Eric Bailly image 3

Eric Bailly Ivory Coast flag

2020-21 Performances


View full 2020-21 profile

6.3 Season Average Rating
Appearances
15
Clean sheets
9
Goals
0
Assists
1
Yellow cards
2

Kostov

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
6,554
Location
Skopje, Macedonia
Started a bit poorly with some mistakes but grew in to it after a few minutes. Overall I think he was ok defensively and a clean sheet is always a clean sheet. Normally he is pretty weak in the air, but in the first half he stepped up and won some good headers, nice to see. The problems imo were more when we weren’t defending and it was not only Bailly but more collectively owned problems. The whole back line + Matic were slow with the ball and when under pressure they looked stressed. They also dropped very deep which didn’t help our attack.
Did he? I think he was shit in the air as per usual, and remember only one header he won over Benteke but it was in the 2nd half.

I forgot what minute, but there was him and Benteke (I think), where he flicked the ball backward over the later, then carried on with the ball forward. Hahha.. I thought that was great.
:lol:

That's always amusing when it comes off, but absolutely brainless to do in that situation, which suits him to be fair.
 

Isotope

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2012
Messages
16,992
Supports
Ole Ole Ole
Did he? I think he was shit in the air as per usual, and remember only one header he won over Benteke but it was in the 2nd half.


:lol:

That's always amusing when it comes off, but absolutely brainless to do in that situation, which suits him to be fair.
I'd say if you have the skill, why not? It sure demoralizing the opponent.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
Did he? I think he was shit in the air as per usual, and remember only one header he won over Benteke but it was in the 2nd half.
He won 2 and lost 2 in first half. Maybe not great but it’s a good progress and at least he was challenging for them.
 

Foxbatt

Full Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
9,296
I forgot what minute, but there was him and Benteke (I think), where he flicked the ball backward over the later, then carried on with the ball forward. Hahha.. I thought that was great.
There was a funnier moment inside our own box. Fred had tacked a Palace player on the edge of our box. It broke to Bailly and everything stopped. Even Bailly who was inside our box. The ball at his feet. Even the Palace players stopped. After a few seconds he calmly passes the ball to one of our players just outside the box.
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,865
Did he? I think he was shit in the air as per usual, and remember only one header he won over Benteke but it was in the 2nd half.
This season I actually think he's been quite decent in the air.

Don't mistake, he's got poor technique as he doesn't jump in a clean or consistent way but the good thing is that he takes the initiative and is commited. That's half the job already. Not winning the ball doesn't neccessarily mean he's bad in the air.

He just needs to stop the ball from being won easily or it becoming an easy outlet. Then it's down to his team mates and our tactics to pick up the 2nd ball.

Previously I would say he's been 'poor in the air' as he would over commit and actually make a mistake. Lately, he has the same amount of commitment but has better timing/reading.
 

Maciek

Known for "good moanings" not only in the morning
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
11,730
Location
Włocławek, Poland
It's his fifth season here in Manchester United and today he gets his 100th appearance for the club.

Such a shame he's so injury prone.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
Individually, I thought both him and Harry were good for most parts. But we were horrible as a defensive unit and the whole defence, especially the CBs, must take some blame for that. And Matic.

Once again I think we struggled in defence when playing a high line. Better in second when we sat back a little. Bailly or Lindelof to compliment Maguire, facts are Maguire himself is not optimal for a high line. I’d rather play Lindelof and Bailly if we play high line.
Bailly could have been more active for the goal, but think it was mostly McT and Henderson.
 

Andersonson

Full Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
1,544
Location
Trondheim
A couple of situations where he was out of position. He often loses his offside line and stays a yard or two behind Maguire and the fullbacks.

But he is very calm on the ball. Not sure wether I rate him or not.
 

Devil may care

Full Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
33,930
Did his part and didn't get injured, he's our best 1 v 1 CB.
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,865
Individually, I thought both him and Harry were good for most parts. But we were horrible as a defensive unit and the whole defence, especially the CBs, must take some blame for that. And Matic.

Once again I think we struggled in defence when playing a high line. Better in second when we sat back a little. Bailly or Lindelof to compliment Maguire, facts are Maguire himself is not optimal for a high line. I’d rather play Lindelof and Bailly if we play high line.

