted to give it a ‘hate’ because you reminded me of Okore  ......which then made me remember Richards too ...and it was all going so well ....

[dont_do_it_doug.]

11 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Similarly, I have never seen this Mile Jedinak who covers all the ground like an Aussie Vieira. 

Funnily enough neither have I.

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I have never seen this Birkir Bjarnason people keep referring to. The one who tracks runners like a Viking Kante. 

It's coming across like I don't rate Birkir, I do. I just don't think he's the player y'all think he is. 

Or the Birkir Bjarnason that is a better passer than Jedinak. I've seen no compelling evidence for that.

Again I think BB has done well this year. He's performed far better than I ever thought he would.

But in a BB vs Jedinak discussion, it's not even close imo. Jedinak is clearly the better player.

[omariqy]

Nice discussion to be having though. 

[dn1982]

Can Jedi keep up his high standards 3 times in a week? I’d prefer a fit firing Jedi for Bolton so I’d play Birkir tonight as I think we’ll have a lot more ball and think he ticks us over better.  

[rjw63]

1 hour ago, dn1982 said:

Can Jedi keep up his high standards 3 times in a week? I’d prefer a fit firing Jedi for Bolton so I’d play Birkir tonight as I think we’ll have a lot more ball and think he ticks us over better.  

Don't you **** start with the W**twoo* talk

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Fact - Birkir Bjarnason is better at football than Ashley Westwood

[skarroki]

I would think Jedinak can cope playing tonight and at the weekend, neither are particularly strong opposition and he's a better tactical choice. Rest him after the weekend or bring him off in both games. 

Edit: I prefer Birkir on the wing, unpopular opinion I realise. Would rather see him coming on for Adomah or Snodgrass than a central player. 

Edited March 13, 2018 by skarroki

[Demitri_C]

[bobzy]

2 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Or the Birkir Bjarnason that is a better passer than Jedinak. I've seen no compelling evidence for that.

Again I think BB has done well this year. He's performed far better than I ever thought he would.

But in a BB vs Jedinak discussion, it's not even close imo. Jedinak is clearly the better player.

I'm genuinely staggered by that.  It's entirely visible in the few games Bjarnason has played at DMC.  Bjarnason looks for the ball more and plays more considered passes.  Jedinak gets rid quickly, often into the channels (which can be good) but just not the same degree of calm at all.  When we had Bjarnason there, we built up attacks and, IMO, looked more of a threat going forward.  The team pushed up more.  Jedinak is much better at destroying play but almost giving the ball back to the opposition.  Against Wolves, the long balls into the channels for Grabban did work well (not sure if this was Jedinak or just everyone, but still).

(The stats back it up too, of course.  Against Blues as an example, Jedinak made 40 passes with 57.5% accuracy with 7 "long balls", none finding their target.  Bjarnason's worst performance in that regard was against Barnsley - 38 passes, 79% accuracy, 4 "long balls", 2 finding their target.)

 

Personally, and as many have said, I think they both have their merits in that DMC role.  Jedinak for when we need to fight, Bjarnason against smaller opposition.  Jedinak isn't clearly better though.  Maybe the Jedinak of 4 years ago would have been, but not now. 

[dn1982]

2 hours ago, rjw63 said:

Don't you **** start with the W**twoo* talk

I liked Westwood but I think Birkir is a bit more positive so I’ll  change its to makes us play faster and better. 

[rjw63]

1 hour ago, dn1982 said:

I liked Westwood

[Stevo985]

5 hours ago, bobzy said:

I'm genuinely staggered by that.  It's entirely visible in the few games Bjarnason has played at DMC.  Bjarnason looks for the ball more and plays more considered passes.  Jedinak gets rid quickly, often into the channels (which can be good) but just not the same degree of calm at all.  When we had Bjarnason there, we built up attacks and, IMO, looked more of a threat going forward.  The team pushed up more.  Jedinak is much better at destroying play but almost giving the ball back to the opposition.  Against Wolves, the long balls into the channels for Grabban did work well (not sure if this was Jedinak or just everyone, but still).

