Naby seems to be doing ok for Huddersfield at the moment. I predict that will continue and I don't think I am sticking my neck out saying that. He is a much better player than many gave him credit for.
Naby seems to be doing ok for Huddersfield at the moment. I predict that will continue and I don't think I am sticking my neck out saying that. He is a much better player than many gave him credit for.
Sarr was always decent until he made a mistake or lost concentration. He's improved in these areas and is now a much better player. It doesn't mean fans were wrong on their opinion of Sarr a few years ago, when he was making more mistakes and losing concentration more often.
I think you are right in identifying improvements but the potential was always there and my point is that even going back he didn't make more errors than Lockyer or Pearce. They were just different types of errors.
Agreed. I think most of us could see there was always potential, but that's the point, he had potential but wasn't good enough to hold down a first team place, due to his costly mistakes.
Going back a few years I'd say he definitely made more costly errors than the other defenders. I agree he didn't last season, because he was much improved, which is why Huddersfield came in for him.
I'm with Muttley on this. I can't prove it but I would be amazed if statistically (particularly last season) Sarr made any more mistakes than Pearce. Put Pearce up against a pacey striker and there is a huge risk he will grab him around the waist with both arms in the penalty area. On the flip side Naby gave the team something else in terms of distribution. Always enjoyed watching Naby ...despite the odd mistake!
To be fair to Pearce though, I thought he was pretty good in those last 9 games at the end of last season.
Yes, I'm not trying to criticise Pearce. It is just in football you do have to make judgements based on what you see, but also you need to challenge them with deeper analysis. The point was made in another post about passes and possession. On the face of it, stats can look impressive, but it is the quality of passing and possession when you have it that is important.
I think Sarr was our best centre half last season, but the reality was he was played as if he was our third best. We all have our views and opinions and I like Pearce a lot. I honestly thought Lockyer flattered to deceive and wasn't too upset when we lost him.
Pearce brought (and brings) something fairly intangible that Lockyer didn't - force of personality, character, leadership, conviction. There's a reason he's stuck around in SE London and opened an academy - he sees football as something much larger than himself
Agreed. I think most of us could see there was always potential, but that's the point, he had potential but wasn't good enough to hold down a first team place, due to his costly mistakes.
Going back a few years I'd say he definitely made more costly errors than the other defenders. I agree he didn't last season, because he was much improved, which is why Huddersfield came in for him.
Lets not forget he joined us for a seven figure sum after playing in the Champions League for Sporting Lisbon. This is in contrast to someone like Ryan Inniss who arrived on a free.
The fact that he couldn't claim a regular place says something
Balancing the last minute equaliser at Qpr was the back pass at Wembley. For every superb assist at Forest there was a last minute nightmare against Millwall.
That said, if his wages had been reasonable I would have kept him but lets not forget the expectations we had when he signed
And the "fatal back pass" wasn't "fatal" as we won (unless my mind is playing tricks and the last season was a Dallas-esque dream hence why we're back in Division Three now).
And Dillon must share most of the blame for it anyway; it's not as though Beckensarr curled it over him into the top corner, it was a pass that the 'keeper took his eyes off.
And the "fatal back pass" wasn't "fatal" as we won (unless my mind is playing tricks and the last season was a Dallas-esque dream hence why we're back in Division Three now).
And Dillon must share most of the blame for it anyway; it's not as though Beckensarr curled it over him into the top corner, it was a pass that the 'keeper took his eyes off.
Personally I felt Dillon was more to blame
The fact Naby got subbed at half time for the more reliable Pearce shows that he wasn't that reliable
In truth I liked him. He reminded me of Miguel Llera who was another excellent ball playing left footed centre back who always had a mistake in him. The other similarity was they both had major blunders against Millwall.
He bottled out of challenge for Millwall winner. Not tough enough I’m afraid.
He may have been beaten in the air for that last-minute Spanner winner (which is never going to be a good thing for your reputation in a Charlton shirt) but "bottled"?
Sometimes it's possible to be beaten in the air when the opponent has had a decent run up to it and you're standing still, which Naby was entitled to do in his defensive position.
I don't know if you ever watch any Aussie Rules but it's amazing the number of spectacular marks taken by card-carrying dwarves almost sitting on the heads of 6' 10" ruckmen because the taller man is rooted to the spot, often in a pack of players, and the midget has been moving freely towards the ball with a clear take-off. If you leap early you effectively take the air-space above and stop the other bloke jumping.
When that happens, similar to Naby at the Toolbox, it looks bad but he hasn't necessarily done anything wrong.
If your takeaway from the Naby Years was him getting caught under the ball once against Millwall then you're a very, very petty person.
And it's not like that goal deprived us of the one thing we most truly want: a win against them. He'd assisted our equaliser earlier - it wasn't him who brought Lapslie on and settled for a point
And the "fatal back pass" wasn't "fatal" as we won (unless my mind is playing tricks and the last season was a Dallas-esque dream hence why we're back in Division Three now).
