One to get you Hume-ing

[Fez of Mahrez]

I notice you are another advocating Hume for a midfield role, but I have seen nothing to suggest he would fit the bill. Danny Tiatto ran around a lot too, but there was very little end product and Hume has the same ill discipline for such a role.

With better players in the squad, Hume would find a regular game hard to come by in my honest opinion, but it's very hard to find a real goalscorer and we have one in Fryatt, we all saw that last season.

Nope nope nope.

Hume through the middle holds something of a risk but out wide is perfect for him really. Either flank. He'll put the hard yards in but he's also capable of running at defenders, crossing (see Johnson's goal at home to Coventry), shooting from distance, cutting in and placing a shot in the far corner.

I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree on whether he's good enough for the first team in general.

[potter3]

I notice you are another advocating Hume for a midfield role, but I have seen nothing to suggest he would fit the bill. Danny Tiatto ran around a lot too, but there was very little end product and Hume has the same ill discipline for such a role.

With better players in the squad, Hume would find a regular game hard to come by in my honest opinion, but it's very hard to find a real goalscorer and we have one in Fryatt, we all saw that last season.

But (hypothetically) he would be better than our other midfielders, perhaps with the exception of Weso... (Please don't say Hughes) He has got more of an end product too, he's not bad at crossing or shooting, and he works hard which is one of the traits a most successful midfielders possess.

[BartonFox]

But (hypothetically) he would be better than our other midfielders, perhaps with the exception of Weso... (Please don't say Hughes) He has got more of an end product too, he's not bad at crossing or shooting, and he works hard which is one of the traits a most successful midfielders possess.

Still trying to get round the advocates of Rob Kelly's 'square pegs in round holes' way of managing

[potter3]

When we play him up front it's like playing more of a 4-5-1 or 4-4-1-1 anyway, so dropping him back to midfield and playing another striker could work. And he played in midfield before, y'know

[BartonFox]

When we play him up front it's like playing more of a 4-5-1 or 4-4-1-1 anyway, so dropping him back to midfield and playing another striker could work. And he played in midfield before, y'know

But the point that seems to be swooshing over evryone's head is he isn't all that as a striker and that is his main position, so I am no sure how people can think he will do as a makeshift winger/midfielder

Honestly, it is great that people like the guy, but players come and go and given the choice between a striker who will complement a real goal scorer or a fan favourite who just isn't quite up to it, the choice is an easy one Hume

[Fez of Mahrez]

I reckon he'd even be decent at right-back.

[Fez of Mahrez]

But the point that seems to be swooshing over evryone's head is he isn't all that as a striker and that is his main position, so I am no sure how people can think he will do as a makeshift winger/midfielder

Honestly, it is great that people like the guy, but players come and go and given the choice between a striker who will complement a real goal scorer or a fan favourite who just isn't quite up to it, the choice is an easy one Hume

Why is it his main position? Because Rob Genius Kelly decided it was? Players can switch positions to greater effect if it means they can make the most of their talents. Robbie Savage was a striker at Crewe, then became a right wing-back here before he finally played in central midfield. Gary McSheffrey. Thierry Henry. Jamie Carragher. All it takes is a manager with the balls to decide he can make better use of a player's particular assets. Hume's assets are his energy, aggression, shooting from distance and stamina. Midfield is the answer.

[potter3]

But the point that seems to be swooshing over evryone's head is he isn't all that as a striker and that is his main position, so I am no sure how people can think he will do as a makeshift winger/midfielder

Honestly, it is great that people like the guy, but players come and go and given the choice between a striker who will complement a real goal scorer or a fan favourite who just isn't quite up to it, the choice is an easy one Hume

Yes he isn't all that as a striker, and Fryatt is a better striker, but the his shortcoming are ones that may not be need in midfield so much, his finishing around the 6 yard box is poor, but he seems much more likely to hit the target from long range, he is better runing with the ball than receiving it and trying to turn, he keeps running all game etc, etc.... However good he is, he is still one of our better players and if he can play in midfield, which he did for around half his tranmere matches there is no reason not to at least try him there if we get a proper goalscorer.

