Clean sheets are great - they earn lots of points.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Since Chris took over!
- Thread starter downham seagull
- Start date
Clean sheets are great - they earn lots of points.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
You get one point to start with and if you're very lucky, someone on your team will score a goal to get three.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Your view on Calde being the weakest link when we came out of League One is so ludicrous that it's not worthwhile debating it.
You have also said that Calde playing on the right of midfield represents our drop off this season, when in fact, it was Hughton who placed him there, which has coincided with our improvement.
Calde is a right sided midfielder, who was asked to play at right back by Poyet until he could buy a dedicated right back in Bruno.
You get one point to start with and if you're very lucky, someone on your team will score a goal to get three.
More points per game (PPG) than scoring 2 goals and only fractionally less than scoring 3 goals.
http://footballmythbusters.mvrray.com/2015/03/04/a-clean-sheet-vs-1-goal/
sussex_guy2k2
Well-known member
- Jun 6, 2014
- 3,740
It's ludicrous because he was named in the League One teams of the season when we got promoted or because you genuinely believe that when we stepped up to the Championship he was still a stand out performer at the higher level at right back? Would you genuinely be happy with him as our first choice right back or right midfielder at the start of next season?
As for him playing on the right of midfield, that is simply by default because the squad is imbalanced and because of poor planning last summer. That has meant there are no other options to play out there really and he offers some element of protection to Bruno whilst also getting himself into the box. That does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that we shouldn't be looking to upgrade a player in his position. I might also add that playing him there is not the sole reason for our improvement as you seem to be (rather weakly) arguing. The reason for our improvement, as per my previous points, was that Houghton has built a solid defence based on solid defensive players and a solid core to our midfield. Calderon helps us defensively, and has chipped in with goals to his credit, but if we are serious about progressing back up the table (and when we were play-off contenders, Calderon was neither first choice at right back or right midfield) then we need to be buying more effective players than Calderon over the summer in that position. Furthermore, to highlight the drop off in quality in that position and the poor planning from last summer, we have gone from having Buckley and David Lopez in the right sided midfield position over the last few years to having Calderon in that position. Are you honestly telling me that you think Houghton is delighted to have Calderon rather than either of those players or someone of a similar quality to them? Are you honestly arguing that that doesn't represent a massive drop off in quality in the right midfield position compared to the players we had over the last 2-3 years?
The original point though is that Houghton isn't necessarily a defensive coach. He is a coach that is utilising what he has at Brighton by building his side/our core around our better players which are our defenders, the two central midfielders generally and Tex. Calderon is fitting in there at the moment because we simply don't have another player other than Ledesma at right midfield and because Bruno is a much better defender than Calderon meaning that Bruno has to have the more defensive role down that flank in order to try and ensure that we are as defensively sound as possible. Kudos to CH for finding a solution that means we are defensively sound and credit for Calderon for doing his best to make the role work on some level but I cannot believe for a second that CH is happy with his options in that position or that he wont be trying to upgrade said position for next season.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Our manager's name is Hughton, not Houghton.
sussex_guy2k2
Well-known member
- Jun 6, 2014
- 3,740
I apologise. I'd like to blame my iPad for auto-correct but that just highlights my laziness in not checking what I wrote.
The only man who could turn me gay?
There are some real doozies in these posts.
Calderon was our weakest link in a side that included
Sparrow
Dicker
Painter
Harley
Vincelot
Paynter
Agdestein
Bergkamp
?
Despite being replaced he played 39 times in that first Championship season, 33 times the following season, 30 times last season, and has made 35 appearances so far this season (32 starts). He has played in place of Bruno, alongside bruno, in front of Bruno, behind Bruno. Seems pretty integral to the team, despite supposedly being replaced by Bruno.
Then there's the rather cute assertion that people who aren't writing Calderon off are "using their heart rather than their head to analyse our side or they simply know nothing about football" followed up by the claim that our defensive record has nothing to do with Calderon, even though in some games under Hughton Calderon has played at the back with Bruno in midfield, missing all the times throughout the game where Bruno and Calderon work in partnership, where Calderon slips back into defence when Bruno is caught forward, or if Bruno has to move across to a more central position, or just when there is such danger that Bruno needs support. Anyone who knows anything about football wouldn't be so dismissive of Calderon's contribution to our defensive record.
