![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7L4jJFIIAA9FDK.png)

| Forum Index > Sports |
|
Mensol
14536 Posts
![]() ![]() | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6267 Posts
On January 13 2015 23:55 Pandemona wrote: I erm think it is again another culture thing. I for one think defending is 3000x as hard as being an attacker, not even a question. I only played up until i was 18, all be it semi competitive and we won trophies. I used to play midfield and fill in as right back and centre back. Can 100% say that for me personally being a midfielder is alot easier than being a defender. Now i concede that maybe being the "best" midfielder vs the "best" defender there could be a greater gap, but being an average midfielder (Carrick/Busquets kind of players that do some things well) is easier than being a good centre back or defender. You have to read more than just the game when defending, you have to make sure you are in the correct spot and time your tackle to the maximum or you are going to fail and punish your team more than if you waste away a pass in the middle of the pitch, or over hit a 20 yard pass out of play. Also add in what Ysellian saying where now on top of being a great defender you now have to be able to spread the ball 40 yards to feet and be comfortable passing around the opposition, ha. Crazy! Busquets average? I remember him being very important for Barcelona's play. | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
On January 13 2015 23:03 Pandemona wrote: Think Ronaldo going to get told off by Irina on that picture haha. Really looks like he "jaw dropped" on her like in cartoons xD And what will u tell about this pic? :D ![]() | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On January 14 2015 02:12 RvB wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2015 23:55 Pandemona wrote: I erm think it is again another culture thing. I for one think defending is 3000x as hard as being an attacker, not even a question. I only played up until i was 18, all be it semi competitive and we won trophies. I used to play midfield and fill in as right back and centre back. Can 100% say that for me personally being a midfielder is alot easier than being a defender. Now i concede that maybe being the "best" midfielder vs the "best" defender there could be a greater gap, but being an average midfielder (Carrick/Busquets kind of players that do some things well) is easier than being a good centre back or defender. You have to read more than just the game when defending, you have to make sure you are in the correct spot and time your tackle to the maximum or you are going to fail and punish your team more than if you waste away a pass in the middle of the pitch, or over hit a 20 yard pass out of play. Also add in what Ysellian saying where now on top of being a great defender you now have to be able to spread the ball 40 yards to feet and be comfortable passing around the opposition, ha. Crazy! Busquets average? I remember him being very important for Barcelona's play. Neither is Carrick, on many days he is the best player on that team. The problem is the things your Busquets and Carricks do are subtle. To be a good defender ala Pandemona you must have the big booming headers and clearances and last ditch throw your body in the way tackles to affect the game. Or you need to bully people of the ball ala Matic. Creating and playing forward is way harder. If someone has had it hard playing defense then the attacking players were just better than you period. In a one v one defenders will always have the advantage all things equal. Just look at tier 3 leagues and the awful passing and ball control that is forced simply by a player pressing his attacker. If attacking well was so easy Sunday league games would be a pleasure to watch and no one would be paying so much money for top quality attackers. | ||
|
Steveling
Greece10806 Posts
On January 14 2015 02:18 cSc.Dav1oN wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2015 23:03 Pandemona wrote: Think Ronaldo going to get told off by Irina on that picture haha. Really looks like he "jaw dropped" on her like in cartoons xD And what will u tell about this pic? :D ![]() Woman player of the year clearly has the hots for the best male player. | ||
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
On January 14 2015 01:00 warding wrote: The need for you to be so specific, proves that it is no argument at all. Given you want to use market value to disprove my theory, you need to not only get more than 1 person, but also compare different positions. Take market prices of all defenders in some league, and all attackers and compare those. Just looking at the list of most expensive transfers (which you posted in this thread yourself), I'd say there is a pretty high chance market values would be higher for attackers. There can be all kinds of reasons why Luiz's specific price is higher than other defenders. Note that price is not the same as value. The difference between price and value is all the more reason to get more than one person into the equation.Show nested quote + On January 13 2015 21:15 Yorbon wrote: Attackers benefit from high risk high reward situations, defenders from low risk low reward situations. For example, a winger may be tempted to try to trick their opponents. If it works, it's a potential chance on goal. If it doesn't, you'll lose the ball and nothing really happens. If a defender (or rather someone in a defensive position) tries to get the ball from an opponent , he won't get any reward for it's riskiness, while a risky manoeuvre does increase the chance of giving