₦airaland Forum

airmark:
You have memory problem bro. Below is my first comment which you quoted and i just shot. I dont know why you were twisting my view, as if you made any point. You made it look as if every tackle is a successful one. Without even knowing makelele had 82 % tackle success until you sent a link, i commented based on successful tackles. The link you sent put tackles in the stats, and that's a premier league site. Instead of you to stay mute or address those areas i corrected, you were mentioning me in your posts.
Tell me , why you stated tackles are only to be deployed in counter-attacks
Tell me why you expect defenders that operate mostly in the box to make more tackles than dms outside the box.
Tell me why whoscored used tackles to rate players.
Tell me why idrissa gueye who has high number of tackles now, was tipped for greatness by you last year.
From lesotho to peru, successful tackles will always be used to rate dms.

None of this makes any sense. It is not worth commenting on as it's full of misconceptions and poor understanding.

For example, I said the only time tackle is a must is to stop a dangerous counter. How you stop opposition in normal situations is your personal preference and your style of play. You can tackle like Kante or you can block passing lanes like Makelele. I have no quarrel with whatever method you use. So I won't start counting no of tackles as that is influenced by your style of play. You read it to mean that I said tackle is only to be used on counterattack.

So there is just one example of how the above post is full of misconceptions that are not worth my energy.

I only have one question, what is the difference between successful tackles and no of tackles?

airmark:
You have been found out, just take your L and sleep on it, dont twist my view to look as if you made any meaningful point here. Nobody stated tackles are the all in all in defensive skill, what we are educating you on is, tackle is an essential part of defensive skills you can use to rate a dm.

My friend shut it there. I don't know how someone who came in yesterday insisting we must count players tackles will be going into grey area now. Is counting tackles an indication of a defensive players effectiveness or not? Cos I don't understand this one you dey talk now. Do you count tackles or not when rating players?

Nihilist:
Take 5.

This your high five look like waka. Not accepted!

Nihilist:
Learn to read bro.

This is the official Nihilist postion on Matic with regards to tackles. This was in Feb. I can go back to last year if you want.

Whether it is in suporting airmark as he erroneously claims that no of tackles is a key stat to judge a players effectiveness, or plethora of comments made in the past, or posting tackle stats after many matches to prove a point. . . . or your recent attempts to prove that VDV, Luiz, Azpi, Aldeweireld etc are high volume tacklers to go with their status as top defenders, it has always been clear to me what your stance is, as well as from the likes of the below:

Nihilist:
Yet this big man was making more tackles in his best season than he is now.

Nihilist:
LOL so you mean Kante is carrying Matic....because Kante is definitely posting those high tackle and interception numbers.

My stance has always been clear on the other side of the debate based on my experience with Makelele, Ballack, Terry and co that you don't need to post high numbers of tackles to be effective.

If we misunderstood each other before, and now both agree that no of tackles is not an indication of effectiveness, then there is no need to fight. Lets just shake hands and help me pass the message the Airmark, bigkesh and co rather than supporting their stance. I will not hear that the Greatest Chelsea legends who barely tackled are ineffective because someone wants to promote Kante or down Matic.

Nihilist:
Nobody said tackle's prove an indication of a player's effectiveness. All i said was that tackles are in important tool in the skill set of a defender.

The most important thing in an exercise is that truth is brought to light and peoples behaviour changes whether they admit it or not.

Nihilist 3 months ago - "No of tackles is a very important stat".

Nihilist over the last months - "What exactly does Matic do. Look at his low no of tackles. He is ineffective"

Nihilist today: "Nobody said no of tackles prove an indication of a player's effectiveness."

You went from fervent counter of tackles to "no of tackles is no indication of effectiveness"

It doesn't matter to me if you admit you were wrong and are now changing views as long as you correct yourself​ undercover.

Keep shape-shifting, you will soon turn to amoeba.

Nihilist:
That was at 9am this morning. I don't need to be an an accantant to know that you cannot find a correlation between an individual defender's tackles and the number of goals his team concedes.

Because cleansheet is a function of the whole team, not an individual defender. The only player on the pitch whose individual actions directly correlate with clean sheet is the goalkeeper, which is why they only count clean sheet as a stat for keepers and not anybody else.

