fightoffyour Posted December 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2012 For me he has looked better when coming off the bench in games this season where he is fresh and can run at tired defenders and cause a nusense. . I agree, I think he could be useful to bring on towards the end of games we are winning in, to give that extra bit of energy to chase down the ball. However it's no good if he's just going to give the ball away as quickly as he's won it, like he was against QPR. He can definitely run non-stop for 30 minutes though and that alone is sometimes useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 His passing accuracy stat was very good, he gave the ball away a few times in quick succession before he was taken off. I think that, coupled with the unfair 'limited footballer' tag he's not earned means he can't give the ball away once without people castigating him. The truth is, this limited footballer actually has an eye for a pass and a fantastic shot. Ireland on the other hand can get away with doing three years of **** all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2012 Well 1. No one is castigating him. Saying he's liited, which he is, is just a cirtique of a player. I can't see anyone who has said they don't appreciat ehim, or like him, or see his value in the team. 2. 3 years of **** all or not, it's about what the players are doing now. And as I've said in numerous places, no-one in te team can play AMC like IReland does (and that isn't a comment on how good Ireland is, it's a comment on our lack of options in that position) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 By castigating I mean people are selling him short. He has good technique not bad technique, his goal, and general shooting support that. His passing is not bad either, and statistically wasn't bad v QPR. He's in the limited hard worker box and people want to keep him there, I think. The same thing is happening with Ireland, technically gifted creative player? Except he hasn't ever created (fact) or looked like creating (IMO) an awful lot since he's been here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2012 Agree to disagree. Obviously your opinion of technique and creativity differs greatly to mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I think the difference between the two is one is quite direct, but doesn't have the intuition of the other. The other one can keep a ball moving nicely which is good for setting tempo. I'd see Holman as a more 'box-to-box' type player who will get the ball and try and move it forwards quickly. Ireland is the guy who likes to recieve the ball to his feet, is a little more quicker a picking a pass, but is predominantely found useful in the final 3rd - very much a finesse player. They're both good, at different things and I would personally have them in the same midfield 3 along side Westwood. Bannan is also good, but sometimes inconsistancy can creep into his game, but that's his age and play style - which will come with experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarpie Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I think the difference between the two is one is quite direct, but doesn't have the intuition of the other. The other one can keep a ball moving nicely which is good for setting tempo. I'd see Holman as a more 'box-to-box' type player who will get the ball and try and move it forwards quickly. Ireland is the guy who likes to recieve the ball to his feet, is a little more quicker a picking a pass, but is predominantely found useful in the final 3rd - very much a finesse player. They're both good, at different things and I would personally have them in the same midfield 3 along side Westwood. Bannan is also good, but sometimes inconsistancy can creep into his game, but that's his age and play style - which will come with experience. This, as I have said before it would be interesting to play Holman deeper as box-to-box with Westwood and Ireland in front of them just behind the striker and between LM/RM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2012 I think the difference between the two is one is quite direct, but doesn't have the intuition of the other. The other one can keep a ball moving nicely which is good for setting tempo. I'd see Holman as a more 'box-to-box' type player who will get the ball and try and move it forwards quickly. Ireland is the guy who likes to recieve the ball to his feet, is a little more quicker a picking a pass, but is predominantely found useful in the final 3rd - very much a finesse player. They're both good, at different things and I would personally have them in the same midfield 3 along side Westwood. Bannan is also good, but sometimes inconsistancy can creep into his game, but that's his age and play style - which will come with experience. Pretty much agree with all of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Holman has become an easy target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarpie Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Holman has become an easy target. Yeah, his technique and vision isn't as bad as some say, it looks to me like he is not yet completely up to speed with premier league and tends to hurry too much but he's been getting better gradually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2012 But no-one's said his technique and vision is bad. Just that it isn't great. And no-one's targeting him. Just commenting on him like we do with all players. There's plenty of people critiquing Bannan, KEA, Clark, Stevens, Vlaar, IReland and Z'Zogbia. Are they all being targeted too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 People are saying exactly that. Which I disagree with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 People are saying exactly that. Which I disagree with. You said castigating. I'm no word Nazi but that suggests something other than simple difference of opinion. It suggests you think people are slamming him, stringing him up, which clearly isn't the case. In fact, I've yet to find anyone who doesn't want him around. If you don't think that you picked about as wrong a word as you could! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praisedmambo Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 He does very often lose the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Crocodile Dundee is surprising me A decent player for us he gives us something we haven't had for a while a player willing to have a long range crack at goal He should have scored against Arsenal and got his rewards against QPR keep it up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 You said castigating. I'm no word Nazi but that suggests something other than simple difference of opinion. It suggests you think people are slamming him, stringing him up, which clearly isn't the case. In fact, I've yet to find anyone who doesn't want him around. If you don't think that you picked about as wrong a word as you could! If you think castigated is too strong, well whatever, I'm not bothered as it's splitting hairs. The main point of disagreement is on the area of criticism rather than the strength of it. I think people are fundamentally wrong to say his technique is bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 If you think castigated is too strong, well whatever, I'm not bothered as it's splitting hairs. The main point of disagreement is on the area of criticism rather than the strength of it. I think people are fundamentally wrong to say his technique is bad. I'm asking you if you think castigated is too strong? Do you think Holman is being castigated, by anyone? There are different kinds of technique employed on a football pitch. I think he employs a poor technique when taking a first touch, shows average technique when picking a pass but good technique when taking a shot. I think he's limited "technically" overall mainly due to his ball control which is exasperated by his enthusiasm, which is in itself a double edged sword. I love his Milner-esq engine and his terrier like attitude. It makes him a handful but he tires quickly as a result. He's an above average tackler. Nobody is "severely punishing" him here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 3, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 3, 2012 I'm asking you if you think castigated is too strong? Do you think Holman is being castigated, by anyone? There are different kinds of technique employed on a football pitch. I think he employs a poor technique when taking a first touch, shows average technique when picking a pass but good technique when taking a shot. I think he's limited "technically" overall mainly due to his ball control which is exasperated by his enthusiasm, which is in itself a double edged sword. I love his Milner-esq engine and his terrier like attitude. It makes him a handful but he tires quickly as a result. He's an above average tackler. Nobody is "severely punishing" him here. I would agree with all of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodytom Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Some games he has been our best player. West Brom at home - certainly the first half - I thought he was really good. Yet to make my mind up really but a good squad player at worst. I think Mcleish did ok here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted December 3, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 3, 2012 It is always the same with this sort of player, when you as a team are playing poorly they are the best player on effort alone. When the team is playing well no matter how much this sort of player runs around you still find yourself groaning when you lose possession because of their poor control. Not McLeish's worst signing by a long way (doesn't say a lot as the rest were shite) but as and when (if) the team improves I suspect he will look more and more like a try hard but ultimately average player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts