chili_con_carne Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 Is he actually that good? Ever since he joined I am yet to be convinced by him. He has some games where he is immense, but mostly does little. He reminds me of a poorer David Bentley. Good at set pieces and good technically but offers little else. Then there's Lloyd dyer who's got next to no technical ability but frightening pace. But Gallagher seems great to have around the club and dressing room. He is a character which you need I think. What is everyone's view on gally?
Fox92 Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 I don't like him, I think he is overrated. No pace. Doesn't tackle. Afraid to get stuck in. Can't beat players. Not very good in the air. Not very strong. Hit and miss. I can go on. I'd prefer to see Danns out wide.
EnderbyFox Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 Is he actually that good? Ever since he joined I am yet to be convinced by him. He has some games where he is immense, but mostly does little. He reminds me of a poorer David Bentley. Good at set pieces and good technically but offers little else. Then there's Lloyd dyer who's got next to no technical ability but frightening pace. But Gallagher seems great to have around the club and dressing room. He is a character which you need I think. What is everyone's view on gally? Technically gifted, but slow and not very strong. Thought we improved greatly yesterday once Danns came on
Marmite Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 I would prefer to see Danns out wide instead of Gally. Thought he was pretty average last night, never really looked up for it
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 I don't like him, I think he is overrated. No pace. Doesn't tackle. Afraid to get stuck in. Can't beat players. Not very good in the air. Not very strong. Hit and miss. I can go on. I'd prefer to see Danns out wide. Agree with you totally. The worst thing about Gallagher is the goals he scores, if he didnt score the long rangers he would have nothing hin his game and he would be criticised by everyone, but as he scores 'class' goals he must be good. He isnt poor, but he isnt good either. What I will say though is that it is embarrassing for Scotland he hasnt even made a squad in recent times, Levein blatantly doesnt know he is Scottish.
davieG Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 It's a team/squad game and these two players like most of ours do not possess all the tools in the box but they do offer a mix of attributes/kills that other players don't have. So it's really a case of the manager maximising the effect those skills can have on the team in producing match winning performances. You don't have to be perfect to make a telling contribution.
MPH Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 I think Gallagher is an excellent player... his set piece delivery at the club is unrivaled. However he just isn't a RM/winger and that there is the problem... I think he would fit in perfectly behind a front two in a diamond formation as i don't see him competing up front. He doesn't have a lack of pace exactly... he isn't slow... he just isn't a speed merchant but as he isn't that big wouldn't make a good target man either. He could be a surprise departure in January as Pearson will go for a dyer-esque right winger and he is too technically gifted to want to sit on the bench.... Possible move to Notts. Forest as i think his family might be settled in the area. ( all speculation... no inside info or anything)
Ric Flair Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 Gallagher is like many in our squad, too inconsistent either due to ability or the system we play. On his day he is superb at this level with a fine array of finishing and set pieces. I'm still unsure on his best position, he was a striker when he started professional football and I think he's a victim of not being a complete master of any role, a bit of a jack of all trades. But he'll score and create in excess of 20 goals a season so he's useful.
Bryn Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 He works well in Pearson's system because he helps hold the midfield while King and Dyer push forward. Add that to his technical attributes, the goals and assists he brings with them, and plus the fact that he is clearly a positive influence in the squad, and I think he's worth his place. I think there are better players out there but he does a good job. I think if we played 4-4-2 and had two Dyer-like players, we'd get raped in midfield.
StanSP Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 If he's getting the goals and ultimately helping the team out through that, then I'm happy for him to stay in the team. He's a team player. As DavieG said, perfection isn't a necessity in a team game. To be able to work with your team-mates and work with them to reach the goal (winning games) is, so what's the fuss? If we do end up getting a right-winger in the transfer window, it shouldn't mean Gally should leave. He's actually doing alright in a position that doesn't come natural to him. I think his natural position is sitting in just behind the front two. An attacking midfielder. All that happiness and joy of reaching the play-offs barely lasts 24 hours before the moaning about players begins .
acooling08 Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 He is our only player who can consistently: 1) Take a good corner 2) Take a good free kick 3) Score from outside the box
chili_con_carne Posted 30 November 2011 Author Posted 30 November 2011 If he's getting the goals and ultimately helping the team out through that, then I'm happy for him to stay in the team. He's a team player. As DavieG said, perfection isn't a necessity in a team game. To be able to work with your team-mates and work with them to reach the goal (winning games) is, so what's the fuss? If we do end up getting a right-winger in the transfer window, it shouldn't mean Gally should leave. He's actually doing alright in a position that doesn't come natural to him. I think his natural position is sitting in just behind the front two. An attacking midfielder. All that happiness and joy of reaching the play-offs barely lasts 24 hours before the moaning about players begins . Being in the play off positions now means nothing. If you haven't noticed - birmingham have 3 games in hand. They only need to win 1 of those games to push us out again. I just personally think there are better wingers out there.
