Daniel Agger

[Delinquent]

Yes. And Agger and Skrtel can defend. They are not in the same league as Sami but have other traits to their game that Sami hadn't.

Its a balance and though Im not saying they've got it right it's surely the way the game is heading. Defending alone doesnt make it for a defender this day and age. Same goes for a striker, he also needs to cover more ground and participate in the defensive part of the game.

You're not getting it. Both can defend, to a point, but both have similar weaknesses in their games, and these revolve around their defending. Neither reads the game particularly well, neither (especially Agger) is that strong, both can be dominated in the air, and both are prone to lapses in concentration. Being a decent passer, or good at bringing the ball out of defence, or scoring a screamer once every five years, does not compensate for defensive frailties. These are luxuries you look for once you have ticked the defensive boxes.

Similarly, the prerequisite for a striker is to score goals, and that takes precedence over any ability to harry and defend.

 

[rurikbird]

Yeah, but ones that give strikers a yard of space just a yard from goal are equally useless. Of course, we should just sell Skrtel though and let Agger dine on that West Ham goal for another few seasons. About once every six months we can all "ooh" when that Hollywood ball comes off.

It's not really about "Hollywood balls" though, Mark. Any team who tries to play possession style football needs to be able to build from the back consistently, no matter how much pressing the opposition forwards are doing. If you can't pass your way from the back, suddenly the whole shape and balance of your team becomes wrong. If your goalkeeper is constantly forced to pump the ball forward, then players like Suso or Coutinho won't stand a chance, the ball will just fly over their heads all the time. So that's why a ball-playing CB is ESSENTIAL. Unless you want to bring Andy Carroll back and hire Fat Sam as the manager.

You could see this even in the last game. As soon as Enrique came off and Agger moved to the left, our build-up play was disrupted. Skrtel and Reina had a few nervous moments and we immediately found ourselves under more pressure.

BTW, I wouldn't sell Skrtel. On his best form he is very good and overall he can be a really great 3rd choice CB.

 

[Fabio]

Let's be honest here, any cb in the top leagues can pass the ball 8 yards. Realistically, under rodgers, that's all we need. We don't need passes to be pinged cross field (pepe can do that). We need defenders who don't fuck up. Ones confident in their own ability but without being arrogant.

I think Agger is a little arrogant. Those 40 yard runs when people back off him,then he thinks "I'm gonna crack it". We don't want that. We want him to be careful and not wasteful in possession. A CB losing the ball anywhere on the pitch puts us under direct pressure. We cannot afford to be so wasteful wi the ball when we're so wasteful in front of goal.

Oh and khl, I've no agenda if you recall I said agger should be made captain due to how long he's been about and I prefer CB captains. Sadly though, I'm concerned now that the run of great form that prompted that statement was just that; form, not class.

 

[Delinquent]

Defender who can't pass is useless in modern game. Whether you like it or not, StevieM.

That's a massive exaggeration, and misses the point of Stevie's post, which is that defending is first and foremost for a defender. Of course, if a defender doesn't even have a short passing game, then that's a problem, but those defenders generally don't make it as far as the Premier League, so it's largely irrelevant.

If anything, the modern game has brought about the rise of deep-lying midfielders, which obviously reduces the need for defenders with laser-guided passing. Indeed, our midfielders regularly drop deep to collect the ball from the defence, so a decent short passing game is usually perfectly sufficient.

 

[Fabio]

That's a massive exaggeration, and misses the point of Stevie's post, which is that defending is first and foremost for a defender. Of course, if a defender doesn't even have a short passing game, then that's a problem, but those defenders generally don't make it as far as the Premier League, so it's largely irrelevant.

If anything, the modern game has brought about the rise deep-lying midfielders, which obviously reduces the need for defenders with laser-guided passing. Indeed, our midfielders regularly drop deep to collect the ball from the defence, so a decent short passing game is usually perfectly sufficient.

I said dat!

 

[Delinquent]

Yeah ya did!

 

[the_khl]

Its a bit boring you dont read my posts Mark but keep harping the same 'he's infallible' line.

Ive been one of his biggest critics on here of late as he's looked less convincing than for a while. He does make mistakes and this will not go away completely.

