Duffy/Goldson - confused???

[Captain Sensible]

Goldson has been very unlucky with the timing of his injury, but will be needed at some point. I think Duffy's signing is connected with our perceived weakness at set pieces at certain points last season. Aspinall seemed to think that Duffy and Dunk were fairly imperious in the air today. They possibly had it fairly easy against a smallish forward line, but its good to get used to being dominant. John Keeley hints that Duffy also has a bit of the Gordon Greer's about him in his passing which would be nice to see.

Goldson's great pace would have been better suited to the way Brentford played, but I guess that game just came a little too early in his recovery for Hughton to try him from the start. Its very nice to have the option.

Is the correct answer. We conceded far too many from set pieces and corners last season. Especially when looked at the percentage of the goals we conceded, I remember reading it was above 50% for set pieces. I think this is the reason behind Duffy coming in. The flip side is that Goldson seems more athletic. I would have thought Holdson would have coped with Hogan better than Duffy did. Maybe. The point is, Duffy will only get better and Hughton knows what he's doing.

 

[el punal]

Duffy no mug, 2 clean sheets, no mistakes can't drop him. Also more experienced than Goldson so can see the appeal as Hughton last season seemed to rate BFG & Dunk together. BFG being the more experienced player

And that's the good thing. At last the Albion have got strength in depth in virtually all positions, so if there is a run of injuries or suspensions there is decent cover. This is something that the club suffered from in recent seasons. Nice to see Rob Hunt get a run-out yesterday.

 

[mona]

Is the correct answer. We conceded far too many from set pieces and corners last season. Especially when looked at the percentage of the goals we conceded, I remember reading it was above 50% for set pieces. I think this is the reason behind Duffy coming in. The flip side is that Goldson seems more athletic. I would have thought Holdson would have coped with Hogan better than Duffy did. Maybe. The point is, Duffy will only get better and Hughton knows what he's doing.

Agreed. And I still think back to Burnley's late equaliser.

 

[chaileyjem]

Would still rather we had spunked the £4million on [Duffy on] a striker. If indeed this is the figure.

Nothing from the club indicates the two were related at all.
They didn't land their striker for all sorts of reasons but not because they'd bought Duffy (or already spent the money on wages/fees for Norwood, Sidwell, Murray and other signings).
The club were always going to replace Greer and wanted to do so by end of July when they first bid for Duffy.

This Duffy OR the "Striker" false choice will never go away will it.

 

[Bigtomfu]

Good shout but against Brentford, from where I was sitting he looked fearfully slow and vulnerable on the turn (e.g. to Hogan)...?

Are you sure about that? Watch their first goal again and you'll realise Duffy was a good 5/7 yards behind hogan when he received the ball and made up so much ground that as he struck the shot he was making a last ditched slide tackle attempt.

 

[GT49er]

I don't agree with much of that. For instance, Albion had made at least two bids for Duffy by the end of July - Brighton and Hove Albion want Blackburn Rovers centre-half Shane Duffy

Fair enough - I wasn't aware of the Argus article (and therefore of previous bids). Still wonder how much they were for, and how much LR's injury pushed us into paying top whack at the end of the transfer window, though - suspect the earlier bids would have been a fair bit smaller!

Also, you say that Duffy is "a CB who had spent most of his career playing for teams where defence was likely to be of the last ditch, get rid of it anyhow type."
Former Brighton and Hove Albion goalkeeper John Keeley on the "brilliant" Shane Duffy deal

Just the eams he's been playing for - Blackburn have been rubbish, so will have been under the cosh from better teams. Irish international teams' successes have been more through teamwork and determination rather than silky football skills. Teams under the cosh do tend to defend desperately. Again, didn't see the Argus article - agree it's very positive, although of course when a big transfer fee is involved, neither party is going to come out and say, 'We took 'em to the cleaners there', or 'We wuz robbed!'