Anyone who knows anything about football would know the importance of experience in a squad, of characters, of heart and someone in the team with Calderon's personality, even if he isn't starting regularly.
His headless chicken run caused premier league footballer Rosicky to sky the ball leading to one of our goals against arsenal, his headless chicken routine led to a block that kept it 0-0 v Wednesday, scoring a couple v Birmingham, followed up with a goal v leeds (yes, the ball went off his face, but being in the right place at the right time doesn't really sound like a headless chicken, to me) was involved in build up to goals v derby and wolves. Pretty productive and focused for a headless chicken.
There seems to be a split in our fan base, with some fans thinking Calderon is better than Bruno and it's ridiculous anyone thinks otherwise, and some fans think Bruno is better than Calderon and it's ridiculous anyone thinks otherwise. You're clearly part of the latter group, but the truth is, while they have different strengths and weaknesses, overall they are pretty similar.
You also seem to be talking in weird absolutes.
You are arguing here that anyone who thinks your suggestion Calderon was the weakest link is a ludicrous one thinks we should stick with him on the right wing rather than sign a specialised player or that Hughton would rather have him than Buckley. That's a non sense argument. It's not all or nothing. You can think Calderon contributed a significant deal to team over the last four years and that to consider him the weakest link in that team is utterly ridiculous, while also acknowledging that if we had a better quality player he would be starting ahead of Calderon (whose versatility would see him almost certainly on the bench most weeks, if he isn't getting selected ahead of Bruno).
Seeking to improve on a player you have doesn't mean he is a weak link. Any manager would replace any player in their squad if they could get someone better than them (taking into consideration budgets, of course). We would replace Bruno if we had a better player than him .Replace Stockdale. Replace Kayal. Replace Teixeira. Any of them, if he had someone better. Doesn't mean they are all detrimental to our team.
Calderon was our weakest link in a side that included
Sparrow
Dicker
Painter
Harley
Vincelot
Paynter
Agdestein
Bergkamp
?
Despite being replaced he played 39 times in that first Championship season, 33 times the following season, 30 times last season, and has made 35 appearances so far this season (32 starts). He has played in place of Bruno, alongside bruno, in front of Bruno, behind Bruno. Seems pretty integral to the team, despite supposedly being replaced by Bruno.
Then there's the rather cute assertion that people who aren't writing Calderon off are "using their heart rather than their head to analyse our side or they simply know nothing about football" followed up by the claim that our defensive record has nothing to do with Calderon, even though in some games under Hughton Calderon has played at the back with Bruno in midfield, missing all the times throughout the game where Bruno and Calderon work in partnership, where Calderon slips back into defence when Bruno is caught forward, or if Bruno has to move across to a more central position, or just when there is such danger that Bruno needs support. Anyone who knows anything about football wouldn't be so dismissive of Calderon's contribution to our defensive record.
Anyone who knows anything about football would know the importance of experience in a squad, of characters, of heart and someone in the team with Calderon's personality, even if he isn't starting regularly.
His headless chicken run caused premier league footballer Rosicky to sky the ball leading to one of our goals against arsenal, his headless chicken routine led to a block that kept it 0-0 v Wednesday, scoring a couple v Birmingham, followed up with a goal v leeds (yes, the ball went off his face, but being in the right place at the right time doesn't really sound like a headless chicken, to me) was involved in build up to goals v derby and wolves. Pretty productive and focused for a headless chicken.
There seems to be a split in our fan base, with some fans thinking Calderon is better than Bruno and it's ridiculous anyone thinks otherwise, and some fans think Bruno is better than Calderon and it's ridiculous anyone thinks otherwise. You're clearly part of the latter group, but the truth is, while they have different strengths and weaknesses, overall they are pretty similar.
You also seem to be talking in weird absolutes.
