Sandro - Beast

[thfcsteff]

Cheers Diego, Milo and KD.



Chelsea is a pretty ridiculously high standard though. Few teams can do what a Mourinho organized Chelsea team can do defensively. And that too comes at a cost I think. Similarly to how you wouldn't expect Real or Pool to defend as well as that you wouldn't expect Chelsea to crush a medium to big team the way Real and Liverpool can.

I'm not sure I agree that most of those teams I mention have "massive defensive frailties". We normally watch those games when those teams are up against other big clubs and in those games most teams that won't park the bus will look vulnerable at times.

They're probably more frail than if they had a "dedicated" or "pure" defensive midfielder, by a bit. But that is probably also offset by them having more ability on the ball, that again means that they can retain possession better, attack more etc. I agree that it's a good option to have in a squad, but like I said I'm not sure it's always a necessary option or perhaps even a necessary option in a squad.

Another point is also that for a player like Sandro to step up and become really top class he has to learn how to play consistently well when on the ball.

What do you mean?
Define some examples mate. Otherwise that looks like one of those fantastic 'footbalisms' which read well but don't actually pan out to much.

I'll start it off (;-))…he IS a top class player, of that there can be little doubt. You don't get a place in Brasil's starting 11 as a mug (pre-injury he was a firm favorite for Big Phil). I'm not sure what you want him to do on the ball to be honest that he doesn't do already. He retains possession, he distributes well, he's an intelligent 'space invader' and he moves into smart spaces.

It's finny how this discussion is moving. It's becoming an extreme. In the way that people are roaring about how amazing Eriksen is (he's good, he has great potential and we should really hope the next coach nurtures and develops him into what he could be), Sandro is suddenly being viewed as a 'limited DM' by some. I think it's laughable personally, but the underlying consistency here is we have a 'manager' (currently) who simply has not coached these players well enough.

Finally, in response to a comment you made about Sherwood and not dismissing his opinion as BS, it would help if I believed he wasn't self-protecting/promoting at every drop of a media mic. He has never admitted to making mistakes. He ridicules the players in public and rinses some of them out.His 'conduct' has been reprehensible in such a regard and in others with regards to media and leaks. His stubborness tactically seems borne of something other than 'naivity' and frankly, if you cannot trust a man's motivations then you tend to dismiss what he says as ********. I think he's talking ******** most of the time. I don't believe him. I doubt half the squad do either. He's a dead man stumbling and I can only hope he doesn't **** off players to the point where they won't stick around for the change. By the way, his treatment of Sandro in this regard is, IMO, yet another shining example of his poor, poor management.

 

[glorygloryeze]

What do you mean?
Define some examples mate. Otherwise that looks like one of those fantastic 'footbalisms' which read well but don't actually pan out to much.

I'll start it off (;-))…he IS a top class player, of that there can be little doubt. You don't get a place in Brasil's starting 11 as a mug (pre-injury he was a firm favorite for Big Phil). I'm not sure what you want him to do on the ball to be honest that he doesn't do already. He retains possession, he distributes well, he's an intelligent 'space invader' and he moves into smart spaces.

It's finny how this discussion is moving. It's becoming an extreme. In the way that people are roaring about how amazing Eriksen is (he's good, he has great potential and we should really hope the next coach nurtures and develops him into what he could be), Sandro is suddenly being viewed as a 'limited DM' by some. I think it's laughable personally, but the underlying consistency here is we have a 'manager' (currently) who simply has not coached these players well enough.

Finally, in response to a comment you made about Sherwood and not dismissing his opinion as BS, it would help if I believed he wasn't self-protecting/promoting at every drop of a media mic. He has never admitted to making mistakes. He ridicules the players in public and rinses some of them out.His 'conduct' has been reprehensible in such a regard and in others with regards to media and leaks. His stubborness tactically seems borne of something other than 'naivity' and frankly, if you cannot trust a man's motivations then you tend to dismiss what he says as ********. I think he's talking ******** most of the time. I don't believe him. I doubt half the squad do either. He's a dead man stumbling and I can only hope he doesn't **** off players to the point where they won't stick around for the change. By the way, his treatment of Sandro in this regard is, IMO, yet another shining example of his poor, poor management.

