Hammonds goal scoring record

[The People's Hero]

I love Elvis Hammond. Just for sheer entertainment purposes.

That was Trev's purpose.

Boy did I give Levein some sh it when he released him.

Levein then told me he'd release me too if he could as we don't need supporters like me.

Who's still 'with' the club Craig?

Tosser.

[filbertboy]

to have scored fewer than 85 goals at all levels when aged 27 it astonishing for a striker. it's by far the worst record of all our strikers

Thracian how does 63 goals from arouund 7 years of RESERVE football prove a player can shoot.

great question

cant wait for the answer !

[Thracian]

to have scored fewer than 85 goals at all levels when aged 27 it astonishing for a striker. it's by far the worst record of all our strikers and he's got a good four and a bit years on our next oldest striker Ian Hume.

There are five goals he scored in the Dutch first divison play offs for RBC Roosendaal in their play off campaign that for some reason never get counted towards his goal tally on Wikipedia, Soccerbase etc so it's actually 17 senior first team goals.

Thracian how does 63 goals from arouund 7 years of RESERVE football prove a player can shoot.

You don't detail the number of games he's played. But what you've said so far perhaps does more to prove my other point - that's he's not really a specialist striker at all - much rather than indicating that he cannot shoot.

Hammond would seem to have had few sustained opportunities and, while different managers clearly did see something in him I suspect his being "not easy to place" is his main problem. Hence his bitty career.

Hammond is not a specialist centre-forward, nor a midfield attacker who could play in the hole nor, alas, is he a winger.

His best position - as I've said for some months would be as the outside of a front three but teams don't often play like that - even when they are consistently doing badly as we have done for so long.

There is no doubt in my mind we would have benefitted from 4-3-3 because a) we had no real wingers, b) our strikers were never good enough in two's and c) Our midfield wasn't strong enough or creative enough with just two in the centre.

But we persisted with a limp-wristed 4-4-2 which successive managers liked to make 4-5-1 if they got half a chance. The result has been two years of broadly dour/defensive rubbish with an often unbalanced, partly fit side which was playing the wrong system for the personnel.

No wonder we scored so few goals. Not one of our strikers attacks crosses. So making efforts to deliver crosses was always likely to be fruitless as was clearly demonstrated, apart from set plays converted by centre-backs.

We'd have done better with Porter, Weso and Tiatto in the centre, playing ball to feet, give-and-go football, and trying to provide Hammond with balls into space behind people so he could use his pace to cause problems.

It is not my fault if we waste people's ability.

Hume and Fryatt might well have benefitted from this approach too although I would never have chosen Fryatt for anywhere but the bench last season - apart from in exceptional circumstances.

[Head Honcho]

Only 12 goals in 7 years

Only 59 Starts in 7 years

:rolleyes:

Am I the only one who is shocked by this. We have a player who has scored 12 goals in 7 years. Iain Hume beat him in one. Fair enough, he has'nt played much but - why did we sign him in the first place?

LINK

This was all said in the thread started when we signed him and I was one of his biggest critics but surprisingly I'm more inclined to keep him now, just not as a striker.

He should have more of a midfield role or get him on the wing. He certainly shouldn't have the tag striker after his name. Take the pressure of goalscoring away from him and I'm sure he'll improve and get more confident as a player. He does run well at defenders and can be a bit of a handful, trouble is it goes tits up when he spots the goal!

[Manwell Pablo]

You don't detail the number of games he's played. But what you've said so far perhaps does more to prove my other point - that's he's not really a specialist striker at all - much rather than indicating that he cannot shoot.

Hammond would seem to have had few sustained opportunities and, while different managers clearly did see something in him I suspect his being "not easy to place" is his main problem. Hence his bitty career.

Hammond is not a specialist centre-forward, nor a midfield attacker who could play in the hole nor, alas, is he a winger.

His best position - as I've said for some months would be as the outside of a front three but teams don't often play like that - even when they are consistently doing badly as we have done for so long.

There is no doubt in my mind we would have benefitted from 4-3-3 because a) we had no real wingers, b) our strikers were never good enough in two's and c) Our midfield wasn't strong enough or creative enough with just two in the centre.

