29 Jun 2015 16:11:02
The Benteke Debate
-----------------------
Recently there has been a lot of discussion about Benteke I thought that I would weigh in with an opinion.
There are a number of questions to consider when discussing any potential new signing -
Is he talented enough?
Does he add something that we currently lack?
Does he fit our style of play?
Ignoring the financial aspect of signings (as most people don't understand football finances) these are the only questions to answer.
1. Is he talented enough?
The short answer is yes. 42 goals in 88 appearances for a very average side is a great strike rate for any striker, what's better is his goals are spread over a couple of seasons so he is no one season wonder. In addition to that he has also scored against many of the top teams and in important games (such as cup semis). These are all the hall marks of a very good striker. It's debateable that our system requires more of a front man than just goals (something we will get to soon) so let's have a look at his other contributions.
He averages 0.4 tackles a games which isn't too bad for someone labelled lazy (Suarez - who is often labelled a hard worker - averages 0.7) and his 0.7 clearances a game say that his defensive contribution isn't that bad at all.
That's the stats, not a complete picture, having watched him myself I can understand why he is labelled lazy, when attacking his movement is lacking (backed up by the fact that his distance ran when attacking is lower than distance ran defending) and prefers to sit up front waiting for the move to finish not very helpful when trying to create chances (the exact same fault Balotelli has). Is he talented enough? I would say yes, just.
2. Does he add something we lack? This is a pretty emphatic yes in my opinion. We have next to zero physical presence up front, this is what Benteke has in spades. At times he reminds me of a less talented and finished Drogba with his physical and abrasive playing style, but he also hides a little finesse in his locker too. Watch him for Belgium and you'll see what I mean.
3. Does he fit our style of play?
This is the sticking point for many, and I have to agree. He does not suit our intended style of play - high pressing and fast fluid attacking style. Benteke simply does not fit in, his brutish static style is more suited to a team playing a long counter attacking game (would probably suit Chelsea really well). However - he is only 24 years old and it seems really unfair to assume that he can't learn a different style of play and adapt to a new system. Is it worth a high transfer fee to find out? I don't know, but I don't think he would be the disaster that many think he would be.
I'll be honest, before I started writing this I was against signing him. I'm not entirely in his favour now, but I'm not against him either once I separated emotion from my argument.
That's all for now, hope you enjoyed reading, comments welcome and appreciated as always.
29 Jun 2015 16:42:50
Well I can only guess that we are going to try a bit of long ball football when Benteke plays.
This style of play theory is nonsense, we have no style of play. We are just dreadful. Someone made a good point earlier in the year our attacks seem purposeless we just hope for a rabbit out of the hat. At least Benteke gives us a purpose in our attacks.
People seem to forget we could play 70 odd games next season if all goes well in competitions. (That's just a figure from thin air I'm too lazy to find out the exact maximum, and true maximum includes FA Cup replays so it's probably more than 70.) For this to happen we need a squad that adapts and plenty of talented players to come in and rotate. It will be a difficult task to rotate effectively but it has to be done.
Maybe just maybe these signings are being made with a view to change the approach. For instance Clyne signing is also under scrutiny because of the protection Wanyama provides that we don't play with. Maybe just maybe we do plan to utilise a DM this season!
I am very very ticked off with Rodgers stubbornness and his clear inability to learn from errors, but he did deliver 2nd place that cannot ALL have been down to Suarez. Okay I would definitely have sacked him, but he is our manager and I have accepted that FACT even if I'm not happy with it. So I am going to give him a final chance to win me over, but if all these signings are being made and he still tries to play "death by football" nonsense, then we will most certainly lose and considering our early fixtures, we will be out of the top for chase.
One final word about long ball negative football. is it really THAT bad, I am all for being entertained by incredible football, but what entertains me the most is watching Liverpool win.
29 Jun 2015 16:51:11
In my post I highlight that just because Benteke is more suited to a long counter that does not mean he can't learn a different style.
I also, very purposefully, used the phrase "intended style" not our current style. I think it's pretty obvious that Rodgers would like to play the style that saw us get 2nd place and not what landed us much farther down the league last year.
Thanks for weighing in, healthy debate is part of what this site is for.
29 Jun 2015 17:10:59
No Balo's problem is he drops deep and tries to create too much which leaves no one in the box. That's why he's more comfortable and better in a two striker system.
29 Jun 2015 17:30:50
@Nevada, I think it's a case of most people will back him if we sign him but generally it is two issues for me - 1) the style as you have pointed out and yes I'm sure he could improve and adapt due to his age, 2) his price is ridiculous - for this type of money you should not be going for a player who does not really fit in with the rest of your good players.
He's way over-priced. I agree with you he would suit Chelsea better but at that I don't think he'd be worth £20m.
