Gallagher.

[Bert]

Technically, he's perhaps the best player we've got and can deliver a great set-piece, which is fantastic.

I think a few people are being blinkered by his hat-trick and free-kick, (Don't get me wrong they were great) but in the past few weeks I feel he's done next to nothing and should be on the bench for Saturday. I think his main problem is he lacks a bit of pace and when we're breaking away he often slows the play down allowing the opposition to get men back.

What does everyone else think about him?

[dpjfox]

technically hes one of our best , i agree he lacks pace, unfortunately this is highlighted when he plays wide, i still dont think weve found his best position. i think its behind a front 2 of Fryatt/Waghorn

[Heart-Shaped Fox]

I agree with everything you say.

I think he does put in the odd cross,which goals come from, but he hasnt done much else for me.

And he has only scored in 3 games! He isnt a small bloke and every time he goes up for a header he loses, he never seems like he wants to sprint after/with the ball and his free kicks are sometimes overrated, he has only scored two, he is no Beckham for god sake!

I dont think he is the best defensively either, often lets the opposition get around him down that side which can be costly.

I think he is a good squad player, but I think he has only really had 2/3 great games.

[dandannieldanok]

Forward players like Gallagher do need goals and assists more regularly than he has provided so far to be declared a success, but his technique and ease with the ball at his feet offers something that most of the squad can't give us. He's good in possession and rarely gives the ball away cheaply, overall he's be decent but no more. Hopefully there's more to come.

[ScouseFox]

I agree with what's been said here.

He's technically brilliant, but at times he goes missing, and doesn't put in the effort defensively, but that's because he's not a winger. Unlike Dyer, who knows that he has to track back.

I feel sorry for him playing on the wing, as it isn't his favoured position, but he's scored a few crackers, and his poor deliveries, which you don't see very often, are still a million times better than Oakley's.

Needs to show he's up for a fight more often i think, and get stuck in. But he's had a good season. Good squad player.

[Lineker's Left Foot]

I'd play him behind the front two with more ballwinners or defensive midfielders supplying him with the ball.

[unreachable]

It's difficult to discuss the merits of a single player in isolation from the team in total. He doesn't seem to be a "key" player in the sense that we are in trouble and weakened if he doesn't play. He did lay on that perfect cross for the second goal on Saturday against Peterborough so he did change the game with his quality. In the pecking order of players who change games I would prefer Dyer ahead of Gallagher. Gallagher needs to add some aggression and heading ability to his game. He also seemed to wander in no-man's-land against QPR and didn't stop the crosses coming in.

[Guest Bilo]

I do agree that his technical ability is great but he does need more pace and I'm not sure about his footballing nous. One thing Fryatt has is real footballing intelligence and an ability to read a game to great effect, something I feel Gallagher lacks even if he is a superior technician.

On the left, though Dyer doesn't have the football brain of Fryatt by a long chalk or Gallagher's technical ability, his sheer blistering pace and willingness to run at defenders can make him lethal when on form. It's a real quandary for Gally as I do rate him very highly. He's a natural striker and is very dangerous when on form, but can go badly missing when not on it. I fear he could be in and out of the team when Fryatt's back as he isn't a natural partner to either him or Waghorn. It's difficult really because there's no doubt he'd walk into a lot of teams in this league.

Must be a nice problem to have for Pearson though.

[Kilworthfox]

Technically, he's perhaps the best player we've got and can deliver a great set-piece, which is fantastic.

I think a few people are being blinkered by his hat-trick and free-kick, (Don't get me wrong they were great) but in the past few weeks I feel he's done next to nothing and should be on the bench for Saturday. I think his main problem is he lacks a bit of pace and when we're breaking away he often slows the play down allowing the opposition to get men back.

What does everyone else think about him?

Not too far wrong really, Wellens is the class act for me week in week out, he is just a class above, but Gally is easily 2nd especially technically, he is excellent. However both players do tends to be defensive minded, but that is how we play with the retention of posession paramount. I always say if we have the ball they cannot score! So possesion is very important. I do think that at times we need to be much more direct & utilise Dyer & Waghorns pace.

Gally is a good player, all his goals are very eye catching! I think if he was a little more physical or enjoyed being more physical he may prove a much harder player to play against. He is not really going to open a defense with a pacey run, however he is not slow! his crossing is sometimes unreliable, but whose is consistant in our side??? I think that we need a settled side heading into the playoffs and he is one our best players whilst on the ball, certainly a better option than Oakley, Dyer or N'Guessain whilst in possesion. Without the ball he is asked to cover a full back which, is not a strong point of his game, but he did come a s a striker!

