Cliffy Biro Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 How many of the worlds top teams go out of their way to buy a left/right combo for central defence? None of them. The only top team off the top of my head i can think of is bayern with dante being the left footer but i doubt they went out of their way to do that. Its a rubbish argument imo it basically comes down to how good the player is, the reason baker/clark doesn't work is not because they are both left footed its because neither are good enough especially when paired together. Of course the most important thing is the quality of the players but you'd be wrong if you think this is not considered by managers. You might want a word with our current one : Lambert : "His absence ( Vlaar ) affects things because of the balance. We have two left footers playing at centre-half which is not ideal." Yes and as i said its an utterly rubbish and nonsense excuse/argument, the results have been shite and its not because baker and clark are left footed If so many teams in the world and most of the teams in the league play with same footed centre backs then we can't we? Utter rubbish from PL but then again its not the first time he's talked rubbish is it? Eh? All he said is it "affects things" He hasn't attributed all of our problems to having two left footed centrebacks. Neither has he said we can't play with them. Neither has he used it as an excuse for the results. He said it's "not ideal". Man United having RVP out is "not ideal" but that's not why they've been so crap this season. If Lambert had said "The reason we're losing games is because we've had to play two left footed centrebacks" then you'd have a point. But he obviously hasn't. Jesus christ, there's enough to be negative about without making up this sort of nonsense. Did i say he's attributed it to the loss? He's saying the absence of vlaar is affecting us because we have two left footers and thats what im replying to not going off your little rant would help. The absence of vlaar undoubtedly affects us but again its not because they are both left footed and to even suggest it is ridiculous. Put it this way when okore/vlaar are fit and play together (assuming its pl's first choice partnership) would you not laugh if he suggested after a game it affects us because they're both right footed? I think them being left footed is a problem, because they only use the other foot for standing on. Vlaar and Okore are more capable of handling playing on there weaker side than both Baker and Clark would. But it's not just them being left footed, without Vlaar you lose the leader and the organiser of the back line. I agree, which comes back to them not being good enough overall, but obviously hes not going to say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 13, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted February 13, 2014 Did i say he's attributed it to the loss? the results have been shite and its not because baker and clark are left footed Thats me saying its got nothing to do with loss, not suggesting lambert said it. But nice try. But why would you say it's got nothing to do with us losing if you didn't think lambert had said that? This is so bizarre. It's a tiny comment by Lambert that means pretty much nothing. He didn't even say it was a problem, he just said it "wasn't ideal" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myko Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Please everyone drop the left footed/right footed thing. It has no relevance at all and I'm sure anyone who works in football would agree. If you're not good enough to play on the other side, then you're not good enough to be a professional footballer anyway, so the whole thing is a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliffy Biro Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Did i say he's attributed it to the loss? the results have been shite and its not because baker and clark are left footed Thats me saying its got nothing to do with loss, not suggesting lambert said it. But nice try. But why would you say it's got nothing to do with us losing if you didn't think lambert had said that? This is so bizarre. It's a tiny comment by Lambert that means pretty much nothing. He didn't even say it was a problem, he just said it "wasn't ideal" Because moaning about it and saying is not ideal is suggesting its a big problem which its not, the only thing bizarre here is some of the stuff that lambert says after a game and this is coming from someone who still supports him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czechlad Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Well he got dropped for Baker the other night. Which I frankly did not understand. Baker has not done anything to warrant a starting spot over Clark. Maybe Clark just needed a rest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Well he got dropped for Baker the other night. Which I frankly did not understand. Baker has not done anything to warrant a starting spot over Clark. Maybe Clark just needed a rest. IMO he played Baker to deal with Height of Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I think he picked baker to deal with Jones. Actually thought that was a smart decision from Lambert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 It's a tiny comment by Lambert that means pretty much nothing. Like so much of what he says after matches. I agree it would be useful to drop this discussion because it's about a silly comment made by a manager who seems to be losing the plot a bit. It certainly doesn't bear too much analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Well he got dropped for Baker the other night. Which I frankly did not understand. Baker has not done anything to warrant a starting spot over Clark. Maybe Clark just needed a rest. IMO he played Baker to deal with Height of Jones I think he picked baker to deal with Jones. Actually thought that was a smart decision from Lambert. Great minds... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I could deal with Jones. Woeful player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Well he got dropped for Baker the other night. Which I frankly did not understand. Baker has not done anything to warrant a starting spot over Clark. Maybe Clark just needed a rest. IMO he played Baker to deal with Height of Jones I think he picked baker to deal with Jones. Actually thought that was a smart decision from Lambert. Great minds... Haha clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I could deal with Jones. Woeful player. Clark has issues when he comes up against powerful players. He gets too tight and rolled over far too easily. He needs to get down the gym. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Anichbe against Everton and Carroll against Newcastle completely dominated Clark. He's not physically strong enough to deal with defenders like that and would no doubt have been the target when Cardiff attacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie09 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Anichbe against Everton and Carroll against Newcastle completely dominated Clark. He's not physically strong enough to deal with defenders like that and would no doubt have been the target when Cardiff attacked. Carroll for Newcastle was over 3 years ago and Clark has improved since then. He reads the game far better than Baker so for me he's ahead of him in the pecking order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KjParton Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Sometimes you have to be flexible choosing players to suit tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVTuco Posted February 13, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted February 13, 2014 Please everyone drop the left footed/right footed thing. It has no relevance at all and I'm sure anyone who works in football would agree. If you're not good enough to play on the other side, then you're not good enough to be a professional footballer anyway, so the whole thing is a moot point. I'll quote you just as an example. It most definitely is not a moot point. You're right in that a player needs to be of some standard and the better the better. However, if you have a right footed and a left footed CB, it's better than if you have two right or two left footed ones. Neither of them plays in the center so that it wouldn't make any difference. If a player is far superior, he can play on the wrong side too, but it's not ideal, as someone has mentioned. I wouldn't want to play Vlaar on the wrong side if possible. But if Okore is clearly better than Clark, I would. I don't have evidence he is at the moment, so I'd play Clark on the left and Vlaar on right. Let them fight it out. No way is it clear that Okore walks back in and Clark gets dropped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raymond Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Jores does love him some eff-word. @MatKendrick: RT @JoresOkore: @22Gards **** sake gards u just leaving me like that... Best of luck bro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyM3000 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I love Okore and he has barely played for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samjp26 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Guy is such a legend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Please everyone drop the left footed/right footed thing. It has no relevance at all and I'm sure anyone who works in football would agree. If you're not good enough to play on the other side, then you're not good enough to be a professional footballer anyway, so the whole thing is a moot point. I'll quote you just as an example. It most definitely is not a moot point. You're right in that a player needs to be of some standard and the better the better. However, if you have a right footed and a left footed CB, it's better than if you have two right or two left footed ones. Neither of them plays in the center so that it wouldn't make any difference. If a player is far superior, he can play on the wrong side too, but it's not ideal, as someone has mentioned. I wouldn't want to play Vlaar on the wrong side if possible. But if Okore is clearly better than Clark, I would. I don't have evidence he is at the moment, so I'd play Clark on the left and Vlaar on right. Let them fight it out. No way is it clear that Okore walks back in and Clark gets dropped. I don't get it either. If a right footed cb needs to go on the left side of the pitch is he a lesser defender all of a sudden? Most players today are at least reasonable (if not good) with both feet, I wish somebody did a statistic on Vlaar's defending touches on either side the pitch to see exactly if this 'right/left footed' discussion has any relevance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts