2018/19 Gylfi Sigurdsson

[Tel001]

Yes, if your only metric for laziness is ground covered. That's not the only indicator of laziness though, which is exactly what I've just explained to you.

To be clear, I'm not saying Sigurdsson is lazy. It's not the word I personally would choose to describe the issue he has, but the point was that I can understand why people say that. I have a girl who works for me who can spend the whole day working, and appear to be busier than all of her colleagues, and yet to a man they would call her lazy. That's because the work she does is often fairly unnecessary, low pressure, stuff. She'll spend hours shredding, filing, restocking, ordering etc while they're left doing all the work that has deadlines, emailing people, dealing with aggro on the phone. I think this is similar to what people mean when they say Sigurdsson is lazy. The recent Chelsea home game for example, he spent the whole first half running round looking like he was working his socks off. But he hardly touched the ball. When we got the ball, suddenly those lungbusting runs he'd been making forlornly chasing Chelsea's defenders just stopped, and he was back to milling round at the edge of the box while the midfield tried to do something with it. The argument being put forward is that at times like that he needs to do more to involve himself in the game, and regardless of the semantics, I think it has some validity.

He’s basically a second striker mate and he likes to arrive in the box late. He works his arse off and with the girl in your office doing the easy work , Siggy leads the press , this isn’t the easy job. The reason he might not get the ball is because he is pressing the back line and that player usually has at least two options that are easy balls and the keeper to pass to. He starts the press and then DCL or whoever continues it and it’s often the 3rd or 4th pass that gets intercepted when pressing. Cahill was similar in that he worked hard but didn’t really get on the ball, or take the game by the scruff. Siggy is not Gerrans, he’s not going to drive his team on , making slide tackle in his own box then dribble up the pitch and end up on the end of the cross and slotting. He doesn’t have the pace or running power for that.

 

[Lanolin]

He’s basically a second striker mate and he likes to arrive in the box late. He works his arse off and with the girl in your office doing the easy work , Siggy leads the press , this isn’t the easy job. The reason he might not get the ball is because he is pressing the back line and that player usually has at least two options that are easy balls and the keeper to pass to. He starts the press and then DCL or whoever continues it and it’s often the 3rd or 4th pass that gets intercepted when pressing. Cahill was similar in that he worked hard but didn’t really get on the ball, or take the game by the scruff. Siggy is not Gerrans, he’s not going to drive his team on , making slide tackle in his own box then dribble up the pitch and end up on the end of the cross and slotting. He doesn’t have the pace or running power for that.

Which takes us full circle back to my original point...

You don't need to explain to me how he wants to play the game or what his strengths are. I watch him every week, I can see that. Nobody is saying he needs to play like Gerrard, or like Arteta, those are both straw man arguments. The point is simply that, at times, he needs to come out of his comfort zone and play in a way which benefits the team a bit more, rather than just carrying on doing what he likes to do.

 

[okellypj]

Looks to me like everyone's agreed he's not lazy... some people just think he should change is style of play or be more consistent.

 

[Zatara]

You do realise the amount of his transfer fee never changes don’t you? Like 22.5m a season is 45m devided by two? As in after 5 season it will be 45m devided by 5 = 9m a season? I don’t think we agreed to pay Swansea 22.5m for every season he’s here

Your post bears no relation to the point of my response.

 

[CRIMHEAD]

You do not an will not ever understand the game of football

Cool. Tell me about your coaching badges...

 

[CRIMHEAD]

You misunderstand this point time and again, no matter how many times and different ways it's presented to you. People have concerns over the fact that Sigurdsson can, at times, fail to impose himself on games. I don't care whether that's his style, or how he wants to play the game, it is very often detrimental to us and so will be commented on. There are lots of things he's good at, and I think he's been one of our best players this year on an individual level, but it's a very valid criticism that he doesn't do enough to get on the ball and make things happen when we need him to.

And again I tell you the concerns are silly. There are actually posters here that think Gylfi is a coward because he doesn't dwell on the ball.

"Getting on the ball" is the problem. Like that is some ideal state in this game in all tactics or scenarios. It surely is not.

 

[zook]

Important for us when we’re playing this high-intensity pressing game - has the engine for it and a goalscoring instinct that too many are lacking in this team. He can be frustrating and seems to be invisible at times but despite not being a stand-out in our recent good run of form he has still been a very important cog in the system.

 

[formerly manx toffee]

I really like him.

 

[catcherintherye]

Yes, if your only metric for laziness is ground covered. That's not the only indicator of laziness though, which is exactly what I've just explained to you.

To be clear, I'm not saying Sigurdsson is lazy. It's not the word I personally would choose to describe the issue he has, but the point was that I can understand why people say that. I have a girl who works for me who can spend the whole day working, and appear to be busier than all of her colleagues, and yet to a man they would call her lazy. That's because the work she does is often fairly unnecessary, low pressure, stuff. She'll spend hours shredding, filing, restocking, ordering etc while they're left doing all the work that has deadlines, emailing people, dealing with aggro on the phone. I think this is similar to what people mean when they say Sigurdsson is lazy. The recent Chelsea home game for example, he spent the whole first half running round looking like he was working his socks off. But he hardly touched the ball. When we got the ball, suddenly those lungbusting runs he'd been making forlornly chasing Chelsea's defenders just stopped, and he was back to milling round at the edge of the box while the midfield tried to do something with it. The argument being put forward is that at times like that he needs to do more to involve himself in the game, and regardless of the semantics, I think it has some validity.

The word you are looking for is probably deceptive or devious, not lazy. I am not sure I characterise Sigurdsson as that though mind, but it's not an unreasonable suggestion.

My own perspective would be he is simply not good enough to dominate the ball, particularly in a game against Chelsea. He has never done this in his career. He is someone who benefits from an economy of output.

To use your workplace analogy (with the ball at least) he's more the fella who is relied upon to deal with the customers who are most angry and can resolve it. He does a little amount of work, but does it well.

The same with Sigurdsson, his best stuff with the ball often comes for me when he plays 1 or 2 touch.

 

[CRIMHEAD]

Which takes us full circle back to my original point...

You don't need to explain to me how he wants to play the game or what his strengths are. I watch him every week, I can see that. Nobody is saying he needs to play like Gerrard, or like Arteta, those are both straw man arguments. The point is simply that, at times, he needs to come out of his comfort zone and play in a way which benefits the team a bit more, rather than just carrying on doing what he likes to do.

Are you now seriously suggesting he's doing whatever he wants? He's playing within a designated tactic for heavens sake. If he wasn't, he'd be gone.

I still don't understand what you want him to do more of. He's in constant motion. Do you not like his movement? Is it when he's on the ball or off the ball? Is it the final third? Is it when we are in possession? What phase of the game are you even talking about?

 

[bluebert55]

He is getting better and better and his understanding with Bernard and Gomes is improving.

 

[Lanolin]

And again I tell you the concerns are silly. There are actually posters here that think Gylfi is a coward because he doesn't dwell on the ball.

"Getting on the ball" is the problem. Like that is some ideal state in this game in all tactics or scenarios. It surely is not.

Are you now seriously suggesting he's doing whatever he wants? He's playing within a designated tactic for heavens sake. If he wasn't, he'd be gone.

I still don't understand what you want him to do more of. He's in constant motion. Do you not like his movement? Is it when he's on the ball or off the ball? Is it the final third? Is it when we are in possession? What phase of the game are you even talking about?

No you still misunderstand the point. I have no idea how, it's quite a talent you have.

You consistently talk about it as if people want him to play like Gomes, getting on the ball all the time and moving it round, but NOBODY is saying that. The point is that at times when we're looking for a goal he often seems to want to just be the one who scores it, or who plays a nice ball at the edge of the box to set it up, rather than saying right I've got the talent to actually make this happen by demanding the ball and doing something with it. It's such a ludicrously simple point that you just don't grasp. I wouldn't mind you disagreeing, but it's incredibly frustrating when you just argue a completely different point to the one people are making to you.

