James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
Spijed
Posts: 17120
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2895 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by Spijed » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:10 pm

With Calum Chambers playing in the centre of defence for Arsenal who would ever have thought we'd have far better players (at least one) than the likes of Arsenal in certain positions.

Shows how far we've come in the last decade at least.

jrgbfc
Posts: 8499
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2106 times
Has Liked: 337 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by jrgbfc » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:56 pm

If you assume Tarkowski is better than Chambers then yes.

AndyClaret
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
Been Liked: 217 times
Has Liked: 543 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by AndyClaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:34 pm

jrgbfc wrote:If you assume Tarkowski is better than Chambers then yes.
Good grief, quite incredible.
This user liked this post: Rick_Muller

Foshiznik
Posts: 2538
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 1:18 pm
Been Liked: 722 times
Has Liked: 2025 times
Location: Computer matrix, IP not found- current code: 00101110100101001100100 1011101010100010101101010100100

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by Foshiznik » Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:52 pm

We've had a better defence than Arsenal for about 10 years to be fair...
This user liked this post: tim_noone

Vino blanco
Posts: 5363
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:42 pm
Been Liked: 1904 times
Has Liked: 1978 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by Vino blanco » Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:54 pm

Accy Stanley have a better defence than Arsenal.
This user liked this post: Bosscat

SGr
Posts: 4413
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:46 pm
Been Liked: 1022 times
Has Liked: 307 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by SGr » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:06 pm

Chambers is a Championship level footballer. Funnily enough, Tarkowski being better than him isn’t actually an achievement.

ŽižkovClaret
Posts: 7040
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 2167 times
Has Liked: 3100 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by ŽižkovClaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:09 pm

jrgbfc wrote:If you assume Tarkowski is better than Chambers then yes.
If you are going to try and play devil's advocate, at least 1/100 people would have to be able to agree with you.

Failed miserably there

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10159
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4183 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:13 pm

ZizkovClaret wrote:If you are going to try and play devil's advocate, at least 1/100 people would have to be able to agree with you.

Failed miserably there

That is the problem though, if you find yourself typing negative nonsense most the time then it becomes a habit and you type stupid comments like that. He isn't on his own though on here.

jrgbfc
Posts: 8499
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2106 times
Has Liked: 337 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by jrgbfc » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:13 pm

ZizkovClaret wrote:If you are going to try and play devil's advocate, at least 1/100 people would have to be able to agree with you.

Failed miserably there
I'm not saying Tarkowski isn't better. Just that the way we play makes all our defenders look better. I reckon if you put any average Premier league centre half into our team they'd look outstanding.

ŽižkovClaret
Posts: 7040
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 2167 times
Has Liked: 3100 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by ŽižkovClaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:15 pm

jrgbfc wrote:If you assume Tarkowski is better than Chambers then yes.
Your statement suggested you believed there was anyone outside of the Chambers family who might believe that Tarks isnt a better player....

Utter hogwash

claretnproud
Posts: 643
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:20 am
Been Liked: 261 times
Has Liked: 21 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by claretnproud » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:16 pm

we probably have a better keeper than them as well but then again we may have a better keeper than anyone in the prem. I think Pope is that good.

claretnproud
Posts: 643
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:20 am
Been Liked: 261 times
Has Liked: 21 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by claretnproud » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:20 pm

jrgbfc wrote:I'm not saying Tarkowski isn't better. Just that the way we play makes all our defenders look better. I reckon if you put any average Premier league centre half into our team they'd look outstanding.
definitely an element of that in our team and I agree with you on that. For me I think Tarks has potential but could be exposed at a top team where defensive players will often be exposed more than at Burnley. Keene certainly took time to find his feet at Everton.

ksrclaret
Posts: 6897
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2540 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by ksrclaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:45 pm

Nothing wrong with Calum Chambers. He's a decent Premier League player.

Tarkowski is the better defender but Chambers is the better distributor.

ksrclaret
Posts: 6897
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2540 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by ksrclaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:47 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:That is the problem though, if you find yourself typing negative nonsense most the time then it becomes a habit and you type stupid comments like that. He isn't on his own though on here.
Do you have anything to add in terms of the topic?

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 9599
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 3148 times
Has Liked: 10236 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by evensteadiereddie » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:53 pm

Tarks is a cracking defender but he will have to curb that diving in at the edge of the box ; it cost him his England place and damn near let Southampton in on Saturday.

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10159
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4183 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:54 pm

ksrclaret wrote:Do you have anything to add in terms of the topic?

For you ? Nope, knock yourself out

ksrclaret
Posts: 6897
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2540 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by ksrclaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:01 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:For you ? Nope, knock yourself out
Odd to comment on a thread if you have no intention of adding any of your own contributions to the topic.

It's not very fair to constantly have a go at other's people contributions when you're not prepared to offer any yourself.
This user liked this post: careyclaret

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10159
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4183 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:02 pm

ksrclaret wrote:Odd to comment on a thread if you have no intention of adding any of your own contributions to the topic.