You have to weigh the pro and cons really. Imo he adds something Skrtel doesnt and as I dont see theres much between them defensively Id keep the former. Someone posted a week back that Agger had the most successful passes of any defender in the league and actually many of those are hit upfield. That help us greatly in the build-up play and something I doubt many could offer us.

He is also the most calm defender on the ball, again, very important ability in your central defenders if you are not a long ball team.

The fact he can score is a luxury I dont think thats the most important part of Aggers game by a long margin either.

Fair enough Fabs, to be honest I wish he'd make far more runs upfield than is being the case. We just see that differently then.

 

[the_khl]

You're not getting it. Both can defend, to a point, but both have similar weaknesses in their games, and these revolve around their defending. Neither reads the game particularly well, neither (especially Agger) is that strong, both can be dominated in the air, and both are prone to lapses in concentration. Being a decent passer, or good at bringing the ball out of defence, or scoring a screamer once every five years, does not compensate for defensive frailties. These are luxuries you look for once you have ticked the defensive boxes.

Similarly, the prerequisite for a striker is to score goals, and that takes precedence over any ability to harry and defend.

What is it I dont get. Ive been highlighting exactly their similarities as their weakness as a pair for quite some time?

What do you mean?

 

[the count]

What is it I dont get. Ive been highlighting exactly their similarities as their weakness as a pair for quite some time?

What do you mean?

Kristian, Agger isn't as bad as some have been making out and your vocal defense of him while admirable is somewhat compromised by someone else not yet spoken about in this current debate,
Nicklas Bloody Bendtner.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

Nicklas Bendtner is probably the best finisher we've seen since Van Basten, who was born in Copenhagen. His parents moved him to Holland at a young age though, and he betrayed his roots.

 

[Leo]

And please stop comparing him to Jockey.
It's an insult to one of our greatest ever players.

 

[the_khl]

And please stop comparing him to Jockey.
It's an insult to one of our greatest ever players.

No one have compared Bendtner with Jockey silly Leo.

 

[Leo]

No one have compared Bendtner with Jockey silly Leo.

A knob jockey possibly.

 

[the_khl]

That's more likely.

 

[the count]

A knob jockey possibly.

Lol


Sorry K. 🙂

 

[the_khl]

Can I just say Hansen is one of my all time favourite players although I dont remember him play in detail. More the awe I felt from watching him float across the pitch ever so elegantly.

Bet there where a few penfriends back then claiming he was a luxury and we'd be better of with that young no nonsense defender Vinnie Jones....

 

[the_khl]

Lol


Sorry K. 🙂

You just had to bring him up mate eh?

Hurtful.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXyAkpIwHhg

 

[the count]

You just had to bring him up mate eh?

Hurtful.

You live by the sword, you die by the sword.
I suspect I will get payback on my next visit to Laudrup Gardens.

 

[rurikbird]

That's a massive exaggeration, and misses the point of Stevie's post, which is that defending is first and foremost for a defender. Of course, if a defender doesn't even have a short passing game, then that's a problem, but those defenders generally don't make it as far as the Premier League, so it's largely irrelevant.

If anything, the modern game has brought about the rise of deep-lying midfielders, which obviously reduces the need for defenders with laser-guided passing. Indeed, our midfielders regularly drop deep to collect the ball from the defence, so a decent short passing game is usually perfectly sufficient.

"Decent short game" is not sufficient for possession-oriented side. That's why Barca HAS to have a defender like Piqué, and tolerate his occasional defensive blunders and risk-taking. That's why Hummels is in such high demand, that's why Thiago Silva was sold for a ridiculous amount. That's why Man City wanted Agger and why Barca keep him (and a handful of other ball-playing CBs) constantly on their radar. That's why they paid 20 millions for Chygrinsky from Shakhtar, despite him being very raw in the defensive part of the game. Whether you guys understand it or not, the football world fully understands the importance of so-called "ball-playing CBs." For many teams they are not a luxury, but a necessity. This is not about CBs having a minimal competence at passing the football to a teammate 6 yards to the side. You are the one who is missing the point.

It's surprising to see how many of you want us to sign someone like Hummels, but apparently have no idea what is it that sets him apart. Guess what, if by some miracle we do sign him, we are going to have the same debates about him as we are having now about Agger, drawn along roughly the same battle lines. Hummels might become a better player than Agger in a few years (although at this point, I'm not sure he is better than Agger defensively), but they are the same type.

