Tav - Get used to it

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

4 minutes ago, Ibroxric72 said:

I dont dislike Tav at all and see he can be a great asset but fact is he will always be targeted by teams because he’s weak defensively.  SG surely must see this and needs to address it. 

Stop talking too much sense ffs. 

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

Tavernier is a good option to come off the bench if we require a more attacking threat but I do think we need better than him for a defensive full back. He is an important squad member but shouldn’t be captain. Ryan Jack is starting to show the qualities required for that role.

[BlueMe 25,327]

Just now, Blue Avenger said:

Mer pish.

No one doubts his attacking abilities, which he lost today and aganst UFA and and and.

A liability is a liability, as facts are facts and fuck all to do do wirh scapegoating anyone.

What? 

[ForeverAndEver 71,464]

Some absolutely baffling posts, regardless of how many goals he's scored or assisted, he cost us big time today.

[backup 4,724]

We need a full back who knows he is a full back first and foremost, Tav imho is a luxury player, one we cannot afford if we are to mount a serious challenge for the title.

[BlueMe 25,327]

2 minutes ago, ForeverAndEver said:

Some absolutely baffling posts, regardless of how many goals he's scored or assisted, he cost us big time today.

Goldson was worse today

[ForeverAndEver 71,464]

1 minute ago, BlueMe said:

Goldson was worse today

He had a bot of a shocker yes, doesn't change the fact Tavernier cost by not being able to mark a player

[TMB 14,167]

12 minutes ago, Blue Avenger said:

Mer pish.

No one doubts his attacking abilities, which he lost today and aganst UFA and and and.

A liability is a liability, as facts are facts and fuck all to do do wirh scapegoating anyone.

He didn't lose his attacking abilities today he put in a brilliant cross for Lafferty to make it 2-2.  While true he didn't make or score against UFA he's doing it against just about everyone else.  So there is no "and and and".  He's a huge asset to our team and we wouldn't be doing as well as we have been without him.  7 assists and 3 goals means Tavernier has been involved in a huge number of goals that we've scored.  

[theclothmonster 1,707]

6 minutes ago, TMB said:

Candeias and Kent work hard defensively but didn't seem to offer anything going forward.  Today the manager put faith in our attacking full-backs to make things happen and they created all three goals.  Our full-backs, Tavernier and Barisic, are our main attacking threats whether some want to accept it or not.  Those two players have been involved in 13 of our 17 competitive goals thus far.  Without those two we'd struggle to create anything going forward and the strikers would be completely isolated.  You can't simply overlook the attacking contribution of the attacking full-backs and dismiss it.  Tavernier is a key player for us that's why Gerrard made him captain.  

Not sure how you can mention both Tav and Barisic as attacking fullbacks in the same sentence to justify Tav's inability to defend without realising that Barisic counters your own argument due to his ability to defend.

[BlueMe 25,327]

Just now, ForeverAndEver said:

He had a bot of a shocker yes, doesn't change the fact Tavernier cost by not being able to mark a player

Tav definitely didn't do well at the second goal losing his man, but McGregor should be doing more for the third i think. 

[Laudrupsleftfoot 10,870]

1 minute ago, ForeverAndEver said:

He had a bot of a shocker yes, doesn't change the fact Tavernier cost by not being able to mark a player

He shouldn't be asked to mark a player five or six inches taller than him at a corner.

He's suspect at set plays defensively but in open play I don't think he does a great deal wrong. Recovery pace, tackles relatively well, can carry the ball out of defence as well as passing the ball out in tight spaces or playing a ball down the channel. 

Some folk aren't going to be happy until we have a team full of cloggers.

[ForeverAndEver 71,464]

2 minutes ago, BlueMe said:

Tav definitely didn't do well at the second goal losing his man, but McGregor should be doing more for the third i think. 

100% McGregor gets the blame as well mate

[TMB 14,167]

1 minute ago, theclothmonster said:

Not sure how you can mention both Tav and Barisic as attacking fullbacks in the same sentence to justify Tav's inability to defend without realising that Barisic counters your own argument due to his ability to defend.

