Glen Johnson
- Thread starter mark1975
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
[quote author=Hardcastle link=topic=46780.msg1395392#msg1395392 date=1315389511]
I still think your bring very harsh on him.
He's a Wing back, full back, attacking right back - whatever you want to label him, im not saying that voids him of any defensive capabilities but I'd suggest Lucas and or the playing right cb were just as much to blame .
You could say their performances have improved due to a lessened work load.
You phyiscally cannot say glen ' I want you to bomb forward at every opportunity but never get caught out of position ' as he'll clearly never be capable of that. Either give him that attacking license and accommodate him or give him a mote conservative role as he had at lb last season and have fewer worries .
[/quote]
So if Glen wants to attack all the time would it not be logical to put him in a position in the team to do so ?
If a defender can't defend he's a liability.
I still think your bring very harsh on him.
He's a Wing back, full back, attacking right back - whatever you want to label him, im not saying that voids him of any defensive capabilities but I'd suggest Lucas and or the playing right cb were just as much to blame .
You could say their performances have improved due to a lessened work load.
You phyiscally cannot say glen ' I want you to bomb forward at every opportunity but never get caught out of position ' as he'll clearly never be capable of that. Either give him that attacking license and accommodate him or give him a mote conservative role as he had at lb last season and have fewer worries .
[/quote]
So if Glen wants to attack all the time would it not be logical to put him in a position in the team to do so ?
If a defender can't defend he's a liability.
Quite, and we're not just talking about for Liverpool, but for England too. No one is saying he's not a top attacking player at times, I honestly think he is, but that's just it. When I think of him I don't think about his defensive capabilities at all, because they're not strong enough to be considered as prominent in any way. We shouldn't really have to accommodate a defender who can't defend that well.
[quote author=Hardcastle link=topic=46780.msg1395400#msg1395400 date=1315389928]
I did start off by saying I'd like to see him at rm.
[/quote]
I can understand people having reservations about that too, but I don't see the harm in trying it at some point, it certainly shouldn't be dismissed just because other managers haven't tried it.
I don't see his future nailed on as a right back for us, so if that becomes the case, either we find another role for him or buy another right back/persevere with Kelly/Flanno.
I did start off by saying I'd like to see him at rm.
[/quote]
I can understand people having reservations about that too, but I don't see the harm in trying it at some point, it certainly shouldn't be dismissed just because other managers haven't tried it.
I don't see his future nailed on as a right back for us, so if that becomes the case, either we find another role for him or buy another right back/persevere with Kelly/Flanno.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=46780.msg1395394#msg1395394 date=1315389646]
[quote author=Hardcastle link=topic=46780.msg1395392#msg1395392 date=1315389511]
I still think your bring very harsh on him.
He's a Wing back, full back, attacking right back - whatever you want to label him, im not saying that voids him of any defensive capabilities but I'd suggest Lucas and or the playing right cb were just as much to blame .
You could say their performances have improved due to a lessened work load.
You phyiscally cannot say glen ' I want you to bomb forward at every opportunity but never get caught out of position ' as he'll clearly never be capable of that. Either give him that attacking license and accommodate him or give him a mote conservative role as he had at lb last season and have fewer worries .
[/quote]
So if Glen wants to attack all the time would it not be logical to put him in a position in the team to do so ?
If a defender can't defend he's a liability.
[/quote]
johnson has demonstrated that he can defend, I will go further and say that ashley cole johnson's age was at a similar level defensive and added defensive solidity later in his career.
[quote author=Hardcastle link=topic=46780.msg1395392#msg1395392 date=1315389511]
I still think your bring very harsh on him.
He's a Wing back, full back, attacking right back - whatever you want to label him, im not saying that voids him of any defensive capabilities but I'd suggest Lucas and or the playing right cb were just as much to blame .
You could say their performances have improved due to a lessened work load.
You phyiscally cannot say glen ' I want you to bomb forward at every opportunity but never get caught out of position ' as he'll clearly never be capable of that. Either give him that attacking license and accommodate him or give him a mote conservative role as he had at lb last season and have fewer worries .
[/quote]
So if Glen wants to attack all the time would it not be logical to put him in a position in the team to do so ?
If a defender can't defend he's a liability.
[/quote]
johnson has demonstrated that he can defend, I will go further and say that ashley cole johnson's age was at a similar level defensive and added defensive solidity later in his career.
