marvin 290 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Karanka? Pfft. Clearly all down to Varga... :D Hmm, now that's not quite what I said is it you little tinker you :P Why did we go on that run of not conceding a goal when he came into the side at right back? Why not beforehand if it's down to Karanka or even a month later for example? Why did it happen at that specific point in time when we were all looking at the relegation zone and wondering how we'd get out of the mess? Why did we concede goals at Bolton when he was dropped in the middle of it? Here's a hypothetical way of looking at it: What if him being in the side changed the way that teams attacked us? What if they all think the same as you or p mards - this guy doesn't have much pace, he's not especially big, he's not great on the ball and he isn't really even a right back so lets target him. They target him but actually he's not that bad, he gets caught out a bit but not a great deal and he is mostly solid if not spectacular. Teams keep targeting him but it's not really working is it because however weak he is, we're not conceding goals. At the same time across the other side of the pitch our other fullback is suddenly looking much better. Now obviously that's all down to the impact of Karanka but maybe there is something else as well. Maybe because Varga is seen as the weak link, Friend is now not being targeted as much himself as he clearly was in the first half of the season. So with less pressure on that side of the field, Friend's performance improves. As I said this is totally hypothetical but is it really that far fetched? I don't think it is. There's a lot analysis coming into the game right now. Everyone's heard of Moneyball and Sabermetrics I imagine but it's not stopping there and football is only starting to develop it's own way of analysing performance. One of the things happening in basketball is a very 'basic' analysis of how teams perform when individuals are in and out of the line up. It's not interested in how quick they are, how big they are or even their individual stats, simply whether the team is better with them in it or not. This type of analysis will eventually come into the game here, if it isn't already. Now I'm not saying that Varga is an example of this because it's too few a sample size of games to prove it either way but to dismiss it in the way you're doing is unfair in my opinion. You don't have a clue quite frankly (neither do I before you see that as an insult) but at the same time as doing that you're banging on about signing a player you've never even watched in a full game because he played for ***nal, he's young, he's got some pace, he's 'cheap' and you've seen him on some highlights! So you dismiss the player we have that's contributed to our being better defensively in favour or someone you actually know nowt about. Think about that for a moment, does it make sense? Obviously I look at the game in a different way to quite a few on here, which often leads to disagreements. It's not that I'm argumentative as I'm sure some people believe, it's just that as you can see I tend to look at things from all sorts of angles as the above might suggest! Funny thing about the analysis of 'how teams perform when individuals are in and out of the line up...' Took my 5 year old son to football training this morning. In the match they had at the end of training, the team he was on were winning 5-3 and comfortable with it having come from 0-3 down. Now, my son isn't the most gifted of 5 year olds but he does try hard, running around and falling over the ball every now and again etc. Certainly not doing anything productive other than making the numbers up. However, the coach put him on the other team and the match finished 5-8. I can honestly say that he didn't appear to contribute in any footballing way (I monitored his performance very closely), but he did seem to somehow make a difference. Obviously this all proves that Varga is the reason for our recent form... Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Changing Times Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 It's all down to Karanka. He worked under Mourinho and he's probably the best tactician there is when it comes to defence so Karanka has clearly picked up few tips. That and he was a damn good defender in his day so knows what he's doing (yeah, you may say Mowbray was but come on, he had no clue how to coach it) Sorry but I can't accept that. Not that it can't be true because Karanka may well be a great coach and be able to coach defensively but there's no way of proving what you're saying. It's based on what exactly? It can't all be down to Karanka or we could buy and pick anyone and get the same results so some of it has to be down to the players clearly. On Mowbray, the season before last we had the joint 5th best defensive record in the Championship and conceded just one more goal than we have this season. So he could coach it a bit to be fair to him. It was strange with how good a defender Mowbray was how he turned into such an offensive minded manager. Look at George Graham, nicknamed 'stroller' as a player but his teams were all about organisation and discipline. Don Revie was a fairly cultured player, an old inside forward that used to drop deep, effectively becoming the forerunner of a deep lying forward but his Leeds team were brutally cynical at times. I wonder if some managers remember there own deficiencies as players and work more on those as managers if that makes sense? Alex Ferguson was a fairly typical bruiser of a target man but look at his United sides all about pace and attacking football. It won't be the same for every manager but maybe some of them take things from their playing careers in a different way to others? Link to post Share on other sites
Prowler 197 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Mowbray really should have taken defendonh into his managerial career :p Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Changing Times Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Funny thing about the analysis of 'how teams perform when individuals are in and out of the line up...' Took my 5 year old son to football training this morning. In the match they had at the end of training, the team he was on were winning 5-3 and comfortable with it having come from 0-3 down. Now, my son isn't the most gifted of 5 year olds but he does try hard, running around and falling over the ball every now and again etc. Certainly not doing anything productive other than making the numbers up. However, the coach put him on the other team and the match finished 5-8. I can honestly say that he didn't appear to contribute in any footballing way (I monitored his performance very closely), but he did seem to somehow make a difference. Obviously this all proves that Varga is the reason for our recent form... ...And that your son is Marvin Emnes ;) Link to post Share on other sites
ManBearPig 1,853 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 I dont understand all of the Varga bashing, whenever I've seen him he is a player who will give you a solid performance for each game he plays. As a defender he ticks all the boxes for me. Hes not slow, doesnt give up, loves a tackle and regardless of statistics etc, when ive seen him play he in my eyes is a good defender. Link to post Share on other sites
Prowler 197 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 He's not a defender and he is very slow Link to post Share on other sites
p_mards 1,365 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Varga generally does an ok job but he clearly has limitations. Those limitations hold us back as a team and is why I wouldn't like him back, especially not for the inflated £490,000 fee that he would cost. Link to post Share on other sites
-Tim@london- 17 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 He's decent overall and a good defender but decent players wont get us promoted. If we had a George friend equivalent on the right then we would look a better team. Those differences are the gap between us now and the top six Link to post Share on other sites
Prowler 197 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Varga is a weak link and other teams know that and target him. We need a RB who is a RB and a quick one too! Link to post Share on other sites
Brunners 7,982 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 I honestly don't think Varga is all that bad. I think we're spoiled by Friend on the other side. Link to post Share on other sites
Neverbefore 10,937 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 I prefer the idea of one defensive fullback and one attacking. Think its a more solid way to play. Good example is barca who looked a hell of a lot better with abidal at left back and alves at rb than with the two flying full backs they currently have. Link to post Share on other sites
Adam P 331 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 He's not a defender and he is very slow Hes not very slow at all, id wager he would outpace friend in a race tbh, hes got the fastest 5 yards in our squad, maybe not flat out but over 5-10 yards he is very quick from standing. And he covers for the centre half's very well, i think he gets treated a bit harshly by some on here if im honest. Link to post Share on other sites
Prowler 197 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 Being a quick over 10 yards is not exactly good enough for a full back these days :P I'm not saying he's a bad player, I'm just saying he's not a full back and shouldn't be ours next season. Would happily have him as a defensive midfielder. Link to post Share on other sites
p_mards 1,365 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 I'd go as far to say McMahon is a better all round RB than Varga. *Tin hat firmly placed on* Link to post Share on other sites
Prowler 197 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 McMahon :heart: Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts