This is part of the problem -we've lack consistency and Arbeloa is an example of someone who is very consistent. I agree that he won't excel but do we really expect that from a RB? Personally, I don't - I want them to be able to defend and hold their line first and foremost, and support the attack as and when they can. I agree that Johnson can be a 10/10 but he rarely is - again underlying my comment on consistency. Same with someone like Kuyt - never spectacular but very consistent.
I agree it is a matter of choice I'd go for Johnsons attacking over a more solid defender at this moment in time, if we start leaking goals then I may change my mind.
Kelly? I would take a fully fit Kelly over Johnson right now. But Johnson from circa '09 would win every time.
My problem there is that the lad is a center back and the more we play him running up and down that line the more chance of him getting a serious injury. I think this lad is class and will be a Liverpool player for many years we need to look after him and play him in the right position.
Gerrard played well at right back for a while in 2nd half during a little known cup final in Istanbul. I seem to recall he did pretty darn brilliant in the role. Regarding finny and Arbeloa. Finny at his peak was really good... by the time we signed Arbs though he seemed to be declining. Fin was a good traditional defensive fullback but he didn't have the ability to get forward as well as Arbs... or Johnson.
We all do mate. The key word there is team. IMO it's not (just) about filling individual positions and chopping and changing to improve weak areas. If we have poor players then fine, getting shut is the best bet. When you have a good player who's a bit out of form then bust a gut to find a way to get him back to his best. Let's be honest he hasn't been terrible or making horrendous gaffes every game. Improve the weak areas by coaching the decent players we have. I think we'd all agree that in order to build a great team we need a lot of good quality "team players" and Johnson is certainly one of them. Look at the right backs in all the teams above us last season and how many are better (consistently) than Johnson?
I agree we need to evolve and I'm certainly not looking for an argument over this. I wasn't singling you out, there are some on here and a lot of people I watch games with who do seem to go for one player in particular. I agree that when you get rid of a weak link, you then need to look at the next weakest in the quest to continually improve. However, the window is closed and we now need to see how the squad performs for the next few months before we can accurately assess areas of weakness. As said above, it is a team game and I think for the moment Johnson is more of an asset than a liability. He does get caught going forward sometimes, but that's the nature of his game. Occasionally I think he doesn't get back fast enough to fill the gap when his CB gets dragged out wide to cover him, but that's a tictac we have to work on. As someone pointed out earlier, he possibly misses Diggler in front of him who always put a shift in up and down the line. Whatever, there's nothing we can do about it for now, and I think he's still the best we have at the moment.
But we need Gerrard in the middle. Plus Gerrard is not the athlete he used to be. Henderson is good at RB.
You also have to remember that while we all long for the traditional RB that stayed in position and put in a hardworking but not glamorous shift, it doesn't really fit the tactics of modern football. An attacking player is a defender as well, only higher up the pitch. With Rodgers tactics, a defending right back would invite too much pressure when the opponents have the ball. With Johnson attacking, it stops the opponents from starting a quick counter often. Its then up to him to track back when they do break through. We could obviously improve on Glen but not too many better options are available to us! He's more than decent and I'd rather get him motivated and playing well than sell him. Kelly is not fit yet to take on his spot and any first team player brought in would kill his development. He really needs to improve his shot, as he wastes at least a couple chances from cutting in and shooting over the bar per match. He also needs to release the ball quicker and not hold onto it too long. He breaks away well and then stalls with it in the corner which allows them time to bring defenders back. Being less selfish could help this aspect of his game which isn't that bad. He's good at crossing too. Also, Kelly is a RB, plain and simple. People think because he is tall he is meant to be a CB but that's not the case. In fact I think it was Carra that came out and said Kelly's best position is the one he's been used in during all of his senior career. There are so many things he hasn't been properly trained in (CB tactics, marking centrally, etc). At RB he has had very extensive training and should be kept there. Eventually he will take over from Johnson. Or he won't get better and we bring in a senior replacement, then try again to develop that position.
Think many of you are missing my point. Walker was ****e last night. Had Johnson played like that they'd have been calling for his public execution in every news outlet in the country.
I got your point DD and he was woeful last night. He's a young kid though and he isn't the first to look out of his depth in an England shirt (Lampard has 100 caps and was awful to). Plus, bear in mind it was the media painting him as a drug addict the day before the game. Take a look through the thread and you can see it's not just the media who are prone to criticising certain players. We've all done it, sometimes with less justification than is probably fair. The best thing to do is...ignore the bellends who write football reports in newspapers they are full of ****.
Disagree with this point. Just because Kelly is played at RB doesn't mean that's his best position. You mention Carragher, well he played most of his early career at RB & LB because at a young age he wasn't quite suited to play at CB. However, over time and with more experience he gained a better understanding and flourished at CB in the senior side. Kelly is the same in my opinion. He's a CB however because that is probably the most crucial part of the team where any mistake could lead to a goal, you very rarely teams playing a 19/20 year old at CB at the top level. Therefore, those players get pushed out into the wider position where mistakes are less likely to mean a goal and it allows them to develop. I do think he's a decent RB don't get me wrong, however you can see when he's attacking that he clearly hasn't been brought up as a modern day RB because most players his age who have come through as full backs are comfortable going forward. Yes he can put in a half decent cross, but so could Carragher when played there. I don't think there is anything wrong with playing him at RB early in his career to help him develop however comes a point where have to say, if you're going to be a CB, we need to play him there and see how he does. The exact same argument can be used for Wisdom.
Good points and I agree with you on all of them except for that what you said applies to Kelly. He may be listed as a CB on the website but for years he's been played at RB, for England and for Liverpool. He was actually good going forward when he did play. He wasn't quite Johnson but then again Johnson is 29 and has been attacking for a very long time. Kelly wasn't bad at all. All in all he's scored 5 goals in 80 matches at all levels (including his international ones). In contrast Glen has scored 17 goals in 404 career matches. [These don't include club friendlies, but the ratio is much higher for Kelly] I know its not all about goals especially not for a defender, but that is something that I felt he was developing well. As well as his crossing (not close to Glen but again, 29 vs 23) being decent and him running well with the ball - these are vital attributes that he has developed. Moving him to CB means he won't ever progress past "decent" at those. Not to mention we now have Ilori, Sakho, Toure, Agger and Skrtel not to mention Coates trying to get on the pitch and the bench. He's been at RB since he broke through and he's been there for such a crucial time in his development that to move him NOW would be wasting too much of his potential. His problem is his injury proneness, which is actually awful. He's basically our Diaby. He missed a further 2 years of development to a back injury at youth level. That's crazy considering his natural talent made up for that to the point where we don't even notice it. He's been out with so many injuries that he's reminding me of Kewell, Mellor, and of course Aurelio. So perhaps CB would protect him a bit more but at what cost? Too many years of development would be lost at this stage. He should stick to what he knows well.
I'm sure he used to play CB for the reserve and youth teams? It's his natural position in my opinion. As others have mentioned, he's been playing RB for a while because he's not good enough to dispossess the current CB's (Carra played at RB and LB because we had Hyppia and Henchoz). Personally, I believe he is suffering injuries because he is playing as RB far too often. It's as if his body is not used to sprinting up and down the wing all game.