[quote author=Richey link=topic=46780.msg1395411#msg1395411 date=1315391725]
Was Ashley Cole still shit at defending only 3/4 years ago? Johnson is not that young any more. He's been around a while.
[/quote]
no, ashley cole wasn't shit at defending 3/4 years ago
he hasn't been for a good 6/7 years
Was Ashley Cole still shit at defending only 3/4 years ago? Johnson is not that young any more. He's been around a while.
[/quote]
no, ashley cole wasn't shit at defending 3/4 years ago
he hasn't been for a good 6/7 years
Personally I'd sell Johnson asap & get the cash whilst there's a premium to be had for English players & he's young enough to get the maximum.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=46780.msg1395467#msg1395467 date=1315399487]
Personally I'd sell Johnson asap & get the cash whilst there's a premium to be had for English players & he's young enough to get the maximum.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
[/quote]
Ditto.
I can't see us getting more than £10M though.
Also, i'd wait until Flanno had matured a bit and we knew if Kelly was gonna stay injury prone.
Personally I'd sell Johnson asap & get the cash whilst there's a premium to be had for English players & he's young enough to get the maximum.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
[/quote]
Ditto.
I can't see us getting more than £10M though.
Also, i'd wait until Flanno had matured a bit and we knew if Kelly was gonna stay injury prone.
The way i see it we have a high value asset being wasted. If he doesn't get played then cash in.
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=46780.msg1395467#msg1395467 date=1315399487]
Personally I'd sell Johnson asap & get the cash whilst there's a premium to be had for English players & he's young enough to get the maximum.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
[/quote]
Yup. i just don't see him fitting long term with our aims. Wingers with width is our new MO, and we need someone stronger at RB
Personally I'd sell Johnson asap & get the cash whilst there's a premium to be had for English players & he's young enough to get the maximum.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
[/quote]
Yup. i just don't see him fitting long term with our aims. Wingers with width is our new MO, and we need someone stronger at RB
Man Utd play with wingers and still have attacking fullbacks. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
I don't think there is any reason to sell Johnson. So far we have Kelly a CB/RB who can't stay fit, Flannagan who isn't fit to lace Johnsons boots (as yet) and well, that's it.
If Johnson goes, we need to spend again to replace him.
I don't think there is any reason to sell Johnson. So far we have Kelly a CB/RB who can't stay fit, Flannagan who isn't fit to lace Johnsons boots (as yet) and well, that's it.
If Johnson goes, we need to spend again to replace him.
T
the_khl
Guest
I'm hopeful about Magic making us even stronger when he returns.
[quote author=keniget link=topic=46780.msg1395474#msg1395474 date=1315400254]
Man Utd play with wingers and still have attacking fullbacks. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
I don't think there is any reason to sell Johnson. So far we have Kelly a CB/RB who can't stay fit, Flannagan who isn't fit to lace Johnsons boots (as yet) and well, that's it.
If Johnson goes, we need to spend again to replace him.
[/quote]
we have a lean squad and people want to make it even leaner. we should aim to only have 16 players, that way we'll make a massive project and we'll save a fortune in wages.
Man Utd play with wingers and still have attacking fullbacks. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
I don't think there is any reason to sell Johnson. So far we have Kelly a CB/RB who can't stay fit, Flannagan who isn't fit to lace Johnsons boots (as yet) and well, that's it.
If Johnson goes, we need to spend again to replace him.
[/quote]
we have a lean squad and people want to make it even leaner. we should aim to only have 16 players, that way we'll make a massive project and we'll save a fortune in wages.
No, people want to make it more efficient. No point having a £15m right back sitting on the bench earning 80k a week. We could have a £5m player doing that. And invest that extra money in an area where we're more in need. Or as others have suggested have that 15m player playing on the right wing, where we're more in need of players.
[quote author=Gerry_A_Trick link=topic=46780.msg1395487#msg1395487 date=1315403063]
No, people want to make it more efficient. No point having a £15m right back sitting on the bench earning 80k a week. We could have a £5m player doing that. And invest that extra money in an area where we're more in need. Or as others have suggested have that 15m player playing on the right wing, where we're more in need of players.
[/quote]
Well, that theory only holds true if you get someone good in. If it's another conveyor belt of Krompamps, Josemis and Dossenas it'll cost us far more in the long run - both on and off the pitch.
