Jump to content

Nathan Baker


AVFC-Prideofbrum

Recommended Posts

Made of glass unfortunately

That's not fair. He's not made of glass, he is a tall centre back who should not have been played SB.

Side backs are usually short in height for a reason.

They are up against fast wingers and need to turn quickly. Tall, bulky centre backs can't turn quickly. When they try they risk injury, especially if it's very cold and they've not warmed up properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not fair. He's not made of glass, he is a tall centre back who should not have been played SB.

Side backs are usually short in height for a reason.

They are up against fast wingers and need to turn quickly. Tall, bulky centre backs can't turn quickly. When they try they risk injury, especially if it's very cold and they've not warmed up properly.

What the hell is a side back? He was playing as a third centre back... Whose fault is it if he's not warmed up properly? That is no excuse..The fact of the matter is he has been injured numerous times in his short career, and that in my eyes makes him metaphorically made of glass

Edited by mikeyp102
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely disagree

Well, one thing we can agree on Baker was caught in the LB position facing Odemwingie.

If it was a back 3 - which I'm not convinced it was - it didn't do him any favours.

In a proper back 4 the LB should be further back and would have taken on the responsibility of tackling or blocking Odemwingie's cross.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Side back is funny. No, centre backs never have to be able to turn and run do they?

Con seemingly doesn't remember the days of Ugo Ehiogu as "side back" - he was far from dainty.

He didn't warm up properly? Clutching at straws?

"He is a tall centre back who should not have been played (in the imaginary) position of side back?"

Er? He might have been on the side of a three but he was still playing centre back. All this "should not" business just seems like desperate digs at Lambert, as with Bannan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Side back is funny. No, centre backs never have to be able to turn and run do they?

For a given level of ability the typical CB is not as agile as the typical LB/RB. This is such an easy point to grasp I should not have to explain it because it would patronise too many people who might potentially read this post.

Con seemingly doesn't remember the days of Ugo Ehiogu as "side back" - he was far from dainty.

Huth, Ivanovic, Cuellar have all played that LB/RB role. They are not as effective in that position as they are at CB. That is my point.

He didn't warm up properly? Clutching at straws?

It's a common explanation for injury. Was a very cold day and it occurred early in the match. Reasonable hypothesis.

"He is a tall centre back who should not have been played (in the imaginary) position of side back?"

Er? He might have been on the side of a three but he was still playing centre back. All this "should not" business just seems like desperate digs at Lambert, as with Bannan.

If it was a back 3 then we can question why Bennett was playing LWB, as Baker was covering down the left side for Bennett. I would have started Lichaj. All 9 games won this season won with Lichaj in the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it was a back 3 then we can question why Bennett was playing LWB, as Baker was covering down the left side for Bennett. I would have started Lichaj. All 9 games won this season won with Lichaj in the team.

(maybe in spite of Lichaj being in the team) Look, defenders have to cover sometimes - it happens all through the game and it is to be expected. He was not playing Left Back but left Centre Back.

Edited by praisedmambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, defenders have to cover sometimes - it happens all through the game and it is to be expected. He was not playing Left Back but left Centre Back.

A CB needs to cover that position more frequently with a back 3 and WBs than with a traditional back 2 and LB/RB because the WB more-often-than-not has sodded off up the pitch somewhere and left that area exposed.

Leaving a big, hulking CB vs a small nippy winger = trouble.

Ideally in a CB 3 I would have one Vlaar type CB in the middle and two, shorter (5'10 - 6') and more agile playmaking CBs on either side, because of the extra work they need to do on the wings compared to a traditional CB.

As a CB in the Vlaar mold, Baker was playing out of his natural position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a CB, especially one who has played FB in his career should fit into a back three easily, and although still lacking experience, Baker has those credentials. As for having to be smaller to deal with agile wingers, well these days many of the top strikers are small and agile, if Baker can't deal with that he's not got a future at the top level.

I think a big lumbering dinosaur like Dunne would struggle to have a top flight career if he was starting out today because he really does struggle against small tricky strikers. Saying that I'd have him back in the side for the rest of this season because despite that he has the experience to organise that mess at the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â