match thread (image) [FT] Motherwell 1 - 5 Rangers (Tavernier 12 pen, 37 pen; Jones 28; Itten 75, 80)

[DMAA 3,658]

So many positives from that win. When @Bill is singing Tavernier’s praises you know things are good. This is the game after I voted Kent MOM for the first time. 
 

I’m going from the RTV highlights unfortunately, but Itten’s double is without doubt the biggest positive. Some fans were already on his back. That injection of confidence could be huge. To have Defoe back and Morelos back in form too is great for that position. Fantastic for Bassey to get 90 minutes. He needs games like that to grow into a reliable backup. Subs appearances can’t give you that. I’m really enjoying seeing Arfield getting this run in the team too. He’s taken so much unfounded criticism from the fans and he showed his quality again. That stat is really impressive, a 93% pass rate at the same time as having played more key passes than anyone on the pitch (leading to another assist). A 93% pass rate is what you expect from a centre back who never plays it long. 
 

On to the Turks, who apparently toiled to a “brutal to watch” 0-0 against their arch rivals yesterday. 

Edited September 28, 2020 by DMAA

[Rousseau 10,806]

11 minutes ago, DMAA said:

So many positives from that win. When @Bill is singing Tavernier’s praises you know things are good. This is the game after I Kent MOM for the first time. 
 

I’m going from the RTV highlights unfortunately, but Itten’s double is without doubt the biggest positive. Some fans were already on his back. That injection of confidence could be huge. To have Defoe back and Morelos back in form too is great for that position. Fantastic for Bassey to get 90 minutes. He needs games like that to grow into a reliable backup. Subs appearances can’t give you that. I’m really enjoying seeing Arfield getting this run in the team too. He’s taken so much unfounded criticism from the fans and he showed his quality again. That stat is really impressive, a 93% pass rate at the same time as having played more key passes than anyone on the pitch (leading to another assist). A 93% pass rate is what you expect from a centre back who never plays it long. 
 

On to the Turks, who apparently toiled to a “brutal to watch” 0-0 against their arch rivals yesterday. 

It wasn't "unfounded": He was rubbish, for a significantly long spell. 

 

However, I will admit he's been very good over the last few games, when he's needed to step in. I've been really impressed. His work-rate was always there, but nothing came off for him; now, he's back to being a dynamic, attacking box-to-box midfielder again. Great to see! 

[DMAA 3,658]

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

It wasn't "unfounded": He was rubbish, for a significantly long spell. 

 

However, I will admit he's been very good over the last few games, when he's needed to step in. I've been really impressed. His work-rate was always there, but nothing came off for him; now, he's back to being a dynamic, attacking box-to-box midfielder again. Great to see! 

That is an vast exaggeration. He definitely wasn’t at his best for spells but the criticism was way over the top and failed to take into account his contribution. Unlike others, he was not playing in his natural position but still chipped in with goals and assists pretty much all season and played a huge role in Europe. For a start, he got 4 league assists from centre mid when Kent got none from behind the striker. 9 goals was more than double any of the other centre mids too (including Aribo). He had spells of poor form but his ability was always there and people were far too negative about him.
 

I suspect you’re not going to agree but we can agree that it is great to have him on form again. 

Edited September 28, 2020 by DMAA

[Rousseau 10,806]

12 minutes ago, DMAA said:

That is an vast exaggeration. He definitely wasn’t at his best for spells but the criticism was way over the top and failed to take into account his contribution. Unlike others, he was not playing in his natural position but still chipped in with goals and assists pretty much all season and played a huge role in Europe. For a start, he got 4 league assists from centre mid when Kent got none from behind the striker. 9 goals was more than double any of the other centre mids too (including Aribo). He had spells of poor form but his ability was always there and people were far too negative about him.
 

I suspect you’re not going to agree but we can agree that it is great to have him on form again. 

I wasn't commenting on any fan exaggeration, merely my thoughts on his form. My criticism wasn't unfounded. There's always going to be exaggeration from some fans (you're criticism of Kent is quite exaggerated! ? ). 

