Gary Cahill

[robsblubot 3,508]

if u believe a few posters on here, the only defenders worth mentioning are the ones who are pro-active. i guess basics like concentration, maintaining discipline, bossing the box, man marking, being aware of attackers and dealing with the danger are things not worth talking about.

solid but very poor (hahahahahhahaha)

Cahill being brilliant ... Lololololilolololol

Feel younger and less wise already...

recommend checking the word 'solid' in the dictionary. It describes being firm at most dependable - little to do with technique/quality. Esp going by how the word is overused around here.

Now if you think defenders don't need technique then it is indeed possible to think Cahill is a brilliant player. as good as hummels and Kompany.

And what does Cahill do with the football After he bosses the 18y box? Row Z or the player closest to him...

Btw football isn't only played inside the box...

[didierforever 7,349]

Cahill being brilliant ... Lololololilolololol

Feel younger and less wise already...

recommend checking the word 'solid' in the dictionary. It describes being firm at most dependable - little to do with technique/quality. Esp going by how the word is overused around here.

Now if you think defenders don't need technique then it is indeed possible to think Cahill is a brilliant player. as good as hummels and Kompany.

And what does Cahill do with the football After he bosses the 18y box? Row Z or the player closest to him...

Btw football isn't only played inside the box...

is it just me who is saying GC has been brilliant. no wait, actually the worst of his detractors are giving him his due.

except of course the guy who thinks luiz "the nutmegged" (who by the way was not at fault for any of the goals that psg conceded to barca ) is the best thing since sliced bread.

so suddenly clearing has become a taboo now? i guess every player defender has to get messi's skills to be considered worthy?

why we say "solid" using for a defender in footballing terms, we actually go a little farther ahead than the dictionary definition. but dont let that affect your luiz-ish opinions.

[robsblubot 3,508]

is it just me who is saying GC has been brilliant. no wait, actually the worst of his detractors are giving him his due.

except of course the guy who thinks luiz "the nutmegged" (who by the way was not at fault for any of the goals that psg conceded to barca ) is the best thing since sliced bread.

so suddenly clearing has become a taboo now? i guess every player defender has to get messi's skills to be considered worthy?

why we say "solid" using for a defender in footballing terms, we actually go a little farther ahead than the dictionary definition. but dont let that affect your luiz-ish opinions.

Please spare me of your rhetoric - either you quote me on what you claim I've said or it's just another figment of your vast imagination.

Luiz is an excellent natural player, which makes him interesting but as a defender he's at about the same level of Cahill - good but flawed. His performance in defense against us was a surprise to me (I thought he was going to play in middle) even though I do think he is a dangerous player to play with or against.

Cahill enjoys a level of protection that has made Luiz look 'solid' for long stretches of time and in a very defensive minded CL win.

I know the footballing world is not made of the sharpest tools in the shed, but do we have to be surprised every time Luiz makes a mistake? He's mistake prone... if you want to play him in defense then adequate protection must be provided. Don't let him be the last man, esp when injured as he'll be late and make a fool of himself.

Your obsession with Luiz is unhealthy...

Going back to Cahill though - It's not about his solidity - because we know he is a solid dependable defender who's going to make few mistakes. However, he can be beaten by better players. He cannot hit a long ball to save his life which slow us down when he reclaims possession. When he hits row Z we lose possession. When he is incapable of cleanly take the football and/or dribble his marker in a more proactive way, we lose possession. His lack of pace is a problem especially when we are chasing and have to move the defense line up the pitch - we become vulnerable.

He also makes a terrible partnership with Terry because they are very similar players so nobody chases and both sit back.

Zouma isn't the most technical player out there, but when someone has to play DM it's zouma not Cahill. Because zouma has more pace and s a bit more rounded even if not particularly technical.

So, again, it's not that Cahill is a a bad player, but IMO he's not good enough. The same way you think Oscar is not good enough, and some say he's 'solid' because we can depend on his hard work, I say we can do A LOT better than Cahill as a starter even though he won't be a liability. And mind you, Cahill is 29, not 23...

[didierforever 7,349]

Please spare me of your rhetoric - either you quote me on what you claim I've said or it's just another figment of your vast imagination.

