Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, HighPeakFox said:

I'd like to raise the possibility that Burnley might themselves have agreed that Tarkowski should not be playing, in light of all the speculation, and the mysterious toe injury has also been agreed by all parties.

Or they've just made him toe the line?

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I don't like the fact Brentford are in line for about 25% of the profit on him. Makes the transfer even harder to do at a sensible price. Walk away and never look back.

 

It's probably a lesson to selling clubs to keep the percentages to about 15% maximum.

 

If Burnley end up with less than £25m net then they may feel they'd rather keep the player. Now Burnley, Brentford and Tarkowski may end up missing out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lesta Legend said:

A few on Burnley board not quite convinced about the toe ‘injury’ and that his omission again seems ominous. However like a frequent Burnley poster they seem determined that it’s £50m or no transfer, unfortunately for them they’ll never be getting that. I would be very happy with this at the right price. 

It's our good luck that no-one else values him highly enough to be worth selling.  There's more to football than money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shane said:

 


We supposedly have a very good scouting network, surely we can find someone for half of what Burnley are asking for and then go back in for Tarkowski next season

This someone for half price will then be cluttering up the changing room next season. Probably on a four year contract at £2m a year? This season we'd probably drop a few places as well so there's a few million lost there as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/09/2020 at 23:29, StanSP said:

But at the same time, people also don't want to spend that same money on a player that has huge potential and is highly rated. But is also unproven in this league (I also don't like that concept as a barometer for how well a signing could do. It's so flawed it's ridiculous).

It's a lot of money for us to spend on anybody. My problem with Tarkowski is where does he actually fit in? If you're going to spend all that much on him then he's surely got to start, but that will mean dismantling the 4-3-3 system which to me we've just bought Cengiz Under to supplement, or it means breaking up the Evans - Soyuncu partnership. The defender we sign in my opinion, unless cheap (which is unlikely), should be an up and coming defender in the mould of Fofana. Somebody who won't expect to start every game immediately but could well come in for Evans in the next couple of years. Tarkowski you buy for here and now.

 

On 25/09/2020 at 23:44, StriderHiryu said:

Agree with this. It's not just Perez. Throughout the league here are some "proven" players:

 

- Maguire

- Hojberg

- Michael Keane

- Gylfi Sigurdsson

- Dejan Lovren

- Pickford

- Walcott

- Drinkwater

 

There are definitely some good ones about too, Mane, Van Dijk, Evans, Gana (before he left for PSG), Kante, Mahrez. But the difference between the second set of players and the first wasn't just that they were proven, but they were obviously really good. Perez had good stats but even Newcastle fans didn't think he was worth the money we paid for him. I don't think Perez is a bad player (more like a misused one) and could yet to be decent. But when you compare his price to that paid for Ricardo, Ndidi, Tielemans, etc then it shows the premium paid for such players is just that, a premium.

 

All that said I think Tarkowski is a good player and probably Burnley's best overall player, but club record fee territory he is not. Given our club record is 32m for Tielemans though, I expect we have to break it to land him though, and he seems available. We also set the precedent ourselves for how much we pulled Man U's trousers down for Maguire.

It is a self-fulfilling prophecy that phrase. There is no harm about having experience in this league, it's clearly not a bad thing, but people use it to justify spending absolutely stupid money when time and time again it's proven that there is better value abroad. There are some flops abroad, of course, but we've made the majority of our best signings from there.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gazza M said:

They blatantly have to sell this guy to invest in 2 or 3 players. Still think we should go for it and offer Slimani, Gray, Amartey etc if required. 

Yeah, I’m not sure if you have ever seen the demographic of player at Burnley but there might be an error in your thinking there pal...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Costock_Fox said:

Yeah, I’m not sure if you have ever seen the demographic of player at Burnley but there might be an error in your thinking there pal...

Slim fits the bill. But they'd never pay his wages. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, murphy said:

 

 

How do you explain VVD being top then?  The top five rated CBs there are all in the top quarter of the league except for Tarkowski.  And where is Ben Mee?

 

By your logic, I would expect to see Norwich, Bournemouth and Watford defenders.

