2021/22 Anthony Gordon

Status
Not open for further replies.
He's twenty, most players don't hit their peak till 24. I will draw all of your attentions to what was said about DCL at twenty? It could be he only becomes an average player but so far he has shown progression showing he can work as part of a system and he is actually performing more than the thirty million pound lump from Arsenal so have patience
Exactly. Far too many morons with no patience.
Developing young players takes time. Many years.
 
He's twenty, most players don't hit their peak till 24. I will draw all of your attentions to what was said about DCL at twenty? It could be he only becomes an average player but so far he has shown progression showing he can work as part of a system and he is actually performing more than the thirty million pound lump from Arsenal so have patience

You want him in the team for the next 4 years? Clubs have to make decisions on young players all the time. Incredible that we have got in the position where him or Iwobi are starters.
 
1637930807439.png

Granted, this will come down the more 90 minutes he plays.

It's very much in contrast to Iwobi pulling out of 50-50s.
 
You want him in the team for the next 4 years? Clubs have to make decisions on young players all the time. Incredible that we have got in the position where him or Iwobi are starters.

No reason as things stand for us not to see how he progresses over the next two seasons.


View attachment 146825
Granted, this will come down the more 90 minutes he plays.

It's very much in contrast to Iwobi pulling out of 50-50s.

Tremendous stats.
 

Pressing, sprinting and pressuring over 90 minutes is far tougher on the body than doing it in one game for 60 minutes, then the next as a 60 minute substitute.

I wonder how players managed back when we were really winning in the 60's and 70's with no subs?
 
I wonder how players managed back when we were really winning in the 60's and 70's with no subs?
I'm not sure what winning games in the 60s and 70s has to do with Gordon maintaining a high press and tackle ratio.

However I'll make a couple of guesses;

1. The game was played a a slightly slower pace, therefore allowing players more time to recover. This negates as much need for subs.

2. Did attacking players who's game revolved around sprinting and getting into attacking positions do as much defending back in the day? Or did they conserve their energy more for those attacking situations?

I'm sure defending from the front is something that has come around more in the modern game.

Happy to be corrected if not. I've only been around since the mid 80s.
 

I'm not sure what winning games in the 60s and 70s has to do with Gordon maintaining a high press and tackle ratio.

However I'll make a couple of guesses;

1. The game was played a a slightly slower pace, therefore allowing players more time to recover. This negates as much need for subs.

2. Did attacking players who's game revolved around sprinting and getting into attacking positions do as much defending back in the day? Or did they conserve their energy more for those attacking situations?

I'm sure defending from the front is something that has come around more in the modern game.

Happy to be corrected if not. I've only been around since the mid 80s.
You're right the game was much slower in the 60s and 70s but, it was played on energy sapping mud patches with hardly a blade of grass. There was also the fact that defenders got away with kicking lumps out of anything above grass height.

The game was slower, but , even though the players covered less ground, it was, in it's own way, just as energy sapping as today's high press.
 
You're right the game was much slower in the 60s and 70s but, it was played on energy sapping mud patches with hardly a blade of grass. There was also the fact that defenders got away with kicking lumps out of anything above grass height.

The game was slower, but , even though the players covered less ground, it was, in it's own way, just as energy sapping as today's high press.

Add to that was sw blue at any of those games to witness first hand?
 
I wonder how players managed back when we were really winning in the 60's and 70's with no subs?

You're right the game was much slower in the 60s and 70s but, it was played on energy sapping mud patches with hardly a blade of grass. There was also the fact that defenders got away with kicking lumps out of anything above grass height.

The game was slower, but , even though the players covered less ground, it was, in it's own way, just as energy sapping as today's high press.
The obvious difference is that everyone was in the same boat. Being tired when everyone is tired is one thing, being tired when the opposition are able to change their entire team between games and make 5 subs to freshen up is another.
 
The obvious difference is that everyone was in the same boat. Being tired when everyone is tired is one thing, being tired when the opposition are able to change their entire team between games and make 5 subs to freshen up is another.
Correct, mind you, that applies to both teams, they can both bring on 3 fresh players as subs. It’s not just the opposition who are allowed subs.
 
Correct, mind you, that applies to both teams, they can both bring on 3 fresh players as subs. It’s not just the opposition who are allowed subs.
No but the point was the difference between playing 90 minutes now and doing it then, so if we say he gets subbed off it’s a pretty pointless comparison.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top