Sorry, this is why I gave you aggregate no of tackles for the whole team vs goals conceded which did not show correlation between a teams aggregate tackles and the no of goals it concedes.

So if the teams total tackles and the players individual tackles show little correlation to goals conceded, how exactly is counting the number of tackles an indication of the players effectiveness? On both counts, your argument fails.

So in other words, stop your foolish counting of tackles which you have been arguing about for over 4 months. I could dig up your numerous posts just in the last 24 hours, never mind 4 months which would torpedo your churlish attempts to backtrack now, but I no get time.

All I will say in summary is it is important to be able to tackle when you need to to save your team which is often only once every game or couple of games, but it is not important to count number of tackles. Counting number of tackles is simply paying homage to a STYLE OF PLAY which I have been consistent about, and which the data analysis backs up.

Nihilist:
Basically all you wanted to do what's show you know how to count and you managed to prove that.

Please leave small yarns for small boys. Pesin wey done climb Everest no fit dey form effizy for Kilimanjaro work. That is a one minute job, it is the going back and forth with you that is the waste of time.

The conclusion of the matter is that we have scientific proof of little correlation between no of tackles and clean sheets.

Lana1:
Na wa o. Football don turn Maths and Stats for here.

Anyways, Ibime are/were u a stat major?? And which kind of correlation coefficient u dey use for ur analysis up there??

Sometimes you have to break coconut head with figures when yarn done too much.

Na Spearmans Rank in excel. Maths with Econs.

Nihilist:
This is why I told you to calm down instead of jumping up and down like a madman with fire ant in his pant. Just look at all the calculation you made there and in the end it brought you to a conclusion that Nihilist made how many hours ago?

Look at this fool. You just wrote that having been backed into a corner. After 4 months of arguing about the relationship between tackling and defensive stability.

Even this morning, you were talking of analysing the percentiles. You did not know that the percentiles is directly linked to the correlation? You cannot be in vastly different percentiles for two different things and have strong correlation between them.

Nihilist:
Actually, there are 43 who have made more than 15 apps this season.

VVD and Azpi are in the top 4. Thats top 10 Percentile

Luiz is in the top 13. That's top 30 Percentile

So Mr Mugu, which is it? Are you denying the correlation or the percentiles?

This is the problem with people with loud mouth and poor education.

Of the 5 CBs I mentioned:

Toby Aldeweireld, top defender in the Prem for goals conceded while he was on the pitch, and 47% of centrebacks tackle more than him.

David Luiz, top 2% of defenders in the Prem for Goals conceded while he was on the pitch, 70% of centrebacks tackle more than him.

Ditto Verthongen etc etc etc

. . . . while the opposite is the case for Azpi and VDV.


PROOF that tackling is a style of play and is not correlated to defensively stability.

Mr "I did not know we were talking about correlation". You should go and return your fathers school fees, loud mouth and empty skull.

Some people are just stewpid with impunity.

Oga diggz the Mathematician, you can verify if you wish.

If you don't already know, lets get the official definitions:

"Statistical correlation is measured by what is called coefficient of correlation (r). Its numerical value ranges from +1.0 to -1.0. It gives us an indication of the strength of relationship"

https://i.imgur.com/8shKhuh.jpg


So I pulled Nihilist 43 centrebacks data, looking at the no of tackles per game and no of goals conceded while they were on the pitch.


https://i.imgur.com/WOpXH0b.jpg


We then rank the centrebacks ie the person who conceded the least amount per game will be no 1 and the person who conceded the most will be no 43

https://i.imgur.com/XYCm85P.jpg


We then run the correlation matrix to test the strength of relationship between no of tackles and no of goals conceded:


https://i.imgur.com/MGvuCCX.jpg


Which shows a correlation of 0.1 ie Very Weak correlation between no of tackles you make and no of goals conceded.

If the maths is too hard for you, check no 1 on the rank of goals conceded, Toby Aldeweireld, languishing in 21st place for no of tackles per game. Check no 2 David Luiz languishing in 31st place.


