|
Post by nott1 on Apr 20, 2015 11:45:59 GMT
Journeyman. Does a reasonable, ordinary job, but never really good as I said. Will never win player of the year or get the headlines! We could get much better! Are you aware of what a journeyman is ? Experienced, competent, but not outststanding (or really good).
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 20, 2015 11:56:31 GMT
We say we want to be the next Southampton. Would Glenn Whelan get into their side? Will Koeman come calling for him when Schneiderlin goes in the summer?
Glenn has been a good player for us, and for the money spent an absolute bargain to boot BUT to improve you have to upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 12:02:01 GMT
Everytime Whelan gets written off or someone is bought in to replace him, he returns playing better than before.
This will be no different.
He had a poor game on Saturday, WITH THE BALL, but without it he was his usual reliable self, popping up here there and everywhere to cover for teammates who were having equally as poor a game as him.
I've seen people blame him for their goal and he may or may not have been at fault. Personally, it was a combination of Wooly and Walters but to put it in perspective, Glenn Whelen has done the job on the 6 yard line, between the corner of the 6 yard box and the front post for nigh on 4 years now. His job, is to intercept any incoming low corner, stopping the ball getting to the danger area. He has done it brilliantly and I can't recall a single time that he has been found wanting prior to Saturday.
Just because he will never likely be in the running for Player of the Year doesn't make him a shit player. Glenn Whelan is a fine player and an important cog in the Stoke City wheel and it would cost a damn site more than 500k to replace him with someone half as good.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 12:08:50 GMT
We say we want to be the next Southampton. Would Glenn Whelan get into their side? Will Koeman come calling for him when Schneiderlin goes in the summer? Glenn has been a good player for us, and for the money spent an absolute bargain to boot BUT to improve you have to upgrade. You can updgrade on every player. There is normally always better out there, particularly for a club of our standing. Southampton were no better than us. The two teams were much of a muchness really. We've played them 3 times this season and whilst they've come out on top in two of them, comprehensively so at their ground, there really isn't an awful lot between our two teams. Would Southampton replace Schneiderlin with Whelan? Unlikely I would say, but they most likely wouldn't replace him with N'zonzi either. Does that mean N'zonzi is in need of upgrading too?
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Apr 20, 2015 12:09:16 GMT
Everytime Whelan gets written off or someone is bought in to replace him, he returns playing better than before. This will be no different. He had a poor game on Saturday, WITH THE BALL, but without it he was his usual reliable self, popping up here there and everywhere to cover for teammates who were having equally as poor a game as him. I've seen people blame him for their goal and he may or may not have been at fault. Personally, it was a combination of Wooly and Walters but to put it in perspective, Glenn Whelen has done the job on the 6 yard line, between the corner of the 6 yard box and the front post for nigh on 4 years now. His job, is to intercept any incoming low corner, stopping the ball getting to the danger area. He has done it brilliantly and I can't recall a single time that he has been found wanting prior to Saturday. Just because he will never likely be in the running for Player of the Year doesn't make him a shit player. Glenn Whelan is a fine player and an important cog in the Stoke City wheel and it would cost a damn site more than 500k to replace him with someone half as good. Spot on Dave. Off the ball Glenn did very well on Saturday, even if he was poorer than usual on it.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 20, 2015 12:18:52 GMT
We say we want to be the next Southampton. Would Glenn Whelan get into their side? Will Koeman come calling for him when Schneiderlin goes in the summer? Glenn has been a good player for us, and for the money spent an absolute bargain to boot BUT to improve you have to upgrade. You can updgrade on every player. There is normally always better out there, particularly for a club of our standing. Southampton were no better than us. The two teams were much of a muchness really. We've played them 3 times this season and whilst they've come out on top in two of them, comprehensively so at their ground, there really isn't an awful lot between our two teams. Would Southampton replace Schneiderlin with Whelan? Unlikely I would say, but they most likely wouldn't replace him with N'zonzi either. Does that mean N'zonzi is in need of upgrading too?
I was just comparing like for like and obviously any player can be upgraded upon. Over the course of the season Southampton have been better than us, and on Saturday I thought they were (marginally) the better team.
We have to improve our quality on the ball if, like the manager says, we can push on. Whether you like it or not, Glenn is consistently poor on the ball.
