One to get you Hume-ing

[Lord Nibblington]

Point taken, but this can hardly apply in the Fryatt vs. Hume debate based on this season....

If we're basing it on this season, Hume has had 37 starts, and 6 sub and no major injuries to get his 12 league goals. Fryatt has had 19 starts, 11 sub apperances and an injury and general lack of fitness.

Point is, it was always going to be that Hume has more goals than Fryatt this season, if we're looking at the players and thier seasons. Fryatt has clearly not been right this season, and in that respect, Hume has been better. But is he the better striker overall? Would a fully fit and competative Fryatt have just 3 goals if he had started 37 games this season?

[Manwell Pablo]

If we're basing it on this season, Hume has had 37 starts, and 6 sub and no major injuries to get his 12 league goals. Fryatt has had 19 starts, 11 sub apperances and an injury and general lack of fitness.

Point is, it was always going to be that Hume has more goals than Fryatt this season, if we're looking at the players and thier seasons. Fryatt has clearly not been right this season, and in that respect, Hume has been better. But is he the better striker overall? Would a fully fit and competative Fryatt have just 3 goals if he had started 37 games this season?

Fryatt has four goals this season anyway, the three is just a false Thracian stat.

[Lord Nibblington]

Fryatt has four goals this season anyway, the three is just a false Thracian stat.

I know. He has 4 in all competitions, Hume has 13. I was just using League Goals and games in my example.

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Can we please use all appearances and goals and not just manipulate stats to back up argumments!

i.e Fryatt has made 60 apps and only has 7 goals whereas Hammond has been lmited to 15 minutes of actual time the ball is in play and has had 87 assists and 6 goals etc etc......

Thracian, that means you as well!!!!

[Lord Nibblington]

Can we please use all appearances and goals and not just manipulate stats to back up argumments!

i.e Fryatt has made 60 apps and only has 7 goals whereas Hammond has been lmited to 15 minutes of actual time the ball is in play and has had 87 assists and 6 goals etc etc......

Thracian, that means you as well!!!!

No. That would defeat the point of randomly spouting statistics!

[Manwell Pablo]

Can we please use all appearances and goals and not just manipulate stats to back up argumments!

i.e Fryatt has made 60 apps and only has 7 goals whereas Hammond has been lmited to 15 minutes of actual time the ball is in play and has had 87 assists and 6 goals etc etc......

Thracian, that means you as well!!!!

Thracian is a journalist, manipulating stats is what they do.

[Guest Gist]

hume and Fryatt + service = GOALS

I think you also need another striker, someone with real quality at this level, someone who can help them raise their game and add competition for places. At the minute it isn't hard to put Hume straight into the starting eleven because he will never be replaced by the players currently sat on our bench so he isn't being pushed.

I think for Hume to score 13 goals this season is pretty good looking at the service and how much other work he has had to do for the team, but with Fryatt, even with poor service and his injuries, he should be doing a lot better than 4 goals for the standards he has shown he is capable of.

I hope both of them raise their game next season, especially Fryatt and start showing their full potential and ability.

[Daggers]

Thats utter tosh. Prove it.

On a recent survey of City supporters 98% agreed that Fryatt was better than Hume.

Football League surveys demonstrate that Fryatt covers 34% more ground, 5% faster with a 19% greater efficiency.

If you take the sum of minutes Fryatt has played and multiply it by the root of metres covered on the pitch and then divide by the unoiversal gravitational constan...."Prove it" - what a daft statement.

[Thracian]

Can we please use all appearances and goals and not just manipulate stats to back up argumments!

i.e Fryatt has made 60 apps and only has 7 goals whereas Hammond has been lmited to 15 minutes of actual time the ball is in play and has had 87 assists and 6 goals etc etc......

Thracian, that means you as well!!!!

You can include Fryatt's cup goal all you like - he's still had a shocking season from virtually one end to the other.