[The People's Hero]

It's not often I disagree with BartonFox.. but I do on this occasion. Hume is certainly good enough for our first team.

His performances this season have been on the whole somewhere between acceptable and good in a team of underperformers and couldn't-care-less-ers. In many games he has seemed to be our talisman, taking the fight to the opposition alone really.

Remember, all this was under Rob Kelly. Rob Kelly is not a good manager. Let's have a look at Hume next season under the new man, in whatever season we play... and decide then.

[Geo V]

I`d like to see Hume in a team that can create loads of chances and a midfield who runs toward him with the ball as aposed to the poor sod having to keep running back to try and pick the ball up and go on a run. We`ll all see how good Hume really is next season when we have better passes of the ball than AJ supplying the passes.

[Ric Flair]

It's not often I disagree with BartonFox.. but I do on this occasion. Hume is certainly good enough for our first team.

His performances this season have been on the whole somewhere between acceptable and good in a team of underperformers and couldn't-care-less-ers. In many games he has seemed to be our talisman, taking the fight to the opposition alone really.

Remember, all this was under Rob Kelly. Rob Kelly is not a good manager. Let's have a look at Hume next season under the new man, in whatever season we play... and decide then.

Barton will very rarely rationalise, which is what's brilliant about the man.

I disagree with some of his stuff, especially the Hume baiting. He likes to be controversial that's why he's an Alan Maybury and a Stephen Hughes fan. Both players have proven in their careers at Leicester that there's every reason for Leicester fans to be slightly disgruntled with them at times, but Barton put's that down to numbskulls.

Hume has been our best striker since Connolly left, whether that's because other's have been injured or crap is again another matter. But he has. If we can get someone in better than him next season, then fine. But he's the least of our worries. I anticipate him becoming a better player under a better manager, the big hope for next season (a good manager who can get the best out of our shower)

[The People's Hero]

We should get Connolly back. I liked Connolly.

[Thracian]

I notice you are another advocating Hume for a midfield role, but I have seen nothing to suggest he would fit the bill. Danny Tiatto ran around a lot too, but there was very little end product and Hume has the same ill discipline for such a role.

With better players in the squad, Hume would find a regular game hard to come by in my honest opinion, but it's very hard to find a real goalscorer and we have one in Fryatt, we all saw that last season.

Ummm! Although I've used the stats too I would agree about Hammond - he has much to prove as a striker.

But the 10 in 50 for Fryatt compared with the 22 in 85 for Hume is pretty persuasive evidence not only of their relative scoring capabilities but their availablility for the job.

That Hume as a secondary striker makes his figures the more impressive and considering his one goal in four games is delivered while playing a much more expansive team role than Fryatt I'd say the figures are all but conclusive.

Fryatt wasn't especially productive last season either - he was patchy - and it's got worse since he lost his edge and since opponents twigged to his style and limitations.

Hume, by the nature of his game, is much more difficult to mark. It's a good point about his decision making but part of that, I'm sure, is because he feels a heavy responsibility for scoring and is trying to accept those responsibilities.

I would say too that Hume has more chance of adapting to the Premiership than Fryatt. His mobility, workrate and directness would never go amiss.

Turning up looking unfit for the season said a lot to me about Fryatt. I'll be surprised (but delighted) if he proves me wron and shows the single mindedness to develop his game and become Premiership standard. Or even decent Championship standard because, this season, he has never really justified his place at all.

But I'm not hoping I'm right on this Barton. I hope you are.

[Geo V]

Ummm! Although I've used the stats too I would agree about Hammond - he has much to prove as a striker.

But the 10 in 50 for Fryatt compared with the 22 in 85 for Hume is pretty persuasive evidence not only of their relative scoring capabilities but their availablility for the job.

That Hume as a secondary striker makes his figures the more impressive and considering his one goal in four games is delivered while playing a much more expansive team role than Fryatt I'd say the figures are all but conclusive.

Fryatt wasn't especially productive last season either - he was patchy - and it's got worse since he lost his edge and since opponents twigged to his style and limitations.

Hume, by the nature of his game, is much more difficult to mark. It's a good point about his decision making but part of that, I'm sure, is because he feels a heavy responsibility for scoring and is trying to accept those responsibilities.