 

[mkrudden]

You misunderstand this point time and again, no matter how many times and different ways it's presented to you. People have concerns over the fact that Sigurdsson can, at times, fail to impose himself on games. I don't care whether that's his style, or how he wants to play the game, it is very often detrimental to us and so will be commented on. There are lots of things he's good at, and I think he's been one of our best players this year on an individual level, but it's a very valid criticism that he doesn't do enough to get on the ball and make things happen when we need him to.

Hmmmm I'm not sure I agree here. There are some points which seem to contradict what is more likely the reality.

"I don't care whether that's his style, or how he wants to play the game"

"it's a very valid criticism that he doesn't do enough to get on the ball and make things happen when we need him to"

Both of these points here seem to point th finger squarely at Sig'. Yet what Crimhead is saying is, you (and others) and judging him on a barometer of what YOU feel you want from him and now what is being asked to do.

He's quite clearly not being asked to delve into the the first two thirds of "our" pitch. Gomes is there and is our playmaker. His job is to be as close to our striker as possible, get it and directly look to play him in. Alternatively he can have a shot, play in a winger / full back or simply keep possession. But he's doing this all in the final third.

Another likely reason for this is that from a defensive point of view, it positions Gylfi at the top of the pitch ready for the "lines". As everyone has seen, we defend in a 4-4-2. Having him maraud about the pitch leaves us unorganised should we lose the ball given Silva likes to press and win the ball early.

Giving Gylfi the job is because he's so damn good at it. The team generally is becoming very good at setting traps and the press starts typically with our number 10.

So there are reasons (more than the above) for Sig' playing the way he's doing and it's far more than a egotistical "I play this way and that's it".

He's been so good this season. He has a dip, like they all did, but along with Digne he's been our best player. Throw in the stats to corroborate and I find it difficult to see how he gets the pelters he does in here from some (not you).

We should be very pleased we have him.

 

[Simon baker]

Cool. Tell me about your coaching badges...

Listen we will just have to agree to disagree your clearly a good blue and I have no hard feelings that you think I’m wrong this is after all a forum.

 

[Lanolin]

Hmmmm I'm not sure I agree here. There are some points which seem to contradict what is more likely the reality.

"I don't care whether that's his style, or how he wants to play the game"

"it's a very valid criticism that he doesn't do enough to get on the ball and make things happen when we need him to"

Both of these points here seem to point th finger squarely at Sig'. Yet what Crimhead is saying is, you (and others) and judging him on a barometer of what YOU feel you want from him and now what is being asked to do.

He's quite clearly not being asked to delve into the the first two thirds of "our" pitch. Gomes is there and is our playmaker. His job is to be as close to our striker as possible, get it and directly look to play him in. Alternatively he can have a shot, play in a winger / full back or simply keep possession. But he's doing this all in the final third.

Another likely reason for this is that from a defensive point of view, it positions Gylfi at the top of the pitch ready for the "lines". As everyone has seen, we defend in a 4-4-2. Having him maraud about the pitch leaves us unorganised should we lose the ball given Silva likes to press and win the ball early.

Giving Gylfi the job is because he's so damn good at it. The team generally is becoming very good at setting traps and the press starts typically with our number 10.

So there are reasons (more than the above) for Sig' playing the way he's doing and it's far more than a egotistical "I play this way and that's it".

He's been so good this season. He has a dip, like they all did, but along with Digne he's been our best player. Throw in the stats to corroborate and I find it difficult to see how he gets the pelters he does in here from some (not you).

We should be very pleased we have him.

Erm… well, yeah. I mean, I thought that's what we were all doing?

What I write on here doesn't change what the owner/manager/players do, it's just me giving an opinion. If I say Bernard needs to score more goals or Holgate needs to be stronger, it's perfectly possible that the manager will disagree with me, I'm fully aware of that. I write about what I think, not what the coaches are telling them to do. I used the example of Lukaku earlier, it would appear that he played to instruction, seeing as I don't recall him ever being dropped in the 4 years we had him, but people were perfectly entitled to say on here that they wanted him to run the channels more/hold the ball up better etc surely?