That folks is the end of the matter, and statistical finality.

First things first, Luiz is only no 31 of 43 on tackles per game for centrebacks. In YOUR list you did total no of tackles which placed Luiz at no 13 not taking into account no of games played. Aldewiereld is no 21, Azpi is no 2 and Van Dijk is no 5.

Top of the list for tackles per game is Otamendi.

Nihilist:
The main thing he said was that top defenders don't tackle, and listed a set of defenders who supposedly do not tackle - all I did was show him that those defenders that he listed are actually the best tacklers in the league within the centreback sector.

Again, you are talking nonsense.

I never said top defenders don't tackle. I said tackling is a style of play. Whatever your style of play does not make you a good or bad defender.

And also stop lying on my name.

YOU posted a top 20 tacklers list, not limited to centrebacks, I said:

Ibime:
Top 20 tacklers does not contain Aldeweireld, Van Dijk, Luiz and Azpi - those are your 4 best defenders this season. I did not see Verthongen or Valencia either. That's your top 6 defenders

I was referring to your list, of course.

Since then, all you have been doing is lying about my original statement to obfuscate matters and wiggle out the fact that you are too dumb to face the science and finish the matter definitively.

You then showed a list with 2 of them in top 10 centreback tacklers, with other rubbish defenders like Otamendi and Steve Cook also in the same list. So again, your list of top centrebacks DOES NOT prove the relationship between tackling and good defending.

So finally, for the dumb obstinate nigga who shout the most at the marketplace and does not know the meaning of correlation, we shall spoonfeed you and check the correlation between tackles and goals conceded using YOUR list.

Hehehehehe. See as the nigga is running. He would rather get hung up on an irrelevant point of me talking about all players than even agree to run the numbers of his list of centre backs only.

"i did not know we were talking about correlation".

This is why you should not argue with simpletons. You could be saying one thing, and they would be understanding another.

My guy, I am ready to run the correlation on YOUR list of centre backs only. Quit harping back to my list of all players to obfuscate matters.

Nihilist:
Why don't you compare shots Cortouis has taken this season to the shots Costa has taken? Or maybe we should check how many saves Hazard has made this season.

First rule of comparison is you compare like for like. Each zone on the pitch has its different risks, so you stick to comparing the players that occupy the same zone. If you don't know this, then why are you even bothering to post Wikipedia definitions and excel worksheets?

This case is Sealed, no Heidi Klum.

Bye!

I'm not going to get into peurile childish back and forth over my original statement which did not specify centre backs.

Let us agree that your method of comparing centre backs only is correct. So it should be. The rest is just miscomprehension of my original statement. I TOTALLY agree that we should limit comparison to centre backs.

You produced a list which shows 2 of the best 10 centre backs in the top 10 no of tackles. The list also contains 2 of the worst 10 centre backs this year (Otamendi and Steve Cook). So in summary, your list is a mixed bag which tells us nothing visually to help us draw a reasonable conclusion about the relationship between no of tackles and defensive solidity.

So, now that you finally understand that we have been talking about correlation for the last 4 months (relationship, link etc), let us run the correlation on your list and see what's what. Agreed?

Nihilist:
You were not mentioning correlation when you made your initial statement which has now been proven to be false. I will only entertain any other discussion after you admit that the statement you made about those players missing from the list was factually incorrect. Otherwise, case closed.

They are not on the list! My initial statement was top 20 tacklers, not limited to centrebacks. Though I agree that we should examine the data on centrebacks only for completeness.

What are you talking about me not mentioning correlation? Do I have to spoonfeed you to know that we have been talking about correlation ever since this debate started? We have been talking about the relationship between no of tackles and good defending (low goals conceded) all this while and you did not know we were talking about correlation? Do you need a dictionary? You did not know there are scientific ways of proving these relationships absolutely?

Nihilist:
Ibime: Top 20 tacklers does not contain Aldeweireld, Van Dijk, Luiz and Azpi - those are your 4 best defenders this season.

Are VVD, Luiz, and Azpi on the the list? Yes or no?

If Yes, case closed.