 

 

 

 

Whoscoreds rating system is utter trash and meaningless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Whoscoreds rating system is utter trash and meaningless.

You usually make stronger arguments than that.  I don't know if they are or not but I think that they use Opta stats.  

 

Admittedly, this is from Whoscored's own website but:

 

WhoScored Ratings Explained

WhoScored.com Ratings are considered to be the most accurate, respected and well-known performance indicators in the world of football. Our ratings are currently used among media giants, bookmakers and football clubs.

 

WhoScored.com Ratings are based on a unique, comprehensive statistical algorithm, calculated live during the game. There are over 200 raw statistics included in the calculation of a player'’s/team’'s rating, weighted according to their influence within the game. Every event of importance is taken into account, with a positive or negative effect on ratings weighted in relation to its area on the pitch and its outcome.

 

An example: An attempted dribble (event) in the opposition’s final third (area of pitch) that is successful (outcome) will have a positive effect on a player's rating. Ratings that are flashing show that an event influencing said rating has just occurred. Green indicates an increase, while red indicates a decrease in rating.

 

The scoring system for the ratings is out of 10, starting from 6.0, with 10 being the highest score. The ratings are updated live every 30 seconds during the game. Our data providers Opta will update and adjust statistics where necessary 5 minutes after the final whistle. The statistics, and therefore ratings, are also subject to change at anytime after the game, due to any further corrections that need to be made to the statistics.

 

A green star will be awarded to the man of the match 10 minutes after full time. A few minutes after full time our data provider will undergo a review process to improve the accuracy of the statistics, which may result in some stats being corrected/updated. Ratings are also subject to an increase or decrease based on the number of goals a team has scored or conceded, and whether the team has kept a clean sheet at 90 minutes. Such boosts in rating are affected by an individual's playing position and their time on the pitch and will be calculated at full time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, murphy said:

You usually make stronger arguments than that.  I don't know if they are or not but I think that they use Opta stats.  

 

Admittedly, this is from Whoscored's own website but:

 

WhoScored Ratings Explained

WhoScored.com Ratings are considered to be the most accurate, respected and well-known performance indicators in the world of football. Our ratings are currently used among media giants, bookmakers and football clubs.

 

WhoScored.com Ratings are based on a unique, comprehensive statistical algorithm, calculated live during the game. There are over 200 raw statistics included in the calculation of a player'’s/team’'s rating, weighted according to their influence within the game. Every event of importance is taken into account, with a positive or negative effect on ratings weighted in relation to its area on the pitch and its outcome.

 

An example: An attempted dribble (event) in the opposition’s final third (area of pitch) that is successful (outcome) will have a positive effect on a player's rating. Ratings that are flashing show that an event influencing said rating has just occurred. Green indicates an increase, while red indicates a decrease in rating.

 

The scoring system for the ratings is out of 10, starting from 6.0, with 10 being the highest score. The ratings are updated live every 30 seconds during the game. Our data providers Opta will update and adjust statistics where necessary 5 minutes after the final whistle. The statistics, and therefore ratings, are also subject to change at anytime after the game, due to any further corrections that need to be made to the statistics.

 

A green star will be awarded to the man of the match 10 minutes after full time. A few minutes after full time our data provider will undergo a review process to improve the accuracy of the statistics, which may result in some stats being corrected/updated. Ratings are also subject to an increase or decrease based on the number of goals a team has scored or conceded, and whether the team has kept a clean sheet at 90 minutes. Such boosts in rating are affected by an individual's playing position and their time on the pitch and will be calculated at full time.

The ratings are toss. How on earth can personal ratings be such when, for instance, your score can be impacted by someone else messing up and conceding your team a goal.
 

Yeah they use opta stats for a part of it. But their “algorithms” don’t only use them and they decide how to interpret them.

 

I don’t know how many times I’ve  watched games and someone has played like utter trash, would score a goal (it could bounce off their arse) and suddenly he’s star man, because it’s weighted so much on favour of certain events.

 

Was Mendy our worst player against Burnley? Was Justin better than Castagne? According to them they were and that’s just nonsense.


Sure for your dream team games it’s probably a decent system. But in terms of trying to decide if a player is good or not it’s not even close to being a good system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...