Weirdness Abounds (or the Idrissa Gana Gueye Thread)

[Palfy]

5 hours ago, Shukes said:

So... is he any good or what?

Serious note though.  Palf, PeteO. Would you risk dropping him as we are in a decent run at the moment, or are you prepared to give him a chance of continuing and seeing where his form goes?

We know he’s not a top four option, but is he good enough for our position and aims at the moment until we find a top class replacement?

No I don’t believe in changing a team that is winning only a twat and a cunt would do that, the same  as changing the name of a topic after 26 pages. 

[pete0]

39 minutes ago, nogs said:

Pete I have to say that is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever read. You are seriously trying to argue that making lots of tackles is a sign of a defect in someone's game... Please, just know when to give up!! Guess who won most tackles in 2016 when Leicester won the title? Yes, N'Golo Kante, so shit and clueless positionally he's got two Premier League winners medals and a World Cup one to go with it!! Oh and guess who was second in the tackling list that year...

And if the top 6 haven't got anyone in the top tackles list, don't you think that might be because as a team they are better at keeping the ball?? 

There's a reason Kante plays for Chelsea and not Gana. 

I'm really struggling to comprehend how people don't see Gana's takling stats to be high as he's all over the shop. Does anyone actually watch what he does on the pitch or just look at stats? 

[Palfy]

7 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

because you and pete have destroyed this thread with your conspiracy theories believing he is a bad player. 

Don’t buy that Mark, if someone doesn’t buy into the beliefs of the majority you think by ridiculing them as weidos is the way forward, that’s a shame mate I thought you were better than that but obviously I was wrong. 

That is a tactic employed by the likes of Trump and what an arsehole he is, I never joined this forum to be labelled a weirdo because my views on a topic don’t meet up with the consensus of the majority.

 If that’s the way the administrators of this forum allow these things to happen it’s a shame because all you are doing is stifling the debate 

Seriously I’m pretty gutted by this  

 

[Romey 1878]

5 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Don’t buy that Mark, if someone doesn’t buy into the beliefs of the majority you think by ridiculing them as weidos is the way forward, that’s a shame mate I thought you were better than that but obviously I was wrong. 

That is a tactic employed by the likes of Trump and what an arsehole he is, I never joined this forum to be labelled a weirdo because my views on a topic don’t meet up with the consensus of the majority.

 If that’s the way the administrators of this forum allow these things to happen it’s a shame because all you are doing is stifling the debate 

Seriously I’m pretty gutted by this  

 

I changed the title of the thread as a joke (as a did with the Lukaku thread (also as a joke)). It wasn’t aimed at any particular side of the discussion, but the thread as a whole. The constant back and forth of the same points, just using different words. So I changed the title and did a play on the Lukaku thread change because they are both as mind-numbing as each other. 

Have a beer. You’re not yourself when you’re not pissed. 

[Bailey]

6 hours ago, hafnia said:

Blimey... Just looking at some stats....  gana gueye is clear and away the highest number of tackles made.... 45. Next highest is 35.

Hes 2nd in interceptions on 23.... capoue leads on 29..... 

 Not bad eh....

 

 

So now stats are important... when you were banging on about Lukaku you didnt care how many he scored or assisted yet now its Gana the number or tackles and interceptions makes him a good player.

Fwiw I think there is a legitimate argument to say that if Gana held his position more then he would get less of the two stats but at the same time he is very good at making tackles and cutting down lanes so if we are going to play him then we should play to his strengths. I would also prefer midfielders who can do a bit of everything and to be a top side we need more than someone who is simply expected to lay the ball off to a better passer when in possession.

[Hafnia]

1 minute ago, Bailey said:

So now stats are important... when you were banging on about Lukaku you didnt care how many he scored or assisted yet now its Gana the number or tackles and interceptions makes him a good player.

Fwiw I think there is a legitimate argument to say that if Gana held his position more then he would get less of the two stats but at the same time he is very good at making tackles and cutting down lanes so if we are going to play him then we should play to his strengths. I would also prefer midfielders who can do a bit of everything and to be a top side we need more than someone who is simply expected to lay the ball off to a better passer when in possession.

What didn't I care about with lukakus goal stats?  Pretty flimsy that.  I often put stats into context -  Especially given it's my day job. 