And of our 3 young centre-backs:

* Dallison had played ONE league game (at League Two Crawley) prior to this season
* Hall is "..a long way from playing in the Championship" in the words of Mark McGhee, his old manager at Motherwell - Ben Hall is a prospect - but not ready for Championship yet says ex-boss
* White's total experience amounted to 17 games at U-21 level coming into the season

Would you really like the club to be in a position where, needing a result in the final match of the season at Aston Villa to guarantee automatic or make the play-offs, one of these completely inexperienced lads is called into the side due to suspension/injury

I didn't say that was what we should be doing, or that was what I wanted us to do - I was just wondering if that had been at least partly under consideration. After all, all three are promising (and one of them has SPL experience too, so 'completely inexperienced' is a bit OTT) prospects - and every experienced player has to have made their debut at some point - and at that time they will have been inexperienced. Everybody has to start somewhere!
Anyway, good to have discussion!

 

[Aveacarlin']

I don't agree with much of that. For instance, Albion had made at least two bids for Duffy by the end of July - Brighton and Hove Albion want Blackburn Rovers centre-half Shane Duffy

Also, you say that Duffy is "a CB who had spent most of his career playing for teams where defence was likely to be of the last ditch, get rid of it anyhow type." I'm not quite sure where you get that from. John Keeley (who is probably in a position to know, having been goalkeeping coach at Blackburn for the first 15 months of Duffy's Rovers career) in the Argus on Friday had this to say:-



Former Brighton and Hove Albion goalkeeper John Keeley on the "brilliant" Shane Duffy deal


And of our 3 young centre-backs:

* Dallison had played ONE league game (at League Two Crawley) prior to this season
* Hall is "..a long way from playing in the Championship" in the words of Mark McGhee, his old manager at Motherwell - Ben Hall is a prospect - but not ready for Championship yet says ex-boss
* White's total experience amounted to 17 games at U-21 level coming into the season

Would you really like the club to be in a position where, needing a result in the final match of the season at Aston Villa to guarantee automatic or make the play-offs, one of these completely inexperienced lads is called into the side due to suspension/injury?

Great post.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

[Stat Brother]

This Duffy OR the "Striker" false choice will never go away will it.

It won't go away because we keep getting fed drivel like 'the market was over heated', on the back of 27 previous cheap option AMEX era strikers.

Would still rather we had spunked the £4million on a striker. If indeed this is the figure.

Would still rather we added the £4m to the £5+m pilchard money and spunked that on a striker.

Perhaps even having enough change to bring in a like for like Greer replacement, as he certainly didn't leave the Albion as a £4m rated centre back.

 

[chaileyjem]

Would still rather we added the £4m to the £5+m pilchard money and spunked that on a striker.
Perhaps even having enough change to bring in a like for like Greer replacement, as he certainly didn't leave the Albion as a £4m rated centre back.

If Bloom wanted to spend £12m on a striker etc then i'm sure he would and has the funds to er "spunk" on em. I doubt the fact that he also had Duffy in his shopping trolley would stop him.
Perhaps he doesn't want to and thinks the club shouldn't pay those sort of sums or that the right player wasn't available.
Is that at all possible SB ?
(regardless of whether you personally think its the right thing to do, or has risked our chances of promotion etc which is nothing to do with whether Bloom actually has the money to spend on players which you seem to doubt.)

 

[El Presidente]

It won't go away because we keep getting fed drivel like 'the market was over heated', on the back of 27 previous cheap option AMEX era strikers.
.

Such as CMS (£3.25m) Ulloa (£2m) Manu (£1.5m) Baldock (£1.75m) Hemed (£1.1m),O'Grady (£500k) Dobbie (£650k) and Hoskins (£500k), as well as bidding £8m for Pritchard?

We've spent more on strikers since reaching this division than any other position, but don't let pesky things such as facts get in the way of your posts.

 

[Stat Brother]

Such as CMS (£3.25m) Ulloa (£2m) Manu (£1.5m) Baldock (£1.75m) Hemed (£1.1m),O'Grady (£500k) Dobbie (£650k) and Hoskins (£500k), as well as bidding £8m for Pritchard?