a chance to the opponent. I think attackers benefit from being able to capitalise on moments of brilliance, while defenders are rewarded for constant performance. Imo that's also why attackers sometimes make horrible defensive decisions, their risky style of play isn't rewarded in defensive positions. On the other hand, defenders won't be able to break tight defences on their own, because their decent play isn't volatile enough to have enough of an effect. Returning to the ballon d'or, risky and volatile play will be remembered longer than good defensive work. When an attacker performs well, one says he absolutely dominated the field (for example). When a defender plays well, you'll often hear that the attacking player was invisible. Of course, good defending does get credit, but generally people will remember it less. And I think that is justified. As a consequence of this 'theory', the most extraordinary plays are generally made by attacking players, due to their style. Interestingly, the market value of David Luiz, one of the most risk taking defenders of all time, fits well with this theory. | ||
|
Steveling
Greece10806 Posts
I'm pretty sure he's just trolling guys. | ||
|
Dingodile
4139 Posts
On January 14 2015 02:51 Steveling wrote: Pande saying that defending is harder than attacking and that biscuit is average just shows how much he knows. I'm pretty sure he's just trolling guys. Maybe he was thinking about Messi, CR7, Ibra, Suarez etc. A nightmare for every defender. The mentioned attackers dont. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On January 14 2015 02:49 Yorbon wrote: Show nested quote + The need for you to be so specific, proves that it is no argument at all. Given you want to use market value to disprove my theory, you need to not only get more than 1 person, but also compare different positions. Take market prices of all defenders in some league, and all attackers and compare those. Just looking at the list of most expensive transfers (which you posted in this thread yourself), I'd say there is a pretty high chance market values would be higher for attackers. There can be all kinds of reasons why Luiz's specific price is higher than other defenders. Note that price is not the same as value. The difference between price and value is all the more reason to get more than one person into the equation.On January 14 2015 01:00 warding wrote: On January 13 2015 21:15 Yorbon wrote: Attackers benefit from high risk high reward situations, defenders from low risk low reward situations. For example, a winger may be tempted to try to trick their opponents. If it works, it's a potential chance on goal. If it doesn't, you'll lose the ball and nothing really happens. If a defender (or rather someone in a defensive position) tries to get the ball from an opponent , he won't get any reward for it's riskiness, while a risky manoeuvre does increase the chance of giving a chance to the opponent. I think attackers benefit from being able to capitalise on moments of brilliance, while defenders are rewarded for constant performance. Imo that's also why attackers sometimes make horrible defensive decisions, their risky style of play isn't rewarded in defensive positions. On the other hand, defenders won't be able to break tight defences on their own, because their decent play isn't volatile enough to have enough of an effect. Returning to the ballon d'or, risky and volatile play will be remembered longer than good defensive work. When an attacker performs well, one says he absolutely dominated the field (for example). When a defender plays well, you'll often hear that the attacking player was invisible. Of course, good defending does get credit, but generally people will remember it less. And I think that is justified. As a consequence of this 'theory', the most extraordinary plays are generally made by attacking players, due to their style. Interestingly, the market value of David Luiz, one of the most risk taking defenders of all time, fits well with this theory. I was agreeing with you. David Luiz is an outlier as a defender in that he takes a lot more risks than saner defenders. The fact he is valued so much may be due to that risky and volatile play that get him noticed much more than other 'duller' CBs. I guess the hair style helps too. | ||
|
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
On January 14 2015 02:18 cSc.Dav1oN wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2015 23:03 Pandemona wrote: Think Ronaldo going to get told off by Irina on that picture haha. Really looks like he "jaw dropped" on her like in cartoons xD And what will u tell about this pic? :D ![]() Plot twist : Messi and Ronaldo were a couple the whole time. They are just trolling us with their rivalry. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6267 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
on another note, has anyone been watching asian cup? korea is playing so bad, i highly doubt they can go far unless they change things up. i dont know what the problem is, is it lack of communication/understanding from coach due to language barrier? no key leader of a player to bind the squad? they got decent talent, a lot of experience but they play horribly. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28747 Posts