Good post

 

[glorygloryeze]

I agree with your point in principle, and we don't know what's going on there. But the bold bit? You mean the man who wanted to loan him out? Not really mate.

This is interesting; when did Harry try/want to loan Sandro out? I don't recall that myself but sometimes my memory from Sandro's early times here is what is failing me..

 

[braineclipse]

Let's get back to why we're discussing this:
TS and LF feel that the type of defensive cm that does nothing apart from tackle (i.e. can't pass, shoot etc) should have no place in today's game; They use Makalele as an example to show their point. Makelele: one of the best intercenptors, passers, starters of forward moves that eith Chelski or Real have had in the last 10 years or so. They seem to compare him to some clogger in the mid-90s like perhaps John Jensen at Arsenal.
BS point 1.

They then set up our team where they actively do not play a tackler in the midfield who can a)retreive the ball back for our players to start atttacking moves/keep possession away from the opposition b) set up our 2 CMs against other well-drilled teams who play with 3, e.g. Arsenal, Benfica. We are getting away with it at present due to playing relegation fodder. Shall I mention the Liverpool game, when Sandro and Dembele were kept on the bench?

Mistakes that highlights BS point 1 above and that TS/LF really didn't actually watch Makalele in his prime at all, or understand what he brought to both Chelsea and Real's attacking AND defensive play.

Back to BS point 1: we are speculating that Sandro being dropped is perhaps because TS has identified that Sandro has major weaknesses to his game much like Makalele had the same 'weaknesses'. If we or anyone thinks that Sandro can be compared to old cloggers like John Jensen, then we've fallen for BS point 1 imo

You're wrong about them comparing Makelele to some clogger. I'm almost certain they didn't do that.

You're also wrong about Makelele being one of the best passers or starters of forward moves that either Chelsea or Real have had in the last 10 years or so. Real have two players deep in their midfield today alone that's better than him at that.

Like I said, I agree that Sherwood - like all managers - has made some big mistakes.

 

[braineclipse]

It's a fine post, but for me, it minimizes Sandro as a player in terms of what he is and what he can be. He is a far better passer than people think, he is someone who can quickly shift a 5 yard ball once won, he can cover a fair amount of ground and he is a leader. Further, every side you've mentioned have decent defenders (yes, even Liverpool's CBs have out-performed ours IMO). Our defence has been shambolic, and our style of play for a long time now has involved a 'DM' (whether it be a Palacios a Parker a Sandro). In a few short months, mid-season nonetheless, he decides to throw it out of the window with no transition? No wonder the players look generally lost half the time.

Instead of comparing Sandro to the nebulous popular opinion, how about comparing him to other players playing his role. Who on the world stage would you compare him with in terms of passing?

I didn't at any point defend Sherwood for dropping Sandro. I'm talking about the general truth in what Ferdinand said in an interview.

What do you mean?
Define some examples mate. Otherwise that looks like one of those fantastic 'footbalisms' which read well but don't actually pan out to much.

I'll start it off (;-))…he IS a top class player, of that there can be little doubt. You don't get a place in Brasil's starting 11 as a mug (pre-injury he was a firm favorite for Big Phil). I'm not sure what you want him to do on the ball to be honest that he doesn't do already. He retains possession, he distributes well, he's an intelligent 'space invader' and he moves into smart spaces.

It's finny how this discussion is moving. It's becoming an extreme. In the way that people are roaring about how amazing Eriksen is (he's good, he has great potential and we should really hope the next coach nurtures and develops him into what he could be), Sandro is suddenly being viewed as a 'limited DM' by some. I think it's laughable personally, but the underlying consistency here is we have a 'manager' (currently) who simply has not coached these players well enough.

Finally, in response to a comment you made about Sherwood and not dismissing his opinion as BS, it would help if I believed he wasn't self-protecting/promoting at every drop of a media mic. He has never admitted to making mistakes. He ridicules the players in public and rinses some of them out.His 'conduct' has been reprehensible in such a regard and in others with regards to media and leaks. His stubborness tactically seems borne of something other than 'naivity' and frankly, if you cannot trust a man's motivations then you tend to dismiss what he says as ********. I think he's talking ******** most of the time. I don't believe him. I doubt half the squad do either. He's a dead man stumbling and I can only hope he doesn't **** off players to the point where they won't stick around for the change. By the way, his treatment of Sandro in this regard is, IMO, yet another shining example of his poor, poor management.

He's a top class defensive player, no doubt. Overall I'm not as sure. In the right setup I think he is top class, but he is limited.

He has a lot of the qualities you mention. He is more creative than he gets credit for imo, his movement going forward is also quite good. We've seen that he can strike a ball too. But he's not a consistent short and mid range passer. He's not someone that moves the ball around effectively and quickly with one and two touch passing. And he's not good enough at moving into space to make himself available during buildup play in deeper positions.

A lot of those can be worked on, I have no doubt he has the hunger to improve. He could become immense (again?) under the right manager in the right system. But right now, as good as he is and has been, he's not a world class/top class player for me. I would trade him for Modric in a heartbeat. I'd give Real £25m on top of that. Different players, different player styles. But still.

**** Sherwood then, I'm sick and tired of even talking about the man. Every single conversations devolves. Look at Ferdinand's comments at a time when he wasn't being self serving and discuss those points. I don't think it can be dismissed as BS. And without blowing my own horn I think I supported a similar opinion fairly well with my initial post on the topic. And other than "Real are sometimes also vulnerable defensively" there hasn't really been much in terms of counter arguments.

 

[Raziel]

Instead of comparing Sandro to the nebulous popular opinion, how about comparing him to other players playing his role. Who on the world stage would you compare him with in terms of passing?

I didn't at any point defend Sherwood for dropping Sandro. I'm talking about the general truth in what Ferdinand said in an interview.



He's a top class defensive player, no doubt. Overall I'm not as sure. In the right setup I think he is top class, but he is limited.

He has a lot of the qualities you mention. He is more creative than he gets credit for imo, his movement going forward is also quite good. We've seen that he can strike a ball too. But he's not a consistent short and mid range passer. He's not someone that moves the ball around effectively and quickly with one and two touch passing. And he's not good enough at moving into space to make himself available during buildup play in deeper positions.

A lot of those can be worked on, I have no doubt he has the hunger to improve. He could become immense (again?) under the right manager in the right system. But right now, as good as he is and has been, he's not a world class/top class player for me. I would trade him for Modric in a heartbeat. I'd give Real £25m on top of that. Different players, different player styles. But still.

**** Sherwood then, I'm sick and tired of even talking about the man. Every single conversations devolves. Look at Ferdinand's comments at a time when he wasn't being self serving and discuss those points. I don't think it can be dismissed as BS. And without blowing my own horn I think I supported a similar opinion fairly well with my initial post on the topic. And other than "Real are sometimes also vulnerable defensively" there hasn't really been much in terms of counter arguments.

Maybe wrong thread, but lets see what we do agree on

- Most modern football tactics/systems are based on controlling the midfield (yes?), this is where most would say games are won/lost.
- Accepted by most top tier coaches to achieve this is playing a DM (quality can vary from Palacios -> Makelele), but generally accepted/successful practice
- In absence of a DM, a few top sides with some of the best players in the world play a extremely intelligent, technically excellent type of CM (usually 2)
- Even with that top tier player, those side quite often still seem less defensively solid
- Add to that, while it may change this season, Madrid has won what? two Copa Del Ray's in last 4 years? with that array of talent and Jose & Ancelotti as coaches.

I think you are mixing up the ability to play no DM when you have a WC player in midfield that can control possession, with you being able to just not have a DM as an option in the modern game and be consistently defensively solid, and successful.

If we had the option to play Modric instead of Sandro, sure I'd consider it, but when it's our back four, and the option is Sandro or Dembele/Siggy/Paulinho/etc. I'd go with Sandro.

 

[Jordinho]

This is interesting; when did Harry try/want to loan Sandro out? I don't recall that myself but sometimes my memory from Sandro's early times here is what is failing me..

I did hear some ITK on this I think. Harry wanted him out on loan, but Levy simply rebuffed all offers. Eventually Harry had to play him due to injuries. Or am I confusing him with Bale?

 

[thfcsteff]

This is interesting; when did Harry try/want to loan Sandro out? I don't recall that myself but sometimes my memory from Sandro's early times here is what is failing me..