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Apr 20, 2015 12:33:05 GMT
Yeah, that's why he's been one of the mainstays of a team that's gone from a promotion-chasing Championship team to one that's established itself in the Premier League for the best part of a decade. Jesus wept. Journeyman. Does a reasonable, ordinary job, but never really good as I said. Will never win player of the year or get the headlines! We could get much better! Hardly a journeyman 142 games Sheffield Wednesday and 200+ games at Stoke since 2008. He's been a great servant for Stoke, not spectacular but does a good job protecting the back four. Very unfair to right him off after one mistake, especially as he made up for it later when he rescued Begovich from a major blunder. We can upgrade in every position with unlimited funds and it may be time to look for a younger player to replace Whelan but not on the basis of one mistake.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 12:39:50 GMT
It's not a case of whether I like it or not. We have consistently tried to improve on Glenn Whelan, spending various sums of money on doing so in the process.
Olifinjana, Amdy Faye, Dean Whitehead, Wilson Palacios, Diego Arismendi, Charlie Adam, Steve Sidwell, maybe even Steven N'zonzi have all arrived at the club with managers attempting to replace Whelan and supporters thinking that the time has finally arrived, yet Whelan is still going strong, is still performing in a team that is getting better and better each year and remains a key player for the manager.
Whelan, as so many others, look a better player when surrounded by better players. Given us the quality options of Bojan, Odemwingie, Moses, an in-form Arnie with fully fit and firing Adam and Ireland behind them in the pecking order, and Whelan will look a better player ON THE BALL because he will have more options.
Southampton have been better than us over the course of the season. The league table doesn't lie. We aren't that far away from them though and Whelan could still play regularly in a Stoke City team that could target 60 points and a top 7 finish as a seasons objective. We will end up with 52 points or so this season, finish 8th or 9th, in a season where we've been decimated by injury to key players and through this, Whelan (save for his own spell out with a broken leg) has been a near ever present.
It would be great to get an upgrade on Whelan (and indeed any other player we have) but a poor game on Saturday doesn't really merit a thread title "The beginning of the end for Whelan?" does it?
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Apr 20, 2015 12:45:20 GMT
Are you aware of what a journeyman is ? Experienced, competent, but not outststanding (or really good). No then
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 20, 2015 13:00:53 GMT
It's not a case of whether I like it or not. We have consistently tried to improve on Glenn Whelan, spending various sums of money on doing so in the process. Olifinjana, Amdy Faye, Dean Whitehead, Wilson Palacios, Diego Arismendi, Charlie Adam, Steve Sidwell, maybe even Steven N'zonzi have all arrived at the club with managers attempting to replace Whelan and supporters thinking that the time has finally arrived, yet Whelan is still going strong, is still performing in a team that is getting better and better each year and remains a key player for the manager. Whelan, as so many others, look a better player when surrounded by better players. Given us the quality options of Bojan, Odemwingie, Moses, an in-form Arnie with fully fit and firing Adam and Ireland behind them in the pecking order, and Whelan will look a better player ON THE BALL because he will have more options. Southampton have been better than us over the course of the season. The league table doesn't lie. We aren't that far away from them though and Whelan could still play regularly in a Stoke City team that could target 60 points and a top 7 finish as a seasons objective. We will end up with 52 points or so this season, finish 8th or 9th, in a season where we've been decimated by injury to key players and through this, Whelan (save for his own spell out with a broken leg) has been a near ever present. It would be great to get an upgrade on Whelan (and indeed any other player we have) but a poor game on Saturday doesn't really merit a thread title "The beginning of the end for Whelan?" does it? I don't see how a top six side could feature Glenn Whelan in it and in my opinion in order to get there we need better players than him and a few others.
I didn't start the thread but discussions on the quality of player we have are certainly merited. Beginning of the end for Whelan? After the first half on Saturday you might think so, albeit a harsh.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 20, 2015 13:17:47 GMT
Glenns a good servant, a decent enough squad player, but not good enough technically to warrant a place in the first 11.
