Weirdness Abounds (or the Idrissa Gana Gueye Thread)

[Hafnia]

1 hour ago, Bailey said:

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.

 

Not being able to control a football and pass it accurately is a bit of a problem wouldn't you say?  Should Man United just set up their team so it doesnt involve lukaku having to worry about controlling or passing a ball?  I don't think they can.

Belgiums attacking midfielders like hazard have actually stopped passing to Lukaku outside the box. Watch them. He is ignored so often. 

As I said in a previous post. The tranmere Rovers players didn't pass to aldridge outside the box.... they only passed to him on the understanding that a shot on goal would be the next action.   It's not 1992 anymore.... 

There is no similarity to Gana.  Gana does not have a deficiency in his game that surrenders possession. Lukaku does. It's as simple as that.

 

Like lee sharpe said. You can't have a centre forward who can't hold on to the ball. It just makes it too hard for the team. 

[Elston Gunnn]

8 hours ago, Shukes said:

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.

 

Thanks, seriously, for a thinking Evertonian response.  Maybe my questions have been answered many times, but perhaps not so straightforwardly, nor easy to ferret out amid the off-putting, back-and-forth personal carping.  Some of the carping is tongue-in-cheek, some a bit of wind-up, some just rude.

Your risk/reward point Is definitely worth thinking about.  I guess I tend to lean toward the anti-Gana viewpoint because for me he risks a little too often, with not quite enough consistent reward.  But that’s really just an impression I’ve built up over many matches, and admittedly I might have become inclined to see more silly risks than actually took place during the frenetic run of play that is football.

I do still hope to see a Gomes-McCarthy pairing.  Maybe a Gana-McCarthy pairing, too.  It looks to me that Silva, despite his proclaimed preference for 4-4-2, has settled for now for 4-2-3-1.  In that formation, it just seems to me preferable in most matches to have 1 of the 2 DMs sit in to protect the back 4, especially when either of the fullbacks dashes forward.  I’ve seen no evidence that Gana could be deployed as a sitter/protector.  Nor, as I vaguely recall, is that how McCarthy plays.  So, given my preference, Gomes is the most likely sitter.  As for box-to-box, I prefer McCarthy (ah, and Besic) to Gana.

I think there’s likely more reward, a bit less risk, playing 2 of Gomes, McCarthy, and Besic.  But who knows whether Gomes or Besic will play for Everton next season.  And, alas, with McCarthy’s injury history ....... 

Odds are we’re fated - or, depending on your perspective, lucky - to depend on Gana for risky rewards.

 

[Shukes]

2 hours ago, Elston Gunnn said:

Thanks, seriously, for a thinking Evertonian response.  Maybe my questions have been answered many times, but perhaps not so straightforwardly, nor easy to ferret out amid the off-putting, back-and-forth personal carping.  Some of the carping is tongue-in-cheek, some a bit of wind-up, some just rude.

Your risk/reward point Is definitely worth thinking about.  I guess I tend to lean toward the anti-Gana viewpoint because for me he risks a little too often, with not quite enough consistent reward.  But that’s really just an impression I’ve built up over many matches, and admittedly I might have become inclined to see more silly risks than actually took place during the frenetic run of play that is football.

I do still hope to see a Gomes-McCarthy pairing.  Maybe a Gana-McCarthy pairing, too.  It looks to me that Silva, despite his proclaimed preference for 4-4-2, has settled for now for 4-2-3-1.  In that formation, it just seems to me preferable in most matches to have 1 of the 2 DMs sit in to protect the back 4, especially when either of the fullbacks dashes forward.  I’ve seen no evidence that Gana could be deployed as a sitter/protector.  Nor, as I vaguely recall, is that how McCarthy plays.  So, given my preference, Gomes is the most likely sitter.  As for box-to-box, I prefer McCarthy (ah, and Besic) to Gana.

I think there’s likely more reward, a bit less risk, playing 2 of Gomes, McCarthy, and Besic.  But who knows whether Gomes or Besic will play for Everton next season.  And, alas, with McCarthy’s injury history ....... 

Odds are we’re fated - or, depending on your perspective, lucky - to depend on Gana for risky rewards.

 

I hope that we do try the two combinations of Gana/McCarthy or McCarthy/Gomez, and stick with the best one... or even play them depending on the situation.

I think McCarthy could be the better box to box player. And he is the one I think Gana will be competing with. 

