THE Lucas thread

[Kenneth]

I dont think people are voting for him as soon as they see his name on the teamsheet.

I do think however, that players are judged by the standards they set themselves, so if Lucas plays better than the poor standard that some may have in mind as 'his' level, then he'll get votes.

By the same token, if Gerrard has an 'average' game by Gerrard standards, people may get on his back a little, despite the fact that even an average Gerrard is still better than most players.

Aye, I think that's fair.

[Reece]

In all honesty, I think a lot of people are. I think that for some peope, he's a shoe-in for a MOM nomination as soon as his name is on the teamsheet. There's a Lucas backlash backlash going on which means the merits of his performances are often over-egged. Some people love the underdog and I think this is winning him votes.

I dont think people are voting for him as soon as they see his name on the teamsheet.

I do think however, that players are judged by the standards they set themselves, so if Lucas plays better than the poor standard that some may have in mind as 'his' level, then he'll get votes.

By the same token, if Gerrard has an 'average' game by Gerrard standards, people may get on his back a little, despite the fact that even an average Gerrard is still better than most players.

As outrageous as it may seem, there may not actually be any deep psychological reasons for people putting Lucas in their top three players for a game. It could quite simply be because they genuinely felt that he was one of the top three performers in that game.

[RedReet]

Aye, I think that's fair.

I don’t. I find it patronising and arrogant for Craig to claim that people aren’t capable of judging Lucas fairly because HE thinks Lucas has previously set himself poor standards.

[Kenneth]

As outrageous as it may seem, there may not actually be any deep psychological reasons for people putting Lucas in their top three players for a game. It could quite simply be because they genuinely felt that he was one of the top three performers in that game.

Whether they genuinely feel it or not, I still think some people are judging him by different standards to others. They remember his two decent passes and praise him while remembering two misplaced passes for Gerrard who then gets criticism.

[Kenneth]

I don’t. I find it patronising and arrogant for Craig to claim that people aren’t capable of judging Lucas fairly because HE thinks Lucas has previously set himself poor standards.

As you are entitled, but I think there's something in it.

[Shaggy]

If certain people can't see Lucas had a good game on Saturday then he doesn't stand a chance.

[RedReet]

Whether they genuinely feel it or not, I still think some people are judging him by different standards to others. They remember his two decent passes and praise him while remembering two misplaced passes for Gerrard who then gets criticism.

But that's what he's up against. You remember 2 missed passes when he only missed 3 out of 64. Gerrard missed 7 from 43, a much higher percentage, but I'm sure most people didn't pay too much attention to them.

I agree that certain people can go over the top with their praise, but it's far outweighed by the negativity when he is perceived as doing something wrong.

Edit: Misread your point.

[Kenneth]

If certain people can't see Lucas had a good game on Saturday then he doesn't stand a chance.

He had a decent game. Not one of our top 3 performers, but decent. I'm sure at least one person had him down as MOM.

[Reece]

Whether they genuinely feel it or not, I still think some people are judging him by different standards to others. They remember his two decent passes and praise him while remembering two misplaced passes for Gerrard who then gets criticism.

Two decent passes? It's clearly pointless discussing Lucas with you as you'll never give him any credit.

[dww]

I think Craig/Operation have a point in the sense that people will always judge things relative to their own biases. The problem comes when at times people fail to account for that in their own judgments as well.

There is also the question of what constitutes being worthy of being 'man of the match'. It was a question addressed at the end of last season by Gabriel Marcotti on 5Live when people claimed Kevin Davies should be in the team of the year. Obviously Davies is not as talented as many players but his performances whether or not in the same class as say Torres or Drogba when on form probably earned Bolton a high percentage of their points. Which means there are two points - 1/ how much did the player contribute to the cause and 2/ how well did they maximise what they could have done personally. So far this season I think Lucas has generally been in the top 3 in the latter category for certain and his level of overall performance has been comparable with most of his team mates in every game. He may not (yet ) be able to boast of being able to have the peaks of Gerrard and Torres but so far this season their peaks have been sporadic any way.

[Kenneth]

Two decent passes? It's clearly pointless discussing Lucas with you as you'll never give him any credit.

I didn't mean it literally. Some people notice and remember his successes more because of his, now lessening, reputation for being a bit ****.

[Reece]

I didn't mean it literally. Some people notice and remember his successes more because of his, now lessening, reputation for being a bit ****.

Is that actually an incy wincy bit of praise there?

[Craig_H]

I refuse to get into a circular discussion about this (this thread would make a hula hoop dizzy as it is), however before I exit gracefully I would just like to point out that your previous post I quoted was insinuating that a large percentage of people follow a "simple formula". If you're talking about "a few" then you're probably right, just as for a few everything a player or a manager ever does will be wrong, and as a few think they are household pets..... but that wasn't what you initially said.

Most people see things in various shades of grey, as we already established on multiple occasions last season, categorizing everyone in a RCDNW or RCDNR camp is just reductive of most people's actual views, and serves the purpose of interesting discussion only negatively. So stop it, it drives me utterly mad; people wanting to be supportive of the manager or a player is not an inherently bad thing, it is possible to explain an alternative view point to them in a constructive manner without forcing a total polarisation you know.

At the start of this thread I reckon I mainly agreed with you about Lucas but by the end of it I'm inclined to disagree just because of statements like the one before! So knock it off

I wasnt doing it in the first place, numb nuts

[Kenneth]

Is that actually an incy wincy bit of praise there?

It was only a comment on his reputation.

In all seriousness, he has improved gradually in the past year and I think he is a player worth keeping in the squad, we should just have a couple more players ahead of him in the pecking order.


I do think a lot of other young players given the opportunities he's had would have developed similarly, and maybe from a higher starting point.

[Craig_H]

Oh, it'd be foolhardy to claim Lucas hasnt improved, he certainly has done and this is the main barometer by which i consider which players i think are worthwhile to keep and which arent. He's improving and there's potential there. He's bulked up well, started to grow a pair and put himself about a bit and gradually imposing himself more onto games.

Previously, he stood out for looking like he was out of his depth and didnt belong at this level. Now he doesnt really stand out (and that's meant in a good way) because he can easily hold his own.

Next step is to stand out for being one of the most significant positive contributors of impact to our game.