On January 13 2015 21:41 Twisted wrote: All analysis aside, it's just easy. Attackers are better players than defenders. They are more mechanically gifted. Also, attacking (or playmaking for that matter) is way harder than defending. Every kid when they grow up (exceptions aside) wants to score goals so everyone wants to play striker. To put it blunt: eventually the best players end up in a striking position and the worst players end up being defenders. I've mentioned this before, but this is not true everywhere. It's something I know is very true in the netherlands. I remember one of victor's friends being described as "not really good at football, but he's a good defender". In Norway though, it definitely wasn't the case when I grew up. The best players from the teams I played for during my upbringing would either be midfielders or central defenders (the offensive type though, the one that would essentially be a central defender when the opposing team had the ball, but that would run forward and be part of most attacks). Myself I was a defender when I was good, when I became less good they placed me up front. And it corresponds perfectly with the Norwegian footballing heroes of that time; Rune Bratseth was the only really good player we had during the early 90s, and when Rosenborg had success later, Erik Hoftun (defender), Bent Skammelsrud (def.midfield) and Ørjan Berg (off. midfield) were the top heroes, not Harald Brattbakk who scored all the goals. From what I've heard now, there's a trend (in Norway) that all the best players want to be midfielders, but there's no real striker dominance. I would guess that the degree to which youth of a country want to be strikers or midfielders or defenders largely corresponds with what positions the most cherished players from ye olde days from that particular country, probably even favored playstyle. Wouldn't be surprised if some of the best Greek footballers who were like, 6-10 during the EC victory ended up wanting to play defense. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On January 14 2015 03:18 warding wrote: Show nested quote + On January 14 2015 02:49 Yorbon wrote: On January 14 2015 01:00 warding wrote: The need for you to be so specific, proves that it is no argument at all. Given you want to use market value to disprove my theory, you need to not only get more than 1 person, but also compare different positions. Take market prices of all defenders in some league, and all attackers and compare those. Just looking at the list of most expensive transfers (which you posted in this thread yourself), I'd say there is a pretty high chance market values would be higher for attackers. There can be all kinds of reasons why Luiz's specific price is higher than other defenders. Note that price is not the same as value. The difference between price and value is all the more reason to get more than one person into the equation.On January 13 2015 21:15 Yorbon wrote: Attackers benefit from high risk high reward situations, defenders from low risk low reward situations. For example, a winger may be tempted to try to trick their opponents. If it works, it's a potential chance on goal. If it doesn't, you'll lose the ball and nothing really happens. If a defender (or rather someone in a defensive position) tries to get the ball from an opponent , he won't get any reward for it's riskiness, while a risky manoeuvre does increase the chance of giving a chance to the opponent. I think attackers benefit from being able to capitalise on moments of brilliance, while defenders are rewarded for constant performance. Imo that's also why attackers sometimes make horrible defensive decisions, their risky style of play isn't rewarded in defensive positions. On the other hand, defenders won't be able to break tight defences on their own, because their decent play isn't volatile enough to have enough of an effect. Returning to the ballon d'or, risky and volatile play will be remembered longer than good defensive work. When an attacker performs well, one says he absolutely dominated the field (for example). When a defender plays well, you'll often hear that the attacking player was invisible. Of course, good defending does get credit, but generally people will remember it less. And I think that is justified. As a consequence of this 'theory', the most extraordinary plays are generally made by attacking players, due to their style. Interestingly, the market value of David Luiz, one of the most risk taking defenders of all time, fits well with this theory. I was agreeing with you. David Luiz is an outlier as a defender in that he takes a lot more risks than saner defenders. The fact he is valued so much may be due to that risky and volatile play that get him noticed much more than other 'duller' CBs. I guess the hair style helps too. Yeah sorry dude, I think you just got caught in his own insecurity about the theory. But hes right in that David Luiz's sale is an outlier so he just spent a paragraph disproving himself really. And yes role models are arguably the greatest driving factors. But at the end of the day most mature footballing traditions have a plethora of attacking role models. Everyone loves JT to death for example. But very few would want to be the next JT. Then you have Italy, plenty of great italian defenders+ Show Spoiler + (and thugs sure, but still the best at their craft whatever it entailed) You could probably name plenty of attackers though.. | ||
|
TerransHill
Germany572 Posts
On January 13 2015 22:05 Twisted wrote: And to your other point, it's pretty clear that you're overhyping Neuer. Yeah he's a great goalkeeper but 8 months ago all the rave was about Thiboaut (sp) Courtois and those other World Cup goalkeepers. Messi/Ronaldo have been on top by quite a distance for 6 years or whatever. No-one comes close to what they achieve every year. Well Neuer was voted the best keeper of the world cup so I guess he is better than all those keepers. And he has already been great 4 years ago he just didnt play for a premiere league team or Barca/Real so he never got that much hype in the past. On January 14 2015 01:00 warding wrote: Interestingly, the market value of David Luiz, one of the most risk taking defenders of all time, fits well with this theory. That market value is just that high because PSG payed a retarded amount of money... | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
