Simon Brunton's Attack on Defoe

Status
Not open for further replies.


More obsessed with how many passes Defoe did than goals he scored. Pathetic to be so obsessed with meaningless stats - sums up many in modern football journalism.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...a-world-cup-qualifying?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

https://twitter.com/simon_burnton?lang=en

Sorry Simon Burnton not Brunton
If Defoe played for a fashionable club (a London one especially) these journo's would be waxing lyrical about how wonderful JD is and how he totally deserves his place
 
I think it's partly due to people wanting to get rid of the older generation and give youth a chance. We've had players like Defoe in the squad for about a decade now and he's mostly been shit for England (one goal in a competition). I understand why certain people don't want to see him back in the fold, I don't agree with it though.

I think that's quite harsh. He's been largely back up (32 of his appearances as sub) and ignored for the most part when it comes to tournaments until they got a bit desperate around 2010/12 and only played four tournament games. He was never the level we required during the early parts of his career (nor were most others) but never really had a spell of regular starts either. In qualifiers he's scored 8 in 18 World Cup qualifiers and 5 in 9 Euro qualifiers.

A grand total of 186 minutes in tournaments.
 
Last edited:
More obsessed with how many passes Defoe did than goals he scored. Pathetic to be so obsessed with meaningless stats - sums up many in modern football journalism.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...a-world-cup-qualifying?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

https://twitter.com/simon_burnton?lang=en

Sorry Simon Burnton not Brunton


For those who cant be arsed to read that waffle I have written a short synopsis of it.


"How dare you pick a player from outside the top 6 Gareth"
 
I completely disagree with the article. In that sort of game, against a massed ranks defence, having a poacher like Defoe is ideal and he'll break the deadlock despite have little to do in all around play; there is little point having a link up striker against Lithuania as we have no real problem with keeping the ball up front or making it stick.

So the journalist is wrong imo. Despite my previous errors about Defoe, I completely disagree about with the article.

However.......

I'm guessing the journalists point is that, in terms of England being particularly successful we'd need a striker to do more than stand around and wait for a chance. Against somebody half-decent, when we have to try to function as a whole team and won't be against a team playing all out defence, we'd need somebody as more of an all rounder or who can hold it off for us.

I can agree to a point, but I don't think a poacher like Defoe should be written off; somebody like him against Slovakia, Russia or Iceland in the summer would have been very handy coming off the bench to nick a goal and he shouldn't be done down because of that.

So, again, I think the journalist is wrong. But I can understand the opinion and it's got f***ing nothing to do with some crazy bizarre mad agenda because everyone hates Sunderland.




Iv often thought that there is an obsession to have a drogba type england player up front because thats what works in the champions leauge when in fact in tight and sometimes boring international games a goal poacher type forward may be far better such as lineker.
 
From what I remember of the game - I thought the rest of the England players were never going to pass to him and certainly seemed unwilling to play a ball for him to move onto. But despite that his first 5 touches (including the kick-off ) included 3 shots - one off target, one on target and one goal! Funny how Mr Guardian man doesn't use that statistic!
 
For those who cant be arsed to read that waffle I have written a short synopsis of it.


"How dare you pick a player from outside the top 6 Gareth"
always the way

I don't care what anyone says.. the media clamour for Rashford to go to the last tournament was pure press pressure cos he plays for man utd. I actually thought hodgson had more about him than to give in to those twats but in fact it was the first sign he had lost focus.

the media are absolute tossers when it comes to England backed by the usual armchair moron fans of the top 6 clubs and west ham .
 
always the way

I don't care what anyone says.. the media clamour for Rashford to go to the last tournament was pure press pressure cos he plays for man utd. I actually thought hodgson had more about him than to give in to those twats but in fact it was the first sign he had lost focus.

the media are absolute tossers when it comes to England backed by the usual armchair moron fans of the top 6 clubs and west ham .
Rashford was England's best player at the Euros.
 
based on what .

he hardly played
Still made more of an impact than most. He deserved the call up his form last spring was electric. Rated the highest of all England players at the Euros here.
http://www.goal.com/euro2016/en/gal...2016/1x2mwlpc9za6d1k7ka1el2kzqf/roy-hodgson/1

Added some much-needed dynamism against Wales and then completing more take-ons than any other player in just four minutes against Iceland. Had he come on earlier, England might have gone through.
 