Furthermore there's little point comparing Fryatt to Hammond any more - we should be comparing both to the sort of striker I expect to see in City's colours which is one who bags 15 goals goals a season - not four or five.

And the only player in the frame is Hume who can be forgiven a two-goal deficit considering there's two matches to go, he's had as bad service as everyone else, and he's been slaving for the cause in other areas.

But, Fryatt, Hammond and Horsfield have been way off the pace, whatever way you or I manipulate the statistics.

[Thracian]

Thracian is a journalist, manipulating stats is what they do.

As we're talking about accuracy....ex-journalist.

[Phube]

As we're talking about accuracy....ex-journalist.

Once a journalist, always a journalist!!!

[Zingari]

this journalist is no more ; he's ceased to be ; he's an ex journalist.

i heard that journalists use statistics like a drunkard uses a streetlight ;

more for support than enlightenment

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

He uses stats as he lacks imagination

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

You can include Fryatt's cup goal all you like - he's still had a shocking season from virtually one end to the other.

Furthermore there's little point comparing Fryatt to Hammond any more - we should be comparing both to the sort of striker I expect to see in City's colours which is one who bags 15 goals goals a season - not four or five.

And the only player in the frame is Hume who can be forgiven a two-goal deficit considering there's two matches to go, he's had as bad service as everyone else, and he's been slaving for the cause in other areas.

But, Fryatt, Hammond and Horsfield have been way off the pace, whatever way you or I manipulate the statistics.

STOP PRESS

Thracian agrees that Hammond is utter dog turd!!

Tune in next week to see if he will:

admit that Sheehan is not the answer to the left back problem?

:D

[Thracian]

STOP PRESS

Thracian agrees that Hammond is utter dog turd!!

Tune in newxt week to see if he will:

admit that Sheehan is not the answer to the left back problem?

:D

I didn't say or imply that at all.

He been involved in quite a lot of goals this season and was bound to fall short of my criteria with the number of games he's played,

But I've never really viewed him as an out and out striker anyway and his goals ratio is simply not high enough for what we want and where we're going.

My arguing his case was alongside the alternatives available. It had nothing to do with what I might want in the future. Had I been manager I doubt I'd have ever signed Hammond because his record would never have taken him to first base for consideration in the first place.

As for Sheehan his main aim - whether here or anywhere else, is to get himself clear of niggling injuries, stay fit and focus once more on being the excellent attacking full-back he can be providing he is willing to push himself and demand improvement of himself.

You might have little faith in Sheehan - and you'll not be the only one - but I have every faith in him, especially if he gets chance to play in the sort of team that would suit his style.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

Mattock and Nils are better than Sheehan therefore he is surplus.

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Mattock and Nils are better than Sheehan therefore he is surplus.

That was abrasive!!!

[Manwell Pablo]

That was abrasive!!!

Bang on though.

[The People's Hero]

You can include Fryatt's cup goal all you like

Well you include offside goals, goals scored against Weymouth U13's and goals which Elvis/Dodds 'would definitely' have scored if they'd been playing... so I think including cup goals is reasonable.

[Thracian]

Mattock and Nils are better than Sheehan therefore he is surplus.

Nils cannot compare to Sheehan as an attacking full-back and we'll never score enough goals without attacking full-backs as has been fairly well demonstrated this season.

That's not to say Nils is not important though because he's perfectly capable at centre-back or full-back, providing he's not expected to be an athlete with overlaps all afternoon.

Even if he wasn't first choice he's a capable and reliable stand-by and the same applies to Sheehan, particularly if Mattock gets injured, has England youth duties or is required to play elsewhere.

One of our great problems this season was not having a genuine attacking left-back until Mattock arrived on the scene and certainly not having any established cover.

And if we're going to win things we need proper cover everywhere. Not Maybury's playing left-back thanks.

* PS: I'm not sure how you can be so emphatic about Mattock and so dismissive of Sheehan either. They are totally different players with different styles.