| ||
|
Greg_J
China4409 Posts
edit: It's going to go to extra time. edit 2: 10 man Everton have gone infront now. Mirallas litterally ran in circles around the West Ham defence and passed across the goal for Lukaku to put it in from close range. edit 3: Mirallas just ran through the entire West Ham defence again (seriously he's unstoppable tonight). 'Oh Kevin Mirallas' yell the Everton fans. edit 4: I missed that getting a drink but West Ham are level Carlton Cole the scorer they are saying. 2:2. Heading to penalties at the moment. edit 5: Carol misses a head for West Ham to win it at one end. Then a minute latter down the other end Lukaku misses a golden chance to win too. West Ham piling forwards again. But ten man Everton are so quick on the break. edit 6: Valencia down the wing passes square to Carlton Cole who collapses on the floor on top of the ball. He's trying to poke it towards the goal and Evertons keeper is on the floor scramberling to get the ball out of play. What drama It's going to penalties. edit 7: West Ham win on penalties. Everton's keeper Joel Robles hit the cross bar and Adrián gets out of the goal pushes everyone out the way and demands to take the next one. He scores to become the hero and win the game for West Ham. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
| ||
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
On January 14 2015 03:18 warding wrote: Lol, I thought you were being sarcastic, sorry for that.Show nested quote + On January 14 2015 02:49 Yorbon wrote: On January 14 2015 01:00 warding wrote: The need for you to be so specific, proves that it is no argument at all. Given you want to use market value to disprove my theory, you need to not only get more than 1 person, but also compare different positions. Take market prices of all defenders in some league, and all attackers and compare those. Just looking at the list of most expensive transfers (which you posted in this thread yourself), I'd say there is a pretty high chance market values would be higher for attackers. There can be all kinds of reasons why Luiz's specific price is higher than other defenders. Note that price is not the same as value. The difference between price and value is all the more reason to get more than one person into the equation.On January 13 2015 21:15 Yorbon wrote: Attackers benefit from high risk high reward situations, defenders from low risk low reward situations. For example, a winger may be tempted to try to trick their opponents. If it works, it's a potential chance on goal. If it doesn't, you'll lose the ball and nothing really happens. If a defender (or rather someone in a defensive position) tries to get the ball from an opponent , he won't get any reward for it's riskiness, while a risky manoeuvre does increase the chance of giving a chance to the opponent. I think attackers benefit from being able to capitalise on moments of brilliance, while defenders are rewarded for constant performance. Imo that's also why attackers sometimes make horrible defensive decisions, their risky style of play isn't rewarded in defensive positions. On the other hand, defenders won't be able to break tight defences on their own, because their decent play isn't volatile enough to have enough of an effect. Returning to the ballon d'or, risky and volatile play will be remembered longer than good defensive work. When an attacker performs well, one says he absolutely dominated the field (for example). When a defender plays well, you'll often hear that the attacking player was invisible. Of course, good defending does get credit, but generally people will remember it less. And I think that is justified. As a consequence of this 'theory', the most extraordinary plays are generally made by attacking players, due to their style. Interestingly, the market value of David Luiz, one of the most risk taking defenders of all time, fits well with this theory. I was agreeing with you. David Luiz is an outlier as a defender in that he takes a lot more risks than saner defenders. The fact he is valued so much may be due to that risky and volatile play that get him noticed much more than other 'duller' CBs. I guess the hair style helps too. @ Liquid'drone: I think teams in the Netherlands are pretty bad at defending overall, sadly enough. | ||
|
haitike
Spain2724 Posts
On January 14 2015 04:12 RvB wrote: Messi is wearing a disgusting suit by the way. It is less disgusting that the two previous one, lol. Messi (terrible) suits are a classic xD | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Sea Dota 2Britney Rain Shuttle JYJ Free Backho Dewaltoss Rock ToSsGirL [ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games tarik_tv2189 B2W.Neo1134 Liquid`RaSZi1066 Grubby836 Beastyqt487 mouzStarbuck171 ArmadaUGS116 QueenE112 Hui .102 Mew2King92 KnowMe58 JuggernautJason18 Organizations Counter-Strike Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • HeavenSC StarCraft: Brood War• poizon28 • AfreecaTV YouTube • intothetv • Kozan • IndyKCrew • LaughNgamezSOOP • Migwel • sooper7s Dota 2 League of Legends |
|
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] CranKy Ducklings
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|