Still made more of an impact than most. He deserved the call up his form last spring was electric. Rated the highest of all England players at the Euros here.
http://www.goal.com/euro2016/en/gal...2016/1x2mwlpc9za6d1k7ka1el2kzqf/roy-hodgson/1

Added some much-needed dynamism against Wales and then completing more take-ons than any other player in just four minutes against Iceland. Had he come on earlier, England might have gone through.
disagree. had he not been shoe horned into the squad to please the press and aforementioned fans we could have taken a natural winger with pace suited to Playing there .
 
Just for info, this is from the vaguely football related satirical email that the Guardian sends out each evening, which relentlessly rips the piss out of whatever was happening each day. It never makes the sports section of the printed paper, and is only findable on the website if you go deliberately looking for it. I recommend reading some of the other articles under the "Fiver" tag. It's the last remnant of decent content in the Guardian.
I personally read it as a pisstake of the whole possession stats based bollocks commentary you'd hear from twats like Sutton, and actually being pretty complimentary to Defoe, precisely because all he does is score goals. Because that's his job. Let's just calm down on the outrage here. Save if for something like the Chronicle which actually deserves it.
 
Still made more of an impact than most. He deserved the call up his form last spring was electric. Rated the highest of all England players at the Euros here.
http://www.goal.com/euro2016/en/gal...2016/1x2mwlpc9za6d1k7ka1el2kzqf/roy-hodgson/1

Added some much-needed dynamism against Wales and then completing more take-ons than any other player in just four minutes against Iceland. Had he come on earlier, England might have gone through.

Why Hodgson waited till the last 5 minutes to bring him in remains a massive mystery to me, his pace could have caused them all sorts of problems if brought on earlier, and the players on the field namely Rooney and Kane I had never seen both them play so bad!
 
Why Hodgson waited till the last 5 minutes to bring him in remains a massive mystery to me, his pace could have caused them all sorts of problems if brought on earlier, and the players on the field namely Rooney and Kane I had never seen both them play so bad!
Was a crazy decision mate! I'm big fans of both but Rooney and Kane had shockers. Rashford could have had the same impact Owen had in 98 if Hodgson had more guts rather than playing it safe.

Just for info, this is from the vaguely football related satirical email that the Guardian sends out each evening, which relentlessly rips the piss out of whatever was happening each day. It never makes the sports section of the printed paper, and is only findable on the website if you go deliberately looking for it. I recommend reading some of the other articles under the "Fiver" tag. It's the last remnant of decent content in the Guardian.
I personally read it as a pisstake of the whole possession stats based bollocks commentary you'd hear from twats like Sutton, and actually being pretty complimentary to Defoe, precisely because all he does is score goals. Because that's his job. Let's just calm down on the outrage here. Save if for something like the Chronicle which actually deserves it.
If you listened to the journo talking about Defoe on Football Weekly this week you would clearly see it wasn't a pisstake. The Fiver is a smug and stale column that is well past it's sell by date.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Was a crazy decision mate! I'm big fans of both but Rooney and Kane had shockers. Rashford could have had the same impact Owen had in 98 if Hodgson had more guts rather than playing it safe.


If you listened to the journo talking about Defoe on Football Weekly this week you would clearly see it wasn't a pisstake. The Fiver is a smug and stale column that is well past it's sell by date.

Yeah the best we

had looked in major touraments is Owen in 98 and Rooney in 2004 when young talented players played without fear.

Mind saying that the players have to take responsibility for that game against Iceland as well,they totally froze,never seen England players play as bad,Kane was especially a diffrent player.
 
Horrific article seems desperate for Defoe to fail.

"34-year-old darling of the footballing-focused chattering class, hoary sharpshooter de luxe, golden-booted highwayman who can always be relied upon to stand and deliver: long-in-the-tooth Jermain Silver."

I'd be embarrassed to present that to an editor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top