 

For me, Arfield was phenomenal for a spell, then he was very poor for a spell. I never overlooked his work-rate during that slump. But, his goal contribution dropped substantially. I thought he should be played deeper to utilise that work-rate. His offensive game just wasn't working. 

 

The stats back it up: he went from a goal contribution of 0.68, to 0.33 per game. 

 

(I really don't want to get dragged into a Kent argument. You're obsessed! Even though I agree Kent's return has not been good enough.)

[DMAA 3,658]

50 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

(I really don't want to get dragged into a Kent argument. You're obsessed! Even though I agree Kent's return has not been good enough.)

I'm not. When making the case for a player who isn't rated it just makes sense to use the stats of a player who is rated as a reference point, especially when he is regarded as our best creative player by so many. Anyway, I wasn't trying to start a debate so I'll leave it there. Oh, other than to point out that I'm pretty sure the statistic you used is comparing 18/19 when he played as a number 10 (his best position and where I would like him to play) to 19/20 when he was pushed back to centre mid. Though as I said I do agree he was poor for spells.

Edited September 28, 2020 by DMAA

[Rousseau 10,806]

1 minute ago, DMAA said:

I'm not. When making the case for a player who isn't rated it just makes sense to use the stats of a player who is rated as a reference point, especially when he is regarded as our best creative player by so many. Anyway, I wasn't trying to start a debate so I'll leave it there. Oh, other than to point out that I'm pretty sure the statistic you used I comparing 18/19 when he played as a number 10 (his best position and where I would like him to play) to 19/20 when he was pushed back to centre mid. 

I ran them again, per position, being as generous as possible. 

 

18/19: Attacking Midfield (AM): 0.41 goal contribution.

18/19: Central Midfield (CM): 0.46. 

 

19/20: AM: 0.27

19.20: CM: 0.40

 

Arfield's attacking output in attacking positions drops off.

 

(Interestingly, his output in deeper positions drops off much less.)

 

Again, it's not "unfounded" - which you claimed -- because he was poor for a spell, as the stats back up. 

 

Interestingly, I don't want him further forward. I think he's showing up very well playing deeper. He's very good with those late runs.  

[Bill 13,717]

3 hours ago, DMAA said:

So many positives from that win. When @Bill is singing Tavernier’s praises you know things are good. This is the game after I Kent MOM for the first time. 

I want to make it clear I have never once criticised James Tavernier. I have criticised his poor performances, of which there have been many over the last season or two. Since it's never a reflection on the person, it's an easy step to commend any player who actually performs well. Tav deserves all the praise he gets for his display yesterday and will no doubt continue to receive it if he continue to improve. Perhaps now his growing confidence will see him become the more assertive captain I feel we need.

 

Given the appalling performances turned in by many players after last New Year, it's hardly surprising that several of them are receiving better evaluations this season. Kamara, Arfield, Davis, Tavernier, Kent were often dreadful in the run up to lockdown and our better results recently are in no small measure due to the way they've transformed their game.

 

I've always found Rangers fans to be very fair and their views tend to reflect only what they see in front of them on the park. What else should we do.

[Bill 13,717]

......

Edited September 28, 2020 by Bill

[DMAA 3,658]

57 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

Again, it's not "unfounded" - which you claimed -- because he was poor for a spell, as the stats back up. 

I only said he had taken a lot of unfounded criticism, which he has, that isn’t the same as saying all and any criticism has been unfounded. 

Edited September 28, 2020 by DMAA

[craig 5,199]

I don't think the criticism of Arfield was unfounded either - he was poor, by his standards, for quite some time - proof of which is the fact that Gerrard dropped him and he struggled to get back in the team.

 

However, rather than accentuate that negative, surely our best course of action as fans is to highlight his current form, which is very, very good.  The Arfield of old is an excellent player for us - and he seems to have recovered that form, form which will make it difficult to drop him - exactly what we want