Johnson is a good player and the only established RB we have and what's more there has been nothing to suggest so far that he'll be a permanent benchwarmer, has there?
No, people want to make it more efficient. No point having a £15m right back sitting on the bench earning 80k a week. We could have a £5m player doing that. And invest that extra money in an area where we're more in need. Or as others have suggested have that 15m player playing on the right wing, where we're more in need of players.
[/quote]
Well, that theory only holds true if you get someone good in. If it's another conveyor belt of Krompamps, Josemis and Dossenas it'll cost us far more in the long run - both on and off the pitch.
Johnson is a good player and the only established RB we have and what's more there has been nothing to suggest so far that he'll be a permanent benchwarmer, has there?
[quote author=FoxForceFive link=topic=46780.msg1395467#msg1395467 date=1315399487]
Personally I'd sell Johnson asap & get the cash whilst there's a premium to be had for English players & he's young enough to get the maximum.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
[/quote]
That wouldn't bother me a great deal but wouldn't we need to buy another full back, particularly while there is still doubts over Kelly?
Obviously if Kelly can prove a degree of long term fitness and suitability then it would be less of an issue but that would take some time
Personally I'd sell Johnson asap & get the cash whilst there's a premium to be had for English players & he's young enough to get the maximum.
I'm sure 'arry will give us 15m plus.
[/quote]
That wouldn't bother me a great deal but wouldn't we need to buy another full back, particularly while there is still doubts over Kelly?
Obviously if Kelly can prove a degree of long term fitness and suitability then it would be less of an issue but that would take some time
I'm making the assumption that Kelly and Flanagan are our future. It seems that way, but if not, then be all means keep Johnson. If both Kelly and Flanagan are not deemed good enough, I think we do need to invest in a right back, one that's a consistently good defender.
I'm not all that into full backs that aren't great defenders, for me defending comes first, and any attacking options are a bonus. For all Johnson's plus points, and all the benifits he brings to our attack, as well as relieving pressure on our defence, he's not as good defensively as we need, in my opinion anyway.
I'm not all that into full backs that aren't great defenders, for me defending comes first, and any attacking options are a bonus. For all Johnson's plus points, and all the benifits he brings to our attack, as well as relieving pressure on our defence, he's not as good defensively as we need, in my opinion anyway.
[quote author=Gerry_A_Trick link=topic=46780.msg1395504#msg1395504 date=1315404613]
I'm making the assumption that Kelly and Flanagan are our future. It seems that way, but if not, then be all means keep Johnson. If both Kelly and Flanagan are not deemed good enough, I think we do need to invest in a right back, one that's a consistently good defender.
I'm not all that into full backs that aren't great defenders, for me defending comes first, and any attacking options are a bonus. For all Johnson's plus points, and all the benifits he brings to our attack, as well as relieving pressure on our defence, he's not as good defensively as we need, in my opinion anyway.
[/quote]
this man know
I'm making the assumption that Kelly and Flanagan are our future. It seems that way, but if not, then be all means keep Johnson. If both Kelly and Flanagan are not deemed good enough, I think we do need to invest in a right back, one that's a consistently good defender.
I'm not all that into full backs that aren't great defenders, for me defending comes first, and any attacking options are a bonus. For all Johnson's plus points, and all the benifits he brings to our attack, as well as relieving pressure on our defence, he's not as good defensively as we need, in my opinion anyway.
[/quote]
this man know
Got a weird feeling of deja vu reading this. Especially Fabio's post about A.Cole and one of Jon's also. Freaky.
Back on subject, I love Martin Kelly but I'm still looking forward to the return of Johnson. He'll be cracking to watch bombing down the right and joining in with our attacks. He just needs to keep his concentration levels up at the back as he proved he's capable after his stint on the left.
Back on subject, I love Martin Kelly but I'm still looking forward to the return of Johnson. He'll be cracking to watch bombing down the right and joining in with our attacks. He just needs to keep his concentration levels up at the back as he proved he's capable after his stint on the left.
[quote author=Modo link=topic=46780.msg1395546#msg1395546 date=1315407385]
I don't understand this Glenjo hate....
[/quote]
I don't think anyone hates him. I think people are sensibly saying that defenders' main job is to defend. Not sure how that could be argued with really
I don't understand this Glenjo hate....
[/quote]
I don't think anyone hates him. I think people are sensibly saying that defenders' main job is to defend. Not sure how that could be argued with really
Not going to lie, i'm a worried man when i see Johnson's name on the team-sheet.
