Ben Davies

LB is not purely a defensive position though. Against a team like Burnley, it’s probably 50% attack. And Davies did it poorly. Talking about fullbacks like they’re center backs is inappropriate.
I disagree. I think that Jose had a game-plan for this game, and containing Burnley's counter attacks was high on the priority list. Yes, Davies offered little going forward, but then, we didn't really need to go forward very much considering how much of the game Burnley were bound to spend in their own half preventing us from approaching their goal. I don't think the responsibility to find a way through was laid upon our fullbacks in this game.
 
I disagree. I think that Jose had a game-plan for this game, and containing Burnley's counter attacks was high on the priority list. Yes, Davies offered little going forward, but then, we didn't really need to go forward very much considering how much of the game Burnley were bound to spend in their own half preventing us from approaching their goal. I don't think the responsibility to find a way through was laid upon our fullbacks in this game.
We were fortunate to get a goal. Reguilon would’ve taken on his man and put threatening crosses into the box.
 
Sure we were fortunate to get a goal. But I'm not convinced Reg would have made a huge difference, as whenever we were in a position to put in a cross, there was no-one there to aim for because the forwards had to drop back to link up. I put this down to Burnley being good at defending more than I put it down to us being shit.

At the other end, Davies contained everything they tried with him, and I suspect that's what Jose had him on the pitch for. Just my take.
 
Only if you recant your rant about Murphys drinkers!

:mourpoint:
Shemar Moore GIF
 

josh_spurs

An OG from 2012
I think Davies is okay. You know what you get, he is pretty reliable and if he is starting ahead of a fit Reg, its purely a tactical decision, which I am okay with, as under Poch we played "our way" and I don't mind Mourinho taking a game by game decision to counter-act opponent strengths, like Monday.

My only issue with him is his attacking output, he seems to have one style of cross but I accept that he isn't super talented going forward and he is a defensive backup choice.

I saw a video the other day of the Lamela rabona many moons ago, and couldn't believe Davies was on the pitch for us, he's been here a long time and I doubt we will get a better backup who seems like a top pro and knows his place, can play two positions and seems to keep himself fit and is only 27.
 
But he can't play every game and defending was up most in Jose's mind.
Davies did everything that was asked of him by the manager.
Maybe out and out attacking full backs are for playing at home ?
Drawing Burnley would’ve been a real kick in the nuts. Drawing Antwerp is not ideal but is no big deal because we are highly likely to qualify for the knockout stage regardless. The Burnley game is more important. Reguilon is the better player and the one far more likely to break down a tough, organized defense. Playing Davies was a tactical mistake IMO. If we draw 0-0, or 1-1 people would be all over Jose for this. I’m not letting him off the hook just because we got away with it.
 
Drawing Burnley would’ve been a real kick in the nuts. Drawing Antwerp is not ideal but is no big deal because we are highly likely to qualify for the knockout stage regardless. The Burnley game is more important. Reguilon is the better player and the one far more likely to break down a tough, organized defense. Playing Davies was a tactical mistake IMO. If we draw 0-0, or 1-1 people would be all over Jose for this. I’m not letting him off the hook just because we got away with it.
Imagine losing 0-1 to Burnley due to Reggie being out of position or losing a header.

Or, instead of living in fantasy scenario's, let's appreciate the fact that Mou made a tactical choice and admire the fact that it paid off with 3 points and a big squad is rotated well.
 

Airfixx

[Cherub] #TeamHebzebenese
There’s no primary or secondary. Just 50%.

Clues in the name "defender". Ben's skillset is primarily that of a "defender".

Though to indulge you slightly; the remit in any one game depends on the how the manger has set the team up to play...... If you think Ben was selected ahead of Reguilon for attacking reasons then you're a fool.

Against teams that want more possession, a larger percentage of a fullback’s job is defensive. Against an extremely well organized team like Burnley that’s not going to ask too many questions offensively, it’s 50/50.

Funny how they outperformed us in terms of shots though isn't it..... Could it be that Jose had us set up in order to cope with the KIND of attacks that would come our way?????

To that ends, of course it doesn't mean that Ben isn't going to aim to contribute best he can when the situation arises though... Or would you prefer he just sat back and didn't get involved in the attack in the name of "no failed crosses" instead?

We almost dropped 2 points due to our inability to break them down. Davies played a large role in that.

Bearing in mind that prior to scoring we barely registered a shot on target; more so than:

Kane (rated world class)
Son (rated elite)
Lucas (or Lamela)
Ndombele (rated top class/elite) (or GLC)
PEH (whom according to the lazy 'Burnely don't attack' narrative would have had fuck all defensive responsibility)
Sissoko (ditto)

?????

Load of old nonsense. You (and others) are just attacking the path of least resistance.

Even Doherty (a player cast as posing attacking threat), who to my recollection didn't manage a single laudable cross, is getting less criticism.

If Winks had have played in a DM role he'd had been criticised for lacking creativity by his haters too.
 
Last edited:
Clues in the name "defender". Ben's skillset is primarily that of a "defender".

Though to indulge you slightly; the remit in any one game depends on the how the manger has set the team up to play...... If you think Ben was selected ahead of Reguilon for attacking reasons then you're a fool.



Funny how they outperformed us in terms of shots though isn't it..... Could it be that Jose had us set up in order to cope with the KIND of attacks that would come our way?????

To that ends, of course it doesn't mean that Ben isn't going to aim to contribute best he can when the situation arises though... Or would you prefer he just sat back and didn't get involved in the attack in the name of "no failed crosses" instead?



Bearing in mind that prior to scoring we barely registered a shot on target; more so than:

Kane (rated world class)
Son (rated elite)
Lucas (or Lamela)
Ndombele (rated top class/elite) (or GLC)
PEH (whom according to the lazy 'Burnely don't attack' narrative would have had fuck all defensive responsibility)
Sissoko (ditto)

?????

Load of old nonsense. You (and others) are just attacking the path of least resistance.

Even Doherty (a players cast as posing attacking threat), who to my recollection didn't manage a single laudable cross, is getting less criticism.

If Winks had have played in a DM role he'd had been criticised for lacking creativity by his haters too.
Doherty is equally to blame for our lack of goal scoring opportunities. My objection is not to Davies as a player. He is what he is. My objection is to Jose picking Davies when Reguilon was available. Jose didn’t have a better attacking RB option than Doherty.
 
Imagine losing 0-1 to Burnley due to Reggie being out of position or losing a header.

Or, instead of living in fantasy scenario's, let's appreciate the fact that Mou made a tactical choice and admire the fact that it paid off with 3 points and a big squad is rotated well.
Managers can make good decisions and lose and make bad decisions and win. It’s a fickle game. If someone hits in blackjack with a 16 against dealer 5, and wins the hand, I don’t applaud their good decision because it worked. I think they’re a fool who got lucky.

I don’t think Jose is a fool. But I think this was a foolish decision that reduced our likelihood of taking home 3 points.
 
Top Bottom