Player Brett Holman

[heid3ster]

As said in the Liverpool thread... I think he should definitely get a start against Liverpool. He can force them to make errors.

Agree with this, im not his biggest fan but pl's tactics against rodgers have always been about stifling their style and holman fits that description.

 

Agreed here too, the way to get at Liverpool is to hassle their defense and force errors out of them. Holman would be a good asset. Not sure who you sacrifice for him, though.

[Kingfisher]

Oh dear, I see Stevo985 hasn't been to the thread for a while...

[Jimzk5]

I have itk info on why he isn't playing, dont care if you believe me but......

It's cus his not very good at football.

Edited March 24, 2013 by Jimzk5

[Ponky]

he put in some good performances before Christmas but since the Chelsea debacle we just haven't had the margin for error to carry a ball butcher of Holman proportions.

When he has been given little cameos lately he frequently gives the ball away and when you have a team that is prone to disasters like ours has been the last thing you need is someone with his lack of composure adding to the panic.

Personally, as an Aussie, I'm happy to see him in the Premier League. As Villa supporter I'd rather see him somewhere else.

Edited March 25, 2013 by Ponky

[Stevo985]

Oh dear, I see Stevo985 hasn't been to the thread for a while...

A bit like that time you made up a load of stats and then disappeared when asked if you could provide them?

 

Anyway, I have been back in the thread.

 

I just haven't had anything to post. Our debate was over as you weren't reading what I was writing and just repeating yourself. We clearly weren't going to agree, so what's the point in posting with someone who just wants an argument?

 

I left you to it.

Edited March 25, 2013 by Stevo985

[SikhInTrinity]

He runs around but hardly does anything else. He then made statements about having players who have experience of keeping the ball, well It would help if you practice what you preach.

[dudevillaisnice]

If we were to sell him we would make a profit regardless so i'm not too fussed what happens.

 

If he stays he must accept it's a team game, if he goes we get a fee.. even if it is just a £1m or less, still a profit.

 

Personally I feel he can do a job in certain games i.e those teams that pass it around and hate being hassled Swansea and Liverpool for example.

[Kingfisher]

Oh dear, I see Stevo985 hasn't been to the thread for a while...

A bit like that time you made up a load of stats and then disappeared when asked if you could provide them?

 

Anyway, I have been back in the thread.

 

I just haven't had anything to post. Our debate was over as you weren't reading what I was writing and just repeating yourself. We clearly weren't going to agree, so what's the point in posting with someone who just wants an argument?

 

I left you to it.

Firstly my stats aren't made up. But I do take the time to understand what they are telling me.

 

I'm telling you and showing you that the pass accuracy stats you constantly use against him don't paint the definitive picture you think they do. The further up the field, and the more attacking your style of passing is has a negative effect on your accuracy. I've given numerous examples;

 

None of the (for example top 10) most creative players in terms of assists have good pass accuracy, many not in the top 100 in pass accuracy.

 

Totti has a low pass accuracy, lower than Holman, but has the most assists for Roma. 

 

Kevin De Brune of Werder has a pass accuracy of 76.5%, 15th best in the squad but has the most assist. 

 

Like those examples above Holman, has a low pass accuracy, I think this is due to his attacking passing style and his position. But I think his second best assist tally afford him a little more credit than many give him.    

 

Posters on here pull out stats, but I feel they don't often understand what the stats mean. Consider his position, the quality of his team, how his stats relate to others, his game time and most importantly watch him! See how he plays, then judge.  

 

I'd be tempted to play Holman more often, I think he presses well for 90, and is ambitious in his passing so gives an attacking threat too. N'Zogbia though great technically, can turn of when not in possession so I would opt for Holman in AMC versus Liverpool in a 4-2-3-1/4-5-1 style formation.   

[Stevo985]

And I told you why, in our situation and more specifically Holman's situation, that the stats in this case absolutely DID matter, IN MY OPINION.