Bailly could have been more active for the goal, but think it was mostly McT and Henderson.
That's incredibly harsh on the CBs when it was more of a systematic team issue. Individiually both centre backs were good and probably only exposed in behind once or twice, which were cleared. The other times, they were correctly called offside.

The biggest issue is that we were pinned back by a young side missing half their first team players and we couldn't hold onto the ball or pass it out. Of course there's culpability for everyone that played but that's a fundamental issue mostly down to Ole and the horrific lack of consistency regardless of the opposition and the personnel on the pitch.

I don't think playing a higher line contributed any 'more' than usual to our problems. In fact I would say the opposite and they did their job for the most part. This brought us advantages (namely pushing the team up the pitch by using Bailly's pace to sweep up as the deepest) but the rest of the team were really below par in front of them and allowed Milan to constantly come back at us.

As for Bailly, indvidually I thought he was really solid in all the individual 1-vs-1 duels, closed down proactively all the channel threats and was composed on the ball. Aerially decent as in my previous post, even if he doesn't win the ball he commits. Perhaps takes some blame for the corner but at this point, it's a joke how badly organised we are for these i.e it's not down to an individual anymore,
 

Valencia Shin Crosses

Full Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2015
Messages
986
Location
"Martial...He's isolated Skrtel here..."
That's incredibly harsh on the CBs when it was more of a systematic team issue. Individiually both centre backs were good and probably only exposed in behind once or twice, which were cleared. The other times, they were correctly called offside.

The biggest issue is that we were pinned back by a young side missing half their first team players and we couldn't hold onto the ball or pass it out. Of course there's culpability for everyone that played but that's a fundamental issue mostly down to Ole and the horrific lack of consistency regardless of the opposition and the personnel on the pitch.

I don't think playing a higher line contributed any 'more' than usual to our problems. In fact I would say the opposite and they did their job for the most part. This brought us advantages (namely pushing the team up the pitch by using Bailly's pace to sweep up as the deepest) but the rest of the team were really below par in front of them and allowed Milan to constantly come back at us.

As for Bailly, indvidually I thought he was really solid in all the individual 1-vs-1 duels, closed down proactively all the channel threats and was composed on the ball. Aerially decent as in my previous post, even if he doesn't win the ball he commits. Perhaps takes some blame for the corner but at this point, it's a joke how badly organised we are for these i.e it's not down to an individual anymore,
Agreed, our issues tonight all stemmed from the lack of control our midfield had, along with poor performances from James and our fullbacks. But we couldn’t progress the ball or sustain attacks well at all and that’s down to our pivot
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
That's incredibly harsh on the CBs when it was more of a systematic team issue. Individiually both centre backs were good and probably only exposed in behind once or twice, which were cleared. The other times, they were correctly called offside.

The biggest issue is that we were pinned back by a young side missing half their first team players and we couldn't hold onto the ball or pass it out. Of course there's culpability for everyone that played but that's a fundamental issue mostly down to Ole and the horrific lack of consistency regardless of the opposition and the personnel on the pitch.

I don't think playing a higher line contributed any 'more' than usual to our problems. In fact I would say the opposite and they did their job for the most part. This brought us advantages (namely pushing the team up the pitch by using Bailly's pace to sweep up as the deepest) but the rest of the team were really below par in front of them and allowed Milan to constantly come back at us.

As for Bailly, indvidually I thought he was really solid in all the individual 1-vs-1 duels, closed down proactively all the channel threats and was composed on the ball. Aerially decent as in my previous post, even if he doesn't win the ball he commits. Perhaps takes some blame for the corner but at this point, it's a joke how badly organised we are for these i.e it's not down to an individual anymore,
There was very poor protection from the midfield, exactly the same as Everton match. Matic was also having a very poor match. The CBs were fine for most parts, individually, but the back line looked completely unorganised. They had 15 attempts/shots in total. We must defend better as a unit and not play like 5 individuals at the back. Whole defence must take the responsibility for this.

For the corner I agree. It’s horrible how we can concede goals like that, time and time again. He was totally unmarked and unchallenged. We lack organisation at corners and in this case both McT and Bailly were passive, but the main problem is not individual, the problem has been the same no matter who plays.
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,865
There was very poor protection from the midfield, exactly the same as Everton match. Matic was also having a very poor match. The CBs were fine for most parts, individually, but the back line looked completely unorganised. They had 15 attempts/shots in total. We must defend better as a unit and not play like 5 individuals at the back. Whole defence must take the responsibility for this.

