Simon Dawkins

[valleyram]

Define effective...

Would you say Andres Iniesta is effective? If so, label what he's effective at. The same applies for Will Hughes. What exactly is Will Hughes effective at?

The simple fact is, in a possession-based team, you need midfielders who can create space, offer movement, pick the ball off defenders and move the ball forwards.

Can Craig Bryson, Jeff Hendrick or Jamie Hanson do that? IMO, no where near well enough. Dawkins, on the other hand, has all the attributes necessary to do that and Hughes himself labelled him the best technical player at the club.

Now, as 4-3-3 evidently suits or team and gets the best out of the majority of the players, I cannot fathom the idea of not having a ball-playing midfielder who is capable of providing passes to our dangerous front three.

Dawkins is so vastly underrused it's actually painful. 

I also cannot understand why people label him as ineffective or poor. How many chances has he been given in a cental midfield spot? How many? Two? Both times he played there last year he was MOTM.

People are still rating him as a winger, or an attacking midfielder. Rate him as a central midfielder, as a controlling possession-based midfielder in the role of Iniesta/Cazorla and you'll soon see how he clearly has the ability to play there.

If we were a long-ball, direct team who just pumps it into the channels, then I could understand your ineffective comments. But we're a possession-based team who is struggling to get the ball from...

A (the defence)  ---------------------------------------------------> B (the strikers).

And we leave our best ball-playing player available on the bench. It's utterly ludicrous.

 

Look stop mentioning Bryso or Jeff with Simon Dawkins , you are just being silly , he's no a central midfielder it's as simple as that 

[Bris Vegas]

Look stop mentioning Bryso or Jeff with Simon Dawkins , you are just being silly , he's no a central midfielder it's as simple as that 

Tell me reasons why he's not a central midfielder: I've forever listed his attributes and exactly why he's an ideal central midfielder and you keep rubbbishing it without explanation.

You do realsie he was MOTM on the only two occasions he was played at CM last season. You do realise this don't you? Also, check out the Forest away game, look at his positioning in the last 10-15 mins.

You telling me he can't defend - or contribute to defensive shape in the middle?

Go on... Tell me why he can't play there. Instead of just rubbishing it, explain yourself. And don't bother listing his lack of goals or assists, that's not what a CM's job is in a possession-based team.

Also Valley, didn't you lament the positioning of Craig Bryson last season - saying he was too deep? Isn't Bryson a better player playing closer to Martin?

If so, wouldn't you want a genuinely quality ball-playing player able to pick him and Martin out with regularity in the final third? You know why a Hendrick/Bryson middle two doesn't work.

Well all know why those two don't work. Because they're not those sorts of players, they're far better players getting forward close to Martin. So we need a player who can feed them the ball.

Thorne can't do it alone, and there is a very good option for this particular role but he's not being utilised...

 

[valleyram]

He can't tackle 

he can't defend 

hes no stamina 

he keeps the ball wah wee he only plays 5 yard passes and rarely hurts teams 

I honestly don't know his best position but it's certainly no central Midfield 

I only lamented Bryson position last year cause the diddy manager was telling him not to push forward , u tell me why super schtevie wanted that ? 

And if a player is a good professional he will do as he's told 

 

[Will Hughes Hair]

He can't tackle 

he can't defend 

hes no stamina 

he keeps the ball wah wee he only plays 5 yard passes and rarely hurts teams 

I honestly don't know his best position but it's certainly no central Midfield 

I only lamented Bryson position last year cause the diddy manager was telling him not to push forward , u tell me why super schtevie wanted that ? 

And if a player is a good professional he will do as he's told 

 

I'll have you know Bryson is twice POTY, he didn't get that by being unable to tackle, defend....oh, oh I see

[Bris Vegas]

He can't tackle 

he can't defend 

hes no stamina 

he keeps the ball wah wee he only plays 5 yard passes and rarely hurts teams 

I honestly don't know his best position but it's certainly no central Midfield 

I only lamented Bryson position last year cause the diddy manager was telling him not to push forward , u tell me why super schtevie wanted that ? 

And if a player is a good professional he will do as he's told 

 

He can tackle, defend and has stamina. Those aren't exactly his strongest points granted, but he's not a defensive midfielder so I don't see those attributes as being the most important - especially alongside Thorne.

Its not like the opposition are just going walk through him is it? And besides, is Hughes, Bryson or Hendrick good tacklers? Arguably not.

He keeps the ball well over five yards? I pointed out last year that Dawkins made move forward passes than our other midfielders, clearly you chose to ignore that as it didin't suit your agenda.

I don't know why SM did that. IMO we played far better when Bryson and Hendrick pushed forward, supporting Martin and even being somewhat slightly naive in an attacking sense. It puts pressure on the opposition.

But it doesn't take a genius to work out we have avergae/poor ball-playing midfielders who struggle to get the ball off the defence and work it into the attacking players. Even John Eustace was poor at this, despite being a DM and being a fundemental part of his role.

 

[Ramos]

He's not on his own in not rating Dawkins.  He may have talent or skills but he is not an effective footballer.

He is an effective midfielder but he does seem to be one of those players who needs the team to be playing confidently to really get the best out of him. His strong points rely on quick interchanging and movement around him. Unfortunatley apart from in bursts at the moment we look static and I am one for Dawkins playing, I really rate him but first half saturday he really would of struggled to make a difference because of the lack of movement. But in the second half when Hanson went off I thought with leeds on the ropes it was the perfect time to bring him on and play him behind martin. 

[RIMBAUD]

I wonder if the events of last season have caused more problems behind the scenes (?)

I'm not being critical of Dawkins - just trying to understand why he's been used so little.

[Ramos]

I wonder if the events of last season have caused more problems behind the scenes (?)

I'm not being critical of Dawkins - just trying to understand why he's been used so little.

Along with most people I'd have to say missing most of pre season really effected his impact on Clements thinking. But hes been back what 6 weeks now, so he can't be doing enough in training to break into the first team. Or Clement just doesn't rate him, which would be annoying. He deserves his chance, at the moment for me only 3 players have their place nailed down and thats carson, keogh and shackell. 

[rammieib]

I very rarely remember Dawkins passing the ball forward. I agree his ball retention is good but I don't personally see how we would gain from him being in the middle of the pitch. I think we are weak in there as it is, putting in a guy whose idea of a tackle is to stand 6 feet away and hope the guy kicks it at him is not a step forward. I also believe he works the least out of any player in our squad.

[nfb]

I wonder if the events of last season have caused more problems behind the scenes (?)

I'm not being critical of Dawkins - just trying to understand why he's been used so little.

I would love to know.... yesterdays substitutions baffled me, as sooon as PC brought on Shotton and Bent we were a different side which was less ineffective, Dawkins, wasnt so bad against Portsmouth (others were MUCH worse and played since), and we HAVE HAD LIMITED ATTACKING MIDFIELDERS, and yet he selects others (Shotton/Baird/Mason) over Dawkins ? I dont understand it, are any of the ones i mentioned seen as anything other than defensive midfielders?  Dawkins is at least a 'forward thinking/Attacking' midfielder, who can defend too, so surely should have been utilised ? OK, so he isnt Will Hughes, but ffs Hughes is a £12+m player...

So for me, I just dont understand why PC wont select him after  Portsmouth ? Which worries me, we know managers have their favorites, especially if they brought them here, but....

This is a topic about Dawkins, but for me its also about PC, he talked about formations and horses for courses which i have always advocated, so excited me, but now I have to wonder.... can PC pick a horses for courses side, and make it work ??

[SuperRams!!!]

I read it on twitter or some social media that he could be involved in a swap deal for Butterfield (with money as well). But I have no source or anything. I would happily see him go though, I don't rate him.

[Tombo]

I don't think Clement sees him as a central midfielder.

Listening to his postmatch comments yesterday, he made a remark (to some effect) that he had to bring Shotton on because there were no natural midfielders left on the bench.

To be fair, partly down to Dawks to be banging on the head coach's door arguing that he could do the job in the middle.

[Carl Sagan]

Think he's called up to the Jamaican squad for the international break so no chance of spending any quality time with PC in the next fortnight.

[Derby_Dave]

I would have brought him on at half time personally.  He very rarely loses the ball and is very much underrated by a lot of fans.  If we are to be playing a possession style surely players of his type should be utilised. 

[Bridgford Ram]

Define effective...

Would you say Andres Iniesta is effective? If so, label what he's effective at. The same applies for Will Hughes. What exactly is Will Hughes effective at?

The simple fact is, in a possession-based team, you need midfielders who can create space, offer movement, pick the ball off defenders and move the ball forwards.

Can Craig Bryson, Jeff Hendrick or Jamie Hanson do that? IMO, no where near well enough. Dawkins, on the other hand, has all the attributes necessary to do that and Hughes himself labelled him the best technical player at the club.

Now, as 4-3-3 evidently suits or team and gets the best out of the majority of the players, I cannot fathom the idea of not having a ball-playing midfielder who is capable of providing passes to our dangerous front three.

Dawkins is so vastly underrused it's actually painful. 

I also cannot understand why people label him as ineffective or poor. How many chances has he been given in a cental midfield spot? How many? Two? Both times he played there last year he was MOTM.

People are still rating him as a winger, or an attacking midfielder. Rate him as a central midfielder, as a controlling possession-based midfielder in the role of Iniesta/Cazorla and you'll soon see how he clearly has the ability to play there.

If we were a long-ball, direct team who just pumps it into the channels, then I could understand your ineffective comments. But we're a possession-based team who is struggling to get the ball from...

A (the defence)  ---------------------------------------------------> B (the strikers).

And we leave our best ball-playing player available on the bench. It's utterly ludicrous.

 

I realise you are probably on the wind up with this post but I will bite anyway.  I do believe that Iniesta is effective (more than effective actually but to keep the terminology), I also believe that Hughes is effective.  I don't recall ever seeing anyone ever saying that neither of those two players being ineffective.  Dawkins is different.  I have watched him a lot and still remain unconvinced - I actually believe he is playing a level or two above a level where he could be as effective as Iniesta is for Barca and Spain, or Hughes is for Derby.

I realise 'effective' is a broad term.  I view it as having the ability to improve the team the player plays within and help them, whether directly (by scoring or assisting) or indirectly (by being involved in the move or creating space).

I still don't understand why people believe they have spotted something about Dawkins that tens of managers and coaches, professional managers and coaches at that, haven't spotted despite seeing him in training day in day out?

I wonder if Dawkins has become the hipsters choice where people claim to like him despite the obvious reasons not to, in an attempt to get a little bit of attention.  Have you got a beard and a Raleigh Chopper as well?

[Bris Vegas]

I realise you are probably on the wind up with this post but I will bite anyway.  I do believe that Iniesta is effective (more than effective actually but to keep the terminology), I also believe that Hughes is effective.  I don't recall ever seeing anyone ever saying that neither of those two players being ineffective.  Dawkins is different.  I have watched him a lot and still remain unconvinced - I actually believe he is playing a level or two above a level where he could be as effective as Iniesta is for Barca and Spain, or Hughes is for Derby.

I realise 'effective' is a broad term.  I view it as having the ability to improve the team the player plays within and help them, whether directly (by scoring or assisting) or indirectly (by being involved in the move or creating space).

I still don't understand why people believe they have spotted something about Dawkins that tens of managers and coaches, professional managers and coaches at that, haven't spotted despite seeing him in training day in day out?

I wonder if Dawkins has become the hipsters choice where people claim to like him despite the obvious reasons not to, in an attempt to get a little bit of attention.  Have you got a beard and a Raleigh Chopper as well?

What wind up? For somebody as adamant that Dawkins isn't an option at central midfield, you label Hughes' effectiveness as being one which makes the team play better.

Did we not play better last season with Dawkins in the midde? Genuine question, because I vividly remember us beating Blackpool 4-0 at the iPro and he absolutely ran it.

