₦airaland Forum

DissTroy:
Form is temporary, class is permanent. No player has truly lit up the AFCON with goals yet. And there were reports before the game he's nursing a sprain or so.

Mo Kudus says hi!

Khayceeofficial:
How Francis uzoho gets to ply his trade abroad and this current goalkeeper is home based still dhe baffle me

He is not home based

raumdeuter:
Time for Super Eagles to flog sense into popizaino neighbors

Don't count on those chickens bro..

airmark:
And Fraudiola made it balance by bringing a massive Haaland and ejecting Sterling, without touching the defence. You get it?

Chelsea need such balancing. Flush out Sterling and other washed attackers and upgrade. Opponents will be begging for draw, submerged in their own half.

Really??

SMH

airmark:
Not enough to know the best attack and you should know that.

You can see Chelsea having 70+% possession, 21 shots and none scored and they lost by a goal or 2 in matches. A good attack would have scored at least 3 from 21 shots and all these arguments wouldn't have surfaced.

We created enough big chances to be knocking on Ucl qualification like Spurs, but our attackers messed us up. Pocchetino would be stupid not to have seen it by now.

Attack is the best form of defence, a Messified Barca with Mascherano as CB, and spineless DEFENSIVE midfielder, confirmed it.

35 vs 24 vs 33.... Which is higher Airmark? Stop the shalaye

BlueRayDick:
Na u gangan talk the truth of the matter; both defence and attack are very important. A balance of both is why Man City keeps dominating the league

Exactly.

You just hit the nail on the head with Man City example.

airmark:
Statistically, our attack is not better. You are concluding based on wrong premise.

Our highest goalscorer has paltry 9 goals out of 21 matches (thanks to PKs awarded).

We are topping the 'big chances missed' chart among other important attacking stats, that you might have ignored.

The table says Chelsea GF 35, Man Utd GF 24, West Ham GF 33.

Which attack is better?

I don't know why you dey like twist twist things to suit the narrative you wan promote.

When Chelsea conseded just 15 goals, the record was straightforward. Nobody start twisting how many goals the opponent suppose score but somehow missed or how many ball hit bar or how many teams didn't play Chelsea with their top scorer on the pitch. The table simply says Chelsea GA 15....And that's a record. Simple and direct.

Why all the twisting?

airmark:
Fix the attack, as Spurs have the same goals conceded as us, but didn't miss as many big chances as we did.

We saw how our attackers missed big chances and opponents came back to beat us. We won't be where we are if our attackers are not goal-shy.

Once more, you are looking at this from a biased pov that's why you keep making reference to Spurs.

How about you look at it this other way... We have scored more goals (35) than Man Utd (24) and West ham (33) but they are higher in the table than us. If just scoring goals is the answer, then they should be below us because statistically, our attack is better.

While scoring more goals is important, conceding less is also important. There is no major or minor in both. Balance it out and we are good to go.

You can't go into a match believing you will win when your defenders make individual errors all over the place and you concede needless goals everywhere.

Ibime:
In this day and age of VAR giving out penalties wotowoto, unlimited injury time to account for time wasting etc, conditions favour attack than defence. Days of 1-0 matches are over. Chances are if you base your team on defence like Chelsea of 2005, you will drop more points on average. Playing in your own box now is an invitation to VAR to award penalties against you and invitation to opposition attackers to look for initiate contact and go down

Yes we can improve on defence, but I bet if our attackers had been finishing their chances early, allowing us to control the game and simultaneously demotivating our opponents, our goals conceded record would be better. Instead what is happening is we fail to score, opponents ginger, score against us some time in 2nd half, then we overextend ourself while chasing equaliser and concede a 2nd goal. All those could have been avoided if our attackers put us in control in the first half by finishing their chances.

Valid point on VAR.

However there is a confidence that comes with knowing that, no matter what, your defence will always stand strong, hardly conceding goals. Coming into a game with Cech in goal and Sanchez in goal, which is better? Even though Cech is not invincible, he most times singlehandedly win us points. Same cannot be said of Sanchez.

When your back is very solid, you go into any battle with full confidence.

Like I said, balance is the key. While our attack need massive improvement, our defence also need to upgrade. Think of all the individual errors we point out here week in week out after every goal conceded. Think of how many points we would have picked if those individual defenders didn't commit those errors...

airmark:
The question is, is defence our major problem?

This is 2024, where those small teams in 2004/2005 now have financial muscle to get quality players and rub shoulders with the big boys.

Man City won the league consecutively, not because they had the best defence, but because they had the highest goals scored.

Why is Spurs with same goals conceded as us, topping us and Man UTD with lesser goals conceded, this season?

Why is Crystal Palace with lesser goals conceded are still below us on the table?

Answers to these questions, would point you to only one answer. Those who said attack is the best form of defence, are no fools.

So, like it was last season, our attack is our major problem.

My first sentence literally said we should strike a balance between attack and defence.

I still ask, if our attack score 8 goals and we concede 9, will it win us games?

We just need to strike a balance between this attack and defense thing.

If you score 5 goals in a match and concede 6, will you praise your attack for scoring 5 in a match or will you blame you defense for conceding 6?

Conversely,if you concede just 1 goal but scored zero, will you praise your defense for being tight enough to concede "just" 1 goal or will you blame your attack for not being able to score any?

