Comical Clint

[Rangers77]

You're not mate, I thought he was immense yesterday.

Had a very good game. And showed a first class attitude. He was turned by Walcott second half, when a great save from Green prevented a goal. That was on the the v brief MOTD highlights, so thank goodness we're not reading a thread entitled 'Comical Ben Haim'.... And that was an individual, not a team error.

[Gerryhatrick]

Ridiculous.

So in your eyes a good CB's instinct should be to close a player posing minimal threat instead of marking their man in our box who poses massive threat.

You are the exact type of blinkered fan i was talking about earlier. When Hill messes up, try to find fault with others instead of seeing it for what it is.

As for the defensive line.... He's meant to be marshalling itr and calling the line!! The others weren't slow to get out, there was no plan to get out and only Hill charged towards the ball... he was out of position not them.

Wake up ffs.

At first I wasn't going to rise to your ignorance, but can't help it.

You're suggesting that an attacker with the ball on the edge of the box with no-one closing him down as 'minimal threat' which is just laughable. I know, give him loads of room and as much time as he likes, it'll be OK, no possible damage can be done if he chooses to shoot !

As a team defensive unit only Clint reacted to the possibility of a shot, but he can't do it by himself, ideally the midfield need to close down so that Clint could continue to man mark Walcot, but they didn't, and the threat had to be dealt with hence the rush to close down.

Don't try to tell me that a player without the ball is more of a threat than a player with it, thats just niave in the extreme. The job of the the defence is to stop the ball, not the player.

And also, try to respect my valid alternative opinion and not be quite so self righteous.

[Timmy the Doc]

I think their goal was solely Traore's fault. Poor header and he should have covered Hill.

[Del]

Fu@king hell. Everybody's entitled to an opinion. And I respect yours, Del. but ought you start a thread called 'Comical Clint' when you didn't see how the fella played for 90 of the 92 minutes.....??!!!!

At what point was i suggesting it was an evaluation of his performance yesterday???

I saw what mattered and he cost us another goal, as he's done on many occasions. As for not seeing him play, yesterday was the first game i've not bothered to watch in full because have little interest after relegation and knew we'd lose.

The reference was related to countless big mistakes over many games and regardless many will defend him to the hilt. Pretty much proven by some going on about Traore's header that lost posession... yes that was a joke too, but they didn't score as a result of that did they. Hill's left his man (their main goal threat) in our box on his own, charging a player that didn't need to be charged as there was plenty around him, so not sure where this theroy comes from that nobody else was attaking the ball.... they didn't dive in stupidly you mean.

As for who was the bigger threat, well Arsenal are known for trying to walk the ball in the net and rarely shoot from outside the box, so you leave walcott free in space about 12 yards from goal Corzola will pass 99 time out of 100.

[Shania]

Rose tinted specs and all that..... there was no need to charge becasue others were doing their job at the time. He messed up and created the goal, nothing more, nothing less... it's nobody else's fault. This is the reason i felt the need to start the thread becasue there are so many fans on here who woin't hear a bad word said against certain players, no matter how bad they perform, and yet jump on any little thing with others just becasue they earn more. Mackie and Hill have boith been pretty much useless all season, yet some defend them like they've played like Baresi and Messi.

Wasn´t Traore at fault for that goal.:huh:

[Del]

Wasn´t Traore at fault for that goal.:huh:

No.

He gave the ball away in the first instance, but no immediate goal threat then. Clint's job was to deal with Walcott, he didnt.

[Rangers77]

Wasn´t Traore at fault for that goal.:huh:

Of course he was. We were scurrying back after that. The entire back five were. Not only Clint. And Clint was at least trying desperately to save the situation by attacking the man with the ball in the expectation that everyone would push up. No sh1t header from Traore; no goal. And even if Clint were entirely at fault- which he wasn't- the thread ought be better named. There was nothing comical about his MOTM performance yesterday. What other goals has Clint personally cost us? Two against Liverpool, sure. And one of those was a class goal by a great player when the back four was given no protection by Mbia and Diakite. He was slow for Stoke's first, but the chance was created by Samba's ineptitude. All Fulham goals were down to Samba. Villa's match changing equalizer to Cesar..... Methinks Clint- who knows his limitations- has saved this poor team more times than he's let us down. There are others far more worthy of censure, Del.

[Timmy the Doc]

Full backs job is to cover CBs if they go for a ball. Traore's positioning was useless, he should have taken Walcott.

[Will M]

All this argument does is prove one point, our defensive unit is very poor. If we don't work harder on this fact, we will be following Wolves and Portsmouth through the league trap doors.

[shanns]

Clint is twice the man and twice the player than 99% of our squad.

[oldskoolturk]

He does always seems to he a hand in goals we concede, but some of his tackles have been world class. Nature of the prem league is that mistakes get punished. It's no coincidence that we make lots of mistakes and then concede lots of goals.

One thing that does bug me about clint tho is that he always wants to play the long ball. Even when there's a player 5 yards away from him he will still hoof it long to Zamora/Remy

[uptheR's]

he will be vital for us next season so maybe some should get off his back.

[nasser95]

On the subject of defenders; am I the only 1 that thought Ben Haim played really well?! :pleasantsuprise:

you definitely are not the only, although cant help but think he just wants the new contract

[rainham r]

if traore had headed the ball away instead of trying to be clever the goal wouldn't have happened.apart from the goal arsenal didn't really create that much and the back four did ok.

[nasser95]

A very, very unfair thread. First twenty seconds aside Clint was exceptionally good. MOTM for me. It's a team game. If that total clown Traore hadn't fu@ked up as usual Arsenal wouldn't have had the ball. If the defence had come out as one- Onouha and Haim didn't- Walcott would have been offside. And Green should have done better with the shot..... And Hill lost his man..... Good teams, sadly, can create goals. Where was the pressure on the edge of the box before the fella headed it? Or the other one passed it? It wasn't simply Hill's fault. No sh1t header from Traore or Traore closed down his man no goal.

Hill carried the very poor Onouha for the rest of the game. He made two exceptional clearances in the six yard box. And a cracking tackle late on prevented Walcott from bring one on one with the keeper. Onouha, on the other hand, was caught in possession at least five times and looked like an accident waiting to happen. He's paid £50K pw; Hill apparently £28K. I know who's done better for us in his time at the club.

I have to disagree with you there. Other than traore (who wasn't even that bad) that was easily one of the best defensive performances of the season. One or two mistakes are natural but onuoha was quality for most of the match and kept walcott quiet