Eric Dier

[tiger666]

the last couple of years he’s been a passenger. He doesn’t move, doesn’t make tackles, doesn’t make interceptions and has zero workrate. His tendency to turn a fairly routine tackle into a thuggish foul has also become really ugly

He fouls a lot less than Dembele or Wanyama:

 

[glospur]

You didn't use the word genius, but you did say:



And in answer to this:



If this is referring to Pochettino, then the previous season, our best season for 50 years, he didn't pick him, he picked Wanyama instead and played Dier more often as a CB. Why do you think that was?

And could one of the reasons that he picked him so often last season be the long term injury to Wanyama and the struggle for fitness of Dembele (and Winks)?

Because the "bst defensive coach in the league" has openly stated he doesn't see Dier as a CM, but as a CB.

Err ... There's more to defensive positioning that just dropping between CBs, which I outlined.

In the post above that I replied to WS i acknowledged that you're right in that the best football we've played under Pochettino was with a back 3 and Dier a part of that.

If that's the case then why does he continually select him in midfield even when Wanyama was fit as he was for almost all of the second half of last season? Dier only played CB twice after Wanyama's return, yet started 11 times in the league in midfield. Once upon a time, when he gave the interview for that book, he might have seen Dier's future as a CB, but things change. The current evidence of the most recent season doesn't suggest that at all. In fact, despite apparently seeing Dier's future as a CB, he went and bought Davinson Sanchez and played Dier 22 times in midfield and only 10 times at CB, all of them coming when Wanyama was in fact injured, suggesting Wanyama's absence had no bearing on that decision.

 

[theShiznit]

I think Eric has been best in midfield when he was aggressive and going into tackles and generally running around, it seems to make him more alert and mobile around the pitch, but can't help but feel that after playing alongside Moose in the middle he has mistaken his (Moose's) calmness on the ball for passivity, and now seems to just dawdle around barely breaking out of a jog.

Sure there were always times when Eric would be dispossessed by someone he was unaware of behind him whilst looking up for a pass, but now on and off the ball, he just seems far too slow to do anything be that pass or move with the ball or close down dangerous situations.

Hope he can get it out of his system, as i still feel he has a lot to offer. (in both positions)

 

[johnbowel]

He fouls a lot less than Dembele or Wanyama:

That’s interesting. Maybe it’s that the nature of his fouls, combined with his lack of presence in games, stay with me more. Dembele’s fouls are annoying, but almost always deliberate (he always seems to foul players when he loses the ball - it happens so rarely it must be a genuine shock).

I’m not a fan of Wanyama’s positioning, he is too often trying to make challenges running back toward our goal, and don’t think he’s a natural defensive mid in this sense.

Dembele’s stats there are also very poor compared to last season, I think? He was 3 point something tackles whenever I looked on whoscored (which regularly gives incorrect numbers anyway, but you’d think it balances out).

 

[tiger666]

Dembele’s stats there are also very poor compared to last season, I think?

If you mean compared to 16/17 then yes, his stats are much worse. Fallen off a cliff in fact:

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Err ... There's more to defensive positioning that just dropping between CBs, which I outlined.

In the post above that I replied to WS i acknowledged that you're right in that the best football we've played under Pochettino was with a back 3 and Dier a part of that.

If that's the case then why does he continually select him in midfield even when Wanyama was fit as he was for almost all of the second half of last season? Dier only played CB twice after Wanyama's return, yet started 11 times in the league in midfield. Once upon a time, when he gave the interview for that book, he might have seen Dier's future as a CB, but things change. The current evidence of the most recent season doesn't suggest that at all. In fact, despite apparently seeing Dier's future as a CB, he went and bought Davinson Sanchez and played Dier 22 times in midfield and only 10 times at CB, all of them coming when Wanyama was in fact injured, suggesting Wanyama's absence had no bearing on that decision.

Do you think that Pochettino gets everything right ? Because I don't. I also don't think Mourinho gets everything right. And if either of those two think that Dier is the future of midfield football then I don't agree with either of them.