For the corner I agree. It’s horrible how we can concede goals like that, time and time again. He was totally unmarked and unchallenged. We lack organisation at corners and in this case both McT and Bailly were passive, but the main problem is not individual, the problem has been the same no matter who plays.
I don't neccessarily disagree with what you're saying outside of the bolded bits but on the original point, to say the CBs 'especially' must take blame for this is a poor take.

If anything, in retrospect Bailly and Maguire were arguably our 'best' players because they did most of what was asked of them in front and behind. Of course not ignoring the two corners (Maguire's miss and Bailly's lack of impetus).

We conceded 15 shots as a team because our attack and midfield couldn't hold onto the ball and Telles was having an absolutely mare at left back, which was further compounded by the whole Shaw sub/position switch. Milan came at as us at will. When the core is so porous, it's strange to specify the CBs as being most problematic :confused:

Outside of Telles, the defence was actually 'okay'. Henderson held a good sweeper line, AWB was okay and Bailly/Maguire sweeped up with a high line and when dealing with 1 vs 1s.

If your criticism is that the CBs should have organised the team better and created a better shape, I'd understand even if it's still an unrealistic expectation but that doesn't seem to the case. We've had plenty of games where we concede shots/opportunities with Lindelof but I doubt the first thing you would say is that the CBs must take responsibility for this. In fact I will wait for that to happen because it's happened in the past and will happen in the future too, regardless of opposition and personnel on the pitch. It's a systematic/coaching failure.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
I don't neccessarily disagree with what you're saying outside of the bolded bits but on the original point, to say the CBs 'especially' must take blame for this is a poor take.

If anything, in retrospect Bailly and Maguire were arguably our 'best' players because they did most of what was asked of them in front and behind. Of course not ignoring the two corners (Maguire's miss and Bailly's lack of impetus).

We conceded 15 shots as a team because our attack and midfield couldn't hold onto the ball and Telles was having an absolutely mare at left back, which was further compounded by the whole Shaw sub/position switch. Milan came at as us at will. When the core is so porous, it's strange to specify the CBs as being most problematic :confused:

Outside of Telles, the defence was actually 'okay'. Henderson held a good sweeper line, AWB was okay and Bailly/Maguire sweeped up with a high line and when dealing with 1 vs 1s.

If your criticism is that the CBs should have organised the team better and created a better shape, I'd understand even if it's still an unrealistic expectation but that doesn't seem to the case. We've had plenty of games where we concede shots/opportunities with Lindelof but I doubt the first thing you would say is that the CBs must take responsibility for this. In fact I will wait for that to happen because it's happened in the past and will happen in the future too, regardless of opposition and personnel on the pitch. It's a systematic/coaching failure.
I always expect the CBs to be leaders for the defence, especially when Henderson is still quite new in the first team. I also expect more from Maguire and Lindelof in this aspect, than I do from Bailly as 1. he has played very little and 2. I haven’t seen him showing those qualities.

In this game, the midfield didn’t show up at all, and it is hard to defend then when the CBs get poor protection. That’s probably half of the reason why we struggled with a high line in the diet 30 minutes of the game. They are obviously a big part of the failing team defence. The CBs were fine individually which compensated for the poor team defence and that works against a little weaker attackers, but I’m not sure it would have worked with Rebic and Ibrahimovic.
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,865
I always expect the CBs to be leaders for the defence, especially when Henderson is still quite new in the first team. I also expect more from Maguire and Lindelof in this aspect, than I do from Bailly as 1. he has played very little and 2. I haven’t seen him showing those qualities.

In this game, the midfield didn’t show up at all, and it is hard to defend then when the CBs get poor protection. That’s probably half of the reason why we struggled with a high line in the diet 30 minutes of the game. They are obviously a big part of the failing team defence. The CBs were fine individually which compensated for the poor team defence and that works against a little weaker attackers, but I’m not sure it would have worked with Rebic and Ibrahimovic.
So overall you agree then that the one major factor was the poor overall play from everyone in front of the centre backs. It's still baffling and a stretch how you attributed the blame to Bailly and Maguire.