 

But you ignored it and told me that Totti had a low pass average, despite the fact that I'd already addressed that point (which you'd alreayd made) in a previous post and you were just making it again after declaring you'd "put that issue to bed".

 

Fair enough, you rate Holman, I don't. You think he's creative, I don't. You think his poor passing doesn't matter, I do.

 

Great, good for you. Just don't expect me to keep rpelying to the same point over and over when you ignore the response.

 

(I'll choose to gloss over the patronising point about me not knowing what stats mean. Someone else can give you the bite you're looking for on that one)

[Stevo985]

Of course the real irony is a few pages back you were using the (made up) stat that Holman had a very high passing average as a positive.

 

Then when it's proved to be false, it doesn't matter. Funny that.

[SikhInTrinity]

I love the he presses well for us for 90mins, that's a myth in itself. Remember Swansea, his pressing, allowing Dyer just to waltz past him.

[Kingfisher]

Of course the real irony is a few pages back you were using the (made up) stat that Holman had a very high passing average as a positive.

 

Then when it's proved to be false, it doesn't matter. Funny that.

Not made up stats at all, I said I collated his passing stats to be roughly equal to Gabby's, explained I could be wrong, but also said pass success isn't the be all and end all that you make it out to be. Here is why (again);

 

Totti is an attack orientated player, who has a lot of assists, but a low pass success rate, he is a creative forward. De Bruyne is an attack orientated player with lots of assists who has a low pass success rate, he is an attacking midfielder. Non of the top creative players in terms of assists have particularly high pass success rates most of whom are attacking midfielders. The most creative players at most clubs have lower pass success rates than their team mates. Holman is an attacking midfielder who has the second most assists in the squad, if he plays and creates goals I'd prefer that than a 90% safe pass rate from him. We need the Westwood type player be we also need players to open up teams.

 

There you go, based on what I have seen of him, a reasoned, thought out and researched argument, with numerous examples to back up my view that Holman could be a good creative player for us if he is given more opportunities in the middle.    

[Stevo985]

Good for you.

But as I said, I've already given my opinion on why passing ability does matter for Holman, and said we should agree to disagree, so that post wasn't really necessary.

[Ponky]

This thread pretty much sums up what Aussie fans have thought about him for much of the time he has been around.

 

I absolutely despised him and his headless chicken routine for many years. Then he had a brilliant World Cup in Sth Africa and eventually displaced Tim Cahill - and he seems to have become one of those players where you know he is going to have his fair share of bloopers but the upside is his industry and occasional brilliance.

 

Personally I think he has a very good football brain but his ability is not at the same level.

[Kingfisher]

Good for you.

But as I said, I've already given my opinion on why passing ability does matter for Holman, and said we should agree to disagree, so that post wasn't really necessary.

Well I've given you reasonable opportunity to come back with a reasoned, evidenced argument, we shall have to agree to disagree. But it's easy to sit there and say he's rubbish and pick holes in other peoples arguments, worse, questioning their integrity. It seems 'I think he's rubbish' is good enough for you. If pressed you'll give an unqualified stat or an anecdote but you clearly don't set yourself the same standards you expect of other posters.

[romavillan]

"Personally I think he has a very good football brain but his ability is not at the same level."

 

i reckon that's spot on, i love the fact that he busts a gut EVERY TIME he gets a run out, he's scored a couple of corkers, he's put a few good through balls in for people too. the thing is though unless you drop one of weimann or gabby it's hard to make a case for him in the centre behind benteke at the moment. if he'd got the feet to match his brain then he'd be nailed on to start in front of zog/bannan/sylla/kea/dawkins as the more forward thinking of the trio in the middle. as it is though i don't think he's technically good enough to play there. in a 4-3-1-2 as the one woudl be more like it, defending from the front and not given the task of ticking the ball over and keeping it in the middle of the park.

as for the totti comments, i really hope it's not meant as a comparison to holman! in terms of his pass completion, i've read here that he has the highest through ball completion rate in EUROPE, not just serie A. this was for last season (11/12). a little google and here you go although i think i read it end of last season in the gazzetta. totti has been world class for over a decade, it has never been a criticism of his that he wastes possession. i think you could say that holman does give it a way a bit more than totti without being too wide of the mark
 

[Stevo985]

 

Good for you.

