Van La Parra . . . Should we make a bid?

[sussex_guy2k2]

You wouldn't know the meaning of the word.





Completely right.

Charlton; both from the right - one Bruno back off allowing the shot, the other allowing the cross in.
Derby: Both from set pieces.
QPR: One down the middle, one from a set piece.
Boro: One down the right, with Bruno caught upfield, two from set pieces.
Ipswich: Dunk howler.
Wolves: Soft cross allowed in from the right.

Anyone who thinks our recent travails are down to a weakness on the left, is either clouded by preconceptions, or simply a very poor judge.

Just to give a bit of perspective, in the Boro game, it was actually Greer that was out of position, meaning that Bruno moved across to cover him, and consequently it was VLP who was out there letting the cross in.

In the Wolves game, Bruno let one cross in all game despite having to work the whole of the right hand side of his own with Crofts on walk about duty - a cross which would have been dealt with 99 times out of 100 had Goldson not made a mistake.

In the Wolves game and the Ipswich game, Henry (particularly first half) and Sears (most of the game) gave Calderon a torrid time, despite the protection he was afforded. Just because none of the crosses from that side were taken advantage of, doesn't mean that Calderon has played well or been in any way better than Bruno in those games.

The fact is that you can't stop every cross coming in as a full back, it just isn't possible.

Strangely, and to give balance to the argument, if there is one goal Bruno really was guilty of defending poorly on which you've not mentioned, it was the second set-piece goal against QPR when he was marking Austin (very poorly).

 

[severnside gull]

What people seem to be missing is that when teams break from defence they invariably break down our left as they know they will make most progress, when challenges come in just outside of our penalty area they swich the ball to the other side and in most cases Bruno is standing off aloowing the room to advance into the box hence the goials coming from our right. Just an observation but what do I know.

I'm so sorry. I have no desire to be drawn into constantly challenging you and this will be my last post on the matter.
In order to ensure that I am not imagining things or making things up I spent a few minutes looking through match videos and checking "what you know" only to find it has no justification in fact.

No-one will disagree that Calderon is not a first choice left back but trying to justify a particular argument with stuff you make up and then digging an ever deeper hole just gives ammunition to your growing body of detractors and that is a shame.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I would suggest your Charlton analysis is incorrect as goals were conceded due to a sloppy loss of possession initially upfield, first by Murphy, second was from our corner.

You simply should not leave either of your full-backs in one on one situations. To point the finger at Bruno because he is RB is too simplistic.

Not really, as I never commented on where the moves originated - just that the breaks were NOT 'down the left' as BG's nonsense was suggesting. As you correctly say - both were from our possession breaking down in and around their box, originally. I'm not pointing the finger at Bruno at all - I think he's been in unbelievable form. Just trying to paint an ACCURATE picture of where these goals have come from, that's all.

Just to give a bit of perspective, in the Boro game, it was actually Greer that was out of position, meaning that Bruno moved across to cover him, and consequently it was VLP who was out there letting the cross in.

In the Wolves game, Bruno let one cross in all game despite having to work the whole of the right hand side of his own with Crofts on walk about duty - a cross which would have been dealt with 99 times out of 100 had Goldson not made a mistake.

In the Wolves game and the Ipswich game, Henry (particularly first half) and Sears (most of the game) gave Calderon a torrid time, despite the protection he was afforded. Just because none of the crosses from that side were taken advantage of, doesn't mean that Calderon has played well or been in any way better than Bruno in those games.

The fact is that you can't stop every cross coming in as a full back, it just isn't possible.

Strangely, and to give balance to the argument, if there is one goal Bruno really was guilty of defending poorly on which you've not mentioned, it was the second set-piece goal against QPR when he was marking Austin (very poorly).

Again - not an attack on Bruno - just an attempt at accuracy. Nor a suggestion that Calderon has been 'better than Bruno' in those games. of course he hasn't. Though he might have, if he'd been at his natural right back, and Bruno had been doing his best on his wrong foot!

 

[Icy Gull]

I really hope that we can do better than VLP. I think we would have signed him by now if he was anything but a fall back?

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I really hope that we can do better than VLP. I think we would have signed him by now if he was anything but a fall back?

Spot on.

 

[Machiavelli]

Just to give a bit of perspective, in the Boro game, it was actually Greer that was out of position, meaning that Bruno moved across to cover him, and consequently it was VLP who was out there letting the cross in.

In the Wolves game, Bruno let one cross in all game despite having to work the whole of the right hand side of his own with Crofts on walk about duty - a cross which would have been dealt with 99 times out of 100 had Goldson not made a mistake.

