Is our defence falsely ridiculed? (Probably Not)

Telegraph match report on Tuesday night referred to us being "vulnerable at the back" with a "shaky" defence and thus a gritty backs to the wall defensive display away to a team fighting for their lives on a windswept night somehow adds fuel to the fire for those who would criticize our defence. Had Mourinho's Chelsea of last season put in a similar performance it would've been hailed as a defensive masterclass.

Journos and media cunts like Carra think in pre determined cliches and unfortunately your casual armchair fan swallows what they say hook line and sinker and thus we are perceived as dodgy at the back. The stats put paid to that nonsense.

Last 7 league games, 4 goals conceded. Keep that ratio going to the end of the season and we win the league at a canter.
 
Some panicking going on I see.

One said the free header missed by the Sunderland player was all our fault. Do people not also give credit to the opponent.

That side of the game seems to be forgotten.

I don't have the time to reply to all the long posts/rants but I do believe we will be ok in the run in.
 
Lancet Fluke said:
A couple of points. I recognise that to some extent the more attacking you are the less protected the back four will be by the rest of the team but I don't think it is an excuse for a back four that has at times looked incredibly badly organised and like they don't really know what they are supposed to be doing. In my opinion the manager over complicates defending generally and at times I genuinely believe the defenders have looked confused and at times (particularly after new year last season) completely demoralised by having to play in a way that wasn't working and was making them look like poor players. Just because we play attacking football doesn't mean the back four can't stay on their feet more often, track runners, mark players who are six yards out when a cross comes in, not step up for offside when the ball isn't being pressed etc. Second point, I don't reckon united are particularly brilliant defensively, they aren't bad considering how ordinary the personnel is but they owe at least as much to a brilliant keeper as they do to sound defending in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I never said utd defended well, I said they defend. They set out to defend first which then means they are a terrible team to watch.

We are the opposite.

What is the old cliché? Attack is the best form of defence.
 
Our current way works just about in the Premier League because we get the goals but it does not work in the Champions League. We did win the group this time around but we were comfortably beaten by Juventus twice and had it not been for some last minute goals it could of been different. As we progress we are going to play teams like Barcelona again and unfortunately until we learn to deal with these teams we can never win the competition. Obviously Pep will change that and he has a far more balanced and disciplined approach to defending.

I think our defence rightly gets the flak it does but then again our attack does not get enough flak, we have just 2 players in the top 25 scorers and one of them is likely to be injured until April. To say we rely on Aguero is an understatement, he is the only key we have to winning anything this year. Probably the most balanced and consistent team at the moment is Leicester and that is why they are top. Tomorrow is going to be a huge test because they can not just expose our approach to defending but also they know where our biggest danger lies.
 
Lancet Fluke said:
In what way has he missed the point of the thread. The OP asked whether our defence has been unfairly ridiculed, Neville has come on and given us his thoughts on our defending. Do you just want him to literally say "no the ridicule is fair" "or yes it has been unfairly ridiculed"?
Click to expand...

I see you've only taken a little of what I said to make your point.

Indeed it is fair to critisise our defence. It is however unfair and idiotic to ridicule our defence yet describe other defences with almost identical records as 'solid'. That is the point of the thread no?

There is no arguement to our defence could be better. But to be ridiculed, listed as a reason why we may not win the league is idiotic. Especially considering the other defences.

Feel free or Neville can feel free to open a thread on 'how our defending could be better' or 'where could we improve at the back'. But the op has not asked that. He's asked if we are unfairly ridiculed. Which, if United are 'solid', 'tight' or 'hard to beat' then there is only one answer to the op's question, yes we are.
 
the false crap written by media and spoken by pundits is getting that bad that our own fans are doubting..

Utter shite it is, I for one take no notice, just another thing to have a go at besides spot an empty seat and say why extend.
 
inbetween said:
Our current way works just about in the Premier League because we get the goals but it does not work in the Champions League. We did win the group this time around but we were comfortably beaten by Juventus twice and had it not been for some last minute goals it could of been different. As we progress we are going to play teams like Barcelona again and unfortunately until we learn to deal with these teams we can never win the competition. Obviously Pep will change that and he has a far more balanced and disciplined approach to defending.

I think our defence rightly gets the flak it does but then again our attack does not get enough flak, we have just 2 players in the top 25 scorers and one of them is likely to be injured until April. To say we rely on Aguero is an understatement, he is the only key we have to winning anything this year. Probably the most balanced and consistent team at the moment is Leicester and that is why they are top. Tomorrow is going to be a huge test because they can not just expose our approach to defending but also they know where our biggest danger lies.
Click to expand...