You are running away. Top 20 tacklers does not include those players. You brought top 20 centrebacks with Otamendi as number one. You keep running away from correlation coefficient (which I have not even run yet). It is only so long that one would stomach obstinacy when clear defined resolution of a matter is available.

Nihilist:
Each team has played at least 27 league games this season. Whoscored limit it to defenders who have made at least 15 appearances this season which is a total of 43 defenders.

Even if you expand the list to every centre back who has made at least 1 appearance this season, those players still make the top 20 tacklers of 93 players.

Case firmly closed.

I repeat, it is not case closed. Aldeweirelds omission alone from top 20 tacklers cast serious doubt over the correlation between tackles and good defending. Otamendis spot at no 1 casts serious doubt over the correlation too. Steve Cook, Ben Mee, Papy Djilobolodji, both Everton defenders and many others in that top 20 casts serious doubt over the correlation between tackling and good defending. This looks like nothing but a random selection based on style of play.

Again, to settle the matter, I suggest thus:

On a player level, since you will argue about the ranking of players, I am happy to use the "goals conceded by their team" to rank the defenders and check the correlation against the number of tackles the players make.

The correlation coefficient is the scientifically defined finality of the matter. As a quick example to help you understand, simple visuals in the below would tell you in the below that there is 100% positive correlation between IQ and Test Result, and 100% negative correlation between IQ and Net worth

https://i.imgur.com/8nMPkYC.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/8498Il7.jpg


The correlation matrix defines that relationship as 1 between IQ and Test Result, and -1 between IQ and Net Worth. It is the number that tells you the relationship between two data sets.

https://i.imgur.com/wdvualJ.jpg


So it is not a matter of he said, she said, I saw, and picking out of incomplete sections of data to suit your argument. Let us run the correlation between no of tackles and no of goals conceded for each player, and see what is what. Agree?

Nihilist:
This is where you want to try and obscure the argument. You said, those 4 players you listed were not in the top 20 tacklers. I listed the top 20 centrebacks and 3 of your listed players were in it. Case closed.

It's not case closed. 20 out of 43 defenders is 50% of the eligible population. The 20 included a mixed bag of atrocious defenders like Otamendis, Steve Cooks and co as well as good defenders. By visual alone, that is a random selection more in keeping with my argument that no of tackles is a style of play.

To settle the matter, I suggest thus:

On a player level, since you will argue about the ranking of players, I am happy to use the "goals conceded by their team" to rank the defenders and check the correlation against the number of tackles the players make.

There is no arguing with a correlation coefficient. It is the defined truth that establishes the relationship between two or more data sets. All I am asking you is if it is acceptable to use goals conceded by their team to rank the defenders and lets test the correlation of that against no of tackles.

Nihilist:
What is the clown saying?

You are the only that has been shouting correlation upandan. What's my business with correlation?

This was your verbatim statement



My job as the lie detector was to prove you were lying as 3 of those 4 players were in the top 15 for tackles. 2 of them in the top 5. 1 of them in the top 2.

Now after being exposed yet again for yarning bollocks, you're shouting correlation and excel spreadsheet. What next? SPSS? MATLAB?

My nigga cuddle this L and go to sleep.

My friend lets not be combative and stick to the facts. I said "Top 20 tacklers does not include Luiz, Azpi, VVD, Aldeweireld" which it doesn't. You whittled it down to top 20 centrebacks, of which there are only 43 centrebacks. The base of comparison changed from all players to centrebacks only, and it is only fair to compare like for like. I can accept to debate on those terms being that I am not intellectually dishonest.

You then went on an exercise of listing highest tackling 20 centrebacks (50% of the total sample size) to show some of those names I mentioned. A simple visual examination showed the top 20 tackling centrebacks was a mixed bag of good defenders and bad defenders, which does not tell us anything definitive.

If you want to argue something, argue intellectually. I said let's get to the koko of the matter, which is the relationship between no of tackles and being a good defender. In statistics, you cannot talk about relationship without calculating correlation coefficient. I am not about to argue with you about defined and recognised scientific methods of data analysis.

As a start, I have calculated the correlation coefficient between the no of tackles each team makes per game with the no of goals conceded per game. This is a good basis to start since guys will argue about defenders rankings.