Overall for a £1M big ones he is a good signing

[Joe.]

Disagree to be honest.

It took me a while but I really do see what he brings to the table these days. Since we've adopted the 4-3-3 he's been in his element, moreso for his creativity than his goals. I don't think people realise how many crosses he provides which lead to eventual goals; at least two in the last two matches for example.

Goal-scoring has been slightly disappointing for him, but I genuinely feel his absence is felt when he's not in the side. Someimes we can be painfully lacking in the creative department. Not many players in our side have the technical abilities that he has, and he's a useful player who deserves his place in the team for me. Just so long as it's not in midfield...

[Ozwin]

If he had just a little bit more pace he'd be quality and probably a Premier League player, I think he needs to bulk up a little too.

[ozleicester]

Limited information i grant you but... when i saw him at the Walkers (only once).. and when ive seen him on the streams, Gally looks our most assured and skilled player. He seemed to have great vision, could really push the ball about and looked good in creating space etc.

To me he is in our top bracket and definitley one (along with Hobbs) for a long term future at the club.

[Guest ttfn]

He's been awful for at least a month.

As everybody says, he's technically excellent but unfortunately at Championship level, playing on the wing, that will only get you so far. The physicality of the Championship demands strong, quick wingers so the fact that Gallagher has put in some of the decent performances that he has managed is testament to his determination and ability.

And there's no way he should be getting a look in up front. Howard and Waghorn are in excellent form, Vaughan is very possibly a better striker than him, and Fryatt's back next week.

[marbelladave]

I agree with a lot of what has been said and for me the solution is quite simple, look at the facts.

He is not a striker, he does not pick up half chances around the 6 yard box or look at all convincing in close. His goals and his best attempts come from distance.

He does not have the pace to be an out and out winger, neither is he particularly good at getting up and down the line as a wide midfield player.

He is our most creative player and we need to get him more involved.

On the odd occasion he plays 'in the hole' behind a front 2 we look congested and lacking any width.

Oakley is running on empty after a long season and we have not as yet found an effective alternative.

So, play a midfield 3 of King, Gallagher and Wellens. King and Wellens provide the bulk of the hustle and bustle and Gallagher the creativity, let him have a largely free role, with some defensive duties but with the emphasis firmly on attack. He can make a contribution defensively, see the Newcastle and Blackpool games where he replaced the banned Wellens and with a 3 man midfield that will be enough.

With Dyer and Waghorn deployed wide of a Fryatt / Howard spearhead he will have space to work and runners to hit and the opportunity to do what he is best at, making things happen around the edges of the 18 yard box.

[Bettsj2]

I agree with a lot of what has been said and for me the solution is quite simple, look at the facts.

He is not a striker, he does not pick up half chances around the 6 yard box or look at all convincing in close. His goals and his best attempts come from distance.

He does not have the pace to be an out and out winger, neither is he particularly good at getting up and down the line as a wide midfield player.

He is our most creative player and we need to get him more involved.

On the odd occasion he plays 'in the hole' behind a front 2 we look congested and lacking any width.

Oakley is running on empty after a long season and we have not as yet found an effective alternative.

So, play a midfield 3 of King, Gallagher and Wellens. King and Wellens provide the bulk of the hustle and bustle and Gallagher the creativity, let him have a largely free role, with some defensive duties but with the emphasis firmly on attack. He can make a contribution defensively, see the Newcastle and Blackpool games where he replaced the banned Wellens and with a 3 man midfield that will be enough.

With Dyer and Waghorn deployed wide of a Fryatt / Howard spearhead he will have space to work and runners to hit and the opportunity to do what he is best at, making things happen around the edges of the 18 yard box.

I think the problem with Gallagher is the same as the problem with King in that they are both luxury players. Unless they score or provide a goal, they can often appear to be absent.

Personally i'd like to see Gallagher in a roaming role behind the front two.

[marbelladave]

I think the problem with Gallagher is the same as the problem with King in that they are both luxury players. Unless they score or provide a goal, they can often appear to be absent.

Personally i'd like to see Gallagher in a roaming role behind the front two.

We have tried that several times, once quite recently against QPR IIRC and it seems not to work. We have no width with this setup and we look stodgy and congested. Playing in a midfield 3 allows him to do much of what you suggest, but behind a front 3 that will give us width and space to work in.

I really can not see your point about King and Gallagher being luxury players, unless you consider anything other than hard working, scrapping journeymen to be luxury...

