Guest Col city fan Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Instead of taking the piss why don't you post something constructive? Would make a change. Instead of taking the piss why don't you post something constructive? Would make a change.
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 It only changed to 'we don't need a new striker' a few games ago. I think a lot of people just mindlessly flip between the two depending on how our strikers played in the last game. I've been saying it since Beckford went, and we do need another striker it is blatent.
Babylon Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 I've been saying it since Beckford went, and we do need another striker it is blatent. Only since Beckford went? Were you happy with Beckford then?
Fox92 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 I've been saying it since Beckford went, and we do need another striker it is blatent. So did I. And I agree. Just like when we did well in 09/10 and made the play offs, our defence isn't the problem, it's the taking of chances. Thankfully two of our midfielders scored on Saturday, but we do miss Nugent's movement, link up play and finishing.
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Only since Beckford went? Were you happy with Beckford then? Not especially would of been happy to see him, or indeed Waghorn, walk in the summer. But it's a bit silly having five first team million pounds plus(before some pedantic Cvnt points out Nugent was free I am well aware thank you) strikers at the club when you can only play two isn't it?
Guest Col city fan Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 So did I. And I agree. Just like when we did well in 09/10 and made the play offs, our defence isn't the problem, it's the taking of chances. Thankfully two of our midfielders scored on Saturday, but we do miss Nugent's movement, link up play and movement. Good post mate.. Don't forget though, the difference THIS season is the number of matches already lost away from home. During Pearsons first reign, we drew many away. And THAT season we didn't score many goals. We just conceded fewer. We absolutely are not far off getting top two. But we need to be taking more chances. We are making them, just not taking enough. Waggy/Vardy may well start hitting the net. If not, we need another striker to do so. Relying on Nuge is not enough. People keep mentioning Millwall.. They have Wood, Henderson and Keogh.. All scoring goals.
Babylon Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 But it's a bit silly having five first team million pounds plus(before some pedantic Cvnt points out Nugent was free I am well aware thank you) strikers at the club when you can only play two isn't it? You've lost me on that one.
5waller5 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 The form of his career... you mean the kind of form he has had regularly when playing under Pearson. Yes that's right. 18 goals in 96 games = 5.33 games to goal ratio.
5waller5 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Season Apps Gls 2009-2010 46 12 2010-2011 32 4 2011-2012 5 1 2012-2013 13 1 Totals 96 18 If we were linked with someone for £3m with these stats would anyone be pleased??
Happy Fox Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 It isn't a hard concept to understand Waghorn and Vardy will not score a sufficient amount of goals probably 15 between them if they get confidence and are clinical. Getting a quality striker at this level is key in January otherwise you can kiss goodbye to getting those automatic promotion slots imo. Surely we can afford Chris Wood he is only valued at a £1m and scores goals at this level!
Captain... Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Season Apps Gls 2009-2010 46 12 2010-2011 32 4 2011-2012 5 1 2012-2013 13 1 Totals 96 18 If we were linked with someone for £3m with these stats would anyone be pleased?? Are we going to have the games vs starts vs minutes on the pitch argument again? Last time we had it Waghorn had a better minutes per goal ration than Beckford in the Championship and only marginally worse than Nugent, really can't be arsed to go through it all again. Beckford 1 goal every 286 minutes, Waghorn, 1 goal every 262 minutes http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/basics/spielervergleich/basics_38874_61674.html Nugent is 1 goal every 233 minutes. Fryatt for comparison purposes is 1 goal every 273 minutes in the championship
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 It isn't a hard concept to understand Waghorn and Vardy will not score a sufficient amount of goals probably 15 between them if they get confidence and are clinical. Getting a quality striker at this level is key in January otherwise you can kiss goodbye to getting those automatic promotion slots imo. Surely we can afford Chris Wood he is only valued at a £1m and scores goals at this level! I know. Amazingly half the forum seem