Gama is definitely not the sitting/holding midfielder as he is too risky. He is a good disruptor and link to the forward four for me. I don’t expect him to create, but would like him to create more if that makes sense? 

[pete0]

3 hours ago, hafnia said:

Not being able to control a football and pass it accurately is a bit of a problem wouldn't you say?

He got 7 assists last season. In comparison Harry Kane got 2 which is the same as Gana. 

 

 

[barryj]

I think he’s quite good, not world class but good. 

 

Edit: For clarification that was about Gana 

[Palfy]

5 hours ago, Elston Gunnn said:

Thanks, seriously, for a thinking Evertonian response.  Maybe my questions have been answered many times, but perhaps not so straightforwardly, nor easy to ferret out amid the off-putting, back-and-forth personal carping.  Some of the carping is tongue-in-cheek, some a bit of wind-up, some just rude.

Your risk/reward point Is definitely worth thinking about.  I guess I tend to lean toward the anti-Gana viewpoint because for me he risks a little too often, with not quite enough consistent reward.  But that’s really just an impression I’ve built up over many matches, and admittedly I might have become inclined to see more silly risks than actually took place during the frenetic run of play that is football.

I do still hope to see a Gomes-McCarthy pairing.  Maybe a Gana-McCarthy pairing, too.  It looks to me that Silva, despite his proclaimed preference for 4-4-2, has settled for now for 4-2-3-1.  In that formation, it just seems to me preferable in most matches to have 1 of the 2 DMs sit in to protect the back 4, especially when either of the fullbacks dashes forward.  I’ve seen no evidence that Gana could be deployed as a sitter/protector.  Nor, as I vaguely recall, is that how McCarthy plays.  So, given my preference, Gomes is the most likely sitter.  As for box-to-box, I prefer McCarthy (ah, and Besic) to Gana.

I think there’s likely more reward, a bit less risk, playing 2 of Gomes, McCarthy, and Besic.  But who knows whether Gomes or Besic will play for Everton next season.  And, alas, with McCarthy’s injury history ....... 

Odds are we’re fated - or, depending on your perspective, lucky - to depend on Gana for risky rewards.

 

A very good post in a thread that has disintegrated into personal attack’s because people can’t except that others may have a different opinion to the majority. 

I completely agree with your point of risk for me he doesn’t evaluate the situation when he leaves players free and holes for teams to play in in his blinkered attempt to win the ball at any cost, I’ve said it before you do need to take a certain amount of risks but they need to be calculated and not gun ho because whilst you may get away with it with the lesser teams the big boys will take full advantage of the players and space left unmarked. 

And as for stats I pay no heed to them for me they don’t show the bigger picture they give you snippets that can be quantified, but they can’t tell you that he should have been picking this man up, or he left a space for someone to play in or he should have played the ball to a different position etc, I prefer to evaluate using my eyes and making my own judgments and if that makes me weirdo on this forum then a weirdo I am happy to be. 

[Elston Gunnn]

3 hours ago, Shukes said:

I think McCarthy could be the better box to box player. And he is the one I think Gana will be competing with. 

Gama is definitely not the sitting/holding midfielder as he is too risky. He is a good disruptor and link to the forward four for me. I don’t expect him to create, but would like him to create more if that makes sense?

I, too, assume a returning McCarthy will have to compete with Gana for playing time.  Maybe Silva would pair the 2 at some point, but if both essentially go box-to-box, that would seem to restrict our fullbacks pretty seriously.

On Gana as creator - I don’t expect him to create, either, because for me he’s rarely effective as a playmaker.  Maybe he messed up several times many matches ago attempting that, and I just got it in my head that he could only be a disruptor, nothing more.  So while I’d like him to create more, that probably reduces to: I wish he were actually capable of creating.  My biased (?) view is that he just isn’t such a player, and in trying to do so, he disrupts his own team far more often than he makes a good playmaking play.

I’d like him to play to his strength as disruptor while cutting down the risky stuff somewhat.  However, I acknowlege the counter-argument implication of your earlier response re risk/reward; namely, that requiring Gana to take fewer risks might ironically make him less, not more, effective.

[MikeO]

6 minutes ago, Elston Gunnn said:

 I wish he were actually capable of creating.

