|
Post by Hobhead on Sept 13, 2020 8:00:34 GMT
Lower league strikers such as Novak will always miss chances, that's why they're lower league strikers. Doyle didn't last season and he's still down here. Truth is Novaks job is to score goals and he should have 3 now. We don’t create enough chances to carry players like Novak and especially Donaldson who make a habit of missing good chances.
|
|
|
Post by bantam147 on Sept 13, 2020 8:20:26 GMT
Didn't watch it didn't listen to it....why am I not surprised by this comment. You could make a case for Clarke being our best player in the first half. Second half though he faded away to standard Clarke patented anonymity. The thing is, in a 352, with Clarke at 10, hes utterly reliant on the front 2 providing quality movement. Theres nothing out wide for him to work with and his job is to open teams up and create chances, chipping in maybe 10 goals a season. He only has any chance of doing that with a bit of quality and pace in front of him. At this level, Clarke is decent enough.
|
|
|
Post by Neshead on Sept 13, 2020 8:28:42 GMT
Ratings for yesterday, fuck the haters.
R O'D 6 Staunton 7.5 POC 7 AOC 7 Wood 7 DMH 5 Watt 6.5 Cooke 5 Clarke 6.5 Guthrie 6 Novak 5
~Donaldson 6 Pritchard 6.5
Can't rememeber the other. Staunton stood out although he did get dicked twice fairly easily but thats inexperience He actually looks like a footballer and the seats didn't wince like they do when BRE is looking to pass. Shape of the team for most parts looks good, not sure DMH or Ismail are right for the wing back role, maybe stick with French for now. trio of Watt, Clarke and Cooke has individual merits but has signs it might not work long term, another central midfielder is needed. Upfront thought Guthrie played alright but Novak cost us three points. Both are too similar in how they play. New striker needed to reward good approach work.
|
|
|
Post by BingomoanyBob on Sept 13, 2020 8:31:14 GMT
Unless Rupp and the Cap’n have a planned sleight of hand never previously hinted at, there’s no way we’re getting rid of anyone. As has been said previously, Wood is the only realistic saleable asset- and he’s relatively unproven. The lack of (League 2) quality in the team, never mind squad, remains a worry. For all his positivity in the press we can only hope that behind the scenes Stuart’s hammering on Julian’s door every day with a smoking iPad begging for recruits.
At this stage I’m grateful for Carlisle and Morecambe.
|
|
|
Post by Neshead on Sept 13, 2020 8:33:05 GMT
You could make a case for Clarke being our best player in the first half. Second half though he faded away to standard Clarke patented anonymity. The thing is, in a 352, with Clarke at 10, hes utterly reliant on the front 2 providing quality movement. Theres nothing out wide for him to work with and his job is to open teams up and create chances, chipping in maybe 10 goals a season. He only has any chance of doing that with a bit of quality and pace in front of him. At this level, Clarke is decent enough. Clarke seems an easy target to lambast but if used right is our most creative player. He was alright yesterday and to be fair he looked really good under Holloways set up. If we have Clarke around the edge of the penalty box and Watt lying deep what does Cooke do? The lad can play a bit but he was a passenger for large parts of the game due to the way the attacks were coming through Clarke, Wood and DMH.
|
|
|
Post by Hobhead on Sept 13, 2020 8:41:49 GMT
The thing is, in a 352, with Clarke at 10, hes utterly reliant on the front 2 providing quality movement. Theres nothing out wide for him to work with and his job is to open teams up and create chances, chipping in maybe 10 goals a season. He only has any chance of doing that with a bit of quality and pace in front of him. At this level, Clarke is decent enough. Clarke seems an easy target to lambast but if used right is our most creative player. He was alright yesterday and to be fair he looked really good under Holloways set up. If we have Clarke around the edge of the penalty box and Watt lying deep what does Cooke do? The lad can play a bit but he was a passenger for large parts of the game due to the way the attacks were coming through Clarke, Wood and DMH. Said it before but playing Clarke and Cooke together is difficult. Cooke will struggle to occupy his best position as long as we’re playing Clarke behind the front two in the exact area Cooke likes to break into. In signing and playing Clarke we’ve hampered Cooke’s chances. I think as the season wears on McCall is going to have a choice to make and I’m concerned he’ll choose his mate.