For one you can clearly see that lukaku scores goals against poorer sides and very rarely against the better sides.  Two -  I often put lukakus goals in context to pass accuracy, duels won, work rate to give a perspective of how his overall game was.

First point of call is to watch the game. Form an opinion and see if the stats support the opinion.

A 7 year old kid can easily be swayed by a 20 goal scoring striker.  I used to be.

An understanding of forward play  more than any other aspect of the game meant I was never sold on lukaku.  You simply cannot lose the ball with the regularity that he does and not have a negative impact on the team.   As a midfielder with a lone striker you do not have any basis to commit yourself forward with confidence to join him in attack if you fear that he will lose the ball. 

If lukaku was less of a flat track bully then he could almost be tolerated but that the problem - his deficiencies outlined above are the exact reason why he is a flat track bully. 

Gana aside from not offering much guile from an attacking perspective gives solid stats all round.   He's very unlikely to cost us games the way lukaku did and his numerous interventions have likely saved us from conceding many a goal. 

The other point to make is that I support dropping gana for certain games. If we are against a side who will sit back and park the bus then bench him... play Gomes and Gylfi, Bernard as number 10, with richarlison and walcott/lookman with Cenk as striker.  I'm realistic about him.

The same as lukaku. Who imo is best used as an impact striker for the last 20 minutes when it's shit or bust. 

[Palfy]

39 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

I changed the title of the thread as a joke (as a did with the Lukaku thread (also as a joke)). It wasn’t aimed at any particular side of the discussion, but the thread as a whole. The constant back and forth of the same points, just using different words. So I changed the title and did a play on the Lukaku thread change because they are both as mind-numbing as each other. 

Have a beer. You’re not yourself when you’re not pissed. 

That’s fair enough I do get humour but when I asked why and Mark came back with his answer I couldn’t see any  humour in his reply 

[barryj]

Can I just check. Is this still the Gana thread?

[Matt]

6 hours ago, hafnia said:

Pretty much what I expected.  The irony of obsession/stubornness can't exactly be levelled by someone who has took a similar level of tenacity in lukakus defence.. the fact that much of what I've said has pretty much come true further makes it a bit of a weak accusation and makes it appear more a case of sour grapes perhaps. 

All I did was use facts to counter opinion. Those facts still hold true. Which is what you’re doing now. Clearer? What I expect next is the equivalent of a “yeah, but...” 

[Elston Gunnn]

6 hours ago, pete0 said:

I’m really struggling to comprehend how people don't see Gana's takling stats to be high as he's all over the shop. Does anyone actually watch what he does on the pitch or just look at stats? 

I’m not a big Gana fan, though given the choice between him and Schneiderlin, I prefer Gana.  Still, I do think pete0 raises a legitimate issue here.  I have regularly commented that Gana’s major strength is that he’s an effective disruptor, but that too often he also disrupts his own team.  So pete0’s reference to “all over the shop” rings true with me.

Just for a moment take pete0’s (and on this specific issue, my) point seriously, and give it a serious, straightforward — as befits “thinking Evertonians” — answer.  That is, (1) does Gana occasionally actually hurt our play by being too often “all over the shop,” or not.  (2) If “yes,” is that a weakness, or not really?

I assume Gana will continue to start.  Because my own answers to the above 2 questions are “yes” and “yes,” I hope Gomes will for the time being prove a steadying partner for Gana.  If any of you don’t worry about Gana needing a steadying partner, fair enough.

My hope, though not really expectation, is that sometime this season we’ll see a Gomes-McCarthy pairing.

[Shukes]

Already been answered many times though mate. It’s just ignored.

But here goes again.

1: Gana’s strength is breaking up play and getting the ball back. He needs to go out of position to do that... rather than sit back and allow possession. 

This means that if he doesn’t get the ball back, he is caught out of position. But I don’t think it’s because he is a headless chicken, but rather that’s his strength and what he is instructed to do.

2: it is detrimental to the team on occasion, but there is no reward in no risk! Man City concede goals when teams counter them. There isn’t a team in the world that doesn’t.

No one and I repeat NO ONE, says that Gana doesn’t have weakness. But when people watch the match and literally put down times in highlights Gana putting long and mid range passing for all to watch, and even the times in highlights when he sets up chances for all to watch..... and is TOTALLY ignored by certain people saying that he can’t pass a ball forward....

then it makes the whole debate more of a debacle. 