Corky Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 He is prepared to shoot. Against Palace on four occasions he either scored or seriously tested the keeper. He takes good set pieces (crossing rather than shooting, though he's hit some crackers). He isn't the strongest and does fade, but I reckon he does have something to offer with his technical ability.
LCFC_Kraken Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 What people don't see, is the amount of running he does. He tracks back often, he may not put a challenge in, but tracking back and following runners denies them options. Yes, he isn't the best in the air, and he isn't quick. But you don't need to quick if you have a right boot like his. His technical ability is second to none.
cc_star Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 He's a left forward really seeing as he lacks pace to beat people further out wide, have we ever played him there? Not that I know of. I think under Sven he could have done a job at the tip of the diamond supplying the front two with balls to run on to, Beckford might have appreciated that He could have also have linked up well with someone like Yakubu Out on the far left, or his unfavoured right he's often out the game & has little influence to show off his creative side. When he's on form he's pretty darn good & we look a really creative side, when he's not on form we're better with someone else.
marbelladave Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 Actually i think he looks quite good on the right, his tendency to drift inside gives Peltier the space to get down the touchline and he tracks back and defends far better than most give him credit for. As I have said (for most of the last two seasons), his natural position is in the hole, behind the striker(s) but we rarely play a system that allows him to play there. For the moment he plays wide right with licence to come inside, doing ok for me.....
city1993 Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 If Gally doesn't play then what other options do we have bar Danns? Question we have to ask is, who is better out wide on the right, Gally or Danns? Gally can cross a football brilliantly, can Danns rival him? Possibly... Here's an idea... Let's play with 4 CM's instead of any width?
Captain... Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 I don't like him, I think he is overrated. No pace. Doesn't tackle. Afraid to get stuck in. Can't beat players. Not very good in the air. Not very strong. Hit and miss. I can go on. I'd prefer to see Danns out wide. Must have been a different Paul Gallagher sliding in and winning the ball with a clean tackle on the edge of our box last night. Every time I see him play I see him put in at least a couple of good takcles, he gets back and he helps out the defence and the midfield. Either way he is NOT A DEFENDER! He is in the team to provide a bit of creativity and a goal threat, despite that he does get back and tackle. If you want to be critical of him be critical of his ability in the final third, he is the best at the club with set pieces, but also maddeningly inconsistent, last night I saw him delivery a number of very good free kicks and corners. I still think he is worth his place in the team because of what he can do, he can create/score a goal from nothing and is our best from set pieces, which do need work, and hopefully NP is working on them in training. I think we missed him when he was injured under Sven and has shown his worth since NP's return.
Fox92 Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 Must have been a different Paul Gallagher sliding in and winning the ball with a clean tackle on the edge of our box last night. Every time I see him play I see him put in at least a couple of good takcles, he gets back and he helps out the defence and the midfield. Either way he is NOT A DEFENDER! He is in the team to provide a bit of creativity and a goal threat, despite that he does get back and tackle. If you want to be critical of him be critical of his ability in the final third, he is the best at the club with set pieces, but also maddeningly inconsistent, last night I saw him delivery a number of very good free kicks and corners. I still think he is worth his place in the team because of what he can do, he can create/score a goal from nothing and is our best from set pieces, which do need work, and hopefully NP is working on them in training. I think we missed him when he was injured under Sven and has shown his worth since NP's return. I cannot recall him winning the ball back on the edge of the area last night, but, if he did fair play, but that doesn't and won't change my opinion of him. I admit sometimes he may get in positions to help out, but he rarely puts a good tackle in - I saw him back out of challenges again yesterday - I hate it when he turns his back which he does often. Just because he can take a good set piece does not mean he should be picked. Like I said, there a way better optiions than Paul Gallagher, for us to look at and maybe purchase. I would prefer to see Danns play instead of Gallagher. And if you notice, he comes inside far too much which leaves the full back exposed on a constant basis.
Callabinho Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 I love him purely due to his twitter debut!
Kitchandro Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 I don't like him, I think he is overrated. No pace. Doesn't tackle. Afraid to get stuck in. Can't beat players. Not very good in the air. Not very strong. Hit and miss. I can go on. I'd prefer to see Danns out wide. Because he's scored one goal last night and otherwise done buggar all? Gallagher was below par and then had a few weeks of injury, yet still has done more than Danns.
Corky Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 Gallagher, as marbelladave said, would probably look best in the "hole", playing balls like the one for King's goal at Derby last season. But he can cross well so a place on the right is okay for now.
Fox92 Posted 30 November 2011 Posted 30 November 2011 Because he's scored one goal last night and otherwise done buggar all? Gallagher was below par and then had a few weeks of injury, yet still has done more than Danns. No, not because he scored last night. I think you find if you study some of my posts, I don't rate Gallagher and have stated before that Danns looks more dangerous out wide - like against Nottingham Forest, away. That is my opinion, of course. Danns has more pace than Gallagher, and I think he gets back and helps the full back out more than Gallagher does.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.