I may have mentioned it before but if you watch the twenty minute highlights v CP on the OS he's instrumental/involved in creating four or five chances. So I disagree with you, he is capable and does create even though it's not his primary job. For me that's a big asset

[Elston Gunnn]

1 minute ago, MikeO said:

I may have mentioned it before but if you watch the twenty minute highlights v CP on the OS he's instrumental/involved in creating four or five chances. So I disagree with you, he is capable and does create even though it's not his primary job. For me that's a big asset

Ok, I’ll check it out.  As I admit, maybe early on (I thought) he messed up as playmaker, was godawful as shotmaker, etc., and so in subsequent matches I noticed his playmaking failures but missed his playmaking successes.  Maybe he used to be lousy as playmaker but has gradually gotten better.  Or, fair’s fair, maybe he hasn’t been effective at creating chances, but was excellent in this regard against Palace.

Despite the insults, real and imagined, in this thread, the substantive disagreement is about an important footballing issue.  I don’t know what to expect from Man U - talk about weird - but I’ll assume they’ll test Gana and the rest of our team a lot more than did mediocre Palace.  Sunday’s match might provide a good test of Palfy’s prediction that .... 

30 minutes ago, Palfy said:

.... the big boys will take full advantage of the players and space left unmarked.

 

[Shukes]

Excellent run of posts. 

I think we can all be culpable of the same. Some miss anything good he does and look for negatives, while others brush over his weakness as they are looking for his positives.

This is why I think MikeO is a voice of reason in this subject by actually showing facts to back up his points. 

Now im not saying others haven’t or can’t, just that it’s better than just ignoring points.

Take Tom Davies. Many have critisized him recently and publicised their views on his brain farts. But the thread stayed objective as people aren’t trying so hard to find faults or positives. Same can be said for many players in our team. Yet Gana seems to be subject to, what I would class, as grossely unfair and unreasonable..... while also disrespectful to our club, manager and staff.

If he was truly one of the worst players to wear our shirt in the premier era, then what does that say about Silva, the club, and all people involved? 

Gana would be great alongside a proper playmaker. A tiger to win the ball, who passes the ball on to a silky distributer, while also being able to command a more than admirable passing range himself. Are his mistakes costly to the team? More costly than his benefits? 

An example would be to look at how many goals he has gave away, and how does that compare to other players in the team. This is one of the biggest and most important issues. 

[StevO]

Haf/Matt, irony is amazing!!! But then Haf started writing war and peace about Lukaku again and now I feel like I should see a doctor. I swear if I see another post with six or more paragraphs about Lukaku in the Everton section I’m going to get delete happy around here. 

Gana, it seems the professionals who work with him on a daily basis think he is good enough to play football matches, I trust them, they tend to have some sort of clue about the game. 

[Palfy]

Just looked to see who’s online and saw the Vultures waiting to feed on the next Gana post, hiya Shukes and Haf

[Hafnia]

7 hours ago, StevO said:

Haf/Matt, irony is amazing!!! But then Haf started writing war and peace about Lukaku again and now I feel like I should see a doctor. I swear if I see another post with six or more paragraphs about Lukaku in the Everton section I’m going to get delete happy around here. 

Gana, it seems the professionals who work with him on a daily basis think he is good enough to play football matches, I trust them, they tend to have some sort of clue about the game. 

Delete people's posts Steve? You work for the BBC now? 

[London Blue]

2 hours ago, hafnia said:

Delete people's posts Steve? You work for the BBC now? 

Oh no, now the dear old BBC is getting dragged into the omnishamles of the Gana / Lukaku diatribes. 

[Hafnia]

25 minutes ago, London Blue said:

Oh no, now the dear old BBC is getting dragged into the omnishamles of the Gana / Lukaku diatribes. 

Couldn't give a shit if people post opinions that I dont agree with on lukaku or gana. They are made on a forum and if made the right way should be respected as such. 

Threatening to get "delete" happy?  I think some admin rights need deleting more like. 

 

[London Blue]

8 minutes ago, hafnia said:

Couldn't give a shit if people post opinions that I dont agree with on lukaku or gana. They are made on a forum and if made the right way should be respected as such. 

Threatening to get "delete" happy?  I think some admin rights need deleting more like. 

 

All I will say on this, is that when people have such entrenched views, who refuse to accept the possibility they are wrong, or even listen to what other people say then it stops being a debate and becomes a shouting match that infects many threads. It's fun to read for a bit but after a while it's boaring and distracts from genuine topics and spoils their flow.

This is not directed at anyone inparticular, I respect the vast majority of posters here, it's just those two topics seem to angry up people's blood for some reason.

