Player Ben Davies

[Airfixx]

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.

Click to shrink...

I think it's more (and not just) foolish to sit back and pontificate in this manner when regardless of what you think, Jose's decisions were never the less justifiable (it wasn't a blind roll of the dice or draw of a card) and indeed vindicated by the result.

 

[bfwolf]

.....We didn't have Reguilon last year; didn't stop Davies getting mercifully cunted off every 5 minutes did it?

(Besides Serge has been more effective than MD in the attacking third this season thus far so the your last part is moot....)

So, should I nip to the MD thread and see if you blamed him for "playing a major part" in us nearly possibly hypothetically not winning a game that we actually in fact did win too?

As stevee rightfully asked before me; why are you not finger-wagging the players primarily deployed to be creative instead?

The list in case you missed it:

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)

Click to shrink...

I saw a discussion about BD at the top of the message board. I participated in it. I’ve already told you I think Doherty is equally to blame for our weakness in attack Monday. I think if we’d had more threatening attacks from our fullbacks, players like Kane, Son, etc would have been freed up and would appear to play better as a result.

We tore Newcastle apart, but through incredible misfortune drew that game. I don’t blame Jose for that. It was bad luck. Against Burnley, we were very lucky to get 3 points. I blame Jose for not putting Reguilon on the field, a decision that seemed obviously wrong in the moment and in hindsight.

Anyway, I’ve had enough of this conversation.

 

[Airfixx]

I saw a discussion about BD at the top of the message board. I participated in it. I’ve already told you I think Doherty is equally to blame for our weakness in attack Monday. I think if we’d had more threatening attacks from our fullbacks, players like Kane, Son, etc would have been freed up and would appear to play better as a result.

Click to shrink...

Just sounds like scapegoating to me.... I'm more baffled by the 'need' more than anything else.

We tore Newcastle apart, but through incredible misfortune drew that game. I don’t blame Jose for that. It was bad luck.

Click to shrink...

Why didn't we score more? The penalty wouldn't have mattered if we had...... Afterall, the 93 mins leading up to the penalty weren't just one big matter of "luck"; just like it wasn't one big matter of luck that we didn't concede vs Burnley.

(Rhetorical question... I have my own thoughts on that front, but it's your narrative....)

Against Burnley, we were very lucky to get 3 points. I blame Jose for not putting Reguilon on the field, a decision that seemed obviously wrong in the moment and in hindsight.

Click to shrink...

It only seems "wrong" to you as you're determined to ignore the defensive requirements of the task we had ahead of us.... The defensive task that indeed came to fruition and was dealt with well by Mr Davies.

Anyway, I’ve had enough of this conversation.

Click to shrink...

Touche..... I trust you won't feel the need to reply further then.

 

[GGTH]

The weirdest thing about this discussion is people acting like Reggie can't defend, after being voted as left back of the year is Spain and getting a Europa trophy. The respect people give Burnley's attack is mad. Southampton came to Turf Moor with KWP and won with a clean sheet.

 

[Totti]

The weirdest thing about this discussion is people acting like Reggie can't defend, after being voted as left back of the year is Spain and getting a Europa trophy. The respect people give Burnley's attack is mad. Southampton came to Turf Moor with KWP and won with a clean sheet.

Click to shrink...

Because people see an attacking full back and their mind is made up that they can't defend.

Literally THE best part of his game at Madrid was his defensive side but was criticised at times for not offering much in attack (in comparison to a Marcelo)... he then went to Sevilla and didn't look back.

There has been suspect defending from him in his performances this season (Chelsea on his debut and occasions against West Ham) but no more than I'd expect from an attacking full back.

 

[Doc]

The weirdest thing about this discussion is people acting like Reggie can't defend, after being voted as left back of the year is Spain and getting a Europa trophy. The respect people give Burnley's attack is mad. Southampton came to Turf Moor with KWP and won with a clean sheet.

Click to shrink...

It's nonsense talk. He's as good if not better than Davies defensively. His speed alone cleans up situations that would be opposition attacks. I like Davies as backup but we were very lucky to come away with three points from the Burnley game and Reg over Davies is clear as day the easiest fix for the poor performance. Some of the comments above re: cleansheet, defenders job to defend etc don't merit response.

 

[Team Tanguy]

I'd prefer if we didn't field too many non flair/non creative players at the same time. 1 or 2 are fine. But much more than that and then there's way too big a burden on Tanguy/Gio to do everything themselves.

However given the fixture congestion, pre season preparation etc I can understand if we're unable to at the moment. Whilst a few guys get to top speed we'll have to make use of what's available so I won't complain right now.