As for the bolded, I've rarely seen Lindelof do any 'organising' or 'leading' when the going gets tough; pointing fingers doesn't count. 90% of his games he has McFred in front of him and we dare not play a high line because 1) Ole doesn't trust Lindelof/Maguire with faster attackers and 2) it wouldn't matter because Lindelof will retreat more times than not. We played a higher line against Chelsea and City but in the moments where the ball was to be won on the half way line/middle of our half, Lindelof rarely ventured out and instead dropped deep. That's just his natural tendency regardless of it being against City or West Brom.

There's plenty of games where we've dropped deep and invited pressure and no one can honestly say Lindelof has lead us out of these situations or even markedly performed in a stand out manner. Again it's more of a systematic issue i.e coaching but let's not try to elevate something he does not possess.

Other than having played more games (which should not be underestimated), at this stage I don't think there's much between Bailly and Lindelof in terms of fundamental qualities and ability. I certainly wouldn't say one is more influential than the other in terms of mentality.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
So overall you agree then that the one major factor was the poor overall play from everyone in front of the centre backs. It's still baffling and a stretch how you attributed the blame to Bailly and Maguire.

As for the bolded, I've rarely seen Lindelof do any 'organising' or 'leading' when the going gets tough; pointing fingers doesn't count. 90% of his games he has McFred in front of him and we dare not play a high line because 1) Ole doesn't trust Lindelof/Maguire with faster attackers and 2) it wouldn't matter because Lindelof will retreat more times than not. We played a higher line against Chelsea and City but in the moments where the ball was to be won on the half way line/middle of our half, Lindelof rarely ventured out and instead dropped deep. That's just his natural tendency regardless of it being against City or West Brom.

There's plenty of games where we've dropped deep and invited pressure and no one can honestly say Lindelof has lead us out of these situations or even markedly performed in a stand out manner. Again it's more of a systematic issue i.e coaching but let's not try to elevate something he does not possess.

Other than having played more games (which should not be underestimated), at this stage I don't think there's much between Bailly and Lindelof in terms of fundamental qualities and ability. I certainly wouldn't say one is more influential than the other in terms of mentality.
I think the poor performance in the midfield was one major reason for our poor game. There is always a risk for that when we play basically a 2 man midfield which we have done most of this season.

When a defence function poorly as a unit, everybody in the defence has part in that. Imo the CBs have a bigger role in organising than the fullbacks. It is not everybody except Baillys responsibility. Bailly also has a responsibility to make the team work as a unit, and as this is his performance thread there is nothing “baffling” with mentioning that imo.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
@criticalanalysis
Regarding the high line. I’m not sure this team is very suitable for a higher line than we have in most games. There are many reasons for that, but the main reason for me is that we have a midfield who lose possession all the time. That will give opportunity after opportunity for the other team to counter attack. Then Maguire is poor when isolated 1v1 on the ground. It is good that Maguire can win back the ball in the air, but I would prefer Lindelof and Bailly as a pair if we want to play a higher line. Against City and Chelsea we played relatively high line but mostly we played high press from the forwards and midfielders. That was very effective.

Bailly has played “smaller matches” except for Spurs and Leicester. I think Ole chose Lindelof for the bigger occasions because he is better if you prioritise an organised defence. I see no difference in whom Ole picks depending on the opponents speed. Both have played both fast and slow forwards. And for the two man midfield, I don’t think replacing Fred with Matic is a making us more offensive. Fred and McT play for their high work rate which is necessary when you have four attacking players and also want your full backs to leave defence.
 
Last edited:

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,865
I think the poor performance in the midfield was one major reason for our poor game. There is always a risk for that when we play basically a 2 man midfield which we have done most of this season.

When a defence function poorly as a unit, everybody in the defence has part in that. Imo the CBs have a bigger role in organising than the fullbacks. It is not everybody except Baillys responsibility. Bailly also has a responsibility to make the team work as a unit, and as this is his performance thread there is nothing “baffling” with mentioning that imo.
In isolation I don't have a problem with saying Bailly or the centre backs deserve criticism for not organising the team. I just find it interesting when the three most blatant reasons for our poor game was first and foremostly coaching, playing a 2nd team and then basically Telles/everyone in front of the centre backs, you choose this game to say it's especially the fault of the Bailly/Maguire.