Luiz is an excellent natural player, which makes him interesting but as a defender he's at about the same level of Cahill - good but flawed. His performance in defense against us was a surprise to me (I thought he was going to play in middle) even though I do think he is a dangerous player to play with or against.

Cahill enjoys a level of protection that has made Luiz look 'solid' for long stretches of time and in a very defensive minded CL win.

I know the footballing world is not made of the sharpest tools in the shed, but do we have to be surprised every time Luiz makes a mistake? He's mistake prone... if you want to play him in defense then adequate protection must be provided. Don't let him be the last man, esp when injured as he'll be late and make a fool of himself.

Your obsession with Luiz is unhealthy...

Going back to Cahill though - It's not about his solidity - because we know he is a solid dependable defender who's going to make few mistakes. However, he can be beaten by better players. He cannot hit a long ball to save his life which slow us down when he reclaims possession. When he hits row Z we lose possession. When he is incapable of cleanly take the football and/or dribble his marker in a more proactive way, we lose possession. His lack of pace is a problem especially when we are chasing and have to move the defense line up the pitch - we become vulnerable.

He also makes a terrible partnership with Terry because they are very similar players so nobody chases and both sit back.

Zouma isn't the most technical player out there, but when someone has to play DM it's zouma not Cahill. Because zouma has more pace and s a bit more rounded even if not particularly technical.

So, again, it's not that Cahill is a a bad player, but IMO he's not good enough. The same way you think Oscar is not good enough, and some say he's 'solid' because we can depend on his hard work, I say we can do A LOT better than Cahill as a starter even though he won't be a liability. And mind you, Cahill is 29, not 23...

i still say oscar is not good enough. but go to his thread and read what i wrote about his performance against united. and there is the difference between us. i can actually give a player his due while you have to come up with some hopelessly irrelevant talks about our system.

case in point - read what i replied to skipper where i actually say that next season GC should not be in our no.1 CB pairing. it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why and people here do know what GC's strengths and weaknesses are. trying to write an essay and looking like a big shot wont get you very far. so u see, even people like me who are massive GC fans, know what is best for the team and accept it. all we ask is, people judge him on how he has been playing cos they sure were quick to judge him on how he was playing in december.

a "terrible" partnership? hmmm... 27 goals all of last season, 26 goals in 32 games this season. perspective.

i honestly did not know GC lost possession so many times. so i just went i searched a couple of things and voila

http://www.whoscored.com/Players/11981/Show/Gary-Cahill

http://www.whoscored.com/players/27586

GC - dispossessed 0.2 times in a game. or once in 5 games. hmmm... oh well... and then there is the fact that he does in fact pass it on to matic/cesc/iva/JT and he does play it safe but how dare a defender try and play safe when the one on his right is more often than not in the opposition box.

coming on to luiz the great. its not just about the mistakes is it? this guy is supposedly the best defender in the world. i mean i can understand a brain fart moment but to be absolutely embarrased and owned is a completely different issue, specially when people make it seem that he is the next coming of beckenbauer or nesta or maldini.

[Stats 7,056]

Cahill has had some bad games like every other human but he has been a key player for us this season. There is countless games where he has been quality. Don't read in to that system excuse either. If you play good you play good. There is no CB that has had an excellent season. Even ones we are being linked with. Cahill has not been worse than them. Cahill has had a dip in form like the rest of our players have bar Hazard but majority of season has been very good.

[CurlyHairLikeLuiz 1,625]

^This. Gazza could be JT's most successful CB partner, probably ever. Although prime Ricky probably edges him.

And as JT gets older next season, it'd be incredibly dumb to get rid of him now, unless we get John Stones or Varane, there is no reason to.

[LondonsFinest 692]

Given the fact, where he came from, the fee he came for and his career progress till' that moment, I can honestly say Gary Cahill has grown to be a solid defender, and his dip in form was the only thing that stopped me from saying it a while back. The only minus he has is that he realises he doesn't have the pace to keep up with faster players and often backs off, so they can't dribble past him, which may result in worse situations(N'Zonzi's shot at the post being the example that sprung to mind). I like Gazza, even though I'd prefer Zouma to start getting more game time.

[The Skipper 20,593]

^This. Gazza has been JT's most successful CB partner, probably ever. Maybe Ricky has a claim.

This is so disrespectful to the likes of Carvalho, Desailly, Alex and Gallas. Christ.