To me, he has too many games where he looks out of his depth and too few games where he performs well.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Apr 20, 2015 13:18:34 GMT
Experienced, competent, but not outststanding (or really good). No then
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 13:28:11 GMT
Glenns a good servant, a decent enough squad player, but not good enough technically to warrant a place in the first 11. To me, he has too many games where he looks out of his depth and too few games where he performs well. Funny that given that numerous players, past and present, have described Whelan as technically the best player at the club.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 13:32:21 GMT
It's not a case of whether I like it or not. We have consistently tried to improve on Glenn Whelan, spending various sums of money on doing so in the process. Olifinjana, Amdy Faye, Dean Whitehead, Wilson Palacios, Diego Arismendi, Charlie Adam, Steve Sidwell, maybe even Steven N'zonzi have all arrived at the club with managers attempting to replace Whelan and supporters thinking that the time has finally arrived, yet Whelan is still going strong, is still performing in a team that is getting better and better each year and remains a key player for the manager. Whelan, as so many others, look a better player when surrounded by better players. Given us the quality options of Bojan, Odemwingie, Moses, an in-form Arnie with fully fit and firing Adam and Ireland behind them in the pecking order, and Whelan will look a better player ON THE BALL because he will have more options. Southampton have been better than us over the course of the season. The league table doesn't lie. We aren't that far away from them though and Whelan could still play regularly in a Stoke City team that could target 60 points and a top 7 finish as a seasons objective. We will end up with 52 points or so this season, finish 8th or 9th, in a season where we've been decimated by injury to key players and through this, Whelan (save for his own spell out with a broken leg) has been a near ever present. It would be great to get an upgrade on Whelan (and indeed any other player we have) but a poor game on Saturday doesn't really merit a thread title "The beginning of the end for Whelan?" does it? I don't see how a top six side could feature Glenn Whelan in it and in my opinion in order to get there we need better players than him and a few others.
I didn't start the thread but discussions on the quality of player we have are certainly merited. Beginning of the end for Whelan? After the first half on Saturday you might think so, albeit a harsh.
No offence, but Top 6? Since when has that been an objective? If we were to finish 7th, we will have effectively won the league. 7th is the very best we can hope for. In one season, in our current guise (ownership, stadium, income, spending capacity etc) we will never do enough to overcome each and everyone of Manure, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal, Tottenham and Everton. We might hurdle one of them, every now and then, if they happen to have a poor season but the chances of us doing it consistently are slim to non-existant as things stand. What do we need to finish 7th? Circa 60 points? Give us players of the calibre of Bojan, Moses, Odemwingie, Arnie, N'zonzi etc, fit and firing throughout the bulk of the season and a team also including Whelan could push for that spot. Achieve it and we've won the league.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 20, 2015 13:36:31 GMT
Glenns a good servant, a decent enough squad player, but not good enough technically to warrant a place in the first 11. To me, he has too many games where he looks out of his depth and too few games where he performs well. Funny that given that numerous players, past and present, have described Whelan as technically the best player at the club. That's bullshit. I think you're confusing Whelan with Paul Scholes. Nobody today or in the past 6 years (at least) would describe him as the most technical player at the club. Well, not unless they were mental or taking the piss. I expect it was maybe Huth if anyone.
|
|
|
Post by jimmygscfc on Apr 20, 2015 13:40:36 GMT
Funny that given that numerous players, past and present, have described Whelan as technically the best player at the club. That's bullshit. I think you're confusing Whelan with Paul Scholes. Nobody today or in the past 6 years (at least) would describe him as the most technical player at the club. Well, not unless they were mental or taking the piss. I expect it was maybe Huth if anyone. Huth? Please explain.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 20, 2015 13:51:26 GMT
That's bullshit. I think you're confusing Whelan with Paul Scholes. Nobody today or in the past 6 years (at least) would describe him as the most technical player at the club. Well, not unless they were mental or taking the piss. I expect it was maybe Huth if anyone. Huth? Please explain. As in Huth would be most likely to take the piss by saying that Glenn was the most technical player at the club. More technical than Whelan: Recent Years - Rik, Tuncay, Ethers, Pennant, etc... Now - Everyone aside from the CBs and Keepers.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 13:53:40 GMT
Huth? Please explain. As in Huth would be most likely to take the piss by saying that Glenn was the most technical player at the club. More technical than Whelan: Recent Years - Rik, Tuncay, Ethers, Pennant, etc... Now - Everyone aside from the CBs and Keepers. Just because he doesn't do step overs, tricks and showy stuff, doesn't mean he isn't technically excellent.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 13:55:10 GMT