I would like you to be consistent with your criticism as I will equally expect you to blame Lindelof in the next game where we will inevitably concede lots of unneccessary opportunities when the team plays like we do now under Ole i.e inconsistent. In Lindelof's thread this would have been faint heartedly praised as 'did well 1vs1, had a good game individually, midfield and everyone else was poor'.

Just to reiterate I agree there should be an expectation that 'the centre backs should be organising the team' but we both know this has not been applied to standards to Lindelof in the past (just a look at the thread/comments when we have had these games will tell plenty). Very interesting it's suddenly applied to blame Bailly/Maguire in this game.

@criticalanalysis
Regarding the high line. I’m not sure this team is very suitable for a higher line than we have in most games. There are many reasons for that, but the main reason for me is that we have a midfield who lose possession all the time. That will give opportunity after opportunity for the other team to counter attack. Then Maguire is poor when isolated 1v1 on the ground. It is good that Maguire can win back the ball in the air, but I would prefer Lindelof and Bailly as a pair if we want to play a higher line. Against City and Chelsea we played relatively high line but mostly we played high press from the forwards and midfielders. That was very effective.

Bailly has played “smaller matches” except for Spurs and Leicester. I think Ole chose Lindelof for the bigger occasions because he is better if you prioritise an organised defence. I see no difference in whom Ole picks depending on the opponents speed. Both have played both fast and slow forwards. And for the two man midfield, I don’t think replacing Fred with Matic is a making us more offensive. Fred and McT play for their high work rate which is necessary when you have four attacking players and also want your full backs to leave defence.
I agree the team is not suitable for a higher line but not because of personnel but because of coaching.

As for the bolded bits, actually I think there's a clear tactic that whenever Bailly plays and with a higher line, Bailly is always tasked man marking/keeping a close eye on faster forwards. This happened in both Real Sociedad games where it was Bailly (partnering both Maguire and then Lindelof), who closed down and match Isak pace for pace in quite a few duels. He did it well in this game shutting down that right flank too covering AWB. Without Bailly, we wouldn't dare play such a line.

Again, it's hard to prove otherwise but I don't see a difference in capability between the two. Lindelof performing in an organised defence basically means we play a lower line, McFred and have pre-game preparation where as we do under Ole raise our game. The Fred comment was that Lindelof and the team massively benefits from his presence. The stats don't lie, our performances and his individual contributions make us a much more competitive team.
 
Last edited:

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
In isolation I don't have a problem with saying Bailly or the centre backs deserve criticism for not organising the team. I just find it interesting when the three most blatant reasons for our poor game was first and foremostly coaching, playing a 2nd team and then basically Telles/everyone in front of the centre backs, you choose this game to say it's especially the fault of the Bailly/Maguire.

I would like you to be consistent with your criticism as I will equally expect you to blame Lindelof in the next game where we will inevitably concede lots of unneccessary opportunities when the team plays like we do now under Ole i.e inconsistent. In Lindelof's thread this would have been faint heartedly praised as 'did well 1vs1, had a good game individually, midfield and everyone else was poor'.

Just to reiterate I agree there should be an expectation that 'the centre backs should be organising the team' but we both know this has not been applied to standards to Lindelof in the past (just a look at the thread/comments when we have had these games will tell plenty). Very interesting it's suddenly applied to blame Bailly/Maguire in this game. .
If you don’t have a problem with what I’m writing, then stop arguing. This is Bailly’s thread, and it is not strange that I comment his performance in this thread, not the midfield. Defence was poorly organised, and didn’t work as a unit, I blame all defenders for that. I also think CBs have a bigger role in when it comes to organisation of the defence than a FB. Bailly is a CB. He also has some blame for this. That’s basically what I wrote. Stop over analysing what I wrote all the time.

.
I agree the team is not suitable for a higher line but not because of personnel but because of coaching.

As for the bolded bits, actually I think there's a clear tactic that whenever Bailly plays and with a higher line, Bailly is always tasked man marking/keeping a close eye on faster forwards. This happened in both Real Sociedad games where it was Bailly (partnering both Maguire and then Lindelof), who closed down and match Isak pace for pace in quite a few duels. He did it well in this game shutting down that right flank too covering AWB. Without Bailly, we wouldn't dare play such a line.

