I saw this question on the BBC pages covering the Chelsea/United game and thought it raised a good discussion... "Not a lot of incident to discuss, but on a more general point are we seeing the future of what it is to be a central defenders here? Branislav Ivanovic is the only old-school stopper out there with David Luiz, Rio Ferdinand, Chris Smalling and Phil Jones all able to create with the ball at their feet. With John Terry on the bench and Nemanja Vidic creaking, is no-nonsense enough nowadays?" Michael Dawson falls into the no-nonsense group, JV, YK and SC into the other, but which is best?
I think that it's often better to have one of each, but defensive quality has to come first. The opposition is also a factor. If you're not going to be under much pressure during a game, then the centre-half's ability to start off moves becomes more important than it normally would be. I'd suggest that Ivanovic isn't exactly ****e with the ball either, by the way. He's quite happy to get forward at times, diving his arse off as he does so, unfortunately.
I think the main difference between today's modern centre backs and the old school ones, is speed. Speed of thought and movement. Ledley was a classic example of that. Which, along with his strength and ability to read the game, made him the most formidable CB of the recent era, IMO.
I suppose it depends on the nonsense. All this stems from Dutch Total Football in the 1970's when they basically reinvented football. It's fine if you have the players in midfield and defence who can cope with it but if you end up with midfielders defending and defenders attacking you have to ask is that the best way to win games. We have this of course, as do most teams now, with attacking wing backs. Walker for example, I think perhaps I would rather see him hone his defensive skills than double up on Lennons job. In many ways I prefered the Corluka/Lennon option. We are currently debating the option of Vertonghen in midfield but it does all get very complicated, with a large part of the team out of position and presumably not playing to their strengths. Dembele, for another example, can make these devastating forward runs but we seem to be losing those through him spending more time at the back. In some ways I think it's all too clever and we need to get back to basics, but I doubt that would work in the modern game.
Whether we like it or not the modern game requires a complete player, whats being tested imo is the old theory of a settled CB pair. It would seem we are not alone in chopping and changing our defenders to suit different matches and opponents, such is the difficulty in finding a player for all styles of modern play. Our own JV is not in this category for me yet because of his defensive heading, probably got away with it in the Dutch league, but the PL is intense for set pieces and high crosses, and we continue to concede, Swansea's Dyer can also appear on our 6yd line with a free header! and many others have too.
As PNP says, I think it's a case of getting 2 that compliment eachother and especially know eachother well. I still think there's quite a lot of diversity in top teams' approach to defending so it's hard to say what is most important across the board but in general you need more athleticism and technique on the ball than in the past and the aggresive spoiler seems to be preferred to be played in midfield which wasn't always the case.
The good old fashioned defender did start off moves the modern one is more likely to become an attacker himself but taking on board notso comments on Verts heading ability it would suggest that long term we may be looking at Kaboul & Caulker as the main centre back pairing, but Verts as a wing back is a bit of waste IMO.
I will have another look at that in incident but my first impression was that Dawson was more culpable as Dyer ran in to the middle of the box in front of him, whereas Verts would have had to been looking behind him.
Don't get too hung up on it mate, just an example of many, the point being we're vulnerable in the air.
No probs as I agree with the general premise anyway!! (Boring weekend with too much time on my hands..... Lol)
That's why I think we may well end up with Vertonghen at LB, and Caulker and Kaboul at CB. I get the feeling that AVB doesn't rate Benny that highly, anyway.
R69 - ...worst Easter I can remember, far too early, freezing, and most of my lot have got coughs n colds!
Vertonghen is your best centre half. Tall, comfortable on the ball, reads the game well. Might lack a bit of pace. In the PL, he's best served by having a scrapper like Dawson alongside him who is good in the air and fearless. Obviously, I'm going to say that Ferdinand and Vidic at their peak has been the best pairing in the PL era, because they have been the best individually at what they do and complement each other so well.
I've always thought Man U consistently produce stoppers/choppers on a conveyer belt and break the bank going for top goalscorers of their time. Fergie probably learnt this up in Scotland.Well,it darn well works in Manchester! I am amazed,though,every team has shot themselves in the foot while Alec's boys pop the odd goal in and the choppers keep 'em out! I've read that they were thinking of doing a programme on Fergie's success.Look no further dudes!
Still can't look further than Kaboul and Vertonghen as our dream pairing. Although I would hate to lose Dawson's aerial power and combative qualities. 3-5-2 anyone? (Actually with Parker or Sandro playing, 3-1-4-2) I suppose it leaves us narrow and open on the flanks, but with Kaboul's ability at RB and Vert's on the left, I wonder if it would be something worth trying.
what a bizarre list in the quote no Vertonghen, Agger or Cahill but ball watching prospects like Smalling get named and Jones plays rugby, not football. weird
Really??...lets try again with the opening sentence of the OP... "I saw this question on the BBC pages covering the Chelsea/United game and thought it raised a good discussion..." Apart from being ****, thats why Agger is not mentioned...not unless he transfered to one of those two with out you knowing!
Qualities needed to be called a top Centre back? - Ledley King without the injuries For me, there's two types of CB's - the "silky" and the "rugged". Attributes needed for silky: Good technical ability Great reading of the game Able to take the ball out of defence comfortably Clever with the tackle Able to cover ground quicker than a "rugged" CB Attributes needed for rugged: Fearless Powerful in the air Influential High concentration Threat from set pieces Good silky CB's: Vertonghen, Pique, Cahill, Ferdinand, Badstuber Good rugged CB's: Puyol, Vidic, Terry, Kompany, Kaboul, Chiellini
Don't play like Chris Samba did yesterday, before giving pundits plenty of ammunition by asking what a £100k per week performance is.