[Shukes]

4 hours ago, Palfy said:

Just looked to see who’s online and saw the Vultures waiting to feed on the next Gana post, hiya Shukes and Haf

Hi Palf!

Didnt expect to hear mich from you while he’s playing well

[Palfy]

23 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

I'll take that into consideration.

Romney are you part of the admin because I can’t see away of returning the Gana topic back to its original name, so I maybe wrong and I apologise in advance if I am but if you are do you not think it prudent to have some form of consultation before you change a topic name, after all you were not the original author of the topic and if you are only able to make these changes by being part of the admin and it’s not for a violation do you not find that a breach of your powers if the same opportunity to change something for no good reason is not afforded to myself. 

You and others may find my request to have it returned to the original name petty and unnecessary, I do not because I feel rightly or wrongly that weirdness refers to posters who don’t think Gana is a good player, this in my opinion was proven by the reply I received when I asked the question why had the topic been changed. 

[Matt]

4 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Romney are you part of the admin because I can’t see away of returning the Gana topic back to its original name, so I maybe wrong and I apologise in advance if I am but if you are do you not think it prudent to have some form of consultation before you change a topic name, after all you were not the original author of the topic and if you are only able to make these changes by being part of the admin and it’s not for a violation do you not find that breach of your powers if the same opportunity to change something for no good reason is not afforded to myself. 

You and others may find my request to have it returned to the original name petty and unnecessary, I do not because I feel rightly or wrongly that weirdness refers to posters who don’t think Gana is a good player, this in my opinion was proven by the reply I received when I asked the question why had the topic been changed. 

I'm 99.9% certain that it was changed due to the content being posted, not because of anyone in particular. 

[Palfy]

5 minutes ago, Shukes said:

Hi Palf!

Didnt expect to hear mich from you while he’s playing well

[Palfy]

2 minutes ago, Matt said:

I'm 99.9% certain that it was changed due to the content being posted, not because of anyone in particular. 

In fairness to Romey he did say that and I do believe him when he said it wasn’t aimed at any particular side of the argument, but others don’t and they see it as a reference to PeteO and myself, and I’m quite angry about that and is silly as it may seem I don’t enjoy being categorised as a weirdo.  

[Matt]

8 minutes ago, Palfy said:

In fairness to Romey he did say that and I do believe him when he said it wasn’t aimed at any particular side of the argument, but others don’t and they see it as a reference to PeteO and myself, and I’m quite angry about that and is silly as it may seem I don’t enjoy being categorised as a weirdo.  

It’s about the content mate, both sides of the debate getting a ribbing (myself included). He did the same with the Lukaku thread where, again myself, got involved in a debate with Haf (mostly) that just got more and more ridiculous and polarised. It’s just a bit of fun to try and lighten the mood on topics that sometimes get out of hand, it’s really nothing personal. 

Although, Romey is a miserable sod so there’s every chance he’s using the “misery loves company” philosophy  

[Paddock]

Romeys caused fucking murder with a simple thread name change. Excellent work.

[Romey 1878]

41 minutes ago, Matt said:

It’s about the content mate, both sides of the debate getting a ribbing (myself included). He did the same with the Lukaku thread where, again myself, got involved in a debate with Haf (mostly) that just got more and more ridiculous and polarised. It’s just a bit of fun to try and lighten the mood on topics that sometimes get out of hand, it’s really nothing personal. 

Although, Romey is a miserable sod so there’s every chance he’s using the “misery loves company” philosophy  

Matt’s covered everything for me, Palfy. He’s a good lad like that. Except when he’s tired, then he chats complete bollocks. 

19 minutes ago, Paddock said:

Romeys caused fucking murder with a simple thread name change. Excellent work.

It’s a gift...  

[Bailey]

22 hours ago, hafnia said:

 

Not being able to control a football and pass it accurately is a bit of a problem wouldn't you say?  Should Man United just set up their team so it doesnt involve lukaku having to worry about controlling or passing a ball?  I don't think they can.

Belgiums attacking midfielders like hazard have actually stopped passing to Lukaku outside the box. Watch them. He is ignored so often. 

As I said in a previous post. The tranmere Rovers players didn't pass to aldridge outside the box.... they only passed to him on the understanding that a shot on goal would be the next action.   It's not 1992 anymore.... 

There is no similarity to Gana.  Gana does not have a deficiency in his game that surrenders possession. Lukaku does. It's as simple as that.