Again, it's hard to prove otherwise but I don't see a difference in capability between the two. Lindelof performing in an organised defence basically means we play a lower line, McFred and have pre-game preparation where as we do under Ole raise our game. The Fred comment was that Lindelof and the team massively benefits from his presence. The stats don't lie, our performances and his individual contributions make us a much more competitive team.
Bailly is fast and Maguire slow so it makes sense that Bailly chase the forward like he did vs Real Sociedad. We have played Lindelof and Maguire’s most matches, and then they need to stop fast forwards in other ways than chasing them. And that’s also what they have done as we have hardly conceded any goals from fast forward runs, if any.
 

Andersonson

Full Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
1,544
Location
Trondheim
I was looking at the Premier League official stats at their page and some of Eric stats, cant be true?

Aerial battles won 15
Aerial battles lost 11
Duels won 27
Duels lost 18

Compared to Harry Maguire
Aerial battles won 114
Aerial battles lost 15
Duels won 168
Duels lost 89

And Lindelof
Aerial battles won 48
Aerial battles lost 28
Duels won 71
Duels lost 57

I have no clue how they get this stats, but 15/11 is shockinly bad isnt it? He cant be that bad in Aerial battles? Both he and Lindelof is quite bad if the stats are correct, no wonder we suck at defensive deadballs..
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,865
If you don’t have a problem with what I’m writing, then stop arguing. This is Bailly’s thread, and it is not strange that I comment his performance in this thread, not the midfield. Defence was poorly organised, and didn’t work as a unit, I blame all defenders for that. I also think CBs have a bigger role in when it comes to organisation of the defence than a FB. Bailly is a CB. He also has some blame for this. That’s basically what I wrote. Stop over analysing what I wrote all the time.



Bailly is fast and Maguire slow so it makes sense that Bailly chase the forward like he did vs Real Sociedad. We have played Lindelof and Maguire’s most matches, and then they need to stop fast forwards in other ways than chasing them. And that’s also what they have done as we have hardly conceded any goals from fast forward runs, if any.
I'm giving you massive benefit of the doubt with my comments and trying to play it diplomatic. In essence, I'm calling you out on your double standards and hyprocrisy. Ridiculous you can analyse a game so methodically and call out the centre backs as especially being the problem in the Milan game and then when I look in the Lindelof thread, it's always simplistic 'he's had a good game and did what is asked of him'.

Like I said, I look forward to the same scrunity and responsibility calling on Lindelof for when we have a game where we concede chances.
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
I'm giving you massive benefit of the doubt with my comments and trying to play it diplomatic. In essence, I'm calling you out on your double standards and hyprocrisy. Ridiculous you can analyse a game so methodically and call out the centre backs as especially being the problem in the Milan game and then when I look in the Lindelof thread, it's always simplistic 'he's had a good game and did what is asked of him'.

Like I said, I look forward to the same scrunity and responsibility calling on Lindelof for when we have a game where we concede chances.
Yeah, I’m not in this thread to discuss me or if I’m a hypocrite or not. The defence didn’t look like they played like a unit. They all, including Bailly, has to take blame for that. That is basically what I wrote. If you don’t agree, fine, write something about that. Or you don’t think we can nor should expect Bailly to contribute to the defence working as a unit?

I think he was a 6/10 which is slightly more than the average he got from RedCafe rating so it’s not like I thought he was poor.
 

Grande

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
3,709
Location
The Land of Do-What-You-Will
I'm giving you massive benefit of the doubt with my comments and trying to play it diplomatic. In essence, I'm calling you out on your double standards and hyprocrisy. Ridiculous you can analyse a game so methodically and call out the centre backs as especially being the problem in the Milan game and then when I look in the Lindelof thread, it's always simplistic 'he's had a good game and did what is asked of him'.