"Comfortably beaten by Juventus twice"? I'm guessing you either didn't watch either game or you are just using this frankly lazy 'fact' to back up your point.

At home vs Juventus, we had 60% possession. Hart made one save to Buffon's five. We had 8 corners to their one.

Away was much the same story. 60/40 possession. More attempts and 8 corners to their two. Had Sterling not missed the easiest chance by far in both ties, we have drawn both at worst.


Our defence only rightly gets the 'flak it deserves' if the flak is similar to that of United and Arsenal. As it doesn't, the arguement isn't balanced. If there were blanket statements like the top 6 are all shocking at the back, that would be fair and balanced.

My bet, PFA team of the year defence will be Cech/De Gea. Bellarin/Clyne Smalling, Koscielny and Monreal/Fuchs.

All those players play in a defence that come the end of the season will have conceded more or very similar to us.

Yet, we've been ridiculed, is that not the op's point?
 
schfc6 said:
I see you've only taken a little of what I said to make your point.

Indeed it is fair to critisise our defence. It is however unfair and idiotic to ridicule our defence yet describe other defences with almost identical records as 'solid'. That is the point of the thread no?

There is no arguement to our defence could be better. But to be ridiculed, listed as a reason why we may not win the league is idiotic. Especially considering the other defences.

Feel free or Neville can feel free to open a thread on 'how our defending could be better' or 'where could we improve at the back'. But the op has not asked that. He's asked if we are unfairly ridiculed. Which, if United are 'solid', 'tight' or 'hard to beat' then there is only one answer to the op's question, yes we are.
Click to expand...
I would have thought in a thread about how our defence is ridiculed, discussing the merits or otherwise of the defence would be entirely appropriate. As you are being pedantic, I will be too. Where in the OP does it say anything about other defences being described as solid or that the point of the thread is to discuss media treatment of other defences compared to media treatment of ours? He just asks the question why does our defence get such a bad press and Neville presumably was trying to answer why he thinks it gets a bad press. I notice you haven't picked people who have answered by describing the positives of our defence even though some of them haven't gone on to discuss the differences in media perception of our defence and that of other teams. Anyone would think you just have an issue with that particular poster because you don't share his opinion.
 
Last edited:
Lancet Fluke said:
I would have thought in a thread about how our defence is ridiculed, discussing the merits or otherwise of the defence would be entirely appropriate. As you are being pedantic, I will be too. Where in the OP does it say anything about other defences being described as solid or that the point of the thread is to discuss media treatment of other defences compared to media treatment of ours? He just asks the question why does our defence get such a bad press and Neville presumably was trying to answer why he thinks it gets a bad press.
Click to expand...


"So why does it get so much bad press".

I'm not being pedantic, I'm treating the thread as it was meant.

As I've said, our defence can only fairly ridiculed if the defence of our closest rivals is ridiculed.

I'm sorry mate, this is not an arguement about the failings or qualities of our defence but rather how it is treated or seen in the press and amongst experts.

United's Solid,
Arsenal's is never discussed
And ours, "shambolic", "shaky" et al.

If you takes team names away, all the defences are similar if not identical in stats, yet described quiet differently. That is the point the op is making.

If three men all run the 100m in 9.97, 9.98 and 9.98 and one is described as slow and off the pace, yet the others praised is that fair? Same is happening here. We are being described negatively as opposed to our rivals who are largely being praised. Yet we are all identical or thereabouts in performance.

I don't see Arsenal being described as goal shy, or powder puff in attack. Quiet the the opposite, Ozil is a shoe in for top three for POTY. Yet Arsenal are relatively speaking 3 games behind us in terms of goals.
 
Should we be ridiculed? No, our defending doesn't deserve that, it simply fits the media mood music round us.
Should we be better than we have been so far, yes of course we should. More sophisticated defensive coaching will sort us out. I genuinely believe we have good calibre players who will respond to world class coaching.
 
Our defence is ridiculed because of the £75m we have spent on centre backs , which has not really improved us defensively , none of the media , take into account , due to injuries to our defenders , we have not been able to play a settled back four , Chelski had a superb defence last season , and probably only used 5 players in 95% of their games , we have played seven different players/combinations in just over half a season. My 1st choice back four would be , Zabs , Vinnie , Otto , Kolarov , and they have not played one game together this season , which answers a lot of the criticisms , also take into account MP's cavalier tactics , which would leave most defences vulnerable.
 
schfc6 said:
"So why does it get so much bad press".

I'm not being pedantic, I'm treating the thread as it was meant.

As I've said, our defence can only fairly ridiculed if the defence of our closest rivals is ridiculed.