Funny that given that numerous players, past and present, have described Whelan as technically the best player at the club. That's bullshit. I think you're confusing Whelan with Paul Scholes. Nobody today or in the past 6 years (at least) would describe him as the most technical player at the club. Well, not unless they were mental or taking the piss. I expect it was maybe Huth if anyone. Shawcross was one. An ex coach was another. Both at the club currently or been at the club within the last 6 years. Ric was a genius but technically perfect? I don't think so. Ric was "off the cuff". Half the time he didn't know what he was going to do himself. He played on instinct and raw ability.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 20, 2015 14:00:15 GMT
As in Huth would be most likely to take the piss by saying that Glenn was the most technical player at the club. More technical than Whelan: Recent Years - Rik, Tuncay, Ethers, Pennant, etc... Now - Everyone aside from the CBs and Keepers. Just because he doesn't do step overs, tricks and showy stuff, doesn't mean he isn't technically excellent. If you think he's technically excellent from any perspective then you're entitled to your opinion. If I look at each of these individually I would not say he was excellent at any of them...Passing, Shooting, Tackling, Ball control and retention, Dribbling, Heading, etc. I personally wouldn't describe any part of his game as excellent with the exception of perhaps his effort. But that's not technical.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 20, 2015 14:04:17 GMT
That's bullshit. I think you're confusing Whelan with Paul Scholes. Nobody today or in the past 6 years (at least) would describe him as the most technical player at the club. Well, not unless they were mental or taking the piss. I expect it was maybe Huth if anyone. Shawcross was one. An ex coach was another. Both at the club currently or been at the club within the last 6 years. Ric was a genius but technically perfect? I don't think so. Ric was "off the cuff". Half the time he didn't know what he was going to do himself. He played on instinct and raw ability. Are you now suggesting that Glenn is 'technically perfect'? Ryan was young and naïve once and the coach no longer being at the club says it all about him. One of the dinner ladies said he was crap, but I won't disclose her name because that would give away the fact that I'm making this stuff up.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Apr 20, 2015 14:05:36 GMT
Just because he doesn't do step overs, tricks and showy stuff, doesn't mean he isn't technically excellent. If you think he's technically excellent from any perspective then you're entitled to your opinion. If I look at each of these individually I would not say he was excellent at any of them...Passing, Shooting, Tackling, Ball control and retention, Dribbling, Heading, etc. I personally wouldn't describe any part of his game as excellent with the exception of perhaps his effort. But that's not technical. I am merely pointing out that professionals inside the game and club have said such things about Whelan. Whether you or I agree doesn't matter. I'm merely pointing it out to you. To be honest, as much as I like Whelan, whenever he receives the ball in our half facing our goal, I have a mild panic attack because he isn't the best in that situation, in my opinion. That said, I like him as a player, he's more than good enough to play in a team with aspirations such as ours and he has more good games than bad ones in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 20, 2015 14:12:13 GMT
If you think he's technically excellent from any perspective then you're entitled to your opinion. If I look at each of these individually I would not say he was excellent at any of them...Passing, Shooting, Tackling, Ball control and retention, Dribbling, Heading, etc. I personally wouldn't describe any part of his game as excellent with the exception of perhaps his effort. But that's not technical. I am merely pointing out that professionals inside the game and club have said such things about Whelan. Whether you or I agree doesn't matter. I'm merely pointing it out to you. To be honest, as much as I like Whelan, whenever he receives the ball in our half facing our goal, I have a mild panic attack because he isn't the best in that situation, in my opinion. That said, I like him as a player, he's more than good enough to play in a team with aspirations such as ours and he has more good games than bad ones in my opinion. I still think we can do significantly better in his position. Though if an unnamed coach said he was the most technical player at the club then it must be true.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 20, 2015 14:12:41 GMT
I don't see how a top six side could feature Glenn Whelan in it and in my opinion in order to get there we need better players than him and a few others.
I didn't start the thread but discussions on the quality of player we have are certainly merited. Beginning of the end for Whelan? After the first half on Saturday you might think so, albeit a harsh.
No offence, but Top 6? Since when has that been an objective? If we were to finish 7th, we will have effectively won the league. 7th is the very best we can hope for. In one season, in our current guise (ownership, stadium, income, spending capacity etc) we will never do enough to overcome each and everyone of Manure, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal, Tottenham and Everton. We might hurdle one of them, every now and then, if they happen to have a poor season but the chances of us doing it consistently are slim to non-existant as things stand. What do we need to finish 7th? Circa 60 points? Give us players of the calibre of Bojan, Moses, Odemwingie, Arnie, N'zonzi etc, fit and firing throughout the bulk of the season and a team also including Whelan could push for that spot. Achieve it and we've won the league.
I thought the manager was on about pushing on. Is it an objective? A steep one if so. More like an aspiration. One minute you say there is little between a side that will finish 5th or 6th, now you're intimating it's unrealistic to expect to compete with them.
By the way, anyone can look technically proficient on the training pitch, like you say when he gets the ball and is pressured it's panic stations.