Like I said, I look forward to the same scrunity and responsibility calling on Lindelof for when we have a game where we concede chances.
To be honest, I think it was pretty clear the back four wasn’t well organized on several occasions against Milan, both vertically and horizontally. Holes popping up way to often, offside lines fluffed, unclear who took out security and who went pressing quite a few times. It’s hard to tell who’s to blame every time, because we don’t have the defensive plan for the game printed out to read. I do think thatis one thing that looks way more structured and in sync when Lindelöf plays, so that is a point. Though does play much more regularily than Bailly, so there’s hoping Eric will sort the chemistry and decisions out with a run.

But I think if you claim Bailly is as good at contributing to a tightly run back four as Lindelöf, I disagree very much.
 

criticalanalysis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
2,865
To be honest, I think it was pretty clear the back four wasn’t well organized on several occasions against Milan, both vertically and horizontally. Holes popping up way to often, offside lines fluffed, unclear who took out security and who went pressing quite a few times. It’s hard to tell who’s to blame every time, because we don’t have the defensive plan for the game printed out to read. I do think thatis one thing that looks way more structured and in sync when Lindelöf plays, so that is a point. Though does play much more regularily than Bailly, so there’s hoping Eric will sort the chemistry and decisions out with a run.

But I think if you claim Bailly is as good at contributing to a tightly run back four as Lindelöf, I disagree very much.
You might want to read my previous comments and the exchange in this thread because I don't disagree it was disorganised. I just think the criticism is largely misplaced and agenda driven.

Bailly and Maguire lack game chemistry, which is understandable, like how Matic and McT don't mesh well because they simply haven't had many games together (in addition to having different styles). However, unlike the latter, individually and even as a combo the centre backs played as well as you can expect. They were putting out fires and filling gaping holes left by Telles and the porous midfield. They never had a platform to succeed, so to expect them to organise the field, whilst playing with 2nd choice team players against a superior coached team is an out of context narrative.

My biggest gripe is that we've had plenty of games where we've conceded chances and looked disorganised when Lindelof and the entire first team is playing. Therefore, either we agree that 1) this means Lindelof is also very cupable and not great at showing defensive organisation skills (in a much better environment) and 2) we start placing this new found responsibility and judge him (by our systematic failures) in the near future now.

It's not a coincidence we have Lindelof's biggest fan (just check the 'who's posted' stats in both threads ffs) applying new found standards to critique Bailly.

As for your last comment, we haven't seen enough of Bailly unfortunately to argue against it but I wouldn't support your sentiment because I think Bailly is bridging that gap closer and closer with each game/minutes (whilst bringing other and 'better' qualities). Lindelof for all his 'consistency' is really not a stand out performer by any metric to deserve his name to be beholden as the standard first choice alongside Maguire.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
17,644
I was looking at the Premier League official stats at their page and some of Eric stats, cant be true?

Aerial battles won 15
Aerial battles lost 11
Duels won 27
Duels lost 18

Compared to Harry Maguire
Aerial battles won 114
Aerial battles lost 15
Duels won 168
Duels lost 89

And Lindelof
Aerial battles won 48
Aerial battles lost 28
Duels won 71
Duels lost 57

I have no clue how they get this stats, but 15/11 is shockinly bad isnt it? He cant be that bad in Aerial battles? Both he and Lindelof is quite bad if the stats are correct, no wonder we suck at defensive deadballs..
It wouldn’t be that big a surprise. He has the most ludicrous heading technique. He jumps and ducks at the same time.
 

Grande

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
3,709
Location
The Land of Do-What-You-Will
You might want to read my previous comments and the exchange in this thread because I don't disagree it was disorganised. I just think the criticism is largely misplaced and agenda driven.

Bailly and Maguire lack game chemistry, which is understandable, like how Matic and McT don't mesh well because they simply haven't had many games together (in addition to having different styles). However, unlike the latter, individually and even as a combo the centre backs played as well as you can expect. They were putting out fires and filling gaping holes left by Telles and the porous midfield. They never had a platform to succeed, so to expect them to organise the field, whilst playing with 2nd choice team players against a superior coached team is an out of context narrative.

My biggest gripe is that we've had plenty of games where we've conceded chances and looked disorganised when Lindelof and the entire first team is playing. Therefore, either we agree that 1) this means Lindelof is also very cupable and not great at showing defensive organisation skills (in a much better environment) and 2) we start placing this new found responsibility and judge him (by our systematic failures) in the near future now.