Now imagine this.....

P (insert rest of word at pleasure) replies by looking at highlights and says, yes he did do well there, much better than I bought he was capable of. If he can keep that up great... that is an asset. But I still don’t rate him personally. Yes you have proved he can pass and yes you have proved he passes forward, but my opinion of him stays...

why? Because I just dont feel him.

Imagine that eh!

[nogs]

Everton FC, the club whose fans don't like tackling and scoring goals! 

[pete0]

As for closing down, he doesn't close the lane he chases the ball and often ends up wrong side. Hold position more staying goal side and he'd make less mistakes and cost us less goals.. Oh and his tackling stars would go down. 

One pass doesn't prove anything. Like I've said before Peter Crouch scored a worldie past City but they are one offs. You watch Gana over 90 minutes and his passing is dreadful, far from what is expected from a professional footballer. Tactically he doesn't run forward with the ball enough instead choosing to release the ball and killing momentum, this was why we struggled last season so much. He had slow players around him and done very little to help them and the ball move forward. With the worse thing being his off ball movement, literally just has to move a yard or two forward or backward to create space but doesn't have the football brain to do it. 

 

[Hafnia]

5 hours ago, Matt said:

All I did was use facts to counter opinion. Those facts still hold true. Which is what you’re doing now. Clearer? What I expect next is the equivalent of a “yeah, but...” 

Funny that.... all I did was use facts to counter opinion too.  Those facts hold true.... that he's a flat track bully who goes on big barren runs, that his overall inability to play football stifles his team's ability to build and sustain attacks meaning the team is vulnerable to counter and unable to hurt teams with good defences. 

What is clear is that you think you are somehow the white knight in the debate because you were defending the Everton player (to which I pointed out early doors he had zero affinity for us and deserved none back)....  so no.  There is no irony. Glad that is cleared up. 

[Matt]

46 minutes ago, pete0 said:

As for closing down, he doesn't close the lane he chases the ball and often ends up wrong side. Hold position more staying goal side and he'd make less mistakes and cost us less goals.. Oh and his tackling stars would go down. 

One pass doesn't prove anything. Like I've said before Peter Crouch scored a worldie past City but they are one offs. You watch Gana over 90 minutes and his passing is dreadful, far from what is expected from a professional footballer. Tactically he doesn't run forward with the ball enough instead choosing to release the ball and killing momentum, this was why we struggled last season so much. He had slow players around him and done very little to help them and the ball move forward. With the worse thing being his off ball movement, literally just has to move a yard or two forward or backward to create space but doesn't have the football brain to do it. 

 

But it's not just 1 pass though, and his pass completion rate proves his passing isn'tt awful and shows he does have a brain - if he didn't, his passes wouldn't be completed and he wouldn't be able to find our players. But he does. So....

[Matt]

2 minutes ago, hafnia said:

Funny that.... all I did was use facts to counter opinion too.  Those facts hold true.... that he's a flat track bully who goes on big barren runs, that his overall inability to play football stifles his team's ability to build and sustain attacks meaning the team is vulnerable to counter and unable to hurt teams with good defences. 

What is clear is that you think you are somehow the white knight in the debate because you were defending the Everton player (to which I pointed out early doors he had zero affinity for us and deserved none back)....  so no.  There is no irony. Glad that is cleared up. 

 Amazing that you can't see it. But why waste time on it...

[Hafnia]

1 minute ago, Matt said:

 Amazing that you can't see it. But why waste time on it...

Exactly the same matt, exactly the same.  Your like the bloke in the pub who is sat at the bar and says "bloody nora, you in here again"

"Yeah.... every time I'm in here you are" 

[aaron]

If someone was looking for a new forum to sign up to and reads this its going to put them off signing up. Take the Lukaku talk to the Lukaku thread, the personal insults to DM's and the Gana talk on this thread. Its not hard, you aren't children lads. Its been a good read for those who are familiar with you all on this site but I think its ran its course now lads.

[Matt]

Just now, hafnia said:

Exactly the same matt, exactly the same.  Your like the bloke in the pub who is sat at the bar and says "bloody nora, you in here again"

"Yeah.... every time I'm in here you are" 

I just have a severe dislike of OTT arguments based on bias, opinion and cherry-picked stats. No white-knight complex whatsoever

 

[pete0]

21 minutes ago, Matt said:

But it's not just 1 pass though, and his pass completion rate proves his passing isn'tttt awful and shows he does have a brain - if he didn't, his passes wouldn't be completed and he wouldn't be able to find our players. But he does. So....

