claretspice wrote:Is that the best evidence you have? The sporting world is littered with examples of sportsmen who made terrific debuts but then once the adrenalin had worn off and opponents had had the opportunity to analyse and identify his weaknesses, never really replicated it. And as you rightly said, he only had 70 minutes in his legs then. Whats to say he's not fitter now? The fact he's not finished many games, primarily, and perhaps also the fact he has lost large chunks of training as well as games to injury.
Incidentally, the only folk raising the framework as an argument on this thread, so far as I can see, are those in your camp. To be frank, I'm not even sure what it means - it appears to have become a prejorative term and taken out of any context. Every team has a tactical set up. Weve used at least 3 different ones just this season, with varying degrees of success - one of which was formulated seemingly to get Defour into the team.
Spice, let's be clear on this. I suspect that neither of us has any hard 'evidence' to back up our viewpoint. I only pointed out (in reply to all the injury issues which are continuously being brought up) that if a player has been part of the full training sessions for weeks now, and he is deemed fit to sit on the bench by the manager and the medical teal, he should be fit enough to play - or at the least to make a contribution as a substitute (preferentially at half time). Seems logical to me.
Hence the - logical - conclusion that the framework (term which was not raised by me), or the tactical setup, or whatever you wish to call it, is to blame for his (total) omission on playing time. You told us that it comes down to a straight swap between Gray and Defour because both are incompatible in the same team in a 4-5-1. Call that 'framework' or 'tactical set up', all sounds the same for me. As said, I do not agree that Defour only fits one kind of line up, if so he would have been totally overrun during the away cup game at Sunderland. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he appeared to have a good game, getting stronger as the game went on.
Now of course you'll come back with your argument on his later injury, and so I will need to revert to paragraph 1 again
Fact is that Defour did not appear on any away team sheet (FA cup excluded) since that dreaded away game to WBA. No evidence to contradict that at all. Since then, we can hardly call the tactical set up (identical 4-4-2 formation) away from home a great succes.
Furthermore, I do not belong in any 'camp' at all: I am a lifelong Burnley supporter, who wishes my team to do well and also would like to see the team play some good stuff along the way. I will still be a supporter, even if Defour leaves next season. I was however excited when we managed to attract Defour, because I am convinced he has so much in his bag to improve the team. Therefore, I think I'm entitled to share my view (as you are of course) to say we are putting a good investment at risk by casting him aside all together.
For the last time, I commend the manager for getting us to where we are, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be aware of his shortcomings.
Anyhow, the proof will be in the pudding. Barton being suspended, if we don't see Defour in the starting line up of the team during the next few games (hopefully in his best position at CM), I guess we'll never see him play another game in a claret shirt.