I posted it at the time…he wasn't registered for the group stages of CL. Xmas rolled around. Harry wanted him loaned. Levy disagreed but didn't want to go against Harry so obviously, thus set a 'high' loan fee. Injuries came in Jan (and Sandro had been registered for second phase), Harry told Levy not to bother as he might need him after all, Levy thus had achieved what he wanted to as the fee had been considered too high by suitors…Sandro wasn't even scouted by Harry, he was 'recommended'…by posting this I will inevitably open up some old grumbles, but I was asked! ;-)

 

[thfcsteff]

I did hear some ITK on this I think. Harry wanted him out on loan, but Levy simply rebuffed all offers. Eventually Harry had to play him due to injuries. Or am I confusing him with Bale?

Happened with Bale too. Virtually the same story actually…bar CL stuff obviously...

 

[braineclipse]

Maybe wrong thread, but lets see what we do agree on

- Most modern football tactics/systems are based on controlling the midfield (yes?), this is where most would say games are won/lost.
- Accepted by most top tier coaches to achieve this is playing a DM (quality can vary from Palacios -> Makelele), but generally accepted/successful practice
- In absence of a DM, a few top sides with some of the best players in the world play a extremely intelligent, technically excellent type of CM (usually 2)
- Even with that top tier player, those side quite often still seem less defensively solid
- Add to that, while it may change this season, Madrid has won what? two Copa Del Ray's in last 4 years? with that array of talent and Jose & Ancelotti as coaches.

I think you are mixing up the ability to play no DM when you have a WC player in midfield that can control possession, with you being able to just not have a DM as an option in the modern game and be consistently defensively solid, and successful.

If we had the option to play Modric instead of Sandro, sure I'd consider it, but when it's our back four, and the option is Sandro or Dembele/Siggy/Paulinho/etc. I'd go with Sandro.

There's some truth to most of what you say at least. I don't think all managers would agree that controlling the midfield is where most games are won and lost. I suspect that some managers like Mourinho would say that it's won and lost in and around the box.

To get any further on what we agree on we must first agree on a definition for what a defensive midfielder is.

The Real Madrid example doesn't swing your way. Did they look less solid than Bayern today? Last 4 years is largely irrelevant as for most of that they've played with a defensive midfielder in for example Khedira.

Did I say at any point that teams can be able to be consistently defensively solid and successful by "just not having a DM"? I don't think that's what I've been saying and I don't think that's what Ferdinand said either.

What I'm saying, and showing with several examples I think, is that it's not necessary to have a DM all the time to be successful - or even very successful. And that the idea of a defensive midfielder as a very limited player on the ball, passenger when attacking type player is falling out of fashion and that "because Makelele" has been used as reasoning why such players are needed. Despite him not being limited.

 

[braineclipse]

I posted it at the time…he wasn't registered for the group stages of CL. Xmas rolled around. Harry wanted him loaned. Levy disagreed but didn't want to go against Harry so obviously, thus set a 'high' loan fee. Injuries came in Jan (and Sandro had been registered for second phase), Harry told Levy not to bother as he might need him after all, Levy thus had achieved what he wanted to as the fee had been considered too high by suitors…Sandro wasn't even scouted by Harry, he was 'recommended'…by posting this I will inevitably open up some old grumbles, but I was asked! ;-)

Could be.

Redknapp certainly was very reluctant to use Sandro early on. He first played him in an early round Carling Cup game against Arsenal where we played a b-side studded with youth players (and Robbie Keane) iirc, Sandro was one of our best players. Then he didn't play him until injuries.

Then again he had just had a very long season including the Libertadores, he arrived late in the transfer window, we had a well working side and weren't in desperate need for a Sandro type player. Introducing him slowly made a lot of sense, possibly even sending him out on loan made sense even though considering fixture congestion I can't say it was a solid plan if it was ever a plan.

 

[milo]

While that is true.... I think a manager should only select a player if the player is showing the right desire and attitude in training. Now I am not suggesting I have any idea whether Sandro is or isn't doing so currently, but if he isn't then Sherwood has every right not to pick him and give him a message that he needs to do this to force his way into the team. IMO a manager cannot pick players on past performances or reputation alone. Remember also that Sandro was a big favourite of Sherwood's 'mentor' Harry Redknapp.

Wasn't there also a similar situation with Paulinho recently? A player who seems to have since fought his way back into the team and shown better performances?