[magic weeds 446]

The problem with GC is his lack of composure under pressure. He surely needs to calm down and make a pass. Not just kickin the ball anywhere. Againste United, he made that error by kicking the ball just anywhere, and the ball hit Ramires, luckily, bounced back to Thibou. We need defenders who are good on the ball. Defenders who do not panick when they see a striker closing them down. IMO

[Fernando 6,468]

I think is because we have been more defensive, especially against United.

When we went all parking the bus even players like kalas shined a lot like last season against Liverpool.

Still not the defender to have if we are indeed trying to improve our game next season.

But if we are going to continue with our defensive tactics then sure he is great.....

[CurlyHairLikeLuiz 1,625]

This is so disrespectful to the likes of Carvalho, Desailly, Alex and Gallas. Christ.

Lol, because slagging off Oscar for the last 3 months solid is so professional.

But I'll bite. Desailly only played with him for a short time, and few games.

Gallas, as far as I remember, wanted to leave and threatened to score own goals to force through a transfer to Arsenal.

Carvalho I already said could dispute my claim.

Alex, despite being a good defender, still hasn't won what Cahill has. That was my point.

[The Skipper 20,593]

Lol, because slagging off Oscar for the last 3 months solid is so professional.

But I'll bite. Desailly only played with him for a short time, and few games.

Gallas, as far as I remember, wanted to leave and threatened to score own goals to force through a transfer to Arsenal.

Carvalho I already said could dispute my claim.

Alex, despite being a good defender, still hasn't won what Cahill has. That was my point.

Yes, because thinking we can do better than Oscar and not rating him as highly as you do automatically means I'm not being 'professional' or that I'm slagging him off. All because I don't agree on your opinion about him... Incredible really. My arguments on Oscar have been constructive, not once have I "slagged him off". Go ahead, try and find me a post where I've actually slagged off Oscar. Like I said so many times before, I actually used to be a big Oscar defendant on here. I've just given up on him. But that's not the point, no idea why you're bringing Oscar into this and why the 'professionalism' of our posts are being discussed.

It really doesn't matter if Cahill has won more than all the other aforementioned players, that doesn't make him the best partner JT has ever had. That's ridiculous. Cahill will never be the defender Desailly was. Desailly is one of the best ever. Gallas was a better CB during his time at CFC than Cahill was, not even arguable IMO. Carvalho shouldn't even 'dispute' your claim, he was easily JT's best partner. Carvalho is just a much better defender than Cahill. Alex didn't win as much as Cahill but that's just a poor argument to try and state who was the better partner. That's like saying Kalou is better than Hazard because he's had more success here with us.

Edit:

NVM, just seen how old you are. Couldn't have remembered seeing the likes of Carvalho, Gallas, Desailly and probably Alex as well in full action and appreciated them properly I suppose.

[CurlyHairLikeLuiz 1,625]

Yes, because thinking we can do better than Oscar and not rating him as highly as you do automatically means I'm not being 'professional' or that I'm slagging him off. All because I don't agree on your opinion about him... Incredible really. My arguments on Oscar have been constructive, not once have I "slagged him off". Go ahead, try and find me a post where I've actually slagged off Oscar. Like I said so many times before, I actually used to be a big Oscar defendant on here. I've just given up on him. But that's not the point, no idea why you're bringing Oscar into this and why the 'professionalism' of our posts are being discussed.

It really doesn't matter if Cahill has won more than all the other aforementioned players, that doesn't make him the best partner JT has ever had. That's ridiculous. Cahill will never be the defender Desailly was. Desailly is one of the best ever. Gallas was a better CB during his time at CFC than Cahill was, not even arguable IMO. Carvalho shouldn't even 'dispute' your claim, he was easily JT's best partner. Carvalho is just a much better defender than Cahill. Alex didn't win as much as Cahill but that's just a poor argument to try and state who was the better partner. That's like saying Kalou is better than Hazard because he's had more success here with us.

Edit:

NVM, just seen how old you are. Couldn't have remembered seeing the likes of Carvalho, Gallas, Desailly and probably Alex as well in full action and appreciated them properly I suppose.

Point 1: I brought him into it because by no means have you been respectful of Oscar - I'm sure you can agree to that. You were the guy who said he couldn't make a 5 yard pass, right? Well imo that's not respectful. But anyway.

