Some stats to ponder...

[Kilworthfox]

I don't think that's a whoops!

Barton Fox, as I recall, is not the biggest fan of McCarthy.

What! absolute crazyness must be mad as a hatter

McCarthy is one of a select group of players at LCFC that IMO care about the club and the fans.

he does not mess up half as much as the rest and did you see him at the end of the match on satdi came over to the fans again and applauded that make him a top bloke IMO

Looks like a calmer version of a young steve walsh

[Kilworthfox]

Stats can back up almost any view thats the risk, but I think these help show which players get us off to a sound footing in games - and I agree that Hammonds running helps us more than having the 'show pony' with no pace and recently no form whos trying to break the world record for offsides that is Fryatt.

stats can be used to prove anything 78% of people know that

[linekar78]

I'm not defending Fryatt here... but Elvis is hardly the world's greatest exposer/breaker of the offside trap is he?

haha no Elvis certainly isn't but he runs all over the place and drops back to help out our appaling midfield. I like him for his effort but believe me I curse him for wasting easy chances as much as anyone else.

[Thracian]

I'm not defending Fryatt here... but Elvis is hardly the world's greatest exposer/breaker of the offside trap is he?

I know that on two occasions, possibly three, he was given offside for goals he scored when the evidence afterwards showed he wasn't. And, Saturday's was a pefectly good goal too in my view. And whatever the debate he certainly executed his bit competently enough.

If Elvis plays a bit wide of central and we get passers in, he's capable of breaking an offside trap or finding a

space. If we played King and Porter the passes might be there. Indeed Hughes might contribute then because he'd have more options too.

[The People's Hero]

Disagree.

If you play Elvis wide you are then relying on him being able to lay it on for someone else. He simply doesn't have the quality.

He's quick and he worries people, don't try to convince me though that he's technically good enough to play out wide as a winger/wing forward though. He's a forward. A cr ap one but a forward nonetheless.

[linekar78]

I know that on two occasions, possibly three, he was given offside for goals he scored when the evidence afterwards showed he wasn't. And, Saturday's was a pefectly good goal too in my view. And whatever the debate he certainly executed his bit competently enough.

If Elvis plays a bit wide of central and we get passers in, he's capable of breaking an offside trap or finding a

space.

Yes I think that with just Hume and Fryatt it leaves us few options given what our midfield tend to conjure up. At least having Elvis gives you some pace and out wide coming inside is something I think he's capable of. I also think Levi, Weso and Williams could more than cover the rest of the midfield and create some good football. However given the frequency of injuries we seem to get in the midfield area maybe out best chance is to stick with 4 in midfield and put Hammond up with Hume. We haven't ever played truly awfully with Hammond/Hume that I can remember (preparing to be corrected)...

[The People's Hero]

I'd like to hear of these 3 occasions that Hammond has sprung the offside trap and scored, only to be given offside, where evidence afterwards SHOWS he wasn't.

Most times there has been a questionmark over whether he is offside, you watch it back and he is offside.

[Manwell Pablo]

I know that on two occasions, possibly three, he was given offside for goals he scored when the evidence afterwards showed he wasn't. And, Saturday's was a pefectly good goal too in my view. And whatever the debate he certainly executed his bit competently enough.

If Elvis plays a bit wide of central and we get passers in, he's capable of breaking an offside trap or finding a

space. If we played King and Porter the passes might be there. Indeed Hughes might contribute then because he'd have more options too.

The replay shows handball. The decision was spot on.

[Bert]

I'd like to hear of these 3 occasions that Hammond has sprung the offside trap and scored, only to be given offside, where evidence afterwards SHOWS he wasn't.

Most times there has been a questionmark over whether he is offside, you watch it back and he is offside.

Twice at Derby last season (Someone correct me if i'm wrong)

Someone else will have to find the third!!

[The People's Hero]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Hammond

[Thracian]

Disagree.

If you play Elvis wide you are then relying on him being able to lay it on for someone else. He simply doesn't have the quality.

He's quick and he worries people, don't try to convince me though that he's technically good enough to play out wide as a winger/wing forward though. He's a forward. A crap one but a forward nonetheless.

No - not as a winger. I've said before I'm not advocating him as a winger but he needs to utilise the space in the old inside forward areas where his pace will cause damage and perhaps also make space for others.

And nor do I suggest he's a quality player as such - any more than Frank Large or lots of others were quality players, but he's nothing like as bad as you seem to make out.

He is just one of the few choices we've got and, properly used, he would seem to offer more than Sylla because of his greater scoring potential and considerable work rate.

The only person we've got in the first team squad who is a technically good right winger is Max Gradel but that option's just not going to happen especially if his fitness goes down the pan through the consequences of a three match suspension. So we have to consider alternatives.

Apart from Hume, all our forwards are lacking right now but playing three up front might help them a bit, especially if we can get more passers in midfield.

[Thracian]

Twice at Derby last season (Someone correct me if i'm wrong)

Someone else will have to find the third!!

Crewe at home as I recall.

[The People's Hero]

No - not as a winger. I've said before I'm not advocating him as a winger but he needs to utilise the space in the old inside forward areas where his pace will cause damage and perhaps also make space for others.

And nor do I suggest he's a quality player as such - any more than Frank Large or lots of others were quality players, but he's nothing like as bad as you seem to make out.