I agree.

We fans complain when we think that a player is getting picked on reputation but then complain when a fan favourite is dropped because the manager* feels that their performances and effort have dropped below the required standard. We can't have it both ways.







*I understand that there are a number of people who do not trust Sherwood or his judgement.

 

[glorygloryeze]

You're wrong about them comparing Makelele to some clogger. I'm almost certain they didn't do that.

You're also wrong about Makelele being one of the best passers or starters of forward moves that either Chelsea or Real have had in the last 10 years or so. Real have two players deep in their midfield today alone that's better than him at that.

Les Ferdinand said that the "worst thing that happened in this league was Claude Makalele".
“When he came into this country he wasn’t a holding midfield player. He was a player who had the intelligence to say ‘Frank [Lampard], you can score more goals than me so if you go I’m going to tuck in here for you, and I’ll hold. You keep going forward’.
“Then everyone went ‘right, we’ve got to have a holding midfield player’ - and what we’ve done is produce a crop of players who don’t want to go over the halfway line, who don’t want to pass over the halfway line and are happy to just sit in front of the back four.

See here: http://www.tottenhamjournal.co.uk/t...are_overrated_just_look_at_man_city_1_3254990

It's as if before that there were no David Battys, Paul Inces, Kevin Richardsons, Nicky Butts, Gica Popescus, Jim Magiltons etc didn't exist in the league before Makalele. There are only a few top teams over the years who were able to field players in CM of the likes of Keane, Vieira, Fernandinho/Toure etc.
There are more than one way to protect your bak 4, and Jose's way (perhaps one of the more conservative methods) was just one. Perhaps Ferdinand should have said the "worst thing that happened in this league was Jose Mourinho and his-over-defensive approach"

As I say Makalele and his role was not new to the league, which was already loaded with similar types of players. Ferdinand's premise is wrong imo based on this and the fact that in the big games you have to yes keep possesion and attack but also have a system to protect your definsive lines and retrieve the ball. Makalele like Ince, Batty et al beforehand was expert at this and i think you underestimate his ability to intervene and pass quickly to others in starting attacks. I especially remember in Jose's first season in the PL a game where Wenger had his strikers take turns to sit on Makalele to try to cut off their initial attacking play at source.

I also think it could be argued that Makalele and the formation he played in allowed teams to be MORE attacking with the security afforded. Real Madrid certainly suffered for a few years after he left as they had a very soft underbelly afterwards; theire forward-thinking players certainly suffered that's for sure.
I would say that only in recent times with the acquisitions of Alonso and then Modric have they started to finally plug their Makalele-sized hole.

 

[milo]

Let's get back to why we're discussing this:
TS and LF feel that the type of defensive cm that does nothing apart from tackle (i.e. can't pass, shoot etc) should have no place in today's game; They use Makalele as an example to show their point. Makelele: one of the best intercenptors, passers, starters of forward moves that eith Chelski or Real have had in the last 10 years or so. They seem to compare him to some clogger in the mid-90s like perhaps John Jensen at Arsenal.
BS point 1.

Ferdinand didn't say that actually, here are the full quotes

I don’t like holding midfield players. I like players to understand that, if one goes forward, the other one tucks in for them. I don’t want someone who just sits in front of the back four and doesn’t go anywhere but that’s just my own personal view.

I was saying to William Gallas when he was here: The worst thing that happened in this league was Claude Makelele. When he came into this country he wasn’t a holding midfield player. He was a player who had the intelligence to say: ‘Frank, you can score more goals than me so, if you go, I’m going to tuck in here for you and I’ll hold. You keep going forward.’

Then everyone went ‘right, we’ve got to have a holding midfield player’ and what we’ve done is produce a crop of players who don’t want to go over the halfway line, who don’t want to pass over the halfway line and are happy to just sit in front of the back four.'

Do Emirates Marketing Project play with one? They’ve still scored 100-odd goals. People say Yaya Toure is a holding midfielder. No he isn’t, he’s getting forward and getting goals - but, if someone else goes, he’ll stay in there. Fernandinho’s scoring goals. Why? Because he’s a holding player? No. They’ve just got an understanding: ‘If he goes, I’ll hold, and, if I go, he’ll hold’.