You are arguing here that anyone who thinks your suggestion Calderon was the weakest link is a ludicrous one thinks we should stick with him on the right wing rather than sign a specialised player or that Hughton would rather have him than Buckley. That's a non sense argument. It's not all or nothing. You can think Calderon contributed a significant deal to team over the last four years and that to consider him the weakest link in that team is utterly ridiculous, while also acknowledging that if we had a better quality player he would be starting ahead of Calderon (whose versatility would see him almost certainly on the bench most weeks, if he isn't getting selected ahead of Bruno).
Seeking to improve on a player you have doesn't mean he is a weak link. Any manager would replace any player in their squad if they could get someone better than them (taking into consideration budgets, of course). We would replace Bruno if we had a better player than him .Replace Stockdale. Replace Kayal. Replace Teixeira. Any of them, if he had someone better. Doesn't mean they are all detrimental to our team.
sussex_guy2k2
Well-known member
- Jun 6, 2014
- 3,740
I take on board all of your points but actually all you've really done is back up what I've said at most points and make up counter arguments to points that I never made. My original point was meant to support our manager by suggesting (as others seem incapable of doing) that actually he is the main reason for our improved form if not THE main reason (it still bugs me that I am yet to hear a CH song at the AMEX yet I'm subjected to 5 minutes of Tony Bloom songs every single game). He has utilised the players at his disposal as best as he can (and the squad is not at the level it has been over the last 2-3 years) . And the best players he has are defensively minded players really (Kayal and Tex aside) so it is unsurprising that we are a more defensively capable side since he came in.
Nonetheless, I appreciate that the comment re Calderon was a sensationalised one and I retract that in so far as saying he was the weakest link. Furthermore, I never at any point said that Calderon should not be in our squad for the leadership, experience and heart etc that he brings, merely that he was not a first choice once we had recruited better players than him in his preferred positions (and yes, I do believe that Bruno is a better defender than him); by 2012/2013 we had a squad where Calderon was not a first choice player. And the fact that he is now a first choice in those positions illustrates that our squad has gone backwards. You use the statistics of the amount of games he plays to back up your argument but all you are doing is further backing up mine. The reality is he has played at right midfield so much this season because we have no better alternative. And the previous two seasons he was clearly second choice to Bruno at right-back if you compare the amount of starts that both players made in the league (29 Bruno - 16 Calderon in 2012/13, 31 Bruno - 18 Calderon in 2013/2014). So whilst I take on board your point that he has played his share of games in those seasons, 16 and 18 starts in the league is a third of all league games; that is not integral, that illustrates a player that was a back up before his, to date, 26 starts this season.
I don't know where you've got this point about me dismissing his contribution to our defensive record as I've done no such thing (in fact, you've quoted paragraphs from me that clearly state I recognise his defensive contributions - let's not let facts get in the way of a good argument though). I merely stated that Hughton has built the team around our defensive players since arriving and, unsurprisingly, he has placed Bruno in the defence and pushed Calderon ahead of him into midfield. That is likely to be for one of two reasons (or for both reasons). 1) There is no alternative right midfield option and 2) he considers Bruno to be more secure defensively (I personally would agree with that). There is of course a third option in that he may genuinely believe that Calderon is much more effective than Bruno going forward but, if indeed Hughton is trying to build from the back, then logically you would put the players in the defence who you think are most suited to those roles. That leaves Calderon as the default right midfield option at the moment - before you jump on this point, I am recognised it could be for any of those reasons and that isn't a slight on Calderon, merely a statement that it is likely Hughton believe Bruno to be the better defensively hence his position at right back ahead of Calderon, although this may not be the case or the reason for their two positions being as they are.
To reiterate, look back at what I read. I have stated that I recognise the goals he has scored and his defensive contribution. So I have no idea quite why you've needed to list off the goals he has scored at right midfield or condescendingly tried to tell me how he fits in tactically; there is no need as I've already recognised the role he had to play.
As to my last paragraph, I appreciate that it doesn't read as well as it should but again I think you're missing the point of what was said originally and since. Hughton has a worse squad than Poyet did from 2012 and a worse squad than Oscar had last season. I genuinely believe that (I appreciate it is subjective rather than objective although our positions in the table illustrate my point). The point is that Hughton has taken a worse squad and built a pretty consistent eleven on his strongest players (the defence and specific midfield players) and, although I feel like I'm repeating myself here, it appears to me that Calderon (I appreciate it is a subjective viewpoint again) is a default for the position he is currently playing and I would argue that the fact he is currently playing in that position so regularly shows how our squad has regressed this season. I would be absolutely shocked if Hughton doesn't look to upgrade the right midfield position as a priority come the summer for that very reason.