Many want to view Tavernier from a defensive point of view only.  They don't want to give him credit for all the excellent attacking work that he does.  I'm simply pointing out that Barisic and Tavernier are attacking full-backs that deserve a huge amount of credit for the attacking side of their game.  Without them we would be a side bereft of creativity.  They're key players for us right now, both of them.  

[Lord Lockin 3,909]

42 minutes ago, BlueMe said:

I should have said right of the back 3, just thought most people would have known that and not needed it explained.  He was playing left of a back 3 once he got moved. We played 352.

well maybe you can explain why Flanagan was hugging the left hand touchline as part of a back 3 - if you were watching on the tv you've got a slight excuse for not seeing this if you were at the game you must have seen it

[theclothmonster 1,707]

1 minute ago, TMB said:

Many want to view Tavernier from a defensive point of view only.  They don't want to give him credit for all the excellent attacking work that he does.  I'm simply pointing out that Barisic and Tavernier are attacking full-backs that deserve a huge amount of credit for the attacking side of their game.  Without them we would be a side bereft of creativity.  They're key players for us right now, both of them.  

I find it the other way around, I've been one of tav's biggest critics going back to the championship. The argument from others was that you have to just accept his defensive frailties because of the attacking threat he brings, that's all they cared about. Problem is that now we have Barisic who is just as capable going forward but isn't a total liability it completely blows that argument out of the water. 

[BEE 4,880]

He was off the pace today but can think of a few games he’s been decent defensively recently, I have more of an issue with him being skipper.

[BlueMe 25,327]

1 minute ago, Lord Lockin said:

well maybe you can explain why Flanagan was hugging the left hand touchline as part of a back 3 - if you were watching on the tv you've got a slight excuse for not seeing this if you were at the game you must have seen it

It was a 352 and Goldson and Katic were sitting when we were going forward. I don't need to be at the game to know what the formation was. He did try and get forward a couple of times obviously, but he wasn't playing LB, because we weren't playing with a back 4. 

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

Tav is great, Tav is a liability blah blah blah. 

Bottom line any manager studying us knows exactly where to attack us to get the most joy. 

[TMB 14,167]

20 minutes ago, theclothmonster said:

I find it the other way around, I've been one of tav's biggest critics going back to the championship. The argument from others was that you have to just accept his defensive frailties because of the attacking threat he brings, that's all they cared about. Problem is that now we have Barisic who is just as capable going forward but isn't a total liability it completely blows that argument out of the water. 

Finding a full-back who can attack and defend in equal measure isn't easy.  Tavernier is suspect defensively yet WBA were still willing to pay £3m which we knocked back.  If Barisic is the real deal we wont be able to keep him for long.  

If we played a 4 at the back with Flanagan on the right and Barisic on the left I could understand that.  Today the manager played both full-backs and asked them to get forward and they created our goals.  The three CBs didn't seem comfortable with the formation today at all.  Maybe it's just about striking the right balance which I'm sure Gerrard will be looking at.  

[gersandy 594]

Surely Gerrard sees this. 

Against the manky mob, get Flanagan over at right back and either push tavernier up the wing, or drop him.

[G.E.C. 18,754]

1 minute ago, gersandy said:

Surely Gerrard sees this. 

Against the manky mob, get Flanagan over at right back and either push tavernier up the wing, or drop him.

Tavernier is brutal if we play him further up. 

[Orange and Blue 1,173]

Tav does'nt suit the 3-5-2 formation. Because his defending's dreadful. 

[sassaaaa 11,406]

1 minute ago, G.E.C. said:

Tavernier is brutal if we play him further up. 

Hes going to cost us against them if he plays in defence..........

[BlueMe 25,327]

3 minutes ago, gersandy said:

Surely Gerrard sees this. 

Against the manky mob, get Flanagan over at right back and either push tavernier up the wing, or drop him.

Flanagan was terrible at RB against St Mirren, so i can't see him doing much better against celtic playing there.

[G.E.C. 18,754]

Just now, sassaaaa said:

Hes going to cost us against them if he plays in defence..........

He’s a liability whenever he plays against them. Bar one decent showing at the piggery he’s usually hopeless. Flanagen seems a better option.