Question The Enforcer

[cerbera45]

After seperate discussions on Clifford and Deegan I thought I'd get opinions on whether there is still a place in the modern game for this sort of player. Blues had a succession of these kind of player's through the 80's and 90's.

 

[davew]

Sorry to say it looks like there is not a place in the modern game, things could change, the governing bodies need to realise football is a mans game, although fans love to see skill they also love fair tackles etc

 

[Jam_Man]

Clifford is not that sort of player, if he were we wouldnt have got Deegan.

That said, yes there is still a place for that sort of player, all the top sides have a defensive player maybe a more refinded version but someone to add steel to the side. Arsenal were criticised beginning of the year because thats the sort of player they needed and didnt get and were regarded a "soft touch"

They cant be a mindless thug anymore and go around kicking people but they can still use physical presence within the laws of the game.

Even in recent times we have had someone like McCormack or Bentley in there.

 

[rlb999]

That's why most teams now sit 2 players in front of the back four - it used to be 1 but as that bloke isn't allowed to tackle any more, an extra man is needed to 'pester' the opposition into conceding possession.

 

[Toby Esterhase]

Sign this chap

 

[cerbera45]

One that springs to my mind was the original (and best) Dave Martin, had an eye for a goal too.

 

[leeblue]

Absolutely essential to have someone like this in the middle of the park...you have to be able to break the opposition.....yes I said break

 

[chapperzUK]

Look at the top teams and they all have them. They might not charge around and go into full blooded tackles, and they shouldn't need to IMO, but just someone who breaks up the play to allow the others to push forward more freely.

 

[buffalowolf]

sack Deegan and sign Nobby Stiles!:smile:

 

[Eddy Melito]

Sorry to say it looks like there is not a place in the modern game, things could change, the governing bodies need to realise football is a mans game, although fans love to see skill they also love fair tackles etc

next you'll be telling us a womans place is in the kitchen.

 

[jaffa1]

Alan Little was ferocious in the tackle.....

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

Always the ones you don't notice until they're not there.

First game Chelsea lost this season was the first time Matic didn't play.

 

[Ricky Otto]

The enforcers of old are an extinct breed and IMO good riddance. Nothing wrong with a tough tackling player who works hard and does the donkey work, these players don’t need to be dirty though. There seems to be a tendency to look back at some horrible players fondly with a nostalgic romance, hard players, when men were men etc. The Leeds side of the late 60’s/early 70’s may have been successful but it was built on intimidation and not allowing the other side to play through fear, it wasn’t entertaining.Throughout my time in Sunday league there have always been teams who are basically a bunch of animals and get away with it as the refs are weak and there are no proper assistants/linesmen to pick up off the ball stuff, I’ve always played for good footballing sides and those are the games we failed, give us a cup final against the same opposition which is properly officiated and we would destroy them though. Basically my argument is that rules changing and being more protective isn’t a bad thing. Has it gone too far? Maybe, in alot of the games I watch now I see very harsh bookings and a lot of simulation.I think it is the simulation in today’s game that makes people yearn for that bygone era where the ref would just ignore them and play on. We don’t need animals back in the game, we need less pansies diving about.

 

[mfurok]

Resign John Kurila and Joe Jacques (RIP).

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Resign John Kurila and Joe Jaques (RIP).

I think you mean re-sign rather than resign, old chap.Otherwise you're quite right.:winking:

 

[mfurok]

I think you mean re-sign rather than resign, old chap.Otherwise you're quite right.:winking:

You're spot on!