I don't think anything there that suggests Ferdinand thought Makelele was a clogger or that he doesn't rate players like Sandro. He doesn't criticise Makelele at all, in fact he credits him with being an excellent footballer. What he is criticising is the orthodoxy that followed Makelele when every team was looking for a "Makelele type player" most of whom were nothing like him.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Milo - see my post above

 

[milo]

Les Ferdinand said that the "worst thing that happened in this league was Claude Makalele".
“When he came into this country he wasn’t a holding midfield player. He was a player who had the intelligence to say ‘Frank [Lampard], you can score more goals than me so if you go I’m going to tuck in here for you, and I’ll hold. You keep going forward’.
“Then everyone went ‘right, we’ve got to have a holding midfield player’ - and what we’ve done is produce a crop of players who don’t want to go over the halfway line, who don’t want to pass over the halfway line and are happy to just sit in front of the back four.

See here: http://www.tottenhamjournal.co.uk/t...are_overrated_just_look_at_man_city_1_3254990

It's as if before that there were no David Battys, Paul Inces, Kevin Richardsons, Nicky Butts, Gica Popescus, Jim Magiltons etc didn't exist in the league before Makalele. There are only a few top teams over the years who were able to field players in CM of the likes of Keane, Vieira, Fernandinho/Toure etc.
There are more than one way to protect your bak 4, and Jose's way (perhaps one of the more conservative methods) was just one. Perhaps Ferdinand should have said the "worst thing that happened in this league was Jose Mourinho and his-over-defensive approach"

As I say Makalele and his role was not new to the league, which was already loaded with similar types of players. Ferdinand's premise is wrong imo based on this and the fact that in the big games you have to yes keep possesion and attack but also have a system to protect your definsive lines and retrieve the ball. Makalele like Ince, Batty et al beforehand was expert at this and i think you underestimate his ability to intervene and pass quickly to others in starting attacks. I especially remember in Jose's first season in the PL a game where Wenger had his strikers take turns to sit on Makalele to try to cut off their initial attacking play at source.

I also think it could be argued that Makalele and the formation he played in allowed teams to be MORE attacking with the security afforded. Real Madrid certainly suffered for a few years after he left as they had a very soft underbelly afterwards; theire forward-thinking players certainly suffered that's for sure.
I would say that only in recent times with the acquisitions of Alonso and then Modric have they started to finally plug their Makalele-sized hole.

Batty, Ince, Butt etc were nothing like Makelele and I think that you are missing the point a little.

 

[braineclipse]

Les Ferdinand said that the "worst thing that happened in this league was Claude Makalele".
“When he came into this country he wasn’t a holding midfield player. He was a player who had the intelligence to say ‘Frank [Lampard], you can score more goals than me so if you go I’m going to tuck in here for you, and I’ll hold. You keep going forward’.
“Then everyone went ‘right, we’ve got to have a holding midfield player’ - and what we’ve done is produce a crop of players who don’t want to go over the halfway line, who don’t want to pass over the halfway line and are happy to just sit in front of the back four.

See here: http://www.tottenhamjournal.co.uk/t...are_overrated_just_look_at_man_city_1_3254990

It's as if before that there were no David Battys, Paul Inces, Kevin Richardsons, Nicky Butts, Gica Popescus, Jim Magiltons etc didn't exist in the league before Makalele. There are only a few top teams over the years who were able to field players in CM of the likes of Keane, Vieira, Fernandinho/Toure etc.
There are more than one way to protect your bak 4, and Jose's way (perhaps one of the more conservative methods) was just one. Perhaps Ferdinand should have said the "worst thing that happened in this league was Jose Mourinho and his-over-defensive approach"

As I say Makalele and his role was not new to the league, which was already loaded with similar types of players. Ferdinand's premise is wrong imo based on this and the fact that in the big games you have to yes keep possesion and attack but also have a system to protect your definsive lines and retrieve the ball. Makalele like Ince, Batty et al beforehand was expert at this and i think you underestimate his ability to intervene and pass quickly to others in starting attacks. I especially remember in Jose's first season in the PL a game where Wenger had his strikers take turns to sit on Makalele to try to cut off their initial attacking play at source.

