Using City isn't the best example. They're not of the same structure as "normal" teams. 17m for Kolo Toure and he never plays?
Daniel Agger
- Thread starter Ryan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
It was years ago now, and he did.
Carragher +1. The side is desperately lacking in experience and metal at the moment. And Carragher has looked assured in each of his last few appearances for us. Who the 1 is is much of a muchness really.
Did. Yes. But when is the last time he's played consistently?
Jamie and Carragher.
T
the_khl
Guest
Imo Kompany and Agger would form the best CB pairing in the league by a long margin, so I could easily understand Mancini's desire to get his hands on Agger.
Fair does that Liverpool-fans don't rate him for whatever reason but there are loads that do.
They bought better players ... Kompnay, Lescott and now that Nastatic (sp?) kid.
It's not that people don't think he's a good defender, it's that we need a better defender than either Skrtel or Agger. Agger is the more saleable one, so he if we're selling one, it should be one. Skrtel and Agger are about as good as each other.
I definitely rate him. He's a great CB 80% of the time. But he just makes so many silly mistakes, it's fucking infuriating. Simple things like losing his man, not tracking back etc. And he does this at least once per game. As does Skrtel. We can't afford to be doing things like that. Now that we've finally discovered how to stick the ball in the net, we've started to concede more.
Yep. I get that. I'm just making the point that City can afford to have a 17m on the bench, week in, week out. Comparing City to us is not doable.
Phew - for a second I though you might blame us Northern Irish.
T
the_khl
Guest
I don't think that's what we normally get from Agger though - a big mistake per game?
Yeah he's had a bad run and costed us a few goals too, but I think that's more the exception than the rule with him.
Agreed, whatever his shortcomings are with age finally catching up with him, midweek was the most organised I've seen us as a unit for a long long time, you can't account for individual errors though.
So repairing the lack of experience is to remove to International Captains which is hugely admired around Europe? I dont get it. In my eyes, it is not down to the CD. Carra has done a good job no doubt, but the way we defend ourselves as a team is a disgrace. looking at the Arsenal game for instanse. Everytime Reina had the ball he found one of the CDs which then again pushed it to a fullback, who either rolled it to Reina or to a CD. Best case would be roll it to a CM 20 mtr from our goalline who then tried to find someone. Arse could establish their pressline 20 meters from our goalline. And we tried to outplay that pressline. 20 meters from our goalline. Whenever we lost the ball it was deep inside our own half. So all their attacks started deep inside our half, and our attempts of attacking started around the 16 yard line. it is asking for trouble, and that we managed to keep it down to 2 against is a mystery.
You really think we looked organized defensively? I thought they could easily set up each other inside our box for most of the game, and the fullbacks were exposed to 2 players all the time. We got the lucky foot on the ball on numerous of occacions, but to play that down to good organisation? I dont agree on that.
T
the_khl
Guest
A few days back people where worried out of their skins that Carra would play against Arsenal.
Now it's Carra +1.
*confused and ever so slightly bemused*
Now it's Carra +1.
*confused and ever so slightly bemused*
T
the_khl
Guest
Personally I think we stood far to deep almost all game. Suarez at times even further back than Johnson. Lucas and Gerrard standing on Carra and Agger's toes.
I don't think we looked particularly well organised at all. Not blaming Carra of course, more so the manager whom imo chose a dangerous route to defend against Walcott's pace (perhaps).
I don't think we looked particularly well organised at all. Not blaming Carra of course, more so the manager whom imo chose a dangerous route to defend against Walcott's pace (perhaps).
Wisdom wasn't over exposed, he was protected for most of the game by Downing. As a unit, particularly in the first half we were more compact. Tiredness set in late on because we'd hounded them for most of the first 60 minutes, and they're a quick side, so it was no surprise to see us hit on the break and struggling a few times, it happens against many sides because they've got quick skillful players, we handled it reasonably well for the most part until we inevitably sat back later on. For the most part, as a unit we were alot more organised than we have been and I've been one of the most vocal critics on here about how open our system is.
Sometimes you have to do that though Kris. At home against them we were much more open and it cost us. We've gone there enough times under Houllier and others and put men behind the ball to frustrate their tippy-tappy passing game and looked to hit them on the break, and it's worked a few times. Sometimes you have to drop deep, work hard and hope it pays off and that you can grind out a result, I'd take that over going there and trying to play them off the park while getting picked off everytime we give the ball away. We created enough on the break to have beat them, only individual errors at the back and more inconsistency in front of goal cost us.
T
the_khl
Guest
I get your drift indeed and perhaps with a strong defensive midfield type around this could indeed have worked a treat.
The fact is however we don't have that type in the squad let alone in defense why we're going to struggle if invite pressure on as we did. At least imo that was a wrong move from the gaffer. If Allen were as good as we had hoped he had probably been taylor made for that game, with Henderson holding the most defensive line in midfield?
It's two fold, we don't have the defense, so it needs protecting more in some games, inviting pressure is one thing, over exposing players who clearly aren't comfortable one on one is another.
Again, it's not that Agger is a bad player, it's just that he has weaknesses that are exploited - ie he's slow and his reading & positioning are sometimes questionable.
The problem, or part of it, is that his fellow CB is fairly average at positioning.
Then you add in the fact that our 2 first choice FB's are known more for their attacking prowess and have a habit of.... Getting caught put of position.
In fact the only time our defence is solid is when all 4 of them are so hopelessly out of position that they are each miraculously covering a position that one of their defensive colleagues has gone AWOL from.
The problem, or part of it, is that his fellow CB is fairly average at positioning.
Then you add in the fact that our 2 first choice FB's are known more for their attacking prowess and have a habit of.... Getting caught put of position.
In fact the only time our defence is solid is when all 4 of them are so hopelessly out of position that they are each miraculously covering a position that one of their defensive colleagues has gone AWOL from.
Maybe not a BIG mistake, but he does tend to lose his man a lot. It's not always costly, thankfully, but I think his marking is quite shoddy. At times. Not always. Like I said, 80% he's doing his job well.
And with Skrtel prone to making mistakes too, it's a fucking recipe for disaster.
Think back to when we had Henchoz and Sami. Sami was solid. Henchoz, was pretty solid too, but he wasn't nearly as solid as Sami. But Sami being on top of his game made up for Henchoz's weaknesses. Ok, it's probably not the best example to use, but you get what I mean.
T
the_khl
Guest
Taking up on Molby's article in todays ECHO, are we actually a zonal marking team or a man marking one?
If we are indeed a zonal marking one, was it still Agger's job to mark Giroud?
Personally I think he was to blame either way as he obviously tried to get to the ball, but where were Carra if we were expecting to be marking in zones?
If we are indeed a zonal marking one, was it still Agger's job to mark Giroud?
Personally I think he was to blame either way as he obviously tried to get to the ball, but where were Carra if we were expecting to be marking in zones?
We are a no marking team. Not even having a player on the posts to cover the goal. it is crazy times!!!
T
the_khl
Guest
Perhaps we are somehow, again, over-complicating things a bit.
Some of the players are definitely using zonal. Someone in the first half (forget who) left the man he was marking completely when he ran into a zone occupied by Gerrard, leaving Gerrard on two players.
I would guess that some attackers are picked up by dedicated markers, whereas the rest of the team plays zonal. Rafa used the same system
- Status