In the Wolves game and the Ipswich game, Henry (particularly first half) and Sears (most of the game) gave Calderon a torrid time, despite the protection he was afforded. Just because none of the crosses from that side were taken advantage of, doesn't mean that Calderon has played well or been in any way better than Bruno in those games.

The fact is that you can't stop every cross coming in as a full back, it just isn't possible.

Strangely, and to give balance to the argument, if there is one goal Bruno really was guilty of defending poorly on which you've not mentioned, it was the second set-piece goal against QPR when he was marking Austin (very poorly).

This is spot on. I can remember countless blocks Bruno's made this season. He hasn't just been PotS so far on the basis of his attacking FLAIR, he's been defensively solid and, apart from Austin's goal, his heading has been excellent.

 

[Machiavelli]

I really hope that we can do better than VLP. I think we would have signed him by now if he was anything but a fall back?

If, and this looks likely, Knockaert signs, think we can close this thread.

 

[martin tyler]

If, and this looks likely, Knockaert signs, think we can close this thread.

I still think we may still go for a loan move on this lad. LuaLua injury was worse than initially expected and I think CH will want 4 wide men if possible to choose from as he won t want another scenario like the other night with Crofts playing wide right. This lad is still a cheap and decent option.

 

[Stevie81]

A bit harsh. It's just a phrase, water carrier, tea boy, didn't do defensive work - all mean the same thing.

Indeed. Billy check your Pms

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

If, and this looks likely, Knockaert signs, think we can close this thread.

Not sure.

Knockhaert
Murphy
Lua Lua ( injured )
March ( out for season )


Still potential for a 2nd winger ( or Tex ) to sign.

So RVLP or Noone may be a further signing.

 

[severnside gull]

Not sure.

Knockhaert
Murphy
Lua Lua ( injured )
March ( out for season )


Still potential for a 2nd winger ( or Tex ) to sign.

So RVLP or Noone may be a further signing.

Hard to see Liverpool letting Tex go with their injury list mounting but there may be some mileage in us going back for Noone who in my view would be excellent off the bench although he hasn't progressed enough IMO to be worth what we sold him for. Ben Marshall is another option and may be cheaper than the deliberately inflated summer price

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Again - not an attack on Bruno - just an attempt at accuracy. Nor a suggestion that Calderon has been 'better than Bruno' in those games. of course he hasn't. Though he might have, if he'd been at his natural right back, and Bruno had been doing his best on his wrong foot!

No, that's fair enough. I was just trying to give an even broader perspective too. Calderon's been a great servant, he really has, and he deserves recognition for that. But he isn't a left back. The position doesn't suit him and teams know that. He's weak on his left side, he isn't comfortable attacking down there and his positioning out there is all over the shop. Really, that isn't even a criticism of him - it's more a criticism of CH for not actually playing the natural left back we have in reserve or, if he's not going to play Chicksen, then buying a reserve left back last summer.

Anyway, I still think there's a possibility Calderon could play right midfield in the next game (like he did last season) considering Ridgewell is now here and he don't have any other wide men aside from Murphy (and assuming that we don't get anyone else in). So maybe he'll get back to scoring with his face.

 

[jamie the seagull]

"Trio bid for Wolves winger van La Parra"

http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/01/20/trio-bid-for-wolves-winger-van-la-parra/

 

[BensGrandad]

No suggestion who the 3 bids are from but having signed Knockheart I would doubt if we are one of them.

 

[scooter1]

Van La Parra reminded me of a younger Theo Walcott - tricky, quick but always prone to making the wrong decision with the ball. I'd be very surprised if we go back in for him now, having spent circa £2m on Knockeart

 

[Hugo Rune]

Van La Parra reminded me of a younger Theo Walcott

Except for the goal scoring a ability - obviously!

 

[BUTTERBALL]

He did okay for us and will be a good player for someone, but i think with Knockeart and the injury to Lua Lua clearing up, the money would be best spent elsewhere.

 

[Stat Brother]

He did okay for us and will be a good player for someone, but i think with Knockeart and the injury to Lua Lua clearing up, the money would be best spent elsewhere.

Anyone pinning their hopes on Kaz remaining injury free for the rest of the season, is either brave or stoopid.

 

[WATFORD zero]

He did okay for us and will be a good player for someone, but i think with Knockeart and the injury to Lua Lua clearing up, the money would be best spent elsewhere.

A fifth left back ?

 

[Hamilton]

Anyone pinning their hopes on Kaz remaining injury free for the rest of the season, is either brave or stoopid.

Put me down for a fiver.

It's a win win for me then.