This is the list of teams ranked by the no of tackles per game and the no of goals conceded per game:

https://i.imgur.com/zRi2z71.jpg



We then put this into a correlation matrix:

https://i.imgur.com/3CEZMqZ.jpg


The correlation matrix shows a 0.51 relationship between a teams no of tackles and the no of goals conceded. . . .which is a moderate strength of association between no of tackles and no of goals conceded. . . . . about the same as the flip of a coin for heads or tails.


That is on a team level. On a player level, since you will argue about the ranking of players, I am happy to use the "goals conceded by their team" to rank the defenders and check the correlation against the number of tackles the players make. Let me know if this is an acceptable way to test the correlation between tackles and effectiveness.

Nihilist:
Not only excel, you should make PowerPoint slides bro. The first thing you've been shouting is that Luis is top 5 percentile...this is based on what stats? Who said Luis is top 5? Which authority?

Secondly, why are you not trying to calculate for Azpi and VVD? Have you forgotten that these are also examples of players you mentioned?

This guy you have some serious jokes I swear.

Relax yourself. The serious joke was that Otamendi showed strong correlation between being a rubbish defender and having high no of tackles. Azpi and VVD are only 50% of the defenders I mentioned, same probability as the flip of a coin. You presented a mixed-bag of results with some atrocious defenders making your top list of tacklers, threw in Azpi and VVD, and hey voila, presented as evidence of correlation. Wait first, lets chop the numbers up. The list of high volume tacklers look as random as something that would be caused by style of play.

Nihilist:
What is this one yarning again?

The top defenders you mentioned have also been exposed as the top tackling centre backs in the land. Now you're yarning coeffiecient of blah blah.

Those who know you will not be surprised that you try to flip the argument again to save face. The only thing you should be calculating is the coefficient of correlation to this L that you're holding.

Carry on accumulating these Ls and we might have to change your name to lallana

Is it getting too much for you. Calm down.

It's simple. Your correlation coefficient will simply determine the strength of the relationship between having a high number of tackles and being a good defender.

You simply can't come and tell us Luiz is in the highest 30% of tacklers and disappear, when he is in the top 5% of defenders this season. That is weak correlation. When I enter excel, we go chop up the numbers.

Nihilist:
Actually, there are 43 who have made more than 15 apps this season.

VVD and Azpi are in the top 4. Thats top 10 Percentile

Luiz is in the top 13. That's top 30 Percentile

Anyhow you want to look at it, the defenders you mentioned are at the top of the pile when it comes to tackling for centre backs.

Take another L for your troubles.

Calm down, you are about to take a lesson in percentiles. 15 appearances is not much. Claiming someone made top 20 of 43 CBs means nothing except bang average.

Make my daughter comot for youtube first make I enter computer.

Luiz is in the top 30 percentile for tackles yet in the top 5 percentile of centre backs this season. Do you know how low that coefficient of correlation is? Keep yarning, make I enter computer first.

Nihilist:
Unlike you, I like to argue within context.

We were largely discussing midfielders, don't try and obscure the debate by introducing centrebacks to the discussion. Obviously a CB is the last line of defence. He is less likely to attempt a tackle than a midfielder because the consequences could be disastrous. If a DM misses his tackle, a CB can cover him behind. If a CB misses his tackle, then the attacker could be through on goal.

Now while a CB will not be as aggressive in the tackle as a DM, they still need to tackle! Let us compare to top tackling centrebacks in the EPL today.

When we do that, it becomes immediately apparent that you don't know what you're talking about.

Van Dijk is the number 2 on the list of top tackling CBs who have made more than 15 apps in the EPL as of today. Azpi is number 4. So that's 2 of of the players you mentioned sitting in the top 5. Expand it to top 20, and you will find Luiz, and Cahill. You will find a Spurs Centreback there. You will find Arsenal centrebacks there. You will find Liverpool CBs there. You will see Otamendi there.

TACKLING IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE DEFENSIVE TOOLKIT. You cannot remove it. Simples.

You've just ruined your argument by showing us that Otamendi is the top tackling centre back in the league this season.