Dier's defensive positioning is nowhere near as clever as you claim. Against passive/passive aggressive teams it doesn't get tested much but when it did, as witnessed several times last season, most notably against the likes of Arsenal away, manC, Liverpool, Juve, but also many other occasions, unless we are playing passive teams (or passive aggressive) or passive phases of play, his positional and defensive capability is actually not great at all, or certainly his ability to apply it is piss poor. He's too slow, lacks dynamism, can't press, can't receive the ball under pressure. If we played a CM3 system with two dynamic 8's, you could - maybe - argue that those deficiencies wouldn't matter so much, he could just sit centrally and be the insurance, cover less ground, not have to pass with a bit of tempo and incision, but we don't, we play a double pivot CM2 in nearly every game we play, and we play against passive opposition most games, requiring both to be proactive, inject some incision and tempo as well as being dynamic enough to protect FB's and CB's. Too often Dier's "positional awareness" when we are under pressure or shelling, is just him sinking back 20 yards into the back line and dragging the game back there with him and inviting pressure.

The result, as you acknowledge was that the football we played last year was not as good as we'd played the year before with Wanyama in CM. And it's not like Wanyama is world class either, but at least he can press dynamically, allowing us to be more aggressive and transition quicker as a team, he can move with the ball, looks and moves forwards, plays with more tempo, and has the athletic ability to recover better, cover more ground.

In a CM2 system there really shouldn't be a pure DM if you are a proactive team - which we are. Dier is too one dimensional, one paced in leg and thought. And when the chips are really down, that gets exposed.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

He fouls a lot less than Dembele or Wanyama:

But we are a team that use the technical foul well as a weapon, or used to anyway. It's what City did last year as well. I remember someone doing a feature on it - either in the written press or MNF or something.

 

[CheeseGromit]

Football is all about opinion Stats are and aide to understanding a players contribution
Most of all it is a team game and the ultimate objective is get the most cohesive group of talented players together.
I neither think that Poch, Mourinho, Pep or even BC are infallible in their reading of the game.

I opinion I very much realise it is my opinion Dier's midfield advantages come from his reading of the game. He is good at repelling opposition attacks by his positioning often reducing opposition of exploiting opportunity.

He is not without fault, but there are their many, if any, that are and he does always have a good (like others) but he is still extremely effective and I can see his name is very often on the team sheet

 

[Nebby]

Dier’s best position is always the one in which he hasn’t been playing.

He looked fantastic against Everton a few years back but for the last couple of years he’s been a passenger. He doesn’t move, doesn’t make tackles, doesn’t make interceptions and has zero workrate. His tendency to turn a fairly routine tackle into a thuggish foul has also become really ugly, and I’m a bit sick of the gormless tough-man/blow-up doll like expression that comes after. I don’t mind a defensive mid who lets the opposition know he’s there, but these aren’t even deliberate fouls, they’re the result of poor timing and the huffing and puffing just looks increasingly like it’s masking a growing insecurity about being unable to keep up. There’s just so much mental and physical dullness about him.

Embarrassing.

 

[glospur]

Do you think that Pochettino gets everything right ? Because I don't. I also don't think Mourinho gets everything right. And if either of those two think that Dier is the future of midfield football then I don't agree with either of them.

This is such a lazy argument that always gets trotted out whenever someone suggests that a real life successful football manager might know more than people on a Spurs dedicated football forum. it's just weird.

Sure, he might make mistakes. In fact, I would be staggered if he wasn't the first one to admit that, but the fact remains that none here are qualified, experienced or knowledgable enough to be the one to point out that error, categorically state what should have been done and why.

To use an extreme analogy, it's like me arguing with Neil Degrasse Tyson on physics, or you arguing with Ernest Hemingway on the improtance of concise writing. I mean, shit, they could be wrong, but neither of us are experts in the respective fields.

