Nicolás Otamendi - 2018/19 performances

Status
Not open for further replies.
mosssideblue said:
Those looking to pin that goal on him
Click to expand...

I rightly, 'pinned it' on both of them.

One centre back goes for the ball, the other covers.

One made an absolute shithole of a job going for the ball & the other made an absolute shithole of a job of covering.

If he wasn't there to have an effect on the outcome of a straight ball down the pitch, can you please explain to me exactly why the fuck he was there at all ?

What was his job ?

Time & fucking motion studies perhaps ?
 
Neville Kneville said:
I rightly, 'pinned it' on both of them.

One centre back goes for the ball, the other covers.

One made an absolute shithole of a job going for the ball & the other made an absolute shithole of a job of covering.

If he wasn't there to have an effect on the outcome of a straight ball down the pitch, can you please explain to me exactly why the fuck he was there at all ?

What was his job ?

Time & fucking motion studies perhaps ?
Click to expand...
Love Laporte - my PoTY for City.

But that misheader and the resultant debacle was mostly on Laporte. Otters was running back and in semi-good position. I think Otters did his best under the circumstance.
 
CityInWashingtonState said:
Love Laporte - my PoTY for City.

But that misheader and the resultant debacle was mostly on Laporte. Otters was running back and in semi-good position. I think Otters did his best under the circumstance.
Click to expand...

He has to anticipate the possibility of the mistake imo & what might happen.

Which is what their striker did better.
 
Neville Kneville said:
He has to anticipate the possibility of the mistake imo & what might happen.

Which is what their striker did better.
Click to expand...
True - but the guy isn't a speed demon. I think he saw what he needed to do and did his best to get into position. If you want to fault him, OK - but it's for lack of speed rather than positional sense for me.
 
Rolee said:
Otter beaten to a 60/40 ball where he was the 40, nothing to see here.
Click to expand...

Yeah thinking of it now, it's understandable he would end up 40-60 from a hoof down the middle, against a player of Padraig Amond's quality. No way of getting in front of him.

We shouldn't be too hard on Laporte either.

Not only did he have to get off the ground, he also had to direct the ball using only his head.
 
Neville Kneville said:
Yeah thinking of it now, it's understandable he would end up 40-60 from a hoof down the middle, against a player of Padraig Amond's quality. No way of getting in front of him.

We shouldn't be too hard on Laporte either.

Not only did he have to get off the ground, he also had to direct the ball using only his head.
Click to expand...

Laporte misjudged the flight, fucked up and left Otter with a 40/60.

Actually sorry no, I'm being too lenient, he should've anticipated the fuck up.
 
CityInWashingtonState said:
True - but the guy isn't a speed demon. I think he saw what he needed to do and did his best to get into position. If you want to fault him, OK - but it's for lack of speed rather than positional sense for me.
Click to expand...

I agree re speed, but it's his reactions & judgement which are slower imo.

He has got away with quite a few since he came back.
 
Neville Kneville said:
Yeah thinking of it now, it's understandable he would end up 40-60 from a hoof down the middle, against a player of Padraig Amond's quality. No way of getting in front of him.

We shouldn't be too hard on Laporte either.

Not only did he have to get off the ground, he also had to direct the ball using only his head.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree wrt Laporte.

The guy had two choices available - attempt to win a headed ball and to head the ball into safety - or to drop back. Laporte chose the riskier option and failed - placing his teammate whom he new to be not especially fleet of foot into an untenable situation.
===
Keep in mind that Laporte is my PoTY for CIty - in spite of this gaff.
 
Rolee said:
Laporte misjudged the flight, fucked up and left Otter with a 40/60.

Actually sorry no, I'm being too lenient, he should've anticipated the fuck up.
Click to expand...

Your partner goes for the ball, one guy one day goes 'meh' that's ok, another guy another day goes "what if he fucks up, I'll cover the striker ?"

Which one is the top defender ?
 
CityInWashingtonState said:
I completely disagree wrt Laporte.