And Dillon must share most of the blame for it anyway; it's not as though Beckensarr curled it over him into the top corner, it was a pass that the 'keeper took his eyes off.
Personally I felt Dillon was more to blame
The fact Naby got subbed at half time for the more reliable Pearce shows that he wasn't that reliable
In truth I liked him. He reminded me of Miguel Llera who was another excellent ball playing left footed centre back who always had a mistake in him. The other similarity was they both had major blunders against Millwall.
He got subbed at half time because he'd picked up a late yellow and was in danger of getting a second because Sunderland had been targeting him a bit, I guess partly as retribution for the crunching (and legal - according to the ref ) early challenge that eventually resulted in Max Power going off injured and also because of his part in the o.g.
He bottled out of challenge for Millwall winner. Not tough enough I’m afraid.
Was at fault for both goals.
I liked Naby a lot, but to do that against them is unforgiveable
If you're going to have that kind of attitude then most of our Charlton heroes from the last 100 years are going to be on the naughty step with our woeful record against our nearest and dearest.
This is completely true, but I think not necessarily because he's a worse player than what we have but because Bowyer never really trusted him to play every week. League One or Championship he was never consistently in the team as Bowyer generally preferred Pearce there. On that basis it's probably best that he moved on anyway, as Hudds seem to like him and Famewo has done nothing but impress so far. Everybody wins (or at least keeps clean sheets)
He deffo still get in our team, back 3 of Sarr, Innis and Akin
Or as centre-half-back, sitting in front of the back four at the base of the diamond, instead of Watson or Prats: defensive cover and superb passing ability in one Naby-sized package.
I like playing a back 3, indeed in Football Manager I generally played Naby on the left hand side of a back 3!
Naby Pearce and Lockyer was a good combination as Peace could do the dirty work, allowing Naby the freedom to get forward. That cross for the Taylor's goal at Forest was glorious for example
Famewo is more a Naby replacement than Inniss is, as he seems a better footballer. I can imagine us playing Famewo, Pearce and Innis as a back 3 sometimes.
Pearce was famously ropey in a back 3. Bowyer has used Purrington in that role and I can see that being more the option. But maybe. One for if Gunter is injured I think
Comments
He's improved in these areas and is now a much better player.
It doesn't mean fans were wrong on their opinion of Sarr a few years ago, when he was making more mistakes and losing concentration more often.
Going back a few years I'd say he definitely made more costly errors than the other defenders.
I agree he didn't last season, because he was much improved, which is why Huddersfield came in for him.
To be fair to Pearce though, I thought he was pretty good in those last 9 games at the end of last season.
I think Sarr was our best centre half last season, but the reality was he was played as if he was our third best. We all have our views and opinions and I like Pearce a lot. I honestly thought Lockyer flattered to deceive and wasn't too upset when we lost him.
The fact that he couldn't claim a regular place says something
Balancing the last minute equaliser at Qpr was the back pass at Wembley. For every superb assist at Forest there was a last minute nightmare against Millwall.
That said, if his wages had been reasonable I would have kept him but lets not forget the expectations we had when he signed
And Dillon must share most of the blame for it anyway; it's not as though Beckensarr curled it over him into the top corner, it was a pass that the 'keeper took his eyes off.
The fact Naby got subbed at half time for the more reliable Pearce shows that he wasn't that reliable
In truth I liked him. He reminded me of Miguel Llera who was another excellent ball playing left footed centre back who always had a mistake in him. The other similarity was they both had major blunders against Millwall.
Sometimes it's possible to be beaten in the air when the opponent has had a decent run up to it and you're standing still, which Naby was entitled to do in his defensive position.
I don't know if you ever watch any Aussie Rules but it's amazing the number of spectacular marks taken by card-carrying dwarves almost sitting on the heads of 6' 10" ruckmen because the taller man is rooted to the spot, often in a pack of players, and the midget has been moving freely towards the ball with a clear take-off. If you leap early you effectively take the air-space above and stop the other bloke jumping.
When that happens, similar to Naby at the Toolbox, it looks bad but he hasn't necessarily done anything wrong.
And it's not like that goal deprived us of the one thing we most truly want: a win against them. He'd assisted our equaliser earlier - it wasn't him who brought Lapslie on and settled for a point
I liked Naby a lot, but to do that against them is unforgiveable
But Innis would be preferable to Naby in a defensive championship relegation battle (like Huddersfield?).
Naby Pearce and Lockyer was a good combination as Peace could do the dirty work, allowing Naby the freedom to get forward. That cross for the Taylor's goal at Forest was glorious for example
Famewo is more a Naby replacement than Inniss is, as he seems a better footballer. I can imagine us playing Famewo, Pearce and Innis as a back 3 sometimes.