Dier's defensive positioning is nowhere near as clever as you claim. Against passive/passive aggressive teams it doesn't get tested much but when it did, as witnessed several times last season, most notably against the likes of Arsenal away, manC, Liverpool, Juve, but also many other occasions, unless we are playing passive teams (or passive aggressive) or passive phases of play, his positional and defensive capability is actually not great at all, or certainly his ability to apply it is piss poor. He's too slow, lacks dynamism, can't press, can't receive the ball under pressure. If we played a CM3 system with two dynamic 8's, you could - maybe - argue that those deficiencies wouldn't matter so much, he could just sit centrally and be the insurance, cover less ground, not have to pass with a bit of tempo and incision, but we don't, we play a double pivot CM2 in nearly every game we play, and we play against passive opposition most games, requiring both to be proactive, inject some incision and tempo as well as being dynamic enough to protect FB's and CB's. Too often Dier's "positional awareness" when we are under pressure or shelling, is just him sinking back 20 yards into the back line and dragging the game back there with him and inviting pressure.

The result, as you acknowledge was that the football we played last year was not as good as we'd played the year before with Wanyama in CM. And it's not like Wanyama is world class either, but at least he can press dynamically, allowing us to be more aggressive and transition quicker as a team, he can move with the ball, looks and moves forwards, plays with more tempo, and has the athletic ability to recover better, cover more ground.

In a CM2 system there really shouldn't be a pure DM if you are a proactive team - which we are. Dier is too one dimensional, one paced in leg and thought. And when the chips are really down, that gets exposed.

This pretty much all comes down to what YOU think players should be doing in a CM2, not what Pochettino wants players to be doing in HIS system. It's pointless. it criticises players based on a criteria that is in your head, not one that they're actually being measured against by Pochettino.

And all the evidence points to him doing what Pochettino asks of him very well, otherwise he wouldn't continue to be played in midfield even when Wanyama was fit.

Also, that 'sinking back' line, I've seen you say that in Ratings threads, and it usually refers to a time when we're protecting a lead and the whole team has dropped. Has it ever occurred to you that that is exactly what he, and the whole team, are being told to do (and generally it works too)?

 

[Bus-Conductor]

This is such a lazy argument that always gets trotted out whenever someone suggests that a real life successful football manager might know more than people on a Spurs dedicated football forum. it's just weird.

Sure, he might make mistakes. In fact, I would be staggered if he wasn't the first one to admit that, but the fact remains that none here are qualified, experienced or knowledgable enough to be the one to point out that error, categorically state what should have been done and why.

To use an extreme analogy, it's like me arguing with Neil Degrasse Tyson on physics, or you arguing with Ernest Hemingway on the improtance of concise writing. I mean, shit, they could be wrong, but neither of us are experts in the respective fields.


This pretty much all comes down to what YOU think players should be doing in a CM2, not what Pochettino wants players to be doing in HIS system. It's pointless. it criticises players based on a criteria that is in your head, not one that they're actually being measured against by Pochettino.

And all the evidence points to him doing what Pochettino asks of him very well, otherwise he wouldn't continue to be played in midfield even when Wanyama was fit.

Also, that 'sinking back' line, I've seen you say that in Ratings threads, and it usually refers to a time when we're protecting a lead and the whole team has dropped. Has it ever occurred to you that that is exactly what he, and the whole team, are being told to do (and generally it works too)?

I think the lazy argument is to say "if Poch is doing it, it must be right".

And your Tyson/Heningway analogy, isn't really very good. I don't have to be an expert in physics to understand the basics, gravity etc. And that is all I am doing with my appraisal of Dier, not splitting an atom, just expressing what I see, and whilst I haven't spent 50 odd years watching, reading, studying physics or creative prose, I have spent that long playing, watching, reading, studying, analysing (in my own way) and thinking about football. So whilst that may not be enough to get me the spurs job, it is enough to allow me to see and comprehend what a midfielder does on a football pitch.

 

[Shadydan]

John Bowel

 

[Lilbaz]

If we can upgrade then we should just as with every position. But until then he's our player faults aswell. We should support him.

 

[johnbowel]

I think this is very harsh. When he's played centre back he's always looked much more comfortable, perhaps with the exception of LCB in a back four.

That wasn’t what people were saying at the time he was playing CB in a two. He was regularly making errors, out of position, losing important headers etc and people wanted him back in defensive midfield.

I think on the right of a three he looked better, and this was the consensus, but this isn’t too convincing, for me. Feels like we have to play an extra man to cover for someone’s deficiencies.