Pass % rate proves nothing. I'm on about the quality of the passes. At this level you should be doing more than just kicking it at a teammate. 

I'm also on about the 10% he doesn't make. It's not that he's giving the ball away all the time it's that he switches off and gives away a big chance to opposition. If he was passing the ball forward on their half I'd not be arsed of his passing was closer to 80% but the passes he's doesn't make are inexcusable. Davies would have his head bitten off yet this chump does it every game and no one bat's an eye lid, me and Palfy aside. You can't continually give chances away with sloppy passes and getting lost out of position at this level like that, it makes it so much harder. He's a liability. 

[Matt]

9 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Pass % rate proves nothing. I'm on about the quality of the passes. At this level you should be doing more than just kicking it at a teammate. 

I'm also on about the 10% he doesn't make. It's not that he's giving the ball away all the time it's that he switches off and gives away a big chance to opposition. If he was passing the ball forward on their half I'd not be arsed of his passing was closer to 80% but the passes he's doesn't make are inexcusable. Davies would have his head bitten off yet this chump does it every game and no one bat's an eye lid, me and Palfy aside. You can't continually give chances away with sloppy passes and getting lost out of position at this level like that, it makes it so much harder. He's a liability. 

Like what?! 

Actually, nevermind  

[pete0]

22 minutes ago, Matt said:

Like what?! 

Actually, nevermind  

Weight on the pass. Putting to their good foot or in front of them or whichever gives the teammate the best opportunity to do something with it. Not just at them. And look forward first! Him and Schneiderlin burnt my head out last year. 

[Shukes]

But didn’t Mike just prove that theory wrong? I’m absolutely dunfoubded at the moment. 

He is always the wrong side? Errr.... interceptions? Or is that just due to the idiot opponents passing the wrong way. 

This thread as just about been brought down to ridiculousness. I’m expecting the Ps to start talking about train lines any sec.

[nogs]

Pete, do everyone a favour - promise never, ever to coach kids at football, please. 

[Palfy]

1 hour ago, aaron said:

If someone was looking for a new forum to sign up to and reads this its going to put them off signing up. Take the Lukaku talk to the Lukaku thread, the personal insults to DM's and the Gana talk on this thread. Its not hard, you aren't children lads. Its been a good read for those who are familiar with you all on this site but I think its ran its course now lads.

I agree and the topic should be changed back to its original name.

[Romey 1878]

52 minutes ago, Palfy said:

I agree and the topic should be changed back to its original name.

I'll take that into consideration.

[Shukes]

One thing though all. I don’t think we’re being that personal, I think most of it is in jest. Yes Palf had a breakdown haha but it’s probably more to do with how much fun juice he had taken

But mainly, the insults are harmless and more joking. 

I don’t really think the Ps are the same person as Train conductor John.

[Bailey]

4 hours ago, hafnia said:

Funny that.... all I did was use facts to counter opinion too.  Those facts hold true.... that he's a flat track bully who goes on big barren runs, that his overall inability to play football stifles his team's ability to build and sustain attacks meaning the team is vulnerable to counter and unable to hurt teams with good defences. 

What is clear is that you think you are somehow the white knight in the debate because you were defending the Everton player (to which I pointed out early doors he had zero affinity for us and deserved none back)....  so no.  There is no irony. Glad that is cleared up. 

Inability to play football? 

This is a guy that has scored as many goals in the league as anyone his age, has a healthy balance of goals between each foot and his head, takes far less penalties than most mainstream strikers and still scores at similar numbers, has missed less big chances than Aguero is more than holding his own in assists and big chances created when compared to the leagues other best strikers and passes similar amounts.

Like Gana he has his skillset which has positives and weaknesses. Saying he has an inability to play football weakens any good points you may make and makes you look a bit silly.

[pete0]

3 hours ago, nogs said:

Pete, do everyone a favour - promise never, ever to coach kids at football, please. 

The first thing you teach kids is to not run mindlessly to the ball and instead stay goalside. 

[markjazzbassist]

guys goal is not to score goals and win tackles, the goal of football is to keep a good position and shape.  that formation is what wins you the games.