Following on from this and, in regards to your argument on absolutes, you are right, we would always look to improve players in every position in theory (maybe I am completely wrong in how I look at the team and maybe Hughton has built our first choice 11 primarily around getting the best from Calderon as a runner in behind our forwards to feed off of Tex whilst also knowing he can play the dual role of protecting Bruno. Maybe he will look to upgrade at right back as a priority this summer and Calderon will be first choice next year at right midfield). However, if you genuinely think I'm talking in absolutes (and looking at this from an almost Football Manager "I want that player and that player" viewpoint), then I'm sorry but you've misinterpreted everything I've written as I clearly haven't said anything of the sort. Even though I'm repeating myself again (I feel I need to at this stage), what I have said is that CH has built the team on this run around our best players defensively (Bruno, Dunk, Greer, Halford, Bennett and Stockdale, and then he has given them a solid barrier in front with Kayal, Ince and Holla, which frees up Tex to work his magic). Assuming we could keep Tex next year or get a similar replacement and that Hughton wants to play 4411, that leaves us needing an upgrade up front and then an upgrade on Calderon as a first choice at right midfield as they appear to me (subjective again I know) to be the weakest positions in our first 11 currently. This doesn't mean we should sell Calderon. It just means that that appears to me to be one of the weakest positions in our first 11 at present (I recognise that Hughton may feel differently). If an alternative/upgrade is bought, and better forwards are acquired, then I would argue that I have seen enough from Brighton under Hughton to know that he will set us up to be more offensive for next season rather than the counter attacking team we are (more regularly) set up to be at the moment under him.
Anyway, I shall not be replying again to a post on this thread as I've clearly got different viewpoints to other people (it happens, this is football afterall). I see it every game in the North Stand where I have people behind me who constantly slate Tex, game after game, and think he's awful (I'm in the Tex camp as I'm in the Bruno camp and the COG camp, although generally I can appreciate that their alternatives can bring different elements to our game ie CMSs running in behind and pace). We all have different opinions and clearly mine have angered people in this regard. I appreciate that anger comes from my original statement about Calderon which was sensationalist and, as I said earlier, I retract that bit (watching him play still reminds me of watching Dirk Kuyt without the game intelligence or skill). But I stand by my points since that Hughton is the main reason for our progress (and that he has built our current run on our strongest players which are our defensive ones - of which Calderon is not one), that Calderon's continued positioning on the right of our midfield is evidence of the poorer standard of our squad this year compared to the last 2/3 years in particular and that he is also in that position in midfield by default rather than by design as we have no alternatives (other than Ledesma or to swap Calderon and Bruno). I also take on board that Calderon is a valued member of our squad for his experience, leadership etc (although I never in fact questioned this, nor did I doubt he would be on the bench most weeks for us in the Championship). Maybe some perspective and analysis of the actual arguments regarding Hughton and how to improve our squad/first eleven for next year can come from this now that I have accepted the the sensationalist nature of my first comment was wrong (I notice how no one is debating the point I made about CMS - I wonder whether that means that everyone on here agrees he isn't up to standard or whether it is just that no-one wants to have that arugment again).
Simon Morgan
New member
.....Back on topic, that's a very pleasing table to look at. The only time I've seen us under Hughton was the Brentford cup game a few days after he was appointed. He seems to have made the best of what was left for him and carefully added to the squad. There is always going to be a bit of inconsistency due to the sub-standard squad we have compared to recent years, but we've pulled the odd surprise here and there and put in some good attacking performances. Alongside this, we keep more clean sheets nowadays, although we do need to look at doing some pretty major recruitment in defence this summer. If we can reconcile the goals and the solidity, then obviously things are looking good for the future. Hughton has been prone to the odd blunder in the transfer market before (Van Wolfswinkel) but I think he is at home at this level and if the likes of Kayal are anything to go by, then things could be quite promising this summer.
