asajoseph
Established Member
The 'patently lacking' Lauren?
Come off it...
Come off it...
-
! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !
Discussions about police investigations
In light of recent developments about a player from Premier League being arrested and until there is an official announcement, ALL users should refrain from discussing or speculating about situations around personal off-pitch matters related to any Arsenal player. This is to protect you and the forum.
Users who disregard this reminder will be issued warnings and their posts will get deleted from public.
Lucas Neill
- Thread starter GoonerGurjit
- Start date
- Replies 63
- Views 3,836
Sorry, but defensively, he is. No point pretending otherwise. As far as I'm concerned he remains the weak link in that back four.
Its all fine and well going forward, but not so on his primary job - which is stopping the opposition - and not giving away cheap corners and free kicks, which he did an awful lot last season. Which BTW is where we got creamed by opponents.
You should expect more from a 27 year old full back.
Its all fine and well going forward, but not so on his primary job - which is stopping the opposition - and not giving away cheap corners and free kicks, which he did an awful lot last season. Which BTW is where we got creamed by opponents.
You should expect more from a 27 year old full back.
Adam
Established Member
Neill couldn't dream of being as good as Lauren. Our most reliable and consistent defender - and that's not to say he's consistent at a mediocre level; at an outstanding level. I'm quite happy Ronaldo being the only player to burn him. We won.
The only attributes i'd like to see more in Lauren are power and pace, but when you look at his distribution and possesion ability you see how a player with that might lack what he has.
The only attributes i'd like to see more in Lauren are power and pace, but when you look at his distribution and possesion ability you see how a player with that might lack what he has.
Shagin
Active Member
neil is a decent defender. i think he could be good at arsenal with some work. but thats my opinion and i wouldnt pay a huge amount for him either.
Adam
Established Member
Shagin said:
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Shagin
Active Member
im sorry, arent australians alowed to comment on aussie players? didnt realise there was a rule against this. lol
Soler
Established Member
Gurgen said:
Break Cisse's leg?
Gurgen
Established Member
That was him? Good man 
asajoseph
Established Member
Ziontrain said:
Hmmm... I'll grant you that Lauren has been known to have defensive lapses, and has been caught out from time to time. I won't really argue that.
But my argument on Lauren is twofold:-
1) The defensive criticisms of him are often massively overstated. People remember what happened to him in the FA Cup final, and it exaggerates their oppinion of him. In fact, Ronaldo would have raped almost any RB in the world that day, he was bloody brilliant. Whilst generally, he is still prone to the odd mistake (although generally not absolute howlers, they're more positioning errors, in my view), he also does some very good defensive work, especially recently, which often goes un-noticed.
2) Actually, in Arsenal's system, I'd say that his primary role is to link up with the midfielders in front of him. Stopping the attack is of course important, but when looking at full-backs, Wenger will never, in my oppinion, opt for someone to replace Lauren who is an offensive downgrade regardless of what they offer defensively.
As for corners and free-kicks around the box, I'm not sure of the statistics - do we give away more than other teams? With regards to defending them however, you can't single out Lauren for last season's weakness. The whole back line was poor at dealing with set-pieces last year, Kolo, Cygan, Cole...
Are there better RB's for Arsenal out there than Lauren? Probably. But Lucas Neill certainly isn't one of them.
asajoseph said:
I dont think you get it: he was conceding a lot of free kicks. Worse still I noted a great number of times that he would put the ball out for a corner when with minor effort and no risk, he could have put it out for a throw-in. That is really unintelligent play for a veteran. Especially when everyone and their mother knew that we were having trouble defending corners - and that statistically, that was the game situation (free kicks /corners) where people were scoring on us! Who on earth would you do such a dumb thing?
So sorry, but I don't rate Lauren as a defender. And its his intelligence I'm questioning the most. I dont even think he has a problem with footspeed or anyhting else. But he's just not that smart - at his age and time in that position, he should get these simple concepts. That's the bottom line. That is why I say that the is the weak point in that defense.
_scorpion_
Established Member
Id take Willy Sagnol in a heart beat. He is available too.
neill in == hoyte out ?
NO!!!
Lets just keep hoyte firstly because i feel we have at least a few englishmen in the team instead of selling them away
and secondly haven our team get enough red cards over the years? do we need to add to that?
and lastly, neill ain't that good.. imo he's over rated~
:wink:
NO!!!
Lets just keep hoyte firstly because i feel we have at least a few englishmen in the team instead of selling them away
and secondly haven our team get enough red cards over the years? do we need to add to that?
and lastly, neill ain't that good.. imo he's over rated~
:wink:
asajoseph
Established Member
Zion,
I'll be simple about it, because I'm at work and don't have a huge amount of time.
Point by point:-
1) Lauren isn't the greatest defensive RB in the world - he does have weaknesses, and that's not deniable.
BUT
2) Those weaknesses are often massively overstated by people, and his good/solid defensive performances (of which there are plenty) are all too often ignored.