 

[johnbowel]

I don’t understand why it’s so important to have absolute belief in every facet of a manager or player. The people criticising them, do so because they support the club and don’t want players they consider to be very poor, having a negative effect on it. People react to reasonable and specific criticism like you’ve just gargled the blood of their firstborn. I‘ve never been anything but supportive of our players when I;ve been at games, but outside of that, supporting a player you think has been woeful/does not put in any effort, is surely the opposite of supporting the club. It just comes down to whether you rate Dier or not.

Tyson is a physicist/presenter. His expertise in his field is hardly comparable to the personal opinions of a football manager. Ernest Hemingway at least worked in a qualitative field, and as such, is frequently the subject of dogged criticism over his style - he’s probably more popular outside of the English Lit world, than within it (not that english Lit students/professors have opinions particularly worth listening to, which is my point). Differing perspectives should be an opportunity for a bit of self-examination re your own. Outside of Liverpool anyway. Even if you ultimately reject them, at least you know there’s some validity to doing that.

I think it’s telling when the defence of a player, is to try to devalue all the critical points raised against them, rather than addressing them.

Where is the line in terms of when humans are allowed to question one very small aspect of a manager’s judgemen? Is it just Poch and other top level managers? Does proficiency in a job, mean having no flaws in that job?
Was Capello a fantastic England manager? Mourinho made good choices in flogging Salah, De Bruyne and Lukaku?

What happens when Pochettino changes his mind, changes the formation, and his ideas about things? Was he right before or after? How about never loaning our best young players?

Should we be mocking anyone who disagrees with Mark Lawrenson.. after all he’s a hugely experienced and successful player and pundit, while we’re all just armchair managers whose opinions are accordingly inferior.

 

[Lilbaz]

I don’t understand why it’s so important to have absolute belief in every facet of a manager or player. The people criticising them, do so because they support the club and don’t want players they consider to be very poor, having a negative effect on it. People react to reasonable and specific criticism like you’ve just gargled the blood of their firstborn. I‘ve never been anything but supportive of our players when I;ve been at games, but outside of that, supporting a player you think has been woeful/does not put in any effort, is surely the opposite of supporting the club. It just comes down to whether you rate Dier or not.

Tyson is a physicist/presenter. His expertise in his field is hardly comparable to the personal opinions of a football manager. Ernest Hemingway at least worked in a qualitative field, and as such, is frequently the subject of dogged criticism over his style - he’s probably more popular outside of the English Lit world, than within it (not that english Lit students/professors have opinions particularly worth listening to, which is my point). Differing perspectives should be an opportunity for a bit of self-examination re your own. Outside of Liverpool anyway. Even if you ultimately reject them, at least you know there’s some validity to doing that.

I think it’s telling when the defence of a player, is to try to devalue all the critical points raised against them, rather than addressing them.

Where is the line in terms of when humans are allowed to question one very small aspect of a manager’s judgemen? Is it just Poch and other top level managers? Does proficiency in a job, mean having no flaws in that job?
Was Capello a fantastic England manager? Mourinho made good choices in flogging Salah, De Bruyne and Lukaku?

What happens when Pochettino changes his mind, changes the formation, and his ideas about things? Was he right before or after? How about never loaning our best young players?

Should we be mocking anyone who disagrees with Mark Lawrenson.. after all he’s a hugely experienced and successful player and pundit, while we’re all just armchair managers whose opinions are accordingly inferior.

Question even criticise but our fans go over the top what starts as criticism end up slagging off which is not helpful and yes the players read the comments and it effects them. Danny Rose has shown us that much. Read nearly any thread on this site and somewhere there will be a joke about how shit sissoko is. Dier is going down the same route with fans starting to go ott. If our fans could be respectful and not children i wouldn't have a problem with criticism but they show time after time that they can't.

 

[johnbowel]

Question even criticise but our fans go over the top what starts as criticism end up slagging off which is not helpful and yes the players read the comments and it effects them. Danny Rose has shown us that much. Read nearly any thread on this site and somewhere there will be a joke about how shit sissoko is. Dier is going down the same route with fans starting to go ott. If our fans could be respectful and not children i wouldn't have a problem with criticism but they show time after time that they can't.