Lastly, defensive midfielders dropping deep to receive the ball don't solve the need for a "playmaking CB." Next time watch Busquets when he gets the ball from his CBs - usually it's with him facing his own goal. If the opposition applies high pressure, he will not have time to turn around, look up and pick a pass. That's why when Busquets drops deep, both CB push up and when one of them gets a pass from Busquets, he is facing the opposition goal and is maybe 15-20 meters higher up the pitch - a much better position for an attacking pass.

 

[the_khl]

That's a great post Rurikbird.

 

[mark1975]

You're both missing one crucial point, the primary example there is Barcelona, a team that played Mascherano at centre back for a lengthy period. Not something a Premiership team would have gotten away with.

No one is saying ball playing centre backs aren't good value, as pointed out, top sides need that bit more from their players at the back (I don't think Agger or Skrtel are shy in that regard), but it's a far cry from the way a Spanish side is set up to play in their league week in week out, and it's a style that would get exposed here over a lengthy spell - it would have to compromise it's style (regardless of how CL games go head to head).

First and foremost in this league, as a keeper or a defender, you can't be lightweight or a shirker, you have to primarily be a good defender, the rest comes second, though having both sets of qualities is probably what equates to the best defenders around - yet it's not the only style necessary nor a cut above other breeds of defender, there have been many great brutish stoppers in the game too who have become some of the best players in English football. If you want a perfect example, have a look at the clown between the sticks up the East Lancs, or some of the defenders Arsenal have had in recent years..

 

[Fabio]

Also, Busquets came deep to let puyol or pique pass further upfield. Perhaps when Reina passes it to our dm from goal kicks (which he does, as lucas comes deep to get the ball), our dm can use the ball in a productive manner.

 

[Modo]

Someone mentioned Hansen in this thread. Ball playing defender right?
Hyypia, another ball playing defender with excellent control.
We've pretty much always had them, well except when we had Babb and Wright at the back.

So this thing about needing defenders who only defend is a bit strange.

 

[Fabio]

If you're calling hyypia a ball playing cb then fuck me, you lit are doing well great disservice to him by calling agger a ball playing cb.

As hyypia was a sensational defender and could pass the ball (as was hansen), Agger is a competent defender who can pass he ball. That's it.

 

[Modo]

If you're calling hyypia a ball playing cb then fuck me, you lit are doing well great disservice to him by calling agger a ball playing cb.

As hyypia was a sensational defender and could pass the ball (as was hansen), Agger is a competent defender who can pass he ball. That's it.

All I'm saying is that this thing with ball playing defenders isn't exactly new and isn't exactly unnecessary.

 

[Fabio]

It's not new but Ffs, the ball playing defenders of yesteryear and modern greats could DEFEND CONSISTENTLY

Agger can't. He's prone to lapses

I'm actually reeling as to how this topic is being discussed.

 

[Delinquent]

"Decent short game" is not sufficient for possession-oriented side. That's why Barca HAS to have a defender like Piqué, and tolerate his occasional defensive blunders and risk-taking. That's why Hummels is in such high demand, that's why Thiago Silva was sold for a ridiculous amount. That's why Man City wanted Agger and why Barca keep him (and a handful of other ball-playing CBs) constantly on their radar. That's why they paid 20 millions for Chygrinsky from Shakhtar, despite him being very raw in the defensive part of the game. Whether you guys understand it or not, the football world fully understands the importance of so-called "ball-playing CBs." For many teams they are not a luxury, but a necessity. This is not about CBs having a minimal competence at passing the football to a teammate 6 yards to the side. You are the one who is missing the point.

It's surprising to see how many of you want us to sign someone like Hummels, but apparently have no idea what is it that sets him apart. Guess what, if by some miracle we do sign him, we are going to have the same debates about him as we are having now about Agger, drawn along roughly the same battle lines. Hummels might become a better player than Agger in a few years (although at this point, I'm not sure he is better than Agger defensively), but they are the same type.

Lastly, defensive midfielders dropping deep to receive the ball don't solve the need for a "playmaking CB." Next time watch Busquets when he gets the ball from his CBs - usually it's with him facing his own goal. If the opposition applies high pressure, he will not have time to turn around, look up and pick a pass. That's why when Busquets drops deep, both CB push up and when one of them gets a pass from Busquets, he is facing the opposition goal and is maybe 15-20 meters higher up the pitch - a much better position for an attacking pass.