If you agree that Otamendi is the best defender in the league this season, I will agree with you that counting no of tackles is a good validation of a defenders worth.

I hope you realise that there are only 30 regular centre backs in the EPL. I will analyze the percentile ranking shortly

@ Nihilist and Airmark,


Look egbons, I don't want to say the one wey go make handshake pass elbow. . . but una dey try my patience. Why is simple empirical evidence hard to recognise?

Top 20 tacklers does not contain Aldeweireld, Van Dijk, Luiz and Azpi - those are your 4 best defenders this season. I did not see Verthongen or Valencia either. That's your top 6 defenders.

Ngolo Kante is the only player that will PFA Team of the year in the top 20 tacklers. That is empirical evidence, case closed.

Just because NGolo Kante is envogue right now, we have people running around spouting all manner of crap.

The John Terry you have been defending as World Class against Dayo is a low volume tackler. All of my Chelsea defensive heros from Makelele to Ballack were low volume tacklers. I will not come and rubbish them today just because NGolo Kante has a different style of play, nor will I place Ramires above them because of tackle stats.

I put John Terrys tackle stats below. The first people to defend John Terry from Raumdeuter will be the same ones to come around and start telling us that number of tackles is important because of NGolo Kante. Please be consistent.

Let's desist from arguing nonsense. Make we leave am there.

Nihilist:
I think that Maldini's supposed quote should not be taken at face value. That quote has been floating around on the internet on its own for years, rather than as part of an interview so there is no context. Also the quote would have no doubt been given in italian (If at all), so there could be potentially a mixup in translation as well.

Below is Maldini making a lot of mistakes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-4gw7mmE0c

As someone who played with the likes of Nesta and Gattuso, I genuinely doubt that Maldini would be so flippantly dismissive about the art of tackling.

How are you going to show out the likes of Hazard or Messi? How are you going to show out the walking cliche Mr Robben?

It's not a coincidence that the likes of Neymar and Hazard draw career threatening fouls every match day. Only against Manyoo we saw that a defensive coach like Jose Mourinho had already decided that the only way to stop Hazard was to tackle him. Airmark please post that gif of Smelling trying to show out Hazard. That's what happens when you try to jockey around players who have quicker feet and quicker brains than the defender.

Tackling is a very important tool in the skill set of any half decent defensive player. You cannot be a defender or defensive midfielder and not know how to tackle. I mean just look at what's happening over there where the manager doesn't coach tackles. .

Stop miseducating the youth and filling their head with nonsense. There is no professional defender or midfielder that will turn professional and doesn't know how to tackle. Even I know how to tackle.

Every player will tackle to save their team on a dangerous counterattack etc on a need to basis. That is the only situation where a tackle is a must, and that happens rarely in a game. Apart from that, there is no rule that says you must tackle as part of your routine 90 minute play. So going around counting number of tackles is not a valid or sensible measure of a players worth. It is the most INANE use of football stat I have ever seen.

Of the top 20 tacklers in EPL this season (full of luminaries like Erik Pieters, Claudia Yacob and other wastemen), only Ngolo Kante will make EPL team of the season. So much for counting tackles to judge players.

I know we have NGolo Kante who favours that style of play which is making us to puff our chest that no midfielder tackles more than him, yet the 2nd highest tackling midfielder in Chelsea midfield history is Ramires, a wasteman if there ever was one.

Tackling is just a style of play. Even Whoscored recognises tackling as a style of play.

I swear Airmark keeps this thread going. If not for Airmark this thread for don die since.

airmark:
This is ridiculous. so at every point in time your opponent is attacking you, you will have a crowded area to push him into. Footballers reading this will laugh. You dont make tackles recklessly, you should be able to know when and how to give it it out. Which crowded area should coquelin push hazard into? Which crowded area did krychowiak have to race messi into, in that epic moment? There are some moments in a match if you dont activate that tackle, you will lose your opponent or risk being carded. Ability to manage that moment well, speaks volume of how great you are defensively.