 

Like lee sharpe said. You can't have a centre forward who can't hold on to the ball. It just makes it too hard for the team. 

He can control a football and he can pass it accurately. Thats like saying Gana cant score or cant cross accurately. Lukaku wouldnt be hailed as one of the best strikers in the game if he could never pass the ball to a team mate or get it under control. He isnt the best at it, no-one will argue against that, but he can still do it at this level. Morata is similar but for different reasons.

We have had centre forwards that can hold the ball up but its still too hard for the team, especially when they also dont put the ball in the back of the net. 

Likewise we have had centre mids that can pass better and stay in position better than Gana but they still dont bring as much to the table as he can.

 

[Hafnia]

3 hours ago, London Blue said:

All I will say on this, is that when people have such entrenched views, who refuse to accept the possibility they are wrong, or even listen to what other people say then it stops being a debate and becomes a shouting match that infects many threads. It's fun to read for a bit but after a while it's boaring and distracts from genuine topics and spoils their flow.

This is not directed at anyone inparticular, I respect the vast majority of posters here, it's just those two topics seem to angry up people's blood for some reason.

Not sure why that was replied to my post that no one should be getting posts deleted.

If PeteO want to put up reasons that he thinks invalidates stats then let him..... if I want to explain why my views of lukakus 1 in 2 ganes is distorted them I will. 

If people get upset because our lovely Theo is getting dug out for being a bit energy efficient then tough. 

 

[Hafnia]

1 hour ago, Romey 1878 said:

Matt’s covered everything for me, Palfy. He’s a good lad like that. Except when he’s tired, then he chats complete bollocks. 

It’s a gift...  

Hes Very hormonal when tired. I couldn't be married to him.  I bet Gomes is all lovely and cuddly when tired. 

[Hafnia]

54 minutes ago, Bailey said:

He can control a football and he can pass it accurately. Thats like saying Gana cant score or cant cross accurately. Lukaku wouldnt be hailed as one of the best strikers in the game if he could never pass the ball to a team mate or get it under control. He isnt the best at it, no-one will argue against that, but he can still do it at this level. Morata is similar but for different reasons.

We have had centre forwards that can hold the ball up but its still too hard for the team, especially when they also dont put the ball in the back of the net. 

Likewise we have had centre mids that can pass better and stay in position better than Gana but they still dont bring as much to the table as he can.

 

I've heard him be referred to as a great goalscorer.... never heard him called a great footballer.

I'm not gonna waste numerous posts explaining why he is a poor footballer.  I've done it before.  He's getting called for it now.  It would improve I think you and a few others said .... no. It's fookin awful. 

Lee sharpe said hes got the worst touch of any striker he's seen. 

Whether you like it or not teams play with one striker almost all the time.  That means that striker has to be able to look after the ball, control it, pass it. He can't. 

[London Blue]

4 hours ago, hafnia said:

Not sure why that was replied to my post that no one should be getting posts deleted.

If PeteO want to put up reasons that he thinks invalidates stats then let him..... if I want to explain why my views of lukakus 1 in 2 ganes is distorted them I will. 

If people get upset because our lovely Theo is getting dug out for being a bit energy efficient then tough. 

 

Because Haf your post happend to be there, and lets face it you are one of the main culprits. Someone just has to say Lukaku and you pop up with rant. Seriously its like you, Pete0 et al have become Toffee Talks version of Candyman!

If you and others want to continue you merry-go round arguments, then fine, crack on. I would prefer it if you didn't infect other threads that's all.

If you read my posts on Theo you will note that I accept his short comings, but hey that's a debate for another thread...... 

[Hafnia]

2 hours ago, London Blue said:

Because Haf your post happend to be there, and lets face it you are one of the main culprits. Someone just has to say Lukaku and you pop up with rant. Seriously its like you, Pete0 et al have become Toffee Talks version of Candyman!

If you and others want to continue you merry-go round arguments, then fine, crack on. I would prefer it if you didn't infect other threads that's all.

If you read my posts on Theo you will note that I accept his short comings, but hey that's a debate for another thread...... 

Well don't fuckin read them then?! It's clear that that you are able to do that based on your clear "I'll just dip in and take a stab at haf" post. Have a proper read if you want context or just put it on ignore.... simple. 

Ffs. Can't even say walcotts been playing poorly (which many are outside of toffeetalk think is the case) in case some snowflake gets offended by it.