Jump to content

Ron Vlaar


irreverentad

Recommended Posts

It's wrong to suggest Vlaar was just a World Cup hero. Someone needs to post our win/clean sheet ratio with him in the team compared to when not. There is a big difference. He's pivotal to us doing well. 

 

It must be his injury problems that stop the big clubs coming in for him, he's only on 25k with us. 

Edited by supernova26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've been over this so many times. I guess one more then. How many CB's have missed more games than Ron? Jones, Dawson, Kompany, Nastasic, Agger, Koscielny, Lovren last year, Mangala last year and this year, the list goes on. Maybe all of those players should have been sold by all of their teams over the summer as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've been over this so many times. I guess one more then. How many CB's have missed more games than Ron? Jones, Dawson, Kompany, Nastasic, Agger, Koscielny, Lovren last year, Mangala last year and this year, the list goes on. Maybe all of those players should have been sold by all of their teams over the summer as well.

Highlighting other players who are prone to injury and have played less games does not prove vlaar is not prone to injury.

Also, is your list of players from last season?

What about this season? The season before? Are there still that many players?

Can we get a list of players who have played more games than Ron? I'm sure that list will be far far far bigger.

On the question of should the teams have sold their injury prone players? That's up to them?

Mangala's team did, lovren's team did, Dawson's team did. Agger's team did! That's half your list.

Edited by Woodytom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody has ever said he ISN'T injury prone.

 

All anyone has said is that he's not as injury prone as people make out.

 

The comparison to other players wasn't to prove Vlaar wasn't injury prone. it was to counter the point that people were making that his "injury proneness" would stop other clubs wanting to sign him and that we'd never get a big fee for him because he was soooooo injury prone. The Lovren signing being the best example, imo, because he missed more games than Vlaar last season (hence the comparison) yet he's just been signed for a huge fee (although obviously he has a few years advantage on Vlaar too) (sorry donie)

Edited by Stevo985
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All anyone has said is that he's not as injury prone as people make out..

But he is.......

I've made out that he is injury prone to the level that he has missed almost 1/4 of games since coming here. And guess what..........

Nobody is going over the top and saying he's injured every game or all season.

Sure, some people's frustration may lead them to say things like 'he's injured all the time', but I would put that down to just that, frustration.

And so far this season, that frustration is becoming apparent again, already.

In the summer I would have taken 1/2 players who are perhaps not quite the level of vlaar but who offer solidity and leadership and are able to be consistently fit. There is nothing to say that they wouldn't have got injured but you can gage the chances of that to an extent by their history.

Right now, vlaars history of injuries is proving to be 100% accurate.

I would also argue your point that nobody has suggested that he is not injury prone. Not too long ago, people were suggesting that it was all a myth. Before he got injured incidentally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All anyone has said is that he's not as injury prone as people make out..

But he is.......

I've made out that he is injury prone to the level that he has missed almost 1/4 of games since coming here. And guess what..........

Again this is just arguing on how injury prone you think he is. Semantics

Nobody is going over the top and saying he's injured every game or all season.

Sure, some people's frustration may lead them to say things like 'he's injured all the time', but I would put that down to just that, frustration.

And so far this season, that frustration is becoming apparent again, already.

His injury this season certainly doesn't make it look any better. But like I said, nobody has said he's not injury prone, it was a debate before this injury about how "injury prone" he was. I'm sure people's opinions will have changed with his current injury.

In the summer I would have taken 1/2 players who are perhaps not quite the level of vlaar but who offer solidity and leadership and are able to be consistently fit. There is nothing to say that they wouldn't have got injured but you can gage the chances of that to an extent by their history.

Right now, vlaars history of injuries is proving to be 100% accurate.

I'm not really sure what you're saying here. What does his "history is 100% accurate" mean?

I would also argue your point that nobody has suggested that he is not injury prone. Not too long ago, people were suggesting that it was all a myth. Before he got injured incidentally.

But you're acting as if people said "he's NEVER injured". Nobody ever said that. All people said was that he didn't miss as many games through injury as people liked to make out. And I'd still argue that 6 games in a league season is hardly the end of the world. But again that's just arguing over definitions.

I'm sure given his recent injury that people may have changed their minds. But we won't really know until the end of the season.

What if he returns against Chelsea or City and plays every game for the rest of the season? Suddenly he's only missed 2 or 3 games in the season.

Gloating over being right because he's injured for a couple of games isn't very clever, in my book.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is injury prone in my opinion, as in "prone to injuries". They never seem to be particularly bad injuries but they do seem to linger. Don't understand the big argument to be honest.

 

 

Not compared to Joe Cole he's not injury prone or prone to injuries?

 

He's nearly 30 and is probably injured about as often as most defenders his age?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is injury prone in my opinion, as in "prone to injuries". They never seem to be particularly bad injuries but they do seem to linger. Don't understand the big argument to be honest.

Not compared to Joe Cole he's not injury prone or prone to injuries?

He's nearly 30 and is probably injured about as often as most defenders his age?

Not compared to Joe Cole or players like that no, but they are pretty extreme cases.

For a 30 year old central defender he is probably somewhere near average yes. Quite difficult to build a long term defence around that though. In my opinion.

Really good player though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

He is injury prone in my opinion, as in "prone to injuries". They never seem to be particularly bad injuries but they do seem to linger. Don't understand the big argument to be honest.

Not compared to Joe Cole he's not injury prone or prone to injuries?

He's nearly 30 and is probably injured about as often as most defenders his age?

Not compared to Joe Cole or players like that no, but they are pretty extreme cases.

For a 30 year old central defender he is probably somewhere near average yes. Quite difficult to build a long term defence around that though. In my opinion.

Really good player though.

 

 

 

Yes he's a good player but he is coming to the twlight of his career.

 

I had hoped the Okore would have been pushing for this mantle but he seems to be taking longer to get over his injury than expected?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gloating over being right because he's injured for a couple of games isn't very clever, in my book.

Gloating? Who is gloating? I'm as frustrated with his fitness inconsistencies as anybody.

Seriously, I wouldn't gloat about being right over something that I see as blatantly obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â