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Apr 20, 2015 14:19:18 GMT
Experienced, competent, but not outststanding (or really good). No then He was close........... From Wikipedia, In American English, a journeyman or journeywoman is an athlete who is technically competent but unable to excel.[1] The term is used elsewhere (such as in British and Australian contexts) to refer to a professional sportsman who plays for a large number of different clubs during his career
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 20, 2015 14:19:31 GMT
The real measure of someone's technical ability can be easily assessed using the simple yet accurate 'March' test.
Basically, if March describes them as either MOTM, Player of the Season or Vital to the clubs best ever run of results and first cup final in any specified number of years, then they are crap technically.
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Apr 20, 2015 14:20:48 GMT
Everytime Whelan gets written off or someone is bought in to replace him, he returns playing better than before. This will be no different. He had a poor game on Saturday, WITH THE BALL, but without it he was his usual reliable self, popping up here there and everywhere to cover for teammates who were having equally as poor a game as him. I've seen people blame him for their goal and he may or may not have been at fault. Personally, it was a combination of Wooly and Walters but to put it in perspective, Glenn Whelen has done the job on the 6 yard line, between the corner of the 6 yard box and the front post for nigh on 4 years now. His job, is to intercept any incoming low corner, stopping the ball getting to the danger area. He has done it brilliantly and I can't recall a single time that he has been found wanting prior to Saturday. Just because he will never likely be in the running for Player of the Year doesn't make him a shit player. Glenn Whelan is a fine player and an important cog in the Stoke City wheel and it would cost a damn site more than 500k to replace him with someone half as good. I'm glad it wasn't just me who saw this. He gave the ball away a lot, but defensively he was very good. He's now doing the unsung Rory Delap role of reading the game and spotting the danger in advance - he's also doing it very well. We can do better than him, but writing him off on the basis of Saturday's game, where he wasn't even that bad, is silly.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 20, 2015 14:29:58 GMT
Everytime Whelan gets written off or someone is bought in to replace him, he returns playing better than before. This will be no different. He had a poor game on Saturday, WITH THE BALL, but without it he was his usual reliable self, popping up here there and everywhere to cover for teammates who were having equally as poor a game as him. I've seen people blame him for their goal and he may or may not have been at fault. Personally, it was a combination of Wooly and Walters but to put it in perspective, Glenn Whelen has done the job on the 6 yard line, between the corner of the 6 yard box and the front post for nigh on 4 years now. His job, is to intercept any incoming low corner, stopping the ball getting to the danger area. He has done it brilliantly and I can't recall a single time that he has been found wanting prior to Saturday. Just because he will never likely be in the running for Player of the Year doesn't make him a shit player. Glenn Whelan is a fine player and an important cog in the Stoke City wheel and it would cost a damn site more than 500k to replace him with someone half as good. I'm glad it wasn't just me who saw this. He gave the ball away a lot, but defensively he was very good. He's now doing the unsung Rory Delap role of reading the game and spotting the danger in advance - he's also doing it very well. We can do better than him, but writing him off on the basis of Saturday's game, where he wasn't even that bad, is silly.
So basically he kept giving the ball to the opposition but made up for it by putting a few tackles in? We're trying to develop a passing game and to keep possession yet one of our 'cogs' keeps giving the ball away. Bet the manager is happy about that.
I'm not writing him off, all I'm saying is we need better to progress IMHO.
Oh, his substitution on Saturday lead to us wining the game. Would we of won with him still on the pitch?
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Apr 20, 2015 15:30:32 GMT
He is good at defending because he keeps giving the ball away. Thanks for everything Glenda, but time to move on this summer methinks, or at least get used to sitting down every saturday next season.
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Apr 20, 2015 15:57:48 GMT
I'm glad it wasn't just me who saw this. He gave the ball away a lot, but defensively he was very good. He's now doing the unsung Rory Delap role of reading the game and spotting the danger in advance - he's also doing it very well. We can do better than him, but writing him off on the basis of Saturday's game, where he wasn't even that bad, is silly.
So basically he kept giving the ball to the opposition but made up for it by putting a few tackles in? We're trying to develop a passing game and to keep possession yet one of our 'cogs' keeps giving the ball away. Bet the manager is happy about that.
I'm not writing him off, all I'm saying is we need better to progress IMHO.
Oh, his substitution on Saturday lead to us wining the game. Would we of won with him still on the pitch?
That bit wasn't targeted at you, sorry, just the general negativity ('the beginning of the end' etc) around Whelan. I'd probably give him a 6/10 for Saturday, 8 off the ball and 4 on it - a long way from his best.
|
|