But for those saying that playing Reggie would only have resulted in Burnley clearing his crosses- open your minds. If Reggie dribbled past even 1 player then the cross he puts in with a man taken out of the game is much different to Ben Davies crossing against a settled couple banks of 4. It's not hard to imagine he would have made more use of the space afforded to the fullbacks. It's why he's a top attacking LB lol. But again, he won't be able to play every game so we're going to have games where we all feel he's more suited but he's on the bench or not involved.

As for his performance.. he was very lucky his error didn't lead to a goal. There were 2 in fact, I can't remember the 2nd but I recall it being in the Spurs extended hls. He's competent but he's not this super reliable defender. Has to be used wisely.

 

[Airfixx]

Because people see an attacking full back and their mind is made up that they can't defend.

Literally THE best part of his game at Madrid was his defensive side but was criticised at times for not offering much in attack (in comparison to a Marcelo)... he then went to Sevilla and didn't look back.

There has been suspect defending from him in his performances this season (Chelsea on his debut and occasions against West Ham) but no more than I'd expect from an attacking full back.

Click to shrink...

...By this token, you're kinda advocating the concern that it may be the weaker side of his game (The 'devil' being in your use of the "no more than I'd expect from an attacking full back." caveat.)

Regardless, the most important person's judgement is that of the manager (as it dictates our reality, rather than one's fantasy manager tendencies) and I strongly suspect that the WH game would have contributed to him playing Davies against Burnley given what threat they were likely to pose..... (Davies being bigger, stronger, likely better in the air and more experienced with that kind of encounter)

Personally, I'm not conflating the idea that Davies was played with the notion that Reg' can't defend, but there's a plausibly trackable thought process there if one is trying to second guess the gaffa.

 

[Airfixx]

It's nonsense talk. He's as good if not better than Davies defensively. His speed alone cleans up situations that would be opposition attacks. I like Davies as backup but we were very lucky to come away with three points from the Burnley game and Reg over Davies is clear as day the easiest fix for the poor performance. Some of the comments above re: cleansheet, defenders job to defend etc don't merit response.

Click to shrink...

In the case of Burnley can you explain how you think speed counteracts the particular attacking threat that they posed?

As for "clean sheets"; that mattered, because if by whatever means they'd have scored first they'd have completely shut up shop with 2 banks of 5 like the stubborn non-footballing fuckers that they are.

 

[White Van Jan]

Our next 2 PL matches are against:

Brighton
West Brom

Against whom we'd expect to be able to play a bit and be on the attack. Rotate Davies out.

In between times an EL tie. Rotate Davies back in.

Then:

City (Reggie)

EL (Davies)

Chavs (Reggie)

This managing lark is a lot easier than some make it out to be

 

[Airfixx]

Our next 2 PL matches are against:

Brighton
West Brom

Against whom we'd expect to be able to play a bit and be on the attack. Rotate Davies out. In between times an EL tie. Rotate Davies back in.

Then:
City (Reggie)
EL (Davies)
Chavs (Reggie)

Click to shrink...

Agreed though.......

Despite my comments above, I don't think a precedent is/should be set for Ben to play all the lower table teams just in case it gets a bit physical and cloggy. Burnley are a very particular breed and unlike a lot of teams that try to shut the bigger teams out, they are actually pretty good at what they do.

I'd play Reg tonight and again on Sunday (if not for the fact that Ben would otherwise have to play 3 x 90 this week) then proceed with him in the EPL and Ben in Europe.

 

[bk_spur]

Ben Davies is fine if you are trying to defend or get a draw. If you are down goals though it could help to put a more attacking player on. Mou, sensing a need to present a physical defense, made a justifiable decision to start him. After 70 mins though and needing a goal, it was obvious he could be subbed for a player that could better help us get that goal.

Ben did fine and we won so it all turned out ok. We might have scored sooner or more if he had been subbed off for Reggie though. We also could have lost because of a Reggie defensive lapse. I think a lot of the things said about Ben were said with this in mind.

 

[Mrs Perryman]

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.

Click to shrink...

But it didn't!

 

[Mandy]

It baffles me that after throwing away a 3-0 lead against West Ham because of poor defending and sloppy individual errors people are now bitching and moaning because we kept a clean sheet.
It may not have been pretty, but he did the job he was supposed to do. He's not an attacking player so if the attacking side of the game was not up to scratch, that's not his fault.

 

[Totti]

 

[Airfixx]

Click to shrink...

Warms the cockles.... Top pro... Fan favourite.

 

[stevee]

Starts at CB tonight, along with Reggie at LB

 

[Lozza]

Embarrassing

 

[Airfixx]

Embarrassing

Click to shrink...

You certainly are.

 

[Team Tanguy]

#reliable