3) His link up play is excellent, with Ljungberg and the central midfield. He gets forward well, and can play dangerous balls into the box.
4) Despite his defensive inadequacies, it's his offensive production that we have to consider if we're really so obsessed with replacing him. Finding a RB who can defend better probably wouldn't be too hard. Finding one who can defend better, AND offer just as much if not more going forward is far more difficult. Lucas Neill certainly isn't that man.
Could we find a better RB than Lauren, in terms of what Arsenal require, if we were desparate? Probably. But I can't think of many that would be financially smart moves, considering the marginal return it would bring.
I'll be simple about it, because I'm at work and don't have a huge amount of time.
Point by point:-
1) Lauren isn't the greatest defensive RB in the world - he does have weaknesses, and that's not deniable.
BUT
2) Those weaknesses are often massively overstated by people, and his good/solid defensive performances (of which there are plenty) are all too often ignored.
3) His link up play is excellent, with Ljungberg and the central midfield. He gets forward well, and can play dangerous balls into the box.
4) Despite his defensive inadequacies, it's his offensive production that we have to consider if we're really so obsessed with replacing him. Finding a RB who can defend better probably wouldn't be too hard. Finding one who can defend better, AND offer just as much if not more going forward is far more difficult. Lucas Neill certainly isn't that man.
Could we find a better RB than Lauren, in terms of what Arsenal require, if we were desparate? Probably. But I can't think of many that would be financially smart moves, considering the marginal return it would bring.
asajoseph said:
You don't get it, do you: we are not winning any more titles until the defense gets upgraded. If you call that a "marginal" return, then I'm not sure why we waste our time cheering? To come second?
A full back must defend first. If they are least legit on that it allows the others to go forward. You don't design a defense by prioritising offensive skills of the players - otherwise, hell why dont we play Quincy at full back - he'd be a hella lot better overlapper than Lauren!
We lost the title because we lack defensive fundamentals. Until that changes, you can forget about it. So enjoy Lauren as much as you like - we will not win any more titles with him in that position. Thats the reality of the premiership now.
asajoseph
Established Member
Nonsense.
With a double dose of bullshite thrown in for good measure.
You think Lauren is honestly the biggest hole in our football club at the moment? You think that by replacing Lauren we'll have a title-challenging team automatically??? Lauren is perhaps the weakest of our defenders, but when if we're going to be listing reasons why Arsenal are not title contenders at the moment, I'd put Lauren quite a way down that list.
Shouldn't we cheer if we come second? Should the other 19 teams just go home then? We've won titles with Lauren in the side before. We've been the best defence in the league with Lauren in the side before. Yet for some reason we'll never win the league again if Lauren stays as our RB? Bollocks.
As for marginal returns, I guess you just didn't 'get it' either. We're not Chelsea. We have a limited transfer budget. We have a whole host of needs. And replacing our RB is nowhere near the top of that list. The 'marginal return' of spending significant money to replace Lauren with a better player (and the chances are it WOULD cost a significant amount of money - if you think Lucas Neill's the guy, you've lost all sense of proportion), would be miniscule compared to the marginal return gained from signing, say, a new CM, a striker to take the burden of Henry, a goalkeeper to replace the aging Jens. Yes, if we had all the money in the world, perhaps we could afford a better RB. But in our situation, and considering Lauren is a pretty damn solid performer, the 'marginal return' wouldn't warrant chasing many RB's in the world.
I've no idea how serious that point was supposed to be. Anyhow, it's flat out wrong.
If you think that attacking skills aren't a MAJOR characteristic of our fullbacks, you really have no idea of how we play. Yet again, you massively overplay the defensive inadequacies of Lauren. No, he's not the greatest, but he's not at all bad. He's a solid but not brilliant defender, and a very good attacking player. Sure, we'll replace Lauren. But if you think we'll be signing someone who's an attacking downgrade on him any time soon, regardless of how solid he is as a defender, you'll be waiting a long, long time.
Last I checked, we went undefeated in the league with Lauren almost ever-present. What's changed since then?
Yes, we've been lacking defensively last season, but if you're pointing the finger solely at Lauren (and he was partly to blame), you're deluding yourself. This non-sensical argument about selling him because he gives away too many corners - don't you think we should actually learn to defend the things? That might be a tiny bit more important, in my view, than worrying about giving the things away, and if we're pointing fingers on that basis it's Kolo and Senderos who need to stand up. and be counted.
Regardless, I'm not claiming Lauren's the greatest RB in the world. I just can't think of that many who would be much of an upgrade at the realistic amount of money we have to spend on the position. And Lucas Neill? You're having a laugh.
With a double dose of bullshite thrown in for good measure.
You think Lauren is honestly the biggest hole in our football club at the moment? You think that by replacing Lauren we'll have a title-challenging team automatically??? Lauren is perhaps the weakest of our defenders, but when if we're going to be listing reasons why Arsenal are not title contenders at the moment, I'd put Lauren quite a way down that list.