We've spent more on strikers since reaching this division than any other position, but don't let pesky things such as facts get in the way of your posts.

Come on we all know even £3.25m isn't exactly pushing the boat out for a promotion chasing sides striker.
As for citing figures below £2m, having just spent £4m on a centre back is just comical.

I don't quite see how backing that up with a bid of £5+m with excessive add ons, but don't let pesky things such as facts get in the way of your posts, that obviously wasn't enough strengthens your point.


Perhaps if the club hadn't spent so much money trying to under cut the market, it might have bought more than one player of genuine value.

 

[El Presidente]

Come on we all know even £3.25m isn't exactly pushing the boat out for a promotion chasing sides striker.
As for citing figures below £2m, having just spent £4m on a centre back is just comical.

I don't quite see how backing that up with a bid of £5+m with excessive add ons, but don't let pesky things such as facts get in the way of your posts, that obviously wasn't enough strengthens your point.


Perhaps if the club hadn't spent so much money trying to under cut the market, it might have bought more than one player of genuine value.

1: Duffy cost £3.5m not £4m.

2: Your assertion that spending big money on strikers brings success fails analysis. McCormack signed for Fulham for £11m and it got them nowhere, similarly to date with Villa. Blackburn spent £9m on Rhodes and never had a sniff of the playoffs.

3: Palace were promoted on the strength of goals from a Bosman signing who cost nothing. Burnley were promoted due to the goals of Ings (£1m) and Vokes (£350k).

Your constant bitching about Tony Bloom being parsimonious in relation to the playing squad is one eyed and petty.

 

[BBassic]

After a shaky start Duffy gets some good ratings from NSCer's today, and he was better vs Hudds than Brentford.

But Goldson was our player of the year last year, yet he stays on the bench...

Bench means fit to play...

So why is Duffy preferred over him?

Is Goldson suffering from a Bong-esque failure to return to form?

I imagine Duffy is preferred because we spent £3.5m on him.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Such as CMS (£3.25m) Ulloa (£2m) Manu (£1.5m) Baldock (£1.75m) Hemed (£1.1m),O'Grady (£500k) Dobbie (£650k) and Hoskins (£500k), as well as bidding £8m for Pritchard?

We've spent more on strikers since reaching this division than any other position, but don't let pesky things such as facts get in the way of your posts.

CMS crap
Ulloa ace
Manu crap
Baldock crap
Hemed good
O'Grady crap
Dobbie extra crap
Hoskins crap

Not great really.

 

[Hampster Gull]

If Bloom wanted to spend £12m on a striker etc then i'm sure he would and has the funds to er "spunk" on em. I doubt the fact that he also had Duffy in his shopping trolley would stop him.
Perhaps he doesn't want to and thinks the club shouldn't pay those sort of sums or that the right player wasn't available.
Is that at all possible SB ?
(regardless of whether you personally think its the right thing to do, or has risked our chances of promotion etc which is nothing to do with whether Bloom actually has the money to spend on players which you seem to doubt.)

I dont want tony "spunking" on a footballer

 

[Stat Brother]

1: Duffy cost £3.5m not £4m.

2: Your assertion that spending big money on strikers brings success fails analysis. McCormack signed for Fulham for £11m and it got them nowhere, similarly to date with Villa. Blackburn spent £9m on Rhodes and never had a sniff of the playoffs.

3: Palace were promoted on the strength of goals from a Bosman signing who cost nothing. Burnley were promoted due to the goals of Ings (£1m) and Vokes (£350k).

Your constant bitching about Tony Bloom being parsimonious in relation to the playing squad is one eyed and petty.

At no point have I ever been parsimonious about Tony Bloom and the playing squad.
If I am to be accused of that it could only ever be regarding strikers, the club (TB) does a fantastic job with the squad but has consistently had a blind spot over that one position.

I get it, I understand why, the money involved is obscene with no guarantees.

