Richard Dunne

**Dodge** · 07/07/2009, 1:25 PM

Originally Posted by geysir

You are a confused fella Dodge.
Now you say talent has nothing to do with the level of transfer fee

Talent is one of the biggest criteria used to calculate the fee.
Without talent the rest of the criteria has no value.

You're right. i didn't mean to say "nothing to do with it". I meant little to do with it.

Talent is all subjective. Worth can be calculated.

**tricky_colour** · 07/07/2009, 1:25 PM

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...rk-Hughes.html

The Sun says �5m, they must have read my post

**tricky_colour** · 07/07/2009, 1:36 PM

Originally Posted by DeLorean

I presume you're joking as you're hardly rating a defender by how many goals he scores but just in case...

John Terry 17 goals in 272 games for Chelsea (ratio 1 in 16)

Richard Dunne 7 goals in 294 games for Man City and 0 goals in 60 games for Everton ie. 7/354 in PL (ratio 1 in 50)

But you can't compare Chelsea to Man City as they are in a different league

.
Comparing at international level is more valid although England are ranked higher.

**DeLorean** · 07/07/2009, 1:43 PM

Originally Posted by tricky_colour

But you can't compare Chelsea to Man City as they are in a different league

.
Comparing at international level is more valid although England are ranked higher.

In other words you'll use whatever statistics best helps prove your argument.

Some would say Terry is at the better club because he's better. For what it's worth I agree that there shouldn't be anything near that diffierence in each players valuation, I just don't think Terry is as useless as some make him out to be.

**WexCar** · 07/07/2009, 6:13 PM

Originally Posted by tricky_colour

Well if is a good solid statistic.
I mean if Terry was better he would get more goals wouldn't he?

its a good solid statistic if your a striker or an attacking player but the primary objective for defenders is not to score goals but to prevent them.

while scoring goals is important and yes its one statistic you can use to compare players but its a far from ideal statistic to be using to compare defenders.

**youngirish** · 08/07/2009, 9:48 AM

Originally Posted by WexCar

its a good solid statistic if your a striker or an attacking player but the primary objective for defenders is not to score goals but to prevent them.

while scoring goals is important and yes its one statistic you can use to compare players but its a far from ideal statistic to be using to compare defenders.

I personally think it's a worthless statistic for comparing the merits of defenders - particularly central defenders. Ian Harte scored his fair share of goals but was a massive liability because he was constantly found lacking when his defensive qualities were required.

**Scram** · 08/07/2009, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by youngirish

I personally think it's a worthless statistic for comparing the merits of defenders - particularly central defenders. Ian Harte scored his fair share of goals but was a massive liability because he was constantly found lacking when his defensive qualities were required.

Yes, but he got you massive points in Fantasy Football! Pity it was only fantasy.

**tricky_colour** · 08/07/2009, 1:02 PM

Originally Posted by youngirish

I personally think it's a worthless statistic for comparing the merits of defenders - particularly central defenders. Ian Harte scored his fair share of goals but was a massive liability because he was constantly found lacking when his defensive qualities were required.

Not worthless you have to get on the ball to score and you have to get the ball to defend, anyone can look good playing for Chelsea with all those overseas players to carry you.

**youngirish** · 14/07/2009, 10:50 AM

Just a link on the bbc website that seems to paint Dunne in a less favourable light than many on here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A54406172

**NeilMcD** · 14/07/2009, 10:55 AM

Damn someone out there does not rate Dunne, we must be all wrong. Lets run for the hills.

**youngirish** · 14/07/2009, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by NeilMcD

Damn someone out there does not rate Dunne, we must be all wrong. Lets run for the hills.

Nobody posting questions his assessment of Dunne though a fair share agree with it. Might say something about how highly he's rated considering many posting are Man City fans, yes those same people that watch him week in and week out and not just in one game very 2 months.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the rubbish spouted about him on here anyway. Most of that is down to his performance against Bulgaria last month. If he'd put in a bad performance the majority would be singing from a different hymm sheet as per usual. The nonsense being spouted about Caleb Folan is laughable for the same reason.

He's a decent Premiership defender but is not good enough for one of the top clubs, nothing more, nothing less.

**Manblue** · 14/07/2009, 11:21 AM

Richard Dunne has been a good servant to the club and performed consistantly well for the last 5 years (although last season he was quite average).