It's all relative, but how many of Dawkins' former teams played 4-3-3? I'm not a hipster, I'm just very switched on to how to get the best out of a 4-3-3 system and without ball-playing midfielders and striker capable of dropping deep, it won't work.

[ronnieronalde]

What wind up? For somebody as adamant that Dawkins isn't an option at central midfield, you label Hughes' effectiveness as being one which makes the team play better.

Did we not play better last season with Dawkins in the midde? Genuine question, because I vividly remember us beating Blackpool 4-0 at the iPro and he absolutely ran it.

It's all relative, but how many of Dawkins' former teams played 4-3-3? I'm not a hipster, I'm just very switched on to how to get the best out of a 4-3-3 system and without ball-playing midfielders and striker capable of dropping deep, it won't work.

Blackpool are a poor league one side Bris,  and lets be honest, they were a league one side for pretty much the enitre season. They didn't win an away game ALL season and were pretty much a 3-1 gimme for every home side they faced.

I think THAT might actually help to prove @Bridgford Ram point more effectively.

At that level the lad would pull teams apart, at this level or above he'd keep them ticking over. Ticking over isn't enough for a side pushing for automatic promotion.

[TroyDyer]

Big fan of Dawkins. Think it's baffling he isn't getting a game. 

[Bris Vegas]

Blackpool are a poor league one side Bris,  and lets be honest, they were a league one side for pretty much the enitre season. They didn't win an away game ALL season and were pretty much a 3-1 gimme for every home side they faced.

I think THAT might actually help to prove @Bridgford Ram point more effectively.

At that level the lad would pull teams apart, at this level or above he'd keep them ticking over. Ticking over isn't enough for a side pushing for automatic promotion.

They are a poor League One side, but we still had to beat them - something Middlesbrough failed to do at home.

Seeing as he would effectively be playing as the link-up between defence and attack, I'd full expect him to keep us ticking over in the same way Will Hughes keeps us ticking over.

There is nothing anyone has suggested on there that Will Hughes does at CM that Dawkins can't do. And when you consider Hanson, who isn't really a ball-playing player, is in there instead it's all the more painful.

A CM doesn't have to be a great scorer or an amazing tackler to be a very good CM. Andrew Surman is probably the best I've seen at Championship level, or among those I rate the most. He scored 3 goals last year, and he averaged only 1.7 tackles per match. What he does do, however, is pick out the attacking players with regularity and are you telling me that Dawkins, considering his attributes, can't do the same?

 

[ronnieronalde]

They are a poor League One side, but we still had to beat them - something Middlesbrough failed to do at home.

Seeing as he would effectively be playing as the link-up between defence and attack, I'd full expect him to keep us ticking over in the same way Will Hughes keeps us ticking over.

There is nothing anyone has suggested on there that Will Hughes does at CM that Dawkins can't do. And when you consider Hanson, who isn't really a ball-playing player, is in there instead it's all the more painful.

A CM doesn't have to be a great scorer or an amazing tackler to be a very good CM. Andrew Surman is probably the best I've seen at Championship level, or among those I rate the most. He scored 3 goals last year, and he averaged only 1.7 tackles per match. What he does do, however, is pick out the attacking players with regularity and are you telling me that Dawkins, considering his attributes, can't do the same?

 

I'm not saying he can't Bris, I've seen him do some lovely stuff every now and then.

I'm saying he doesn't do it often enough. For all the times I've seen him play a killer ball or go on a mazey run and there have been some of those, he' just as likely to lose his composure and screw up a simple lay off, or blaze wildly over on the edge of the box.

There have been spells in a game where he can get me off the edge of my seat, I don't dislike him at all, but then there have also been times where he's made me want to scream cos he's not made the right decision or he's panicked.

If I had a word for him it wouldn't be special, it would be frustrating, yes he does have a lot of qualities, no he doesn't show those qualities enough. Is it lack of game time? I don't know, possibly.

Should he be in ahead of Hanson, I don't know cos I haven't really seen enough of Hanson, but if he was in ahead of him you'd get no complaints from me whatsoever.

Should he be compared to Will Hughes as a central midfielder. not a chance.