On a slightly unrelated note, Hughton has also done really well in terms of how he comes across. He is enjoyable to listen to in interviews, cares about the club and just generally seems a very decent human being (I still remember how humble he was after being unceremoniously dumped by Newcastle). I always found it quite difficult to get behind Oscar and Sami due to their more languid personalities. It's debatable whether showing your emotional investment in the club you manage makes a blind bit of difference on the pitch, but as a fan it matters to me. Also, I imagine it makes him much easier to work with for Bloom etc, a problem that was previously cited when Oscar was here.
A final thing - quite surprised to Reading so far down. I would have probably just favoured Steve Clarke over Hughton as the post-Sami man given the choice. They've got some good players there, surely a bigger case of under-performing than us?
On a slightly unrelated note, Hughton has also done really well in terms of how he comes across. He is enjoyable to listen to in interviews, cares about the club and just generally seems a very decent human being (I still remember how humble he was after being unceremoniously dumped by Newcastle). I always found it quite difficult to get behind Oscar and Sami due to their more languid personalities. It's debatable whether showing your emotional investment in the club you manage makes a blind bit of difference on the pitch, but as a fan it matters to me. Also, I imagine it makes him much easier to work with for Bloom etc, a problem that was previously cited when Oscar was here.
A final thing - quite surprised to Reading so far down. I would have probably just favoured Steve Clarke over Hughton as the post-Sami man given the choice. They've got some good players there, surely a bigger case of under-performing than us?
That sensationalised comment is, I believe, what caused the reactions you received. Not wanting Calderon involved is implied - why on earth would you want to keep your weakest link?
In an era when squad rotation is a popular feature of a lot of teams, the idea of 11 first choices is a little out of place. That Calderon made 33 appearances over the course of the 2012/13 season would indicate that actually, he wasn't so untrusted (we also won and drew more games with him than without him that season), that actually he was willingly used as and when the manager wanted to.
Right here:
Which is followed up by you followed up by describing Calderon's role as "headless chicken".
There's also the options he believes having Calderon on the right side gives him a defensive minded right-sided player who also likes to get forward, and that they can form an effective partnership, suring up the defence more effectively than a good right back who likes to attack and can often be caught out of position, with an attacking right winger who doesn't like to chase back too much, without sacrificing the attacking intent from both.
When you put comments like this:
In the context of the rest of your argument, it comes across as a very dismissive lip service to Calderon's contribution, and not a genuine appreciation, especially when separating Calderon from defence (as quoted further up in this post) as if each block of the team is completely separate from the other.
I don't think anyone would disagree with that, and if you had posted that initially you wouldn't have been shouted down by so many people.
When you answer
"Your view on Calde being the weakest link when we came out of League One is so ludicrous that it's not worthwhile debating it."
with
"It's ludicrous because he was named in the League One teams of the season when we got promoted or because you genuinely believe that when we stepped up to the Championship he was still a stand out performer at the higher level at right back? Would you genuinely be happy with him as our first choice right back or right midfielder at the start of next season?"
You're talking in absolutes. It doesn't follow that thinking it ludicrous to consider him the weakest link in the team = thinking he is a stand out player or being delighted to have him as first choice on the right wing.
When you take arguing against the idea that Calderon is the weakest link and acknowledging his contribution to the team this season as a suggestion that brightonrock wants Calderon there next season, you are arguing in absolutes.
To deny him as the weakest link, and to appreciate the contribution he has made isn't any more than doing just that. It doesn't mean we necessarily think he is the best option, or that there is no need to strengthen. It isn't "weakest link or best option". Simply that he isn't the weakest link and that he has contributed.
We've all been on that lonely side of our own debates, but the truth is, when you remove the sensationalism in your view of Calderon, and don't extrapolate more from people's defence of him than it is, people will actually agree with the you - the squad is weaker, we need better options (maybe Carayol signing will see Calderon drop to the bench), Hughton has done a great job (as I've mentioned elsewhere, I don't think we should underestimate the contribution of Kayal and the fit again Stephens).