The guy had two choices available - attempt to win a headed ball and to head the ball into safety - or to drop back. Laporte chose the riskier option and failed - placing his teammate whom he new to be not especially fleet of foot into an untenable situation.
===
Keep in mind that Laporte is my PoTY for CIty - in spite of this gaff.
Click to expand...

The striker is the important part imo.

Cover him, then no problem if your mate fucks up. Might as well, if you are there.

Otamendi himself has done at least one bizarre thing per game since he came back & someone has covered most of them.
 
Neville Kneville said:
Your partner goes for the ball, one guy one day goes 'meh' that's ok, another guy another day goes "what if he fucks up, I'll cover the striker ?"

Which one is the top defender ?
Click to expand...
Your post is of relevance only if you believe that Otters had the physical ability to get into position but either didn't care to or misread the situation. This ground has been covered.

Secondly, if Laporte is my PoTY for City - if not the P/L - then is there any question about whom I think is the better defender?
 
Neville Kneville said:
Your partner goes for the ball, one guy one day goes 'meh' that's ok, another guy another day goes "what if he fucks up, I'll cover the striker ?"

Which one is the top defender ?
Click to expand...

Look at Otter's position when Laporte heads it, exactly where he should be to cover, problem was Laporte fucked up and headed it straight into Amond's path.

I'm questioning now whether you've actually seen the goal.
 
Rolee said:
Look at Otter's position when Laporte heads it, exactly where he should be to cover, problem was Laporte fucked up and headed it straight into Amond's path.

I'm questioning now whether you've actually seen the goal.
Click to expand...
Otters for me could have been a bit deeper - between man and goal - he seemed to be side-by-side with Amond. But yeah, Otters was basically in the best position that he physically was capable of getting to for me.
===
This is all subjective of course and many posters will have different views.

But my breakdown of responsibility for the goal is as follows:

70% Laporte - chose to head the ball when paired with a partner who is known not to be especially fleet of foot;

20% Ederson - off his line, in no-man's land, with two defenders in good position to defend;

10% Otters - not fit enough to get between man and ball, although he knew he needed to get there but wasn't physically capable of doing so.
 
Last edited:
Rolee said:
Look at Otter's position when Laporte heads it, exactly where he should be to cover, problem was Laporte fucked up and headed it straight into Amond's path.

I'm questioning now whether you've actually seen the goal.
Click to expand...

It's headed toward both of them.

I don't understand the concept of this argument at all.

When Steve Redmond did this exact kind of thing, when we were complete shit, he used to get slaughtered for it.

Now, we have possibly the best team on the planet & it's ok not to react & no longer classed as dozy defending.

That's the same exact goal we used to let in, in the same kind of games, when we were total shit. It's the City Cup Knockout Goal.

Then we'd lose, because we didn't have 3 or 4 at the other end.
 
CityInWashingtonState said:
Otters for me could have been a bit deeper - between man and goal - he seemed to be side-by-side with Amond. But yeah, Otters was basically in the best position that he physically was capable of getting to for me.
Click to expand...

n6501t.jpg
 
Rolee said:
n6501t.jpg
Click to expand...
Play this forward somewhat :-).

Also Otters is obviously a bit far to the left - the proper position is certainly to the right and a bit deeper.

Otters is almost in the correct position, but not quite. It's clear that he knew the danger and did his best.
 
Neville Kneville said:
It's headed toward both of them.

I don't understand the concept of this argument at all.

When Steve Redmond did this exact kind of thing, when we were complete shit, he used to get slaughtered for it.

Now, we have possibly the best team on the planet & it's ok not to react & no longer classed as dozy defending.

That's the same exact goal we used to let in, in the same kind of games, when we were total shit. It's the City Cup Knockout Goal.

Then we'd lose, because we didn't have 3 or 4 at the other end.
Click to expand...
>> ow, we have possibly the best team on the planet & it's ok not to react & no longer classed as dozy defending.
Dozy defending means that a defender is unaware of the danger and thus failed to reach the optimal defensive position.

Otters was not "dozy" at all - not by a long shot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top