I usually find myself agreeing with you rurik, but I think you're becoming intoxicated by the breadth of your football knowledge.

The football world may well understand the need for ball-playing CBs, but we're talking about the Premier League. I notice none of your examples come from here. How is it that arguably the best team in Premier League history (and an archetypal possession team) coped with a central pairing of Toure and Campbell? And how many of these essential ball-playing CBs can you name from successful sides in this league over the last decade? The truth is, the vast majority of the Premier League's best defenders are of an entirely different breed. They are physical specimens, who first and foremost excel at defending. They dominate in the air, they read the game well, and they are strong in the tackle.

It's all about context. You are talking about very technical leagues (and in particular Spain, where the technical ability is streets ahead of the Premier League). Technical ability is obviously much more of a necessity in La Liga, because that's the nature of the Spanish game. If you don't have it, you're already at a disadvantage. In England, the ferocious pace and physicality of the game require a different set of attributes. Technical players are much fewer, and are largely distributed in midfield and attack. And even then they're supplemented by Brits, who by nature are less technical and more physical. Of course, there are exceptions, but even in the modern game the majority of central defenders in this country are more brutish than exotic. It's clear that you admire Barca (and who doesn't) but it's important to remember that while we are trying to implement possession football, we are not, and never will be, a Barca clone, and we're not playing in Spain. Indeed, the most notable example of the ball-playing CB you speak of is Piqué, who was a failure here. David Luiz may yet find his feet, but he looks every bit as shaky as Piqué did here, and his languid style looks much better suited to the more rhythmic Spanish game.

Do not misunderstand me - I am not decrying the value of ball-playing CBs, or defenders with technical ability. I think they're great. But this discussion was borne from the assertion that Agger's attacking qualities somehow compensate for his defensive frailties. They don't. It's all about priorities. As far as I'm concerned, a defender in the Premier League must first be good at the fundamentals of defending. Looking sexy on the ball is of secondary importance.

 

[the count]

I usually find myself agreeing with you rurik, but I think you're becoming intoxicated by the breadth of your football knowledge.

The football world may well understand the need for ball-playing CBs, but we're talking about the Premier League. I notice none of your examples come from here. How is it that arguably the best team in Premier League history (and an archetypal possession team) coped with a central pairing of Toure and Campbell? And how many of these essential ball-playing CBs can you name from successful sides in this league over the last decade? The truth is, the vast majority of the Premier League's best defenders are of an entirely different breed. They are physical specimens, who first and foremost excel at defending. They dominate in the air, they read the game well, and they are strong in the tackle.

It's all about context. You are talking about very technical leagues (and in particular Spain, where the technical ability is streets ahead of the Premier League). Technical ability is obviously much more of a necessity in La Liga, because that's the nature of the Spanish game. If you don't have it, you're already at a disadvantage. In England, the ferocious pace and physicality of the game require a different set of attributes. Technical players are much fewer, and are largely distributed in midfield and attack. And even then they're supplemented by Brits, who by nature are less technical and more physical. Of course, there are exceptions, but even in the modern game the majority of central defenders in this country are more brutish than exotic. It's clear that you admire Barca (and who doesn't) but it's important to remember that while we are trying to implement possession football, we are not, and never will be, a Barca clone, and we're not playing in Spain. Indeed, the most notable example of the ball-playing CB you speak of is Piqué, who was a failure here. David Luiz may yet find his feet, but he looks every bit as shaky as Piqué did here, and his languid style looks much better suited to the more rhythmic Spanish game.

Do not misunderstand me - I am not decrying the value of ball-playing CBs, or defenders with technical ability. I think they're great. But this discussion was borne from the assertion that Agger's attacking qualities somehow compensate for his defensive frailties. They don't. It's all about priorities. As far as I'm concerned, a defender in the Premier League must first be good at the fundamentals of defending. Looking sexy on the ball is of secondary importance.

Excellent post Del.

 

[LarryHagman]

I could play centre back for Barcelona. That doesn't really add to the debate.

You can stick ball playing centre backs up your cock. If they can't defend, they ain't worth toffee. And ours can't.