I would say too that Hume has more chance of adapting to the Premiership than Fryatt. His mobility, workrate and directness would never go amiss.

Turning up looking unfit for the season said a lot to me about Fryatt. I'll be surprised (but delighted) if he proves me wron and shows the single mindedness to develop his game and become Premiership standard. Or even decent Championship standard because, this season, he has never really justified his place at all.

But I'm not hoping I'm right on this Barton. I hope you are.

Jeezus, Elvis again? If any striker in world football should be tried in a different position its Elvis. He is an absolutely useless striker who has NEVER scored goals wherever he has been and has no excuses. Maybe he can make it as a right-winger like Josh Low as he has some pace but that would only be in conference football.

[The People's Hero]

Jeezus, Elvis again? If any striker in world football should be tried in a different position its Elvis. He is an absolutely useless striker who has NEVER scored goals wherever he has been and has no excuses. Maybe he can make it as a right-winger like Josh Low as he has some pace but that would only be in conference football.

He shouldn't be tried in another position, he should be binned.

There is no position on the football pitch where having no ability is a positive thing.

[Thracian]

He shouldn't be tried in another position, he should be binned.

There is no position on the football pitch where having no ability is a positive thing.

I'm ever so glad you don't make the footballing decisions. Exactly what ability have Fryatt and Horsfield shown us this season or have I missed it all? Cos this is what we're gauging Hammond against - not whether his has the ability to play for Manchester United or Chelsea.

And from what I've seen, which is a fair amount both home and away, I'd have Hammond's contribution against those two anytime.

If they ever show signs of proving me wrong I'll be glad to acknowledge it. But August-April there's been none.

[The People's Hero]

I'm ever so glad you don't make the footballing decisions. Exactly what ability have Fryatt and Horsfield shown us this season or have I missed it all? Cos this is what we're gauging Hammond against - not whether his has the ability to play for Manchester United or Chelsea.

And from what I've seen, which is a fair amount both home and away, I'd have Hammond's contribution against those two anytime.

If they ever show signs of proving me wrong I'll be glad to acknowledge it. But August-April there's been none.

HAMMOND. IS. SH IT.

Get over it and move on.

[Thracian]

HAMMOND. IS. SH IT.

Get over it and move on.

I'll back my own judgement, thanks.

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

Fryatt could be going through a goal drought as dry as mother Teresa's lady bits and I would still pick him ahead of that wide boy Hammond!

Utter dog sh*t!

[Dr The Singh]

I'll back my own judgement, thanks.

Realistically though, I think Hammond, Horsefield, will be given the boot end of season.

I can see both hume and fryatt remianing but ther will be a couple of additional strikers. The question will be who will be first chioce and there relation to the 2 new additional strikers!!!

[The People's Hero]

I'll back my own judgement, thanks.

I'll be waiting for Sheehan to be crowned World Player of the Year next year then.

[FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife]

I'll be waiting for Sheehan to be crowned World Player of the Year next year then.

That award is Andy King's all day long

[Thracian]

Realistically though, I think Hammond, Horsefield, will be given the boot end of season.

I can see both hume and fryatt remianing but ther will be a couple of additional strikers. The question will be who will be first chioce and there relation to the 2 new additional strikers!!!

No doubt, but presumably we'll be setting different standards then. And unless there is the sort of total transformation Fryatt would be given the same one-way ticket.

[Manwell Pablo]

No doubt, but presumably we'll be setting different standards then. And unless there is the sort of total transformation Fryatt would be given the same one-way ticket.

He's shown potential as a young striker at a decent level and should be given a couple of years to develop, Hammond and Horsfield are never going to get any better.

[breadandcheese]

No doubt, but presumably we'll be setting different standards then. And unless there is the sort of total transformation Fryatt would be given the same one-way ticket.

Hammond's big asset is pace. That does not make him a footballer.

The jury is still out on Fryatt. This season has been a let-down for him, but he has more footballing ability than Hammond. I agree he should know that he is very close to being shown the door if he doesn't improve, but under the right management, he can become a decent striker, certainly at this level.