Point 2: I know how good Desailly was (even if I would never have been old enough to remember) but my point is that his main centre back partner was Leboeuf and I agree, it was probably the best we've seen, but JT mostly started playing in the season before Jose came here - the year Desailly left. Carvalho I do remember and he was fantastic. Which is why I said I wasn't sure. I also remember Alex, but to say he's better than Cahill? He has different qualities and I think he was more proactive in his defending but was he really better than Cahill? Not in my opinion. Gallas I can't remember. I have this strange memory of Gallas playing as a left back, though.

Point 3: If your last sentence was meant to patronise me, then that ain't nice. Otherwise, I know what you meant - it's right. But meh.

I know Cahill's recent rough patch has tainted people's view of him but he is a good defender. He's right up there even if you disagree that he's the best. If only JT had 5 more seasons in the tank - him and Zouma together would have been fantastic.

[The Skipper 20,593]

Point 1: I brought him into it because by no means have you been respectful of Oscar - I'm sure you can agree to that. You were the guy who said he couldn't make a 5 yard pass, right? Well imo that's not respectful. But anyway.

Nope. I wasn't the guy that said that. Again, I challenge you to find a post where I have actually "disrespected" Oscar.

On the rest of your points, there's no point in debating about them because in my mind there's no doubt in my mind that Cahill is behind Desailly, Carvalho, Gallas and Alex but of course you have the right to hold your own views.

[Tomo 21,733]

^This. Gazza has been JT's most successful CB partner, probably ever. Maybe Ricky has a claim.

And as JT gets older next season, it'd be incredibly dumb to get rid of him now, unless we get John Stones or Varane, there is no reason to.

Sorry but I can't agree with that, Cahills been good overall for us but he's nothing on a prime Carvalho.

[CurlyHairLikeLuiz 1,625]

Sorry but I can't agree with that, Cahills been good overall for us but he's nothing on a prime Carvalho.

I should probably modify my post

[robsblubot 3,508]

i still say oscar is not good enough. but go to his thread and read what i wrote about his performance against united. and there is the difference between us. i can actually give a player his due while you have to come up with some hopelessly irrelevant talks about our system.

case in point - read what i replied to skipper where i actually say that next season GC should not be in our no.1 CB pairing. it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why and people here do know what GC's strengths and weaknesses are. trying to write an essay and looking like a big shot wont get you very far. so u see, even people like me who are massive GC fans, know what is best for the team and accept it. all we ask is, people judge him on how he has been playing cos they sure were quick to judge him on how he was playing in december.

a "terrible" partnership? hmmm... 27 goals all of last season, 26 goals in 32 games this season. perspective.

i honestly did not know GC lost possession so many times. so i just went i searched a couple of things and voila

http://www.whoscored.com/Players/11981/Show/Gary-Cahill

http://www.whoscored.com/players/27586

GC - dispossessed 0.2 times in a game. or once in 5 games. hmmm... oh well... and then there is the fact that he does in fact pass it on to matic/cesc/iva/JT and he does play it safe but how dare a defender try and play safe when the one on his right is more often than not in the opposition box.

coming on to luiz the great. its not just about the mistakes is it? this guy is supposedly the best defender in the world. i mean i can understand a brain fart moment but to be absolutely embarrased and owned is a completely different issue, specially when people make it seem that he is the next coming of beckenbauer or nesta or maldini.

You misunderstood what I wrote as I did not say he loses possession - you cannot lose what you don't have. He never keeps the ball long enough to lose it.

Once again you are making a directly link between the CB pairing and the defensive numbers which is wrong. The correlation is very subtle because it pertains another 9 players as well as the team setup/strategy and above all, intent.

[didierforever 7,349]

You misunderstood what I wrote as I did not say he loses possession - you cannot lose what you don't have. He never keeps the ball long enough to lose it.

Once again you are making a directly link between the CB pairing and the defensive numbers which is wrong. The correlation is very subtle because it pertains another 9 players as well as the team setup/strategy and above all, intent.

here i was thinking that we were one of the most attacking teams for atleast 4 months of the season with even our RB playing as a RW.

by the way, i really dont mind numbers. i know that they can hide a lot of things, but they can show a lot of simple things too.