I'm sorry mate, this is not an arguement about the failings or qualities of our defence but rather how it is treated or seen in the press and amongst experts.

United's Solid,
Arsenal's is never discussed
And ours, "shambolic", "shaky" et al.

If you takes team names away, all the defences are similar if not identical in stats, yet described quiet differently. That is the point the op is making.

If three men all run the 100m in 9.97, 9.98 and 9.98 and one is described as slow and off the pace, yet the others praised is that fair? Same is happening here. We are being described negatively as opposed to our rivals who are largely being praised. Yet we are all identical or thereabouts in performance.

I don't see Arsenal being described as goal shy, or powder puff in attack. Quiet the the opposite, Ozil is a shoe in for top three for POTY. Yet Arsenal are relatively speaking 3 games behind us in terms of goals.
Click to expand...
Show me where in the op it references anything to do with the press the other defences get. You have even quoted the main question there "why does it get so much bad press?" If you think it is unreasonable to answer that question by saying what is wrong with the defence then I think you're definitely being pedantic. I think we will have to agree to disagree anyway because we seem to be at cross purposes. I look forward to you ranting at someone who has come on this thread and merely mentioned the positives of our defence for not answering the op appropriately.
 
Lancet Fluke said:
Show me where in the op it references anything to do with the press the other defences get. You have even quoted the main question there "why does it get so much bad press?" If you think it is unreasonable to answer that question by saying what is wrong with the defence then I think you're definitely being pedantic. I think we will have to agree to disagree anyway because we seem to be at cross purposes. I look forward to you ranting at someone who has come on this thread and merely mentioned the positives of our defence for not answering the op appropriately.
Click to expand...


Have I ranted at you? Nope.

You clearly don't understand the op's point.
No, he hasn't directly said or mentioned other clubs, but surely you can appreciate that is what he's getting at. Our defence is often ridiculed whilst others are praised. Yet, our defence is statistically no worse than most of our rivals.

It's so very simple, our defence should only be ridiculed to the same extent as our rivals, as the ridicule of our defence goes way beyond that of our rival, it is indeed "unfair". The very point of the thread.


As I say, if three almost identical performances are described in three totally different ways, how is that fair? We are all either, solid, average or shambolic. We can't all be a separate descriptive word for the same performance it doesn't make sense and certainly isn't fair.
 
We have goy away with an awful lot of clangers in our defence so far this season, Hart has saved the blushes of Mangala, Otamendi and MDM countless times. But the facts are the facts its just that you get the feeling we are not going keep getting away with the school boys antics at the back.
 
schfc6 said:
You wouldn't, it's obviously escaped you. I haven't heard Arsenal's defence being slated like ours. I'm regularly hearing United's defence being described as 'solid' and 'well drilled'. Ours, shambolic, calamitous. Yet only 2 goals worse off than such as solid well drilled defence. Are you getting the point?

The whole basis of my point, and the one of the op. Our defence is much questioned, yet others with almost identical records are described in such away you'd believe we were conceding many goals more. Again, the irony, our disasterous defence may cost us the league, to a team with a defence just as disasterous.

Not to worry, I know irony is something that often escapes you.
Click to expand...

I think you are utterly useless at anything but the most mundane level of thinking & thus have no understanding of anything anybody says unless it is spelled out for you, which I can't be arsed doing as you are not worth it & are even crap in your attempts at being insulting.
 
schfc6 said:
Have I ranted at you? Nope.

You clearly don't understand the op's point.
No, he hasn't directly said or mentioned other clubs, but surely you can appreciate that is what he's getting at. Our defence is often ridiculed whilst others are praised. Yet, our defence is statistically no worse than most of our rivals.

It's so very simple, our defence should only be ridiculed to the same extent as our rivals, as the ridicule of our defence goes way beyond that of our rival, it is indeed "unfair". The very point of the thread.


As I say, if three almost identical performances are described in three totally different ways, how is that fair? We are all either, solid, average or shambolic. We can't all be a separate descriptive word for the same performance it doesn't make sense and certainly isn't fair.
Click to expand...
There seem to be a few others on this thread talking about our defence rather than how the media talk about arsenal and united's defence. You'd better give them a bollocking and tell them what they should really be discussing.
 
That defensive genius Jamie Carragher is constantly digging out our defence , and every one in the media follows suit ,its similar to our terrible away form , in all competitions W10 D 4 L 5 , so we have won more than 50% our away games this season and lost just five times in nineteen games , Juventus and Arsenal amongst those .Its all bullshit at the end of the day , our supporters know we havent been at our best this season , for various reasons , but i am confident we will win a couple of trophies this year , not bad for a team who cannot defend or play away from home
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top