Geo V Posted 2 July 2007 Author Posted 2 July 2007 I still think Hume could be an excellent attacking midfielder, probably from the right wing. I've argued my case on a number of occasions so I won't go through it again but to answer the specific points raised - he gets stick for just trying hard etc but he's actually one of the best players at the club when it comes to close control. He can bring down a fifty-yard through ball with one touch. If you removed the goalscoring burden I think he'd show these moments of quality on a more consistent basis. His passing is no better or worse than most attacking players at our level in my opinion. Not quite sure what you mean by vision but the example seems to suggest you don't think he would stick to his role. I think that'd be the point of it to be honest, having a wide player who would roam inside and provide support to the attack in the same way that McSheffrey, Barnes, Koumas and most notably Kightly did for some of the best sides in our division last season. Its a good point mate but I think that these players are wide midfielders. Both McSheffery and Koumas play on the left and if they miss up have cover. If Hume plays it would have to be on the right and I cant see him being that effective from there to be honest. I`d love to see him playing from the middle but in modern day footy he would be a luxury we couldnt afford IMO. One thing though, did Hume sign a contract as soon as the season finished and before MA got to the club? The reason I ask is MA may not like that type of player.
Daggers Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 I still think Hume could be an excellent attacking midfielder, probably from the right wing. I've argued my case on a number of occasions so I won't go through it again but to answer the specific points raised - he gets stick for just trying hard etc but he's actually one of the best players at the club when it comes to close control. He can bring down a fifty-yard through ball with one touch. If you removed the goalscoring burden I think he'd show these moments of quality on a more consistent basis. His passing is no better or worse than most attacking players at our level in my opinion. Not quite sure what you mean by vision but the example seems to suggest you don't think he would stick to his role. I think that'd be the point of it to be honest, having a wide player who would roam inside and provide support to the attack in the same way that McSheffrey, Barnes, Koumas and most notably Kightly did for some of the best sides in our division last season. I'm assuming you're addressing me Fezzy... No wind-up here this time, the vision thing is all about his apparent inability to stop running into his striking partner - he never seemed to be aware of where he or they should be once in the box...consistently being on top of each other. That's simply not good enough. His flick-on's are perfection, by far the best part of his game. How anyone that short can consistently out-jump the oppo (aside from against Brum) is beyond me. Any position he is thrust into has to build on that one aspect of his game.
Jack Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 Deffo keep Hume. Would probably get rid of fryatt unless he shows he can get to full fitness ready for the new season.
Jimmy Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 Its a good point mate but I think that these players are wide midfielders. Both McSheffery and Koumas play on the left and if they miss up have cover. If Hume plays it would have to be on the right and I cant see him being that effective from there to be honest. I`d love to see him playing from the middle but in modern day footy he would be a luxury we couldnt afford IMO.One thing though, did Hume sign a contract as soon as the season finished and before MA got to the club? The reason I ask is MA may not like that type of player. he signed his contract after MA was appointed
Fez of Mahrez Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 I'm assuming you're addressing me Fezzy...No wind-up here this time, the vision thing is all about his apparent inability to stop running into his striking partner - he never seemed to be aware of where he or they should be once in the box...consistently being on top of each other. That's simply not good enough. His flick-on's are perfection, by far the best part of his game. How anyone that short can consistently out-jump the oppo (aside from against Brum) is beyond me. Any position he is thrust into has to build on that one aspect of his game. I agree about the flick-ons and he'd be an asset coming in from the wing onto long balls from the keeper. This is a big part of the game that people don't often mention but if anyone can remember Josh Low's attempts to win headers against opposition full-backs last season, then they'll know Hume couldn't do a worse job. In fact, he'd be bloody good at it as you say. I don't think you were over here at the time mate but last time we got promoted we had a fat-arsed 6-footer with the pace of a tortoise on the right wing. Everyone would throw their arms up in horror if we played someone like Scowcroft there now but he sure won a hell of a lot of headers from Walker's kicks that season and helped link up play really well dropping into the middle. And we had Mad Frank overlapping from right-back in a way that would suit Chambers' game. To answer apexgeo, Allen had taken over when Hume signed his contract and he was very complimentary about him at the time. I think he'll be a key player this season in whatever position Allen sees fit (admittedly probably as a striker). If you remember Andy Johnson's goal at home to Coventry, it was Hume's pinpoint cross from the right that day. I think he could do it.
The People's Hero Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 I agree about the flick-ons and he'd be an asset coming in from the wing onto long balls from the keeper. This is a big part of the game that people don't often mention but if anyone can remember Josh Low's attempts to win headers against opposition full-backs last season, then they'll know Hume couldn't do a worse job. In fact, he'd be bloody good at it as you say.I don't think you were over here at the time mate but last time we got promoted we had a fat-arsed 6-footer with the pace of a tortoise on the right wing. Everyone would throw their arms up in horror if we played someone like Scowcroft there now but he sure won a hell of a lot of headers from Walker's kicks that season and helped link up play really well dropping into the middle. And we had Mad Frank overlapping from right-back in a way that would suit Chambers' game. To answer apexgeo, Allen had taken over when Hume signed his contract and he was very complimentary about him at the time. I think he'll be a key player this season in whatever position Allen sees fit (admittedly probably as a striker). If you remember Andy Johnson's goal at home to Coventry, it was Hume's pinpoint cross from the right that day. I think he could do it. Point in case being those who goaded Scowcroft during our last promotion year when he won every header against full backs.