But we persisted with a limp-wristed 4-4-2 which successive managers liked to make 4-5-1 if they got half a chance. The result has been two years of broadly dour/defensive rubbish with an often unbalanced, partly fit side which was playing the wrong system for the personnel.

No wonder we scored so few goals. Not one of our strikers attacks crosses. So making efforts to deliver crosses was always likely to be fruitless as was clearly demonstrated, apart from set plays converted by centre-backs.

We'd have done better with Porter, Weso and Tiatto in the centre, playing ball to feet, give-and-go football, and trying to provide Hammond with balls into space behind people so he could use his pace to cause problems.

It is not my fault if we waste people's ability.

Hume and Fryatt might well have benefitted from this approach too although I would never have chosen Fryatt for anywhere but the bench last season - apart from in exceptional circumstances.

So one minute it proves he's got a good shot on him the next it proves he's not a specailst striker. Make your mind up.

I really can't be bothred having this discussion again, hopefully he's sold on sooner rather than later.

[The Reverend]

Hammond could be half-decent if he was given more opportunities - in a League One team though.

He lacks the basic attributes of a striker - he hasnt a brain, has a bad touch and isnt the best finisher.

He has one attribute - his pace and that takes him from being non-league to a League One and maybe a lower half Championship player.

He isnt good enough for a team now aspiring to the Premiership.

And as for Fryatts lack of strength - hes a fox in a box, he pops up and scores like a Lineker - and besides he scored his goals in the hustle and bustle of League One - that would suggest he has the strength (or ability), whichever way you look at it - to succeed as a player in is Division.

He certainly has a better chance than Elvis anyway.

[Thracian]

So one minute it proves he's got a good shot on him the next it proves he's not a specailst striker. Make your mind up.

I really can't be bothred having this discussion again, hopefully he's sold on sooner rather than later.

I've long said he's not a specialist striker. Hammond does head the ball, is not an instinctive close-range goal-grabber, doesn't specially attack the near post and is not a great dribbler. He lacks far too many attributes for what I consider to be a good striker - as does Fryatt and, indeed, Hume.

But the strengths he has got are considerable and awkward to deal for vuirtually every defence he plays against. Fryatt doesn't have that effect. If his little dribbles don't work he has little else to offer and often any sharpness off the mark he has disappears fairly rapidly.

I believe Hammond is a far more valuable to come in off the bench that Fryatt and that his speed and strength would always offer us a valuable option. Unless there's someone else comes along with those qualities and a bit more besides.

[Manwell Pablo]

I've long said he's not a specialist striker. Hammond does head the ball, is not an instinctive close-range goal-grabber, doesn't specially attack the near post and is not a great dribbler. He lacks far too many attributes for what I consider to be a good striker - as does Fryatt and, indeed, Hume.

But the strengths he has got are considerable and awkward to deal for vuirtually every defence he plays against. Fryatt doesn't have that effect. If his little dribbles don't work he has little else to offer and often any sharpness off the mark he has disappears fairly rapidly.

I believe Hammond is a far more valuable to come in off the bench that Fryatt and that his speed and strength would always offer us a valuable option. Unless there's someone else comes along with those qualities and a bit more besides.

Fryatt this, Fryatt that, Fryatt Fryatt Fryatt Fryatt. Who's talking about Matty Fryatt. Not me, Elvis Hammond is garbage all he has is pace, if sprinters made good footballers then Darren Campbell would be playing in the Premier League. Fryatt at least has a good four years before he's in his prime. Hammonds never getting better.

Last I have to say on this matter.

[Lichfieldfox.]

12 goals only? Surely its got to be more than that

Please don't write any longer posts as I can't concentrate for all the breast movements.

[Thracian]

Fryatt this, Fryatt that, Fryatt Fryatt Fryatt Fryatt. Who's talking about Matty Fryatt. Not me, Elvis Hammond is garbage all he has is pace, if sprinters made good footballers then Darren Campbell would be playing in the Premier League. Fryatt at least has a good four years before he's in his prime. Hammonds never getting better.

Last I have to say on this matter.

I thought you'd finished on the subject earlier!

If Fryatt has four good years in the Championship or better I'll be absolutely delighted - but he won't.

PS: Hope you enjoyed your holiday.

[Stinkenzo]

I thought you'd finished on the subject earlier!

If Fryatt has four good years in the Championship or better I'll be absolutely delighted - but he won't.