It's not a coincidence we have Lindelof's biggest fan (just check the 'who's posted' stats in both threads ffs) applying new found standards to critique Bailly.

As for your last comment, we haven't seen enough of Bailly unfortunately to argue against it but I wouldn't support your sentiment because I think Bailly is bridging that gap closer and closer with each game/minutes (whilst bringing other and 'better' qualities). Lindelof for all his 'consistency' is really not a stand out performer by any metric to deserve his name to be beholden as the standard first choice alongside Maguire.
I understand there’s a context to the discussion. Fair enough. Personally I like both Lindelöf and Bailly very much as player types and characters, and have doubts wether either of them are ideal options. Simultaneously I think they both are much better than their critics accept.

Lindelöf to me is the most underrated here, so I’ve stuck up for him on the caf a few rounds before. He was shockingly horrible when he arrived, but if you remove his first six months from memory, I think he has been one of our most consistent and best players. I also think he has been our best CB this season. My reasons for this can be put in other threads.

Bailly is more of a conundrum, his strengths are so appetizing, with his speed, his hipsterlike aggressivity, his coolness with the ball when he doesn’t snap. He just picks the ball off attackers as if they were toys. Then again, he still snaps regularily, wether in control, in marking, in aerial duels but most markedly in his positioning. The former are mostly quirks that look terrible but can be carried in a time while he irons them out, but the latter is to me his biggest problem. If you follow him closely in a game where the oposition shows a bit of fluid movement, you can see how it is his rash movement or slow movement that disrupts the backline many many times, rather than the other way around.

Bissaka and Shaw are great at duels, but neither are particularily intelligent when it comes to positional defending. Maguire is fairly good at minding himself and taking responsibility, but he does not lead and organize a defence like a Tony Adams or John Terry. One of Lindelöfs biggest strengths in my view, also on show for Sweden is not that he organizes a defence, but how he keeps a defense organized by reading the game and his colleagues and adapts to them incredibly well. Bailly is the opposite, which is why when we struggle, we struggle much more. If we are allowed to defend mostly man-by-man in a bank of four, these problems seldom arise.

I have, like you, hoped that Bailly’s weaknesses is as much a result of young age (when he arrived) combined with injuries and lack of consistent game time. So I’m a fan of giving him a run like he is getting now. I do think that, per now, Lindelöf is a better choice against teams like City, Milan, Liverpool, Leicester, Leeds and the like, teams that try to give our defence a runaround. If Bailly steps up in that respects, I’ll be very happy.
 

MadDogg

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
12,325
Location
Manchester Utd never lose, just run out of time
I have no clue how they get this stats, but 15/11 is shockinly bad isnt it? He cant be that bad in Aerial battles? Both he and Lindelof is quite bad if the stats are correct, no wonder we suck at defensive deadballs..
I feel he's improved recently (small sample size though), but overall he's generally poor in the air. He has a good leap but his timing and technique are poor.
 

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
48,675
Location
Hope, We Lose
Bailly

13 goals conceded in 15 games. But with 6 conceded against Spurs as an outlier, so just 7 goals conceded in the 14 other games.
1 goal every 2 matches other than Spurs, amazing record.
9 clean sheets in 15 games in all comps - More than half

Maguire
46 goals conceded in 42 games in all comps. But with 6 conceded against Spurs as an outlier, so 40 conceded in the 41 matches other than that.
17 clean sheets in 42 games in all comps

Lindelof
32 goals conceded in 31 games in all competitions, if we exclude Leicester where he played rightback
13 clean sheets in 31 games in all comps




Just needs to stay fit and play him as much as possible
 

A-man

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2017
Messages
3,880
Anybody who knows why he is unavailable for the Milan match?

According to Ole: “Eric’s being assessed”
 

Gandalf

Full Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2018
Messages
1,053
He will never be fit enough to be a regular starter. If we do sign a new CB this summer to play with Harry then Eric has to be the one to be sold to balance the books. Lindelof would attract a higher fee but is much more dependable as a backup and we would have to pay someone to take Jones at this point.
 

DoomSlayer

Full Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
4,291
Location
Bulgaria
Seriously, his career is ruined by injuries. Maybe his style is too aggressive, too reckless, I don't know but it's a huge shame as I think with more experience and proper match rhythm, he would be an incredible defender.