[ousefox]

I wish he would shoot more often from outside the box. He has the ability and if he does shoot more often he is bound to get the extra odd goal.

[Liamlcfc1]

As a striker he should be able to head the ball he cant only seen him do that once when he scored against scunny and that was lucky but apart from that he aint bad.

[lovelcfc]

Play him as a striker give him a chance up front see how he does

[shiv]

I agree he hasn't been great recently and he is definately our best player technically, but I think when he isn't in the team we lack a little bit of creativity. Wellens and Gallagher are the most creative players in our squad and every so often Gallagher comes out with some unbelievable passes. I think we should stick with him in the team, tbh I wouldn't change the team cos we're playing ok and we're winning.

[Edmund]

Disagree to be honest.

It took me a while but I really do see what he brings to the table these days. Since we've adopted the 4-3-3 he's been in his element, moreso for his creativity than his goals. I don't think people realise how many crosses he provides which lead to eventual goals; at least two in the last two matches for example.

Goal-scoring has been slightly disappointing for him, but I genuinely feel his absence is felt when he's not in the side. Someimes we can be painfully lacking in the creative department. Not many players in our side have the technical abilities that he has, and he's a useful player who deserves his place in the team for me. Just so long as it's not in midfield...

Got to agree with Joe here.

I'll put my hand up and admit I really couldn't see the point in his signing at first when he was wasted out of position and that was through no fault of his own. But now it's clear he offers the team another creative dimension and not to forget he chips in with a few goals and assists.

He was slow to get his career at Leicester up and running but now seems to fit into the side without effort.

Considering I doubted this signing at first he has been a revelation.

[Bettsj2]

We have tried that several times, once quite recently against QPR IIRC and it seems not to work. We have no width with this setup and we look stodgy and congested. Playing in a midfield 3 allows him to do much of what you suggest, but behind a front 3 that will give us width and space to work in.

I really can not see your point about King and Gallagher being luxury players, unless you consider anything other than hard working, scrapping journeymen to be luxury...

I take your point and totally agree.

All I was saying about King and Gallagher being luxury players was that they both possess silky skill and look great on the ball but when the chips are down and you need players to scrap, both players often look a little lightweight. That's not to say that I think all players should be bruisers and battlers, just that in the situation where that is required, having both in the same team is not advisable.

[CosbehFox]

I think the problem with Gallagher is the same as the problem with King in that they are both luxury players. Unless they score or provide a goal, they can often appear to be absent.

Personally i'd like to see Gallagher in a roaming role behind the front two.

King might not win many one-to-one challenges but he does a lot of breaking up of play. Gallagher can't tackle to save his life. I am not a big fan of his tbh. Lightweight, won't head but I am not going to be too harsh on the lad. If it wasn't for the goals (eye-catching and important), he'd have been the next Stephen Hughes.

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

Can everyone please just stop agreeing with each other?

[marbelladave]

Busy day, so quite a few points to reply to:

As a striker he should be able to head the ball he cant only seen him do that once when he scored against scunny and that was lucky but apart from that he aint bad.

Certainly no-where near effective enough in the air to play as a central striker and -

Play him as a striker give him a chance up front see how he does

- does not have the 'instincts' of a striker close to goal, he has fluffed a number of decent chances around the 6 yard box and his goals come from the edges of the 18 yard box. That, for me, makes him a creative, goalscoring midfield player.

I take your point and totally agree.

All I was saying about King and Gallagher being luxury players was that they both possess silky skill and look great on the ball but when the chips are down and you need players to scrap, both players often look a little lightweight. That's not to say that I think all players should be bruisers and battlers, just that in the situation where that is required, having both in the same team is not advisable.

Fair enough view, but I disagree. King and Wellens in front of our powerful back 4 should be enough 'muscle'. As has been pointed out by virtually everyone, it's creativity that is lacking and for the moment Gallagher is the most likely player to provide it.

King might not win many one-to-one challenges but he does a lot of breaking up of play. Gallagher can't tackle to save his life. I am not a big fan of his tbh. Lightweight, won't head but I am not going to be too harsh on the lad. If it wasn't for the goals (eye-catching and important), he'd have been the next Stephen Hughes.

Interestingly Gallagher's performances against Newcastle and Blackpool were the most involved he has been all season. In wide positions he gets isolated and doesn't get enough ball so he seems to lose a bit of interest, didn't happen in those games when he was deputising for Wellens.

I accept what you say about his tackling but so long as he does his share and closes people down then with King and Wellens it should be enough.