Are Leicester going up?

[Ric Flair]

I'd like the 63 goals in Reserve Football to be proved as well. From the research i've done on Elvis Hammond it's no where near that amount.

[Head Honcho]

Hammond could be half-decent if he was given more opportunities - in a League One team though.

He lacks the basic attributes of a striker - he hasnt a brain, has a bad touch and isnt the best finisher.

He has one attribute - his pace and that takes him from being non-league to a League One and maybe a lower half Championship player.

He isnt good enough for a team now aspiring to the Premiership.

And as for Fryatts lack of strength - hes a fox in a box, he pops up and scores like a Lineker - and besides he scored his goals in the hustle and bustle of League One - that would suggest he has the strength (or ability), whichever way you look at it - to succeed as a player in is Division.

He certainly has a better chance than Elvis anyway.

Neither is Fryatt!

For saying Fryatt in the same sentence as Lineker you should be locked in a room and made to listen to Scooch for a week but self flagellation will suffice. Ten lashes will do for starters!

[Bluefoxtim]

Put simply...

HAMMOND = SHIT

Need this go on?

He won't be here next season, even if he is he will be nowhere near the first team.

It's pointless discussing it!

[Jay]

Difficult for defenders to play against!!

pure comedy gold!!!

I would say it's the other way round for 2 reasons:

1 chances are anf it's probably around a 99%probability he will be wandering around miles offside

2 IF and I mean IF he manages by some miracle to stay onside you also have a pretty good chance he will get to excited and f**k it up with goal at his mercy

you can't fault Elvis for his effort but he just isn't good enough simple as.

[Head Honcho]

Difficult for defenders to play against!!

pure comedy gold!!!

I would say it's the other way round for 2 reasons:

1 chances are anf it's probably around a 99%probability he will be wandering around miles offside

2 IF and I mean IF he manages by some miracle to stay onside you also have a pretty good chance he will get to excited and f**k it up with goal at his mercy

you can't fault Elvis for his effort but he just isn't good enough simple as.

Who said that?

[Jay]

His 63 goals in reserves football dispel the myth that he can't shoot - shooting is shooting in any football - and he was on target for 12 goals for the season in the first team- 20% more than the much favoured Fryatt.

And this from a bloke who generally makes cameo appearances and has still had less experience of League football than Fryatt despite his age.

For one with so little experience his goals average last season is not far off that necessary for a striker and his speed and strength are far more useful than what Fryatt has offered even when he's not scoring.

Hammond knockers would have a different view if they could experience defending against the two because Hammond would be far more difficult to cope with than Fryatt who has always looked a limited threat to me and doesn't seem to have the strength and stamina I'd expect of a striker.

Anyway, if Hammond moves, which seems inevitable, and someone, somewhere at last shows faith in him over a period of time, then his confidence will return and I am sure he'll prove himself a valuable player. I certainly know which of the two I'd sooner keep.

I've long said he's not a specialist striker. Hammond does head the ball, is not an instinctive close-range goal-grabber, doesn't specially attack the near post and is not a great dribbler. He lacks far too many attributes for what I consider to be a good striker - as does Fryatt and, indeed, Hume.

But the strengths he has got are considerable and awkward to deal for vuirtually every defence he plays against. Fryatt doesn't have that effect. If his little dribbles don't work he has little else to offer and often any sharpness off the mark he has disappears fairly rapidly.

I believe Hammond is a far more valuable to come in off the bench that Fryatt and that his speed and strength would always offer us a valuable option. Unless there's someone else comes along with those qualities and a bit more besides.

does that answer your question?

[Head Honcho]

does that answer your question?

The first statement is comparing him with Fryatt and the second statement:

"But the strengths he has got are considerable and awkward to deal for vuirtually every defence he plays against"

says nothing about being difficult to play against

I take your point though. Thracian is bigging Hammond up a bit too much, but I think he's more frustrated at everyones lovefest with Fryatt and tbh I can't blame him!

Fryatt was poor last season and I can't understand why he hasn't been criticised the way we've criticised our other inept strikers in the past!

[Manwell Pablo]

The first statement is comparing him with Fryatt and the second statement:

"But the strengths he has got are considerable and awkward to deal for vuirtually every defence he plays against"

says nothing about being difficult to play against

I take your point though. Thracian is bigging Hammond up a bit too much, but I think he's more frustrated at everyones lovefest with Fryatt and tbh I can't blame him!