(The stats back it up too, of course.  Against Blues as an example, Jedinak made 40 passes with 57.5% accuracy with 7 "long balls", none finding their target.  Bjarnason's worst performance in that regard was against Barnsley - 38 passes, 79% accuracy, 4 "long balls", 2 finding their target.)

 

Personally, and as many have said, I think they both have their merits in that DMC role.  Jedinak for when we need to fight, Bjarnason against smaller opposition.  Jedinak isn't clearly better though.  Maybe the Jedinak of 4 years ago would have been, but not now. 

You've cherry picked those passing stats nicely. Jedinak's worst game in terms of passing when starting, and it was a rough and tumble local derby, hardly known for it's silky passing. His four starts at DM immediately preceding that, for example, were 83%, 81%, 86% and 82%. Even tonight vs QPR he got 82%.

Bjarnason has only managed to have a better pass completion than ANY of those totals once this season (91% vs Burton)

Overall their pass completion is pretty similar with Bjarnasson slightly ahead (77% vs 75%). However Jedinak's is skewed by the odd weirdly low percentage. The Blues game for example is a very low percentage, despite the fact he was magnificent in that game.

If you isolate games where they play DM then Jedinak's average is better.

 

So, I stand by what I said. I'm yet to see compelling evidence that Bjarnasson is a better passer than Jedinak. I don't see it at games and I don't see it in the stats.

[Bunnski]

Statistically they may be similar but Thor being more mobile ,quicker and more skillful means he gets into better positions to make telling passes that improve us as an attacking force. Jedinak wins a lot more headers tho but imo he doesn't find a teammate enough with his headers. I thought Thor should of started tonight as QPR were always going to sit back and let us have more of the ball and Thor would of suited that type of game better.

[Stevo985]

5 hours ago, Bunnski said:

Statistically they may be similar but Thor being more mobile ,quicker and more skillful means he gets into better positions to make telling passes that improve us as an attacking force. Jedinak wins a lot more headers tho but imo he doesn't find a teammate enough with his headers. I thought Thor should of started tonight as QPR were always going to sit back and let us have more of the ball and Thor would of suited that type of game better.

Again I don't see these telling passes that you're talking about. When has BB made these passes? I don't remember them. in fact I'd say he's quite conservative in his passing.

Jedinak was probably our best player int he first half last night, not that that is saying much. So I don't see how Bjarnasson's inclusion would have made much difference.

[Rob182]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Again I don't see these telling passes that you're talking about. When has BB made these passes? I don't remember them. in fact I'd say he's quite conservative in his passing.

Jedinak was probably our best player int he first half last night, not that that is saying much. So I don't see how Bjarnasson's inclusion would have made much difference.

I'd agree that Jedinak was probably our best player in the first half, but back onto the passing discussion, I thought his passing was poor and his good performance was due to breaking up play because QPR were all over us.

[omariqy]

I didn't think Jedinak was our best player first half. The young lad Eze (?) gave him the runaround. 

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, Rob182 said:

I'd agree that Jedinak was probably our best player in the first half, but back onto the passing discussion, I thought his passing was poor and his good performance was due to breaking up play because QPR were all over us.

I'd agree that he was best because he was breaking up play, but he did only misplace 2 passes in the first half.

[Bunnski]

2 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Again I don't see these telling passes that you're talking about. When has BB made these passes? I don't remember them. in fact I'd say he's quite conservative in his passing.

Jedinak was probably our best player int he first half last night, not that that is saying much. So I don't see how Bjarnasson's inclusion would have made much difference.

Thats fair enough but for me Thor pushes further forward and while he often just lays it off similar to jedinak he also plays some nice 1-2s and looks for the forward pass whereas Ive rarely seen that from jedinak who is extremely one dimensional.