In the instances where that’s happening, I agree. It’s not like he’s been disrespectful to the club or behaved like Ade/Kaboul were meant to have. I just think the fans on the opposite side are too extreme, and behave similarly childishly at any type of criticism. Danny is a good example of both, imo.

Perhaps my blow doll comment was a bit much in retrospect. Round my way, that’s considered a compliment.

Edit: should add, i think for me, criticism is necessary in particular when it relates to players who warrant yet seem to escape it. I dislike the sissoko jokes, because there’s already an established feeling about him as a player, which seems now to be shared by management, so it just feels like bullying or something, to me. Or maybe that’s just me being weird.

 

[Lilbaz]

It isn't childish at all. I suspect people moaning about criticism of Dier is because of how great a person he seems to be and nobody has really questioned this in any way. I think on the whole it's been very objective criticism compared to how Sissoko is assessed on here.

With myself there's an element of frustration that he's being used as a midfielder. Whilst I acknowledge his leadership qualities, attitude and personality which are all exemplary, I think he's severely lacking in the necessary physical and technical qualities to play in this role. I've gone into detail on why I think that earlier in this thread, but I don't see that criticism as aimless slagging off in any way. If anything, i'm more critical of Pochettino for playing him there.

If we were not able to engage in any sort of criticism then there wouldn't be much point in this thread.

You are missing my point. I am talking of scapegoats in the team. We have one every year that fans love to bash because he doesn't meet their expectations. Dier is not one yet but he is slowly getting there. People start criticising then go ott then start slagging off. It's like an obsession with some fans on here, they need their heroes but they also need their villains. I just hate seeing it happen and would prefer if we could focus on the positives rather than the negatives.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

You are missing my point. I am talking of scapegoats in the team. We have one every year that fans love to bash because he doesn't meet their expectations. Dier is not one yet but he is slowly getting there. People start criticising then go ott then start slagging off. It's like an obsession with some fans on here, they need their heroes but they also need their villains. I just hate seeing it happen and would prefer if we could focus on the positives rather than the negatives.

It’s not scapegoating when people can articulate rational criticisms, which is largely what’s happening with Dier.

It’s scapegoating when it’s irrational and people can’t back up their criticism with coherent argument, or they can but it’s clearly nonsense.

I would say Trippier is far more a victim of this than Dier (or even Sissoko).

And I think, as ever, what exasperates things is when people go too far the other way, claiming Dier’s (or Sissoko) much better than he is etc.

 

[glospur]

Geez, that silly little analogy was clearly supposed to be a little tongue in cheek, while poking a cheeky jab at BC's verbose, elongated posts. Maybe I should have used an emoji or something to indicate that.

I think the lazy argument is to say "if Poch is doing it, it must be right".

And your Tyson/Heningway analogy, isn't really very good. I don't have to be an expert in physics to understand the basics, gravity etc. And that is all I am doing with my appraisal of Dier, not splitting an atom, just expressing what I see, and whilst I haven't spent 50 odd years watching, reading, studying physics or creative prose, I have spent that long playing, watching, reading, studying, analysing (in my own way) and thinking about football. So whilst that may not be enough to get me the spurs job, it is enough to allow me to see and comprehend what a midfielder does on a football pitch.

And that's exactly your problem. You're still stuck on judging everything he does on what you think a player in a CM2 should be doing based on your 50 years watching studying, thinking etc about football, not what he's actually being asked to do by his manager.

As you certainly know, not every CM2 combination is the same, not every combination is asked to do the same things etc. These things differ from manager, to system, to philosophy, and so on.

The thing you brought up earlier about always dropping when we're defending a lead is the perfect example. You're making that judgement on what you'd prefer to see him do in that situation, but that's inherently ridiculous. It's a criteria that doesn't even exist to him, so why should he be judged on it? All that matters is if he's doing what Pochettino asks of him well enough, which he obviously is because he keeps being picked in that position, even when the other option for that role is available. it doesn't make him a poor player to follow instructions.

Think of it as like football manager tactics relativism. Kind of like cultural relativism; you know, the idea that a culture can only be judged from within the tenents of that culture, not against the culture of another. Think of it like that, but football.