There are a couple of reasons why i do not think dunnie is a top 4/6 player. He constantly makes too many costly mistakes usually leading to goals, he has lost any yard of pace he had, he seems to have lost interest and most importantly while we were competing in the lower half of the table his distribution was overlooked cause he was purely a stopper but the truth is at the highest level your distribution needs to be better, Rio, vidic, terry, skrtel all out shine him in this regard.

Saying that I would still love to keep him as backup this year should we sign a replacement

**Crosby87** · 14/07/2009, 11:24 AM

Boring article. The whole of Man City as a team was a dissapointment last year, I think Dunne will be fine. Im way more worried about McGeady.

**Manblue** · 14/07/2009, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by Crosby87

Boring article. The whole of Man City as a team was a dissapointment last year, I think Dunne will be fine. Im way more worried about McGeady.

Mcgeady? Must of missed something?

**eirebhoy** · 14/07/2009, 11:41 AM

I've known for some time that a lot of Man City fans don't rate Dunne as highly as they used to. But we know he's as good as he's ever been so I've no worries. I'm absolutely certain his problems with City are to do with the team he's playing in.

One match in Hamburg they played with 5 attackers, leaving Kompany as the only midfielder back covering for the defence when the team lost the ball. For most of the first half of the season this was the case. Not to mention 2 of the defence are youngsters as well.

He'll be back to his best at club level once he's in a solid team. If Arsenal signed him I'd back them for the league, that's how highly I rate him.

If you think he's lost any of his pace watch his performance against Vucinic. Vucinic gave up trying to run onto through balls in the end.

**Ozymandias** · 14/07/2009, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Manblue

Richard Dunne has been a good servant to the club and performed consistantly well for the last 5 years (although last season he was quite average).

There are a couple of reasons why i do not think dunnie is a top 4/6 player. He constantly makes too many costly mistakes usually leading to goals, he has lost any yard of pace he had, he seems to have lost interest and most importantly while we were competing in the lower half of the table his distribution was overlooked cause he was purely a stopper but the truth is at the highest level your distribution needs to be better, Rio, vidic, terry, skrtel all out shine him in this regard.

Saying that I would still love to keep him as backup this year should we sign a replacement

Your argument lost substance when you included him above

**Manblue** · 14/07/2009, 12:50 PM

Ha clearly you dont watch dunne weekly so, thats how poor;y i rate his distribution it is incredibly frustrating to watch

**DeLorean** · 14/07/2009, 1:11 PM

Wouldn't read to much into that forum. Mostly English contributors who can't see past their own, and the superstar immigrants like Fabregas and Torres. Most of them probably rate the likes of Robinson and Carson higher than Given.

As has been said on here many times, all that matters is how he performs in the green and it's always world class.

**gustavo** · 14/07/2009, 1:38 PM

Originally Posted by DeLorean

Wouldn't read to much into that forum. Mostly English contributors who can't see past their own, and the superstar immigrants like Fabregas and Torres. Most of them probably rate the likes of Robinson and Carson higher than Given.

As has been said on here many times, all that matters is how he performs in the green and it's always world class.

I'd trust the judgement of fans that see him week in and week out tbh.

Still it's irrelevant to his position in the Irish team

**NeilMcD** · 14/07/2009, 1:38 PM

Originally Posted by youngirish

Nobody posting questions his assessment of Dunne though a fair share agree with it. Might say something about how highly he's rated considering many posting are Man City fans, yes those same people that watch him week in and week out and not just in one game very 2 months.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the rubbish spouted about him on here anyway. Most of that is down to his performance against Bulgaria last month. If he'd put in a bad performance the majority would be singing from a different hymm sheet as per usual. The nonsense being spouted about Caleb Folan is laughable for the same reason.

He's a decent Premiership defender but is not good enough for one of the top clubs, nothing more, nothing less.

Honestly I do not care what he does week in week out, as long as he puts in the performances he has been putting in for Ireland over the last 5 or 6 years. But saying that I was speaking to a few City supporters over in Manchester and they were saying that it was Richards who was rubbish last year and that Dunnes mistakes largely came from playing besides Richards and having to cover up his initials mistakes. THey all rated Dunne highly and wanted him kept.