I also think it could be argued that Makalele and the formation he played in allowed teams to be MORE attacking with the security afforded. Real Madrid certainly suffered for a few years after he left as they had a very soft underbelly afterwards; theire forward-thinking players certainly suffered that's for sure.
I would say that only in recent times with the acquisitions of Alonso and then Modric have they started to finally plug their Makalele-sized hole.

Again, Ferdinand isn't comparing Makelele to some clogger. He's saying he had the intelligence to make good decisions. He's saying as a result of the focus on the defensive side of what Makelele did there was a crop of players that tried to do that and missed the rest of what made Makelele great.

Hey, Popescu was decent Nah, of course there were cloggers and defensive midfielders before Makelele. And I don't think anyone is arguing that he heralded the epoch of technically limited English footballers as if England had been filled with Guti backheels before that. But I do think there was a change in attitude to where a purely defensive midfielder wasn't just a way to plug a hole, a necessity to defend or something you had because you couldn't afford a more well rounded player. It became the standard "you must have a defensive midfielder", and I don't think it was for the better.

Of course if given the option of Makelele you go for Makelele, he was truly world class and I don't think many people are arguing against that. Including Ferdinand. Most clubs won't have that chance though, then or now. He was pretty special, rare, unique-ish (I know grammar-nazis, sit down). Similarly of course most clubs won't have the option of Alonso alongside Modric or Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta. But there seems to be this idea that "you must have a defensive midfielder, you must have a Makelele" when that just isn't true.

Then you end up with Michael Carrick having 20-ish starts for Engalnd and 32 caps in total. With the, long underrated and even longer injured, Owen Hargreaves picking up more caps than him. "Because Makelele".

 

[milo]

Milo - see my post above

Yeah, I'd been working on the post for a while and didn't see your post.

I think that you are misunderstanding what Ferdinand was trying to say.

 

[thfcsteff]

Answers in bold…
[
QUOTE=braineclipse;545556]Instead of comparing Sandro to the nebulous popular opinion, how about comparing him to other players playing his role. Who on the world stage would you compare him with in terms of passing?


As much as I would love to have an Alonso, I think he is comparable to Xabi. Both break up play, both can pass short, both can find a long ball (Alonso is world class in this regard I agree) but when playing regularly, Sandro's game is top-class. Pirlo has become one, ditto Gerrard, as much for their twighlight years but it's working. Impossible to say whether a Busquets is better because Busquets plays at Barca in front of the likes of Pique and with the likes of Alves at FB instead of Dawson and Rose (not to mention the attacking talent around him). I think, on form, he is a better player than Carrick. So for Tottenham Hotspur, unless you can upgrade me to Alonso, Sandro's my man.



I didn't at any point defend Sherwood for dropping Sandro. I'm talking about the general truth in what Ferdinand said in an interview.



He's a top class defensive player, no doubt. Overall I'm not as sure. In the right setup I think he is top class, but he is limited.


I just think that comment applies to so many players. Very very few players in world football are top class in any set-up. Again, for me it's a 'footbalism'.


He has a lot of the qualities you mention. He is more creative than he gets credit for imo, his movement going forward is also quite good. We've seen that he can strike a ball too. But he's not a consistent short and mid range passer. He's not someone that moves the ball around effectively and quickly with one and two touch passing. And he's not good enough at moving into space to make himself available during buildup play in deeper positions.


I could not disagree more. With Modric he was excellent in this regard. And if our superbly brilliant young manager had the knackers to pay him with Paulinho (has it actually happened, I don't believe so) for a number of games, i think you'd see this myth destroyed again. Modric and Sandro were a great duo, as were Modric and Parker. I would concede that the denominator there is Modric (a player so ludicrously under-appreciated by some it's laughable). Not a consistent enough short-passer? I think that one of the biggest things we missed last season when he was hurt was that deep winning of possession and quick feed to initiate a counter-attack. Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree as I'm sure neither if us has the time to start trawling youtube to try and prove points. You don't rate him in that regard, I do.

A lot of those can be worked on, I have no doubt he has the hunger to improve. He could become immense (again?) under the right manager in the right system. But right now, as good as he is and has been, he's not a world class/top class player for me. I would trade him for Modric in a heartbeat. I'd give Real £25m on top of that. Different players, different player styles. But still.


