Great analysis from Nev but would he dare criticise United or SAF?
Gary Neville on Sky Sports
- Thread starter Havak
- Start date
I'm guessing he's an Arse fan, but you could mistake him for a City fan with all that bitterness oozing out of him.
He's done it already. We're not particularly worthy of an 8-min dissection though, being 6 points clear at the top.
We're the third highest scorers in the league.
Before the game you were 7th. Then Arsenal went on and did what he said they don't do enough. Go figure.
By a couple of goals since we'd played a game less than everybody else. Sloppy thinking a bit like Neville's. The key problem we've had has been forward movement not midfield movement.
Of course your biggest problem was lack of goals. Scoring half of your goals(16) against the likes of reading and southampton(and ten men spurs) isn't that of a record, when you went five games this season in EPL without scoring single goal.
Interesting point re Wilshere having to make runs in behind defences. Hope they don't end up turning him to an out and out attacking midfielder which happened to Fabregas.
He's absolutely top class.
I always though Cesc was less effective in the advanced role compared to deeper. Mind you I thought Jack was a No.10 rather than a CM as he came through and that Ramsey would be a box-to-box CM.
so I take it you are really a very well paid tv pundit not just some random Internet twat who likes to hang around on a Manchester United forum.And btw midfielders are allowed to make forward runs into the box ....... You should listen to Gary Neville
before the game his stats had you at =7th. yet you were higher in most other categories so he then proceeded to illustrate why he felt you were not scoring as many goals, relative to your other higher stats.
and then the same thing he identified was changed for the Reading game and you scored 5.
again, he nailed it.
If you're comparing me to Alan Shearer and co, take your jacket off and step outside.
Chelsea has actually played a game less now. Arsenal are expected to score more goals, not be level to Everton and Fulham (which they would had they only scored a couple).
You do realize that it was more reflective of the last games (before the Reading game they had scored 5 goals in the last 6) so of course he was going to mention it. But unlike most pundits, who would just have said Arsenal haven't been scoring, he asked the question why that was and came up with a possible answer.
There have been 6 games where Arsenal have failed to score. They've managed to keep a clean sheet as often as the team they've been playing against. That's not a stat you want.
Neville's saying that Cazorla for all his talents, could be even more devastating if he tweaked his game to get into the box abit more than he does... he's capable of scoring long-range scorchers, but Neville was saying that if he was more of a 'runner' (off the ball).. and let Wilshere be the one who operates deeper, Arsenal would resolve the issue of lack of penetration.
In the match, Cazorla did what Neville was saying he should be doing in order to further the Arsenal cause, might have been a coincidence but fact remains.. Neville was bang on with his analysis in my opinion by highlighting Cazorla as key not just in buildup play but on the goalscoring front in terms of poacher like goals, scholes-like late runs into the box too.
Cazorla picks and chooses his moments when he wants to attack more or operate a little deeper, Nevilles saying there should be a tactical shift where he is forced to make those runs more consistently throughout the game and leave the build-up play more to Arteta/Wilshere.
In the match, Cazorla did what Neville was saying he should be doing in order to further the Arsenal cause, might have been a coincidence but fact remains.. Neville was bang on with his analysis in my opinion by highlighting Cazorla as key not just in buildup play but on the goalscoring front in terms of poacher like goals, scholes-like late runs into the box too.
Cazorla picks and chooses his moments when he wants to attack more or operate a little deeper, Nevilles saying there should be a tactical shift where he is forced to make those runs more consistently throughout the game and leave the build-up play more to Arteta/Wilshere.
Fabregas was at his best with the attackers ahead of him.
The issue with Neville's analysis is that it lays stress on Wilshere's involvement. Typically it would take Jack about 4-5 months (possibly by Feb-March) to get back to his optimum level, and I think Wenger's mindful of that, as is Santi. The understanding between the 3 will develop over the course of the season, as we play more games.
The larger and more pressing issue is the lack of quality up front. Walcott's role in this team has been over-rated before but I think we're now in danger of him being one of the best attackers we have, which is a scary situation.
Watched the first half of Arsenal's game last weekend and Wilshere was so far ahead of everyone on the pitch - even half fit - it was frightening. He was absolutely magnificent. Just hope he keeps the mental side of his game in order, because he could be world class.
People in missing the point shocker.
Like I said I like Neville and his take on punditry - it's just that this time there really wasn't anything remotely "fantastic" about the analysis. People talked about that bit of football chat like it was the second coming. It's just stating the obvious with a nice digital pen.
The fact that it's still considerably better than the likes of Shearer and Lawrence should really not be the benchmark for someone like Neville.