While our attack need massive improvement to convert chances created, our defense also need to tighten up. Individual errors in defense have cost us a lot this season. So yes, defense is also our problem.

In 2004/05 when Mourinho broke the record of least goals conceded in the league, we scored 72 goals. Arsenal in second scored 87..... The amount of 1-0 matches we played that season was uncountable.

2020/21 when Tuchel won us UCL, we conceded just 4 goals all campaign. 4 goals in 13 matches!

Make una no dey underrate the importance of defense in football.

afrodoc2:
New numbering system.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 18, 20, ....................


Much overdue.

How someone can be confidently yarning dust...

SMH!

Trevor012:
Hensbrainic take don vex timbros 😂😂

BlueMann:
If u see as I burst laugh

Bro just dey cap confidently

hensben:
To be the best centered around how impactful you are for your team and not just occasionally showing up. Rodri falter sometimes in his primary role which is stopping opponent but his offensive out put covers that and offensively he isn’t better than those that were chosen in fifa 11. Messi is too impactful to any team he plays for. Mbappe can testify to that.

Just shut up bro!

I don't mind Jose Mourinho back...

Though I know it's not possible.

raumdeuter:
Rudiger and Hazard played in the same Madrid

Is Madrid in EPL?

raumdeuter:
Did Salah and Droba play in La Liga?

No.

However look at this conversation and tell me how La Liga came into the discussion..

popizaino:
Drogba succeeded where Salah failed.

How about that?

raumdeuter:
So by your logic Rudiger is greater than Hazard

Pedri Gavi Anyone in Barcelona is greater than Coutinho

If we go a bit back, I can quote where you for the topic to revolve around EPL alone.

raumdeuter:
Drogba and Salah played in the same EPL and Salah is about to double Drogbas goal output

Then why bringing in La Liga to the discussion?

raumdeuter:
Rudiger is excelling where Hazard failed which is the response to Popizaino when he compared Drogba to Salah

Was Drogba or Salah in La Liga?

raumdeuter:
Hazard and Rudiger played in la liga for the same team

One of them was disgraced out

Is La Liga EPL?

raumdeuter:
So by your logic Rudiger is greater than Hazard

Pedri Gavi Anyone in Barcelona is greater than Coutinho

Only you go say na EPL una dey talk, still you go run enter La Liga... Pimple dey ur nyansh?

iamoyindamola:
Nah it’s nothing
If we draw civ and beat the other Guinea we will qualify

Which kind pass be this na

The calculator don come out so soon?

Godx:
Depends on the team playing. Ghana, Ivory coast, Senegal, Algeria, Egypt etc and at least 50% of the stadium will be filled even with gate fee of 1k and above.

True.

Leyqute:
If you convert those prices to naira, e dey pass 10k.Something wey be 1week salary for some people. Spend one week salary to stand for 2 hours and watch Zambezi vs Kuvukiland borefest. Mba.

This your post don summarise everything.

I'm just imagining Naija hosting AFCON. And here in PH, Namibia is playing against Kenya.... I no fit even pay 2k to watch the match live. Even if it's free ticket, I will still find it hard to start going to the stadium to sit for 2 hours and watch some 22 unknown players play...

BlueRayDick:
If it’s not in Lagos and the gate fee is above 1k, I can tell u categorically that the stadium will be empty . Stop looking at things from pre-COVID era .

The kind reduction in people’s disposable income that has happened after that period ehn…

Anything above 5h here in Naija, stadium no fit full.

raumdeuter:
Baba economic realities is different in Africa from other continent

I remember Nigeria 99 dem dey beg people to come watch games, I think after a while some venues made it free without gate takings just to get crowd in it

Let me ask you on Tuesday afternoon or evening Equatorial Guinea vs Zambia pay N5k to watch that's the equivalent of $3. How many people will show for stadium in Nigeria that's even richer than many African countries

I have not seen this your post when I made an example of 5k above.

You are very correct. No one will carry 5k and pay for a non Naija match here.

But you know that even that Nigeria 99, the stadiums never got filled up even with the free gate. That's the point I was making to Afrodoc. Central and West Africans no dey watch ball like that compared to North Africa...

Leyqute:
Probably a bit too pricey for the average CIV citizen.

Ah...

These prices are quite expensive for an average Ivorien nah.. Na wao.

It's like making ticket 5k popular stand here for Naija. Stadium go empty o.

afrodoc2:
I wonder how much the tickets are going for. They should make some of the tickets easily affordable because fans improve the atmosphere.

Yes. Price of tickets will help in match attendance.

But generally, I don't see that hunger from fans to go watch live matches in Africa, especially in central and West africa. The Northern Africans fill stadiums more both club football and national teams.

afrodoc2:
See empty stadium for CAF Cup of Nations.

This is the nonsense we keep seeing in AFCON.

Host nation fans only come to the stadium to watch their team play. Rubbish.

raumdeuter:
Show is Gerrard world cup

Or any player who in the entire history of Chelsea who has won the CL and world cup while playing at your club

I guess I no need to answer you again

airmark:
Which of the two won Ucl by scoring and finishing the final match?

Abi you don forget your standard?

I just knew you will show up

Let's see the next amala Dayo will turn

Gerrard = Boateng

KDB = Terry/Silva