Simi Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 I honestly doubt that it is the end for Hume. Having just signed a new contract I would think that he figured withing Allen's plans somewhere next season, whether it be up front, or somewhere on a midfield role. Fryatt however, has been linked with a move away quite a few times. Whether anything will come of that is yet to be seen. If something comes of the supposed moves for Job and Todarov, that would leave us with, Hume, Fryatt, Cort, Todarov, Job and Sappleton. That's six strikers. However, Todarov, Cort and also Fryatt to an extent have been plagued with injuries lately. I would think that Allen would be reluctant to let Fryatt go, but if an offer came in, he may take it. I would guess it depends how much of a role he wants Sappleton to play next year.
Daggers Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 If you remember Andy Johnson's goal at home to Coventry, it was Hume's pinpoint cross from the right that day. I think he could do it. I do remember it...and I remember thinking 'Oh God, he's mishit that pass...phew, Andy Johnson is out of position...' Then I remember thinking 'Yea! Goal!' Then I remember thinking 'I bet Johnson knew sod all about that'
Pete_foxes Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 Hume I don't think should be sold. 13 goals I believe last season? and that was with no quality players around him. If he got the service he could get 20 a season. Fryatt is a difficult one, he had a faily poor season last time out, but I think hes still got potential to sucseed, just needs some confidence. Possibly a short term loan deal to a league 1 club could give him that. We do have alot of strikers with the imminent arrival of Joseph desire-Job & possibly Toddy on his way to. That would mean we have Job, Cort, Hume, Fryatt, Sappleton, Todorov. I assume Sappleton won't play too many games. Cort will undoubtedly pick up an injury. Toddy is no certainty at the moment. I would guess we might try Sappleton out on the wing at one point if hes got the pace & dribbling ability then why not. Hume can do an able job on the right. Lets hope Joe can do the Job upfront.
Daggers Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 ...That would mean we have Job, Cort, Hume, Fryatt, Sappleton, Todorov. But they haven't sign... ...oh you know what? Forget I was saying anything. Yea? Right...as you were saying, it means we will have Job, Cort, Hume, Fryatt, Sappleton, Todorov. I'm off now to sit in a dark corner and wait for August 11th.
Geo V Posted 2 July 2007 Author Posted 2 July 2007 So far 20% think that Fryatt should be sold which is a surprise as he is still young and can improve and maybe even more surprising is that over 40% reckon that Hume shoul end up filling a midfield possie for us next season. I hope we dont go down the road of finding positions for our players by just playing the best individuals as aposed to playing the best available to a given system.
Mikey Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 Fryatt will be rotated around in the strikers position with Cort and Job (if we get him). Hume will play in Attacking Midfield if we do get Job but if we don't then I think he will be a first team striker. Swapping Fryatt and Hume unless two of the three get a good partnership and there is no need for a change. Sappleton will be kept in the reserves and for back-up but will get a few appearances. Also I would welcome any new forward signings.
potter3 Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 So far 20% think that Fryatt should be sold which is a surprise as he is still young and can improve and maybe even more surprising is that over 40% reckon that Hume shoul end up filling a midfield possie for us next season.I hope we dont go down the road of finding positions for our players by just playing the best individuals as aposed to playing the best available to a given system. I, and quite a few other people from the look of it think Hume would be more effective in midfield. He doesn't seem to be a natural striker in and around the 6 yard box, and quite a few of his goals last season came from a greater range.
filbertway Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 I, and quite a few other people from the look of it think Hume would be more effective in midfield. He doesn't seem to be a natural striker in and around the 6 yard box, and quite a few of his goals last season came from a greater range. Where have I heard that before?
dandannieldanok Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 Just when Hume has begun to score vital goals nearly half want him in midfield
Jimmy Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 Just when Hume has begun to score vital goals nearly half want him in midfield he hardly scored towards the end of last season pluss he spends half his time in our half anyway so why not play him deeper and have to proper strikers upfront
filbertway Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 Just when Hume has begun to score vital goals nearly half want him in midfield He's hardly been prolific in the box has he? Does that sentence even make sence? I would feel more confident of him scoring from 20 yards rather than a one on one.
dandannieldanok Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 he hardly scored towards the end of last season pluss he spends half his time in our half anyway so why not play him deeper and have to proper strikers upfront So 14 goals in front of a midfield that barely gave him a decent pass does not suffice as being a 'proper' striker.
Jimmy Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 So 14 goals in front of a midfield that barely gave him a decent pass does not suffice as being a 'proper' striker. not when most of them were from 25+ yards out no
sdb Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 keep them both for sure. hume's our most gifted player and fryatt deserves a full season when fit - he saved our bacon last time he was at full fitness, although he did look utterly useless last term
dandannieldanok Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 So the reason why people want Hume in midfield is because he can score from long range? Ok thats fine but he doesn't have a large range of passing which is desperately needed. I'm not criticising him for this because he is a striker and striker's don't need a range of passing.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 So the reason why people want Hume in midfield is because he can score from long range? Ok thats fine but he doesn't have a large range of passing which is desperately needed. I'm not criticising him for this because he is a striker and striker's don't need a range of passing. This is nuts. He drops deep most of the time anyway. If you think any of our midfielders next season are going to have a significantly "large[r] range of passing" than Hume then you'll be in for a shock. We are garbage and we're not signing Jason Koumas any time soon.
Mikey Posted 2 July 2007 Posted 2 July 2007 This is nuts. He drops deep most of the time anyway. If you think any of our midfielders next season are going to have a significantly "large[r] range of passing" than Hume then you'll be in for a shock. We are garbage and we're not signing Jason Koumas any time soon. And Hume can pass well anyway and does have quite a good range of passing.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.