I know Leicester fans like anyone who's in your face and aggressive but, years ago, we used to mix that with a generous helping of skill too, which is why we reached FA CUP/League Cup finals and beat teams like Manchester United 6-0.

Sheehan is excellent at making room for himself, at crossing the ball and hitting a wicked swerving free-kick when he's confident. Nils has his strengths - and we've been damned grateful for them at times - but he doesn't do those things.

Why are you so keen to offload a perfectly good young player?.

[Flynny]

I'm just going to repeat what I said in the other thread:

Fryatt is technically the better of the two players.

Hume, despite his sometimes poor decision making and movement, plays further back down the pitch and makes his own chances, mostly from harrying the defence and midfield.

In a very good squad, I might prefer Fryatt. (Though Hume in CM and a big striker alongside Fryatt sounds dead good to me.) In our squad this season, though, with our woeful lack of creativity, Hume's been the more important of the two, as he's far less reliant on the (poor) service of the rest of the squad.

[Manwell Pablo]

Nils cannot compare to Sheehan as an attacking full-back and we'll never score enough goals without attacking full-backs as has been fairly well demonstrated this season.

That's not to say Nils is not important though because he's perfectly capable at centre-back or full-back, providing he's not expected to be an athlete with overlaps all afternoon.

Even if he wasn't first choice he's a capable and reliable stand-by and the same applies to Sheehan, particularly if Mattock gets injured, has England youth duties or is required to play elsewhere.

One of our great problems this season was not having a genuine attacking left-back until Mattock arrived on the scene and certainly not having any established cover.

And if we're going to win things we need proper cover everywhere. Not Maybury's playing left-back thanks.

* PS: I'm not sure how you can be so emphatic about Mattock and so dismissive of Sheehan either. They are totally different players with different styles.

I know Leicester fans like anyone who's in your face and aggressive but, years ago, we used to mix that with a generous helping of skill too, which is why we reached FA CUP/League Cup finals and beat teams like Manchester United 6-0.

Sheehan is excellent at making room for himself, at crossing the ball and hitting a wicked swerving free-kick when he's confident. Nils has his strengths - and we've been damned grateful for them at times - but he doesn't do those things.

Why are you so keen to offload a perfectly good young player?.

He's even better at making space for the right winger he's playing against.

[Thracian]

He's even better at making space for the right winger he's playing against.

I thought you'd been quiet!

[BartonFox]

For christ sake, Carling Opta have a lot to answer for.

Matty Fryatt is by far and away a better striker than Iain Hume end of. Infact it's a FACT seeing as some feel the need to state FACT as proof that they are 100% correct.

Look beyond the season stats and you can see that Fryatt is a better long term option and a more natural goalscorer, supported by the right players he'll bag 20-25 goals a season. Iain Hume will never do that (even if he had a supporting cast from Old Trafford) until he learns to be a 'team' player. Great all this running around and that, but poor decision making time after time isn't acceptable anymore.

[Thracian]

For christ sake, Carling Opta have a lot to answer for.

Matty Fryatt is by far and away a better striker than Iain Hume end of. Infact it's a FACT seeing as some feel the need to state FACT as proof that they are 100% correct.

Look beyond the season stats and you can see that Fryatt is a better long term option and a more natural goalscorer, supported by the right players he'll bag 20-25 goals a season. Iain Hume will never do that (even if he had a supporting cast from Old Trafford) until he learns to be a 'team' player. Great all this running around and that, but poor decision making time after time isn't acceptable anymore.

If only you could offer a shred of evidence for that.

The facts say Hume has scored at a faster rate as supplementary striker than Fryatt has as main striker.

Fryatt has injury issues, Hume does not.

Hume usually remains useful when he's not scoring, Fryatt is often inconsequential.

It's hard to look beyond this season because Fryatt didn't break any records last season either.

Never is a big word but I cannot see any signs that Fryatt will suddenly blossom into a lethal striker next season for reasons I've already mentioned.

And we need a far greater presence up front than anything he's offered so far - either this season or last.