|
|
|
Post by Neshead on Sept 13, 2020 8:48:02 GMT
Clarke seems an easy target to lambast but if used right is our most creative player. He was alright yesterday and to be fair he looked really good under Holloways set up. If we have Clarke around the edge of the penalty box and Watt lying deep what does Cooke do? The lad can play a bit but he was a passenger for large parts of the game due to the way the attacks were coming through Clarke, Wood and DMH. Said it before but playing Clarke and Cooke together is difficult. Cooke will struggle to occupy his best position as long as we’re playing Clarke behind the front two in the exact area Cooke likes to break into. In signing and playing Clarke we’ve hampered Cooke’s chances. I think as the season wears on McCall is going to have a choice to make and I’m concerned he’ll choose his mate. If were lining up as yesterday Cooke is a wasted position. its not his best role and there are better players out there if McCall wants a central midfielder around the half way line. It depends on how we line up, Clarke has more movement and goals in him whereas Cooke look more likely to hit the assist ball. Both have merits but not sure who i'd go with.
|
|
|
Post by mikehunt on Sept 13, 2020 11:03:19 GMT
Maybe when Sutton is available it’s him plus one of Cooke and Clarke?
We need another midfielder, RWB and for me, two strikers, it’s asking a lot of a a 17 year old from Palace to make the difference no matter how highly rated he is.
|
|
|
Post by Hobhead on Sept 13, 2020 11:20:16 GMT
Maybe when Sutton is available it’s him plus one of Cooke and Clarke? We need another midfielder, RWB and for me, two strikers, it’s asking a lot of a a 17 year old from Palace to make the difference no matter how highly rated he is. Dropping one of Cooke or Watt in favour of Sutton to accommodate Clarke looks like a mistake. This is the problem with Clarke, you always end up rearranging the side or making tough choices just to fit him in. Clarke needs to be a special player to make the sacrifices worth it and he’s just not that good. Our squad would be in much better shape if we’d left Clarke alone and signed a genuine forward instead.
|
|
|
Post by Neshead on Sept 13, 2020 17:04:12 GMT
Maybe when Sutton is available it’s him plus one of Cooke and Clarke? We need another midfielder, RWB and for me, two strikers, it’s asking a lot of a a 17 year old from Palace to make the difference no matter how highly rated he is. Dropping one of Cooke or Watt in favour of Sutton to accommodate Clarke looks like a mistake. This is the problem with Clarke, you always end up rearranging the side or making tough choices just to fit him in. Clarke needs to be a special player to make the sacrifices worth it and he’s just not that good. Our squad would be in much better shape if we’d left Clarke alone and signed a genuine forward instead. So who do we play in place of Clarke, who to be fair played alright yesterday. Clarke wasn't the problem yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by Hobhead on Sept 13, 2020 19:02:51 GMT
Dropping one of Cooke or Watt in favour of Sutton to accommodate Clarke looks like a mistake. This is the problem with Clarke, you always end up rearranging the side or making tough choices just to fit him in. Clarke needs to be a special player to make the sacrifices worth it and he’s just not that good. Our squad would be in much better shape if we’d left Clarke alone and signed a genuine forward instead. So who do we play in place of Clarke, who to be fair played alright yesterday. Clarke wasn't the problem yesterday. No, I agree. I’ve said already that you could make a case for Clarke being our best player in the first half yesterday and I say that as a confirmed Clarke sceptic. Longer term though, without him we could have signed players for a standard 4-4-2 and had that as our default formation or at least a solid second choice. Not that I believe 4-4-2 is the answer to all prayers but we’re unable to play it at all as long as we build a team around Clarke. Clarke kills Cooke. Clarke removes 4-4-2 from the list of available options. Signing Clarke stunted our recruitment for the forward line. Clarke plays a game that doesn’t suit the forwards we’re unfortunately lumbered with. Clarke is the very definition of a square peg. Clarke isn’t good enough to justify a first team place in his preferred position. He even stifles what little chance DMH has by pushing him from RW to RWB. Clarke wasn’t the problem yesterday but Clarke is a problem longer term.
|
|