I can't even consider the Modric bit here mate. Already commented on what I think, but as you said, different players and styles. Sandro (like Paulinho, Vertonghen - a player I have criticized for his attitude, Soldado and Lamela even) have obviously seen their roles negated somewhat at various time during Sherwood's tenure, and his man-management appears to have fallen seriously short. Right now, I'd say it's taking everything for him not flip his stack. World Cup year, he got injured, he worked damn hard to try and get back and now this self-serving loose-lipped 'genius' is mugging him off? Put yourself in his shoes...


**** Sherwood then, I'm sick and tired of even talking about the man. Every single conversations devolves. Look at Ferdinand's comments at a time when he wasn't being self serving and discuss those points. I don't think it can be dismissed as BS.

Les Ferdinand, for me, has been an abject failure as a coach at this club. Striker coach. Analyse that and tell me what you think of the net results. Let me offer an example of a coach who HAS worked. Tony Parkes. Came in, sorted out Gomes, helped settle Lloris and continues to do something right because generally, our goalies are consistently good. Once again, whilst Ferdinand might have a point worth debating it was poorly stated and poorly defined. Name me a side of any notable success in the last decade that has not ever used what could be considered a 'DM' in some capacity. And to reinforce, I was very very clear as to what about Sherwood I think is BS. I'm sticking firmly with it.


And without blowing my own horn I think I supported a similar opinion fairly well with my initial post on the topic. And other than "Real are sometimes also vulnerable defensively" there hasn't really been much in terms of counter arguments.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but your original point was that Makalele was a good player but due to the tight role he played, ushered in the notion that you can have a deep lying midfielder who is not necessarily great on the ball. I disagree. Strongly. I cannot think of ANY top club who has utilized such a player, not one who has gone on to win things/qualify for CL, etc. There are no Cattermoles at top clubs. I invite you to name a top club who has utilized such a 'limited' player in said-position. No, in truth, I think there's a strong argument for saying that Ferdinand, and in turn Sherwood, were inarticulate in their initial statements and that (in fact) they showed a rudimentary 'fear-of-change' type reaction to a role in football which has developed into a sophisticated and multi-faceted role. Not that I'm surprised. There's my counter argument…consider my horn blown! :lol:

Great debate BTW mate...


[/QUOTE]

 

[thfcsteff]

Again, Ferdinand isn't comparing Makelele to some clogger. He's saying he had the intelligence to make good decisions. He's saying as a result of the focus on the defensive side of what Makelele did there was a crop of players that tried to do that and missed the rest of what made Makelele great.

Hey, Popescu was decent Nah, of course there were cloggers and defensive midfielders before Makelele. And I don't think anyone is arguing that he heralded the epoch of technically limited English footballers as if England had been filled with Guti backheels before that. But I do think there was a change in attitude to where a purely defensive midfielder wasn't just a way to plug a hole, a necessity to defend or something you had because you couldn't afford a more well rounded player. It became the standard "you must have a defensive midfielder", and I don't think it was for the better.

Of course if given the option of Makelele you go for Makelele, he was truly world class and I don't think many people are arguing against that. Including Ferdinand. Most clubs won't have that chance though, then or now. He was pretty special, rare, unique-ish (I know grammar-nazis, sit down). Similarly of course most clubs won't have the option of Alonso alongside Modric or Busquets, Xavi and Iniesta. But there seems to be this idea that "you must have a defensive midfielder, you must have a Makelele" when that just isn't true.

Then you end up with Michael Carrick having 20-ish starts for Engalnd and 32 caps in total. With the, long underrated and even longer injured, Owen Hargreaves picking up more caps than him. "Because Makelele".

I simply don't agree. I have simply never seen a 'limited' or 'solely defensive' player in that role at a top club. Hargreaves, when in full-flight, had a FANTASTIC engine and was more Lampard-esque IMO…Carrick? A wonderful player (as you'll have seen I think Sandro's better!) and NOT 'because Makalele'…

I think that as football developed beyond 4-4-2, the idea of a deep-sitting screen midfielder became clear. I do not think that the top clubs necessarily saw it as a solely defensive' move.

EDIT: In reading through, it appears to me the crux of this discussion comes down to how much we rate Sandro. i think he is absolute quality, a fine footballer with great movement and fine vision who can be a skipper of our club. Thus I would obviously think Sherwood is absolutely wrong to limit him.