Shouldn't we cheer if we come second? Should the other 19 teams just go home then? We've won titles with Lauren in the side before. We've been the best defence in the league with Lauren in the side before. Yet for some reason we'll never win the league again if Lauren stays as our RB? Bollocks.
As for marginal returns, I guess you just didn't 'get it' either. We're not Chelsea. We have a limited transfer budget. We have a whole host of needs. And replacing our RB is nowhere near the top of that list. The 'marginal return' of spending significant money to replace Lauren with a better player (and the chances are it WOULD cost a significant amount of money - if you think Lucas Neill's the guy, you've lost all sense of proportion), would be miniscule compared to the marginal return gained from signing, say, a new CM, a striker to take the burden of Henry, a goalkeeper to replace the aging Jens. Yes, if we had all the money in the world, perhaps we could afford a better RB. But in our situation, and considering Lauren is a pretty damn solid performer, the 'marginal return' wouldn't warrant chasing many RB's in the world.
I've no idea how serious that point was supposed to be. Anyhow, it's flat out wrong.
If you think that attacking skills aren't a MAJOR characteristic of our fullbacks, you really have no idea of how we play. Yet again, you massively overplay the defensive inadequacies of Lauren. No, he's not the greatest, but he's not at all bad. He's a solid but not brilliant defender, and a very good attacking player. Sure, we'll replace Lauren. But if you think we'll be signing someone who's an attacking downgrade on him any time soon, regardless of how solid he is as a defender, you'll be waiting a long, long time.
Last I checked, we went undefeated in the league with Lauren almost ever-present. What's changed since then?
Yes, we've been lacking defensively last season, but if you're pointing the finger solely at Lauren (and he was partly to blame), you're deluding yourself. This non-sensical argument about selling him because he gives away too many corners - don't you think we should actually learn to defend the things? That might be a tiny bit more important, in my view, than worrying about giving the things away, and if we're pointing fingers on that basis it's Kolo and Senderos who need to stand up. and be counted.
Regardless, I'm not claiming Lauren's the greatest RB in the world. I just can't think of that many who would be much of an upgrade at the realistic amount of money we have to spend on the position. And Lucas Neill? You're having a laugh.
Gurgen
Established Member
Had a blinder for Australia yesterday :wink:
asajoseph said:
"What's changed"? You mean other than his defense? The guy has stagnated - not only has he not developed, he has gone backward. That is just a pure no-no for a guy in his stage of his career. He should be peaking - not making mistakes that we would expect from Justin Hoyte!
And in case you've been absent for the past two years, the league has just jumped up a few notches, since the "undefeated season". I wouldn't expect to win the Premiership unless our defense is even tighter than it was back then. The stakes have gone WAY up. That whole thing of spotting people two goal leads and then coming back to equalize aint gonna fly anymore.
Mourinho goes into each and every game with four flat out tight defenders. We cannot afford to field people in our back line who cannot lock down their opponent. That's the reality. That has to come before anything about offensive skill. Especially so in a team where we already have enough offensive firepower (when everyone is fit) and we attack so aggresively. The defenders on this team cannot be anything but flawless, let alone to be making juvenile errors at age 27 or 28.
_scorpion_
Established Member
An Italian news wire has claimed that AC Milan have reportedly made initial enquires about Lauren....the figure being reported is around 1.75 million pounds.
Country: Australia
As Scorpion has stated above Ac milan are supposed to be interested in him . He can't be as bad as some Arsenal fans make out.
asajoseph
Established Member
What nonsense - you actually think he's got worse over the years he's been with us? He's playing more consistently in defence for us at the moment than he ever has in the past, even if he is an unspectacular performer.
Again, nonsense. If anything, the overall standard of the Premiership has fallen at roughly the same rate that Arsenal and Manchester Utd's midfield's have deteriorated. I'm not even sure I think Chelsea are as good on a match by match basis as we were when we were at our peak a couple of seasons ago. If, by getting some proper cover from the midfield and teaching the WHOLE defence how to cut out a cross we can get back to the same level we were at two years ago defensively without any problem whatsoever. In my oppinion, apart from the inability to defend set pieces (which, if we're singling out anyone at all, I'd pick Kolo Toure as the most regular culprit), our defence is not the area to blame for our poorer performances this season and last, and if you watch matches that's pretty obvious. Our midfield isn't able to hold onto the ball in the middle of the park any more, Pires is finished, Gilberto can't (never could) pass, Flamini doesn't cut the mustard on any level and Fabregas is far, far too young to play the number of games Wenger seems to expect of him. Yet despite all these problems, and one or two more up front, you single out the steady Lauren as the reason we're not winning titles? Psh... Nonsense.
As for Chelsea, forget about them. Worry about beating the other 18 teams in the league, and the Chelsea games will sort themselves out. If we play our 36 other league matches well enough, it shouldn't really matter what happens against the pretenders from the west. I couldn't give a toss about their defensive records, their long ball football, and Didier 'strong as an ox, with two left feet' Drogba.
Tell that to Kevin Keegan. I'm not quite sure what Arsène Wenger has to learn from such an insightful remark though...