This is tackling on a "need to" basis. It's an emergency situation that occurs only once or twice a match, and any of the 11 players can be the one in the situation. It doesnt happen with enough frequency to start compiling midfielders tackling stats and judging them on it.

In such situation, pace is what matters. Jamie Vardy or Tijani Babangida will make the tackle better than Makelele. How is that a numeric basis for judging midfielders?

airmark:
Real madrid was not parking the bus and makelele had better numbers which you confirmed. Chelsea deployed different formation against barca, does it remove the fact that dms will be evaluated on tackles? These numbers up there even showed you the reason makelele didn't have high number of tackles as it was the era of parking the bus - responsibility shared. The Premier league link you quoted placed tackle as no. 1 stat in defence, you are here saying its nonsense stat.

That's why tackling is STYLE OF PLAY not measure of effectiveness. Real Madrid set up makes the DM more desperate in his play but the Makelele that was labeled World best DM was the one at Chelsea who barely tackled.

Infact the worlds best defensive team for a decade from 2004 to 2014 was Chelsea and our midfielders didn't tackle except the worst midfielder of them all, Ramires. His first touch was so poor, his 2nd touch was often a tackle. If the best defensive team of the decade didn't tackle, that should tell you how fugazi this new fad of judging midfielders by no of tackles is.

I don't care if you make zero tackles per game like Makelele or 4 tackles per game like Kante. That's your STYLE OF PLAY. All I care is that you do your job which is to keep the clean sheet.

airmark:
A dm playing against an attacking side like barca cant do without tackling because you have attackers who are skillful and will always take you on. Even in the link you posted, tackle is no. 1 on that defensive stat and any dm who cant do above average in it is not a great dm. Makalele and co did.

You are wrong again. Playing midfield against Barcelona where you have already squeezed the space so that a Barca player cannot move 5 yards without encountering another Chelsea player negates the need for tackling too much. You defend those games by positioning and pressing.

Midfielders tackles in 2012 UCL semifinal: Barcelona 2 - Chelsea 2

Busquets - 3
Xavi - 3
Iniesta - 1

Merieles - 3
Mikel - 2
Lampard - 2

Not counting Mascherano and Ramires because they played CB and RB respectively.

Despite the heavy pressure, our midfield did not make 1 more tackle than their midfield.

If it is my job to educate this thread about such nonsense stats that some peeps have been promoting, I will do it.

airmark:
Wanyama also tackles but not as much as kante, because dembele is not sleeping. In fact dembele has won more tackles than all of them. However kante lost more tackles than wanyama. My point here is that you cant relegate tackles as a dm. As you rightly stated makalele didnt do much of tackles at chelsea, cos he wasn't the sole pivot then. He had 82% of successful tackles, which is well above average in effectiveness. The primary responsiblity of a dm is to shield his defence, by way of tackles, interceptions, defensive positioning etc. A dm playing against an attacking side like barca cant do without tackling because you have attackers who are skillful and will always take you on. Even in the link you posted, tackle is no. 1 on that defensive stat and any dm who cant do above average in it is not a great dm. Makalele and co did.



Apari werey, stuffs always fly over your bald skull. My point is tackle is essential in rating a dm. Makalele had 82% so can you see how dull you are? I was expecting tackles not to be part of the stats used to evaluate makalele in ibime's link, but it was used. You just jumped stvpidly into matters beyond your grasp.

82% of zero = zero.

If you offer me 50% of £1,000 or 82% of £1, I know which one I will take.

No of tackles means NOTHING in rating a DM, if not 95% of DMs would be rated better than Makelele.

This is basic common sense.

Wingback:
Did I ask you a question? I wasn't expecting a reply, just calling out your bullshìt...Once again Easy with your lies and Swerve>>>

Stop quoting me madman. You have quoted me dozens of times without reply. Please get the message. What exactly is your mental problem - Schizophrenia or bipolar disorder?

Wingback:
Easy with your lies

How many times have you quoted me without reply? I have no time for the mentally ill. Face front please.

skypeme:
30,100 / 175,000 x 100% = 17.2%
I add 2.5% increment to my wifes salary every Dec

You add 2.5% yet official CBN inflation rate is 17.8%.

Maybe that's why she dey vex