But as I said, I've already given my opinion on why passing ability does matter for Holman, and said we should agree to disagree, so that post wasn't really necessary.

Well I've given you reasonable opportunity to come back with a reasoned, evidenced argument, we shall have to agree to disagree. But it's easy to sit there and say he's rubbish and pick holes in other peoples arguments, worse, questioning their integrity. It seems 'I think he's rubbish' is good enough for you. If pressed you'll give an unqualified stat or an anecdote but you clearly don't set yourself the same standards you expect of other posters.

Further evidence that you're not reading my posts.

I've already answered your post. You've just made the same point over and over.

Here, I've quoted the posts I've already made which explains why, IN MY OPINION, passing matters for Holman.

 

 

Holman is fine if you want someone running around and pressuring, but he lacks positional discipline. But we're not good enough to support a player like that because it means you get huge gaps all over the place where he should be.

And he offers very little on the ball so stifles any creativity we have going forward.

 

 

he's not technically good enough to play through the middle.

 

 

You're advocating playing Holman as a central midfielder, ahead of the rest of our central midfielders.

 

One of the most important things to have as a central midfielder, imo, is to be good at passing and to not give the ball away. Especially in our team where the defence needs as much protection as possible.

 

Holman is not good at passing and not good at protecting possession.

That's why i quoted those two stats.

I also think you need to be positionally aware, and he isn't. I don't have a stat for that to back me up but it's fairly obvious if you watch him play, again that's my opinion.

 

The fact he has 3 assists is a good argument for his inclusion, as is his workrate and pressuring which can be an advantage. I was giving you a reason why I think that, despite those qualities, he shouldn't be in the team.

 

 

IMO the negatives [of Holman's game] aren't worth 3 assists in half a season. You think they are. Agree to disagree.

These have already answered your point that passing stats don't matter.

I've explained why I think they do matter in our situation.

I don't know why you want me to repeat myself.

[Kingfisher]

You hung you're argument on his passing stat before, now you're falling back on opinion. I'd say 'I THINK he's a creative player with an eye for a pass', you'd say rubbish and point to the passing stat. I've pointed out why it is quite convincingly a flawed argument, and now you're just saying 'well I think he's not good enough, end of'. I'm reading your posts but you're displaying double standards.   

[Stevo985]

Jesus christ.

I honestly don't know what you want from me. Again, I've given you a reason (on numerous occasions now) on why I think Holman needs to be a good passer in his and more impostantly in our situation.

I pulled out stats to support my opinion that he wasn't a good passer (let's not forget that you started the stat debate by saying his passing stats were excellent, so don't blame me for posting statistics. At least mine had a source)

 

You've then tried to argue that passing stats don't matter because one of the greatest Italians to ever play the game happens to have a low pass completion rate.

This is where I've said we should agree to disagree, because you obviously think Holman has enough about him to mean that his lack of passing ability doesn't matter (that's what I've gleaned from your argument. Have I got that right?)

 

Whereas, again as I've already explained on numerous occasions, I don't think Holman does have enough to make up for that lack of passing ability. And, maybe more importantly, our team doesn't have enough about it to compensate for his negative points.

 

I'm not sure what you want me to say?

On one hand you're deriding me for posting stats to support my argument, then you're deriding me for just stating my opinion.

 

What is it you want?

[villa89]

If we were to sell him we would make a profit regardless so i'm not too fussed what happens.

 

It doesn't really work like that though. We signed him on a free and probably gave him a decent sigining bonus + his wages ( for example 20K a week is 1 million a year) would mean that even if we did get £1m for him we still wouldn't have made a profit.