But having that culminating in this season where it's bought nobody stating the market was 'over heated', on the back of saying 'well it's top 2 next year', doesn't make any sense.


Come January the club will be in an identical situation only giving up x points to a fair few teams and chances are an insurmountable amount of points to at least 2 of those teams.

Fingers crossed I'm loud wrong, I hope I can bounce this thread and wallow in my wrongness.
But I'm yet to see anything that would suggest that's the case or that the market will 'cool down'.


Anyway much to NSC's and particularly Jem's relief I want to be done with this (except for the odd 'I can't help myself' barb).

 

[LamieRobertson]

1: Duffy cost £3.5m not £4m.

2: Your assertion that spending big money on strikers brings success fails analysis. McCormack signed for Fulham for £11m and it got them nowhere, similarly to date with Villa. Blackburn spent £9m on Rhodes and never had a sniff of the playoffs.

3: Palace were promoted on the strength of goals from a Bosman signing who cost nothing. Burnley were promoted due to the goals of Ings (£1m) and Vokes (£350k).

Your constant bitching about Tony Bloom being parsimonious in relation to the playing squad is one eyed and petty.

You could add boring to that last bit

 

[Stat Brother]

You could boring to that last bit

Believe me I'm boring myself, hence trying to get out of this.
But some of the spin that's being to come up with to try and save face, can't go unchallenged.

Unsurprisingly an 'over heated' transfer market has been enough to make my head explode.
I'm glad there are a few others who are also questioning this nonsense.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Still regard the signing of Duffy a bit of an odd one. We must have known for a month or two (at least) before the end of last season that we would have to replace Greer, but we seemed to be in no hurry.
We have three young CBs (Hall, White and Dallison) all of whom will have had not unrealistic hopes and aspirations of stepping up to possibly become our number 4 CB by the end of the season. At the start of the season, 2 out of 3 of our senior CBs were still on the treatment table, and we drafted in Bruno to play CB (which to be honest worked pretty well). Then Liam got injured, so we needed Bruno to play RB, and it seemed it was only then that we went out and paid top whack for an (almost) deadline day signing - a CB who had spent most of his career playing for teams where defence was likely to be of the last ditch, get rid of it anyhow type. Had it been planned, or was it a bit of a panic buy - did we plan at one time to go with three CBs with one of the youngsters to break through?
Difficult for Duffy - obviously Goldson has quickly become a fans favourite and a lot of people seem to want him to come back in, and it's not Duffy's fault that we paid (allegedly) about £4M for him. Perhaps it's long term planning for Dunk leaving for big money before next season?
Anyway, here's to loads of clean sheets, whoever's playing at the back for us!

Duffy arrived at the club and played within a few days of signing before being played against Brentford. This meant that he had little or no time to get to know his team mates, and develop an understanding with where they would be on the pitch in training, so of course there is going to be more more of a hoof it away type approach that from someone who has had the opportunity to train regularly with the squad before making his debut (Like Goldson, who scored 2 own goals in his first 2 matches and btw - would he have been in for a lot of criticism and questioning why we signed him if we hadn't had our good start or got something from those games?)

Against Brentford, Duffy was often left in a position where their no. 9 went out to a position on the half way line behind Bruno, who had bombed forward as usual, this left Duffy with a dilemma, does he go wide to cut down that space and try to stop that player early but by doing so, leave the middle vulnerable (especially if someone then makes a late run into the area he vacated and we would be left with Dunk struggling to cover) or does he stay in the middle and let their player run in towards goal unopposed until he gets close to the goal - this is an example of unfamiliarity with the tactics that being at the club such a short time would expose. Also we normally push our centre-backs wide when Stockdale has the ball, but again, against Brentford, Dufy wasn't doing this as much as we normally do and was again down to being here such a short time before playing (Goldson was still injured at this point so couldn't start)

With time, Duffy will (and already has started to) develop more of an understanding with his teammates as he settles in. Goldson had a lot longer to achieve this before he was thrown into action

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

Lol, you said buy a striker. As if.

Read the Argus. We tried.