It's not very fair to constantly have a go at other's people contributions when you're not prepared to offer any yourself.

Yet still you felt the urge/need to contact me directly. Just skip past my posts love

ksrclaret
Posts: 6897
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2540 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by ksrclaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:07 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:Yet still you felt the urge/need to contact me directly. Just skip past my posts love
Okay, well I tried to get you involved in the debate. If simply sniping at everyone else and makes you happy then you crack on, 'love'. :roll:

jrgbfc
Posts: 8499
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2106 times
Has Liked: 337 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by jrgbfc » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:09 pm

ZizkovClaret wrote:Your statement suggested you believed there was anyone outside of the Chambers family who might believe that Tarks isnt a better player....

Utter hogwash
Maybe I worded it wrongly. If you asked most neutrals I bet a lot would tell you there wasn't much between Tarkowski and Chambers. On here a lot of people view everything through ridiculous claret tinted specs. Tarkowski is no more than a good steady, Premier league defender yet some folk on here talk about him as though he's the second coming of Franz Beckenbauher.

Vegas Claret
Posts: 30618
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
Been Liked: 11032 times
Has Liked: 5644 times
Location: clue is in the title

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by Vegas Claret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:15 pm

we've to watch Chambers, he has a habit against us
This user liked this post: Elizabeth

ksrclaret
Posts: 6897
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:56 am
Been Liked: 2540 times
Has Liked: 766 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by ksrclaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:17 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:we've to watch Chambers, he has a habit against us
Nearly scored against us on the Turf for Fulham too, had a header that hit the bar.

Spijed
Posts: 17120
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2895 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by Spijed » Wed Aug 14, 2019 4:18 pm

jrgbfc wrote:Maybe I worded it wrongly. If you asked most neutrals I bet a lot would tell you there wasn't much between Tarkowski and Chambers. On here a lot of people view everything through ridiculous claret tinted specs. Tarkowski is no more than a good steady, Premier league defender yet some folk on here talk about him as though he's the second coming of Franz Beckenbauher.
I'd say most neutrals would say Tarkowski is by far the better defender. When discussing the Maguire transfer only two defenders came up as an alternative for Man U. when many thought the £80 million fee was too high - Nathan Ake & James Tarkowski.

Calum Chambers was never even mentioned as a good alternative if the Maguire transfer fell though.

In addition, no Leicester city supporters contemplated the idea of him playing for them either.

Edit: That's based on reading their supporters forums Redcafe & Foxestalk.
This user liked this post: ZizkovClaret

Tricky Trevor
Posts: 8466
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 pm
Been Liked: 2461 times
Has Liked: 1990 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by Tricky Trevor » Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:02 pm

ksrclaret wrote:Nothing wrong with Calum Chambers. He's a decent Premier League player.

Tarkowski is the better defender but Chambers is the better distributor.
That’s Arsenals problem. They sign good footballers, we sign good defenders.

dandeclaret
Posts: 3552
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 am
Been Liked: 2595 times
Has Liked: 301 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by dandeclaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 7:53 pm

Spijed wrote:I'd say most neutrals would say Tarkowski is by far the better defender. When discussing the Maguire transfer only two defenders came up as an alternative for Man U. when many thought the £80 million fee was too high - Nathan Ake & James Tarkowski.

Calum Chambers was never even mentioned as a good alternative if the Maguire transfer fell though.

In addition, no Leicester city supporters contemplated the idea of him playing for them either.

Edit: That's based on reading their supporters forums Redcafe & Foxestalk.

Maybe because Leicester don't expect to sign players from Arsenal's first XI?
This user liked this post: boatshed bill

EarbyClaret
Posts: 1376
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:48 am
Been Liked: 498 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by EarbyClaret » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:12 pm

Both players are good fit for their respective clubs - neither would work if you swapped them.

I'd say Tarkowski has the better defensive attributes - playing for a team who are generally set-up to defend. Chambers is better with the ball - playing for a team who are generally set-up to attack.

A Tarkowski-type player could be a real asset for Arsenal but it would require a shift in their overall approach and philosophy. Conversely it's difficult to envisage a Chambers-like player being effective in Dyche-era Burnley

boatshed bill
Posts: 15228
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3155 times
Has Liked: 6742 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by boatshed bill » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:17 pm

EarbyClaret wrote:Both players are good fit for their respective clubs - neither would work if you swapped them.

A Tarkowski-type player could be a real asset for Arsenal but it would require a shift in their overall approach and philosophy. Conversely it's difficult to envisage a Chambers-like player being effective in Dyche-era Burnley
That Mavropanos lad looked more like an old fashioned centre back. No nonsense type of defender

Archer
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:50 pm
Been Liked: 30 times
Has Liked: 146 times

Re: James Tarkowski v Calum Chambers

Post by Archer » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:22 pm

dandeclaret wrote:Maybe because Leicester don't expect to sign players from Arsenal's first XI?
At that point hadn’t he just come off a season-long loan at a relegated club?

Post Reply