Fryatt was poor last season and I can't understand why he hasn't been criticised the way we've criticised our other inept strikers in the past!

Because he's been good in the past, he's ex England youth, has a goal scoreing record at Youth and Reserve football which makes Louis Dodds look like Elvis Hammond and Adi Akinibiys love child, he hit over 20 goals season before last, he hit 27 goals in in 60 goals for Walsall that nearly a goal every other game. people talk about us signing Luke Varney and Billy Sharp but we have the Luke Varney and Billy Sharp of two seasons ago. No one thinks he's a good player because they like his smile or he has nice hair ffs.

He's still a very young player that up until this season was tipped as one of the brightest young talents outside the Premier League. I'm guessing most people aren't prepared to right off a 21 year old who has looked good up until now just because he's had one bad season due to injuries lack of fitness and I admit a lack of form.

[Jay]

The first statement is comparing him with Fryatt and the second statement:

"But the strengths he has got are considerable and awkward to deal for vuirtually every defence he plays against"

says nothing about being difficult to play against

I take your point though. Thracian is bigging Hammond up a bit too much, but I think he's more frustrated at everyones lovefest with Fryatt and tbh I can't blame him!

Fryatt was poor last season and I can't understand why he hasn't been criticised the way we've criticised our other inept strikers in the past!

you see the conclusion I draw from that statement is that as a defender you would struggle to play Elvis and that he is awkward custonmer to deal with where as I see him as a player that is 99.9% of the time in the back pocket of an average championship defender!!

for the record I haven't praised Fryatt BUT i do see more potential in him than Elvis

[Head Honcho]

Because he's been good in the past, he's ex England youth, has a goal scoreing record at Youth and Reserve football which makes Louis Dodds look like Elvis Hammond and Adi Akinibiys love child, he hit over 20 goals season before last, he hit 27 goals in in 60 goals for Walsall that nearly a goal every other game. people talk about us signing Luke Varney and Billy Sharp but we have the Luke Varney and Billy Sharp of two seasons ago. No one thinks he's a good player because they like his smile or he has nice hair ffs.

He's still a very young player that up until this season was tipped as one of the brightest young talents outside the Premier League. I'm guessing most people aren't prepared to right off a 21 year old who has looked good up until now just because he's had one bad season due to injuries lack of fitness and I admit a lack of form.

Not at this level he hasn't!

He had a bit of a honeymoon period when he joined and since You tell me!

I've never really doubted his potential I just don't think he'll reach it until his attitude changes-lets hope Martin Allen can get the best out of him next season.

Too fat

Too slow

Wrong attitude

Go onto the pitch at this level with those three frailties and you've had it!

[Manwell Pablo]

Not at this level he hasn't!

He had a bit of a honeymoon period when he joined and since You tell me!

I've never really doubted his potential I just don't think he'll reach it until his attitude changes-lets hope Martin Allen can get the best out of him next season.

Too fat

Too slow

Wrong attitude

Go onto the pitch at this level with those three frailties and you've had it!

Pretty impressive honey moon period which streched from January to April.

He's not been all there I admit but I don't think he's had the "wrong attitude" he is one of a serious number of players that have underperformed at some stage of this season. The midfield is non existent and people hark on about how great a centre halfs are but we've had 64 goals stuck past us this season. I just think it's a bit early to right off a 21 year old for having a bad season.

[Jay]

Not at this level he hasn't!

He had a bit of a honeymoon period when he joined and since You tell me!

I've never really doubted his potential I just don't think he'll reach it until his attitude changes-lets hope Martin Allen can get the best out of him next season.

Too fat

Too slow

Wrong attitude

Go onto the pitch at this level with those three frailties and you've had it!

that was a problem most of our players have had since Kelly took charge, his training methods and discipline or lack of both made the majority of our squad not fit enough to play 45mins of football let alone 90

[dandannieldanok]

Why do you people insist on reminding me Elvis ****ing Hammond is still at this club?

[Thracian]

Why do you people insist on reminding me Elvis ****ing Hammond is still at this club?

I felt the same about at least three players almost every time the teams were announced last season.