Stop talking about it like I hate him or that I called his analysis a piece of shit.
Like I said I like Neville and his take on punditry - it's just that this time there really wasn't anything remotely "fantastic" about the analysis. People talked about that bit of football chat like it was the second coming. It's just stating the obvious with a nice digital pen.
The fact that it's still considerably better than the likes of Shearer and Lawrence should really not be the benchmark for someone like Neville.
Stop talking about it like I hate him or that I called his analysis a piece of shit.
The fact is that he is probably the best pundit on TV. He highlighted Arsenal's problem with movement from midfield (Cazorla lack of forward run that could make him more lethal), showed examples, and coincidently they did and scored 5 in a game, the same amount they had scored in the last 6 games.
You say this is common knowledge, that is just usual punditry, but it's not. You don't get insight like that everywhere (I'd say almost nowhere) nowadays.
I saw an article saying that just because Neville is great at it, doesn't mean necessarily that he is Jesus Pundit, is more to the fact all other are awful, he should be the common pundit. But his analysis are amazing, detailed, and very insightful on regular basis. This one included.
To keep telling it ain't no thing, and he said nothing apart from the obvious we see everyday on TV, looks like you're just hating.
It's just bizarre to praise that piece of analysis as amazing and fantastic when in reality it should be the very least a pundit paid to talk football should be able to do.
He's had loads of much, much higher quality pieces before.
He's had loads of much, much higher quality pieces before.
Has this article been posted in here? Quite interesting.
Again, you make it seem like an ordinary analysis we get from every pundit every week. It's not. It maybe not his best work, surely is not, but is really great.
The brilliant bit sometimes may refer to his performance, more than exclusively to this article.
Yup, definitely. It's one of the many reasons (though probably not the biggest) why he's not been as influential for Barca.
For me, Wilshere's the same. He's too good to have to wait for someone else to get him the ball. He was quite deep in those brilliant games against Barca, wasn't he? Meaning he could do the winning-back, the string-pulling and, if he felt like driving forwards, the creative stuff in the final third.
In an ideal world, all pundits would actually be able to talk intelligently about football. But they can't, and until more do it doesn't seem that strange to praise one when he talks some good stuff.
We get stuff like that every single week here in Norway. It's quite ordinary.
Most of the stuff he gets praised for is something the majority of punters can spot on a 20in tv in the pub. He combines the passion of a Souness/Gullit with a much-needed degree of articulacy but what he's saying is all very simple. He's one of the few who really enjoys being there chatting about football and that's what makes him endearing IMO.
The analysis of Arsenal was good, and should be the norm. Can you imagine Hansen and Shearer doing something similar on MotD? They are awful. Interesting article as well Rooney in paris. I doubt the MotD crew spend anywhere as much time preparing what they are going to say.
They are awful. Interesting article as well Rooney in paris. I doubt the MotD crew spend anywhere as much time preparing what they are going to say.Well yeah, I too like his personality on TV. But I just don't get all this over the top praise of his analysis in this case.
Yes, he's passionate and good to listen to and no doubt he's the best pundit in England. I think you're spot on there Brwned.
It is over the top, but you have to forgive that. It's like an England fan getting over-excited about any national-team player who can actually pass the ball back and forth along the ground - can you blame them after years of Barry?
It's weird how much better the Norwegian punditry is than the English stuff (after the move to TV2 PL).
People will perhaps over praise him on here because he is also one of our own. Takes a lot for that kind of attachment to be shaken of.
I also like the fact that he seems to do a lot of work behind the scenes rather than just watch the match and regurgitate whatever crap Talksport are coming out with.
I also like the fact that he seems to do a lot of work behind the scenes rather than just watch the match and regurgitate whatever crap Talksport are coming out with.
Most of his criticism is constructive other than the odd examples of David Luiz and Balotelli in the past.
He would never criticise SAF though and why should he? He owes his career to the man.
There's a 2 hour MNF tomorrow with no live game. From what I can gather it's a 2 hour analysis show.
Lovely stuff
Lovely stuff
Weird. I suppose he'll be going over all the Christmas games.There's a 2 hour MNF tomorrow with no live game. From what I can gather it's a 2 hour analysis show.
Lovely stuff
Yeh I'd expect so.
In fairness, it's going to take two hours just to show all the goals Villa have conceded over Christmas.
Is there anywhere I can watch MNF? I dont have Sky sports :/
Mypremium tv usually shows Sky 1-4.
Cheers pete
Christ how boring.There's a 2 hour MNF tomorrow with no live game. From what I can gather it's a 2 hour analysis show.
Lovely stuff