29 Jun 2015 17:40:21
"when attacking his movement is lacking (backed up by the fact that his distance ran when attacking is lower than distance ran defending) and prefers to sit up front waiting for the move to finish not very helpful when trying to create chances (the exact same fault Balotelli has)"
For me this is the crux - our system, or what remains of it, requires that forward movement, that work ethic from our forwards. Balotelli is a more talented played than Benteke (IMO) yet has been woeful this season, inpart due to his attitude, but in part due to his work rate (or lack of it) in the final third. It is a hugely significant point: if we sign Benteke it gives us two choice - score few goals or change our style of play to a hoofing/crossing team. How we currently set-up is in direct contrast to what Benteke brings to the table - he isn't going to be scoring many goals with our current philosophy.
29 Jun 2015 17:52:51
These type of discussions is why I love this site. Benteke or no Benteke?? Lookin at our current setup of players if we were to add a benteke type player would this mean a revert back to the 442 diamond? I think with our crop of players this could be a huge success for us. 2 full backs(clyne & moreno) who love to bomb forward & put crosses into the box. Think clyne put in the most crosses of any full back in the prem last year. Then 2 solid cbs not sure who they would be. Sakho is a must for me with one other. Lucas in that holding role just covering the full backs when they bomb forward whilst providing protection for his cbs. Henderson & miner in the middle pressing & harrying the opposition all game & doing what they do best. Tip of a diamond coutinho pulling the strings creating all the chances. Up top firmino & benteke could be a nice duo,the Brazilian flair of firmino & the power of benteke. Use his strengths & encourage the likes of moreno & clyne to whip the crosses in early & let the likes of coutinho & firmino feed of benteke knock downs. When studge is back fit (if he ever is) then rotate the top 3 along with ings & origi. Hey ho jus my opinion & won't happen but that's why I love this site. Everyone has different opinions
29 Jun 2015 18:48:18
I'd sign benteke for 50p wait no. no I wouldn't total jizz who plays for a jizz tean
29 Jun 2015 20:53:23
Long ball or long pass? Gerrard & Alonso by-passed midfield pretty much every match. Was that long ball football?
When Chelsea played off Drogba were they a long ball team or a team using a physical striker with a good touch to get them into an advanced position early with pacy runners coming onto his lay-offs?
I am not suggesting Benteke is Drogba class but he is more like him than 99% of strikers.
Where they are very similar is their strike rate but Benteke had scored more than Drogba at the same age (having played 3 seasons more in the Premier League which is where we play last time I looked)
I've seen Benteke bully several sets of LFC centre halves and over the past 3 seasons there won't be many strikers who've scored more against us. And it's Aston Villa we are talking about.
And if Rodgers won't see Christmas (as a lot of the Benteke haters reckon) then Brendan's style of play won't be an issue will it? Old Ron Koeman fancied a big lump, sorry a physical threat, when he took over Saints. Don't think they're long ball.
{Ed001's Note - how do midfielder bypass midfield? That makes no sense. And Chelsea did use a fair amount of long ball direct football with Drogba yes.}
29 Jun 2015 21:11:38
Gerrard & Alonso picked it up of the CBs toes and pinged it over the rest of midfielders heads?
{Ed001's Note - but they were in midfield, so they would have been unable to bypass themselves.....}
29 Jun 2015 21:17:19
But it's a real debate Ed01. LVG actually argued it pretty well last season. The long pass (as he called it) won a few games for United and saved them in a couple of others. And they finished how many points ahead of us? In fact it was instrumental in setting the tone in our game at Anfield. They constantly by-passed our midfield and we didn't have a scooby. We'd press, realise it was pointless pressing, they'd fanny about at the back, we'd jog up, they'd by-pass us into space or Fellaini again and we looked a ragbag army. So it does have a place in the game. That was a very important case in point. Our season turned on it.
{Ed001's Note - no it is a useful tactic, but it was not a pass. A pass is to feet, not to a player to challenge for with their head, which is what United were doing with the hoof to Fellaini.}
29 Jun 2015 21:24:11
Ha ha. If the midfielder is picking up the ball on th D he's not in midfield by definition!
{Ed001's Note - how so? That is not any definition I have heard. Seems like you are making it up to try and obscure the facts.}
29 Jun 2015 21:28:31
You can pass into space! So a pass isn't always to feet!
{Ed001's Note - but that would arrive to feet, as it would be on the ground by the time the player reached it. It is not the same as hoofing it in the air to contest. Doesn't matter how much you try and deny it, an aerial ball to battle for is not the same as a ball along the ground.}
29 Jun 2015 21:37:16
It only arrives to feet because the feet move to the ball to catch it up. If the feet didn't move to the ball the ball would be stranded, possibly for the whole game.
{Ed001's Note - sounds a bit like you are describing the women's world cup there....}
29 Jun 2015 21:52:35
I'd rather watch Fergie: The Glory Years than that!
29 Jun 2015 22:07:12
Ed, do you think thar Benteke could adapt? That his attitude/laziness can be corrected?
Personally I feel that's the only thing making his signing questionable
{Ed001's Note - no, I can't see it.}