He is just one of the few choices we've got and, properly used, he would seem to offer more than Sylla because of his greater scoring potential and considerable work rate.

The only person we've got in the first team squad who is a technically good right winger is Max Gradel but that option's just not going to happen especially if his fitness goes down the pan through the consequences of a three match suspension. So we have to consider alternatives.

Apart from Hume, all our forwards are lacking right now but playing three up front might help them a bit, especially if we can get more passers in midfield.

4 goals in 39 appearances for us says he is that bad.

[Manwell Pablo]

Crewe at home as I recall.

That was extremly debateable as well.

EDIT: Not that any of this matters, if the referre blows his whistle the goal doesn't count end of discussion.

[Thracian]

4 goals in 39 appearances for us says he is that bad.

I'm well aware of his record but if he had been credited with the other four it would have been eight in 39 often half-appearances and that's one in five (even given full appearances) which is not nearly so bad.

Furthermore it is a distance better than Sylla's record of no goals in 30-odd matches and not only no goals but no disallowed goals and hardly any shots.

In fact, apart from Hume and Fryatt (who's awful right now) Hammond is clearly the next best scoring option of people who've been used so far.

[The People's Hero]

I'm well aware of his record but if he had been credited with the other four it would have been eight in 39 often half-appearances and that's one in five (even given full appearances) which is not nearly so bad.

Furthermore it is a distance better than Sylla's record of no goals in 30-odd matches and not only no goals but no disallowed goals and hardly any shots.

In fact, apart from Hume and Fryatt (who's awful right now) Hammond is clearly the next best scoring option of people who've been used so far.

And that is clearly a shocking and unacceptable state of affairs.

[Thracian]

That was extremly debateable as well.

EDIT: Not that any of this matters, if the referre blows his whistle the goal doesn't count end of discussion.

I couldn't agree more but in discussing the scoring feats of our present options you grasp at straws because there's not a lot of substance to be found!.

The point is that he did show himself capable of putting the ball in the net - and though he might miss, he also has far more shots than Sylla.

[Manwell Pablo]

I'm well aware of his record but if he had been credited with the other four it would have been eight in 39 often half-appearances and that's one in five (even given full appearances) which is not nearly so bad.

Furthermore it is a distance better than Sylla's record of no goals in 30-odd matches and not only no goals but no disallowed goals and hardly any shots.

In fact, apart from Hume and Fryatt (who's awful right now) Hammond is clearly the next best scoring option of people who've been used so far.

As you've already been told, Sylla is a winger, Hammond is a striker. Wingers score fewer goals and shots than strikers. It's unfair to comapre the goal scoreing record of the two.

I will say again, disallowed goals are exactly that, disallowed, not important, didn't count, comprende vous?

[Thracian]

As you've already been told, Sylla is a winger, Hammond is a striker. Wingers score fewer goals and shots than strikers. It's unfair to comapre the goal scoreing record of the two.

I will say again, disallowed goals are exactly that, disallowed, not important, didn't count, comprende vous?

Not at all. In considering a 4-3-3 system instead of 4-4-2 then it matters a lot.

[Manwell Pablo]

Not at all. In considering a 4-3-3 system instead of 4-4-2 then it matters a lot.

There will be a cold day in hell before Rob Kelly plays anything beside a 4-4-2

[Thracian]

There will be a cold day in hell before Rob Kelly plays anything beside a 4-4-2

Yes, and when you combine that thought with DavieG's statistics the chill goes right through me.

[lookwhaticando]

I don't think that's a whoops!

Barton Fox, as I recall, is not the biggest fan of McCarthy.

Indeed BF doesn't much like McCarthy. Unfortunately, being only 5% awake, I read the users comments as referring to McAuley not McCarthy.

I guess in my enthusiasm for McAuley, I thought I had seen someone else recognize his unquestionable talent and went on to point out that Barton has never liked McAuley - describing him as merely 'League Two Defender'.

Then I realized I had totally misread things and edited my post simply to read whoops. It was my whoops, not Barton's.

PS: If a mod is reading this babble, feel free to delete my 'whoops' post, it serves no purpose whatsoever.

[davieG]

Indeed BF doesn't much like McCarthy. Unfortunately, being only 5% awake, I read the users comments as referring to McAuley not McCarthy.

I guess in my enthusiasm for McAuley, I thought I had seen someone else recognize his unquestionable talent and went on to point out that Barton has never liked McAuley - describing him as merely 'League Two Defender'.

Then I realized I had totally misread things and edited my post simply to read whoops. It was my whoops, not Barton's.

PS: If a mod is reading this babble, feel free to delete my 'whoops' post, it serves no purpose whatsoever.

Nah we will let you suffer

[lookwhaticando]

Nah we will let you suffer

There's that davieG style, shining through brighter than ever.

[Bert]

I'm well aware of his record but if he had been credited with the other four it would have been eight in 39 often half-appearances and that's one in five (even given full appearances) which is not nearly so bad.

Furthermore it is a distance better than Sylla's record of no goals in 30-odd matches and not only no goals but no disallowed goals and hardly any shots.

In fact, apart from Hume and Fryatt (who's awful right now) Hammond is clearly the next best scoring option of people who've been used so far.

Hammond is a striker. Sylla is a winger. His priority is to supply the goals and not score them.