He's just not a very good defender... That's no secret to anyone that's watched him over the years.
He's not a clean tackler, he's not a good reader of the game, he stands off his winger, his positional sense is poor.
Overall i'm not a Glen Johnson fan, as FF says if we get a decent sum of cash for him, i'd offload without any hesitation.
He's just not a very good defender... That's no secret to anyone that's watched him over the years.
He's not a clean tackler, he's not a good reader of the game, he stands off his winger, his positional sense is poor.
Overall i'm not a Glen Johnson fan, as FF says if we get a decent sum of cash for him, i'd offload without any hesitation.
[quote author=Gerry_A_Trick link=topic=46780.msg1395504#msg1395504 date=1315404613]
I'm making the assumption that Kelly and Flanagan are our future. It seems that way, but if not, then be all means keep Johnson. If both Kelly and Flanagan are not deemed good enough, I think we do need to invest in a right back, one that's a consistently good defender.
I'm not all that into full backs that aren't great defenders, for me defending comes first, and any attacking options are a bonus. For all Johnson's plus points, and all the benifits he brings to our attack, as well as relieving pressure on our defence, he's not as good defensively as we need, in my opinion anyway.
[/quote]
I'm of the opinion that fullbacks have to provide width, sure I don't want a fullback that is all over the place at the back but I want a fullback first and foremost to be attacking. we have players who offer next to nothing in an attacking sense so that balance has to be addressed especially if we are going to utilise midfielders in wide areas who aren't wingers. that said, I'm fine with what kenny does (whether he picks kelly or johnson).
I'm making the assumption that Kelly and Flanagan are our future. It seems that way, but if not, then be all means keep Johnson. If both Kelly and Flanagan are not deemed good enough, I think we do need to invest in a right back, one that's a consistently good defender.
I'm not all that into full backs that aren't great defenders, for me defending comes first, and any attacking options are a bonus. For all Johnson's plus points, and all the benifits he brings to our attack, as well as relieving pressure on our defence, he's not as good defensively as we need, in my opinion anyway.
[/quote]
I'm of the opinion that fullbacks have to provide width, sure I don't want a fullback that is all over the place at the back but I want a fullback first and foremost to be attacking. we have players who offer next to nothing in an attacking sense so that balance has to be addressed especially if we are going to utilise midfielders in wide areas who aren't wingers. that said, I'm fine with what kenny does (whether he picks kelly or johnson).
Yeah, we'll never agree, for me defenders first and foremost have to be defenders. If we're lacking further up the field, we should address that there, and not by taking away from the defence. Any players that can offer more than their primary duties are great, but never at the expense of those duties.
[quote author=Gerry_A_Trick link=topic=46780.msg1395566#msg1395566 date=1315409917]
Yeah, we'll never agree, for me defenders first and foremost have to be defenders. If we're lacking further up the field, we should address that there, and not by taking away from the defence. Any players that can offer more than their primary duties are great, but never at the expense of those duties.
[/quote]
It's a preference, I see it as action/reaction, the more we push the opposition the less they are able to push us. if our fullback is pushing on the less likely the opposition fullback is able to push on and as I said earlier, a fullback the overlapps can drag the opposition centre back away from the their penalty area meaning we can exploit the space. for me babbel is the best fullback I've ever seen play for us with his attacking intent and it can be argued he was pretty solid defensively but the truth is carra, steph, sami and didi never ventured past the half way line so we were always going to be more solid defensively.
as for primary objectives, that is winning the game and that can't happen if you don't score.
Yeah, we'll never agree, for me defenders first and foremost have to be defenders. If we're lacking further up the field, we should address that there, and not by taking away from the defence. Any players that can offer more than their primary duties are great, but never at the expense of those duties.
[/quote]
It's a preference, I see it as action/reaction, the more we push the opposition the less they are able to push us. if our fullback is pushing on the less likely the opposition fullback is able to push on and as I said earlier, a fullback the overlapps can drag the opposition centre back away from the their penalty area meaning we can exploit the space. for me babbel is the best fullback I've ever seen play for us with his attacking intent and it can be argued he was pretty solid defensively but the truth is carra, steph, sami and didi never ventured past the half way line so we were always going to be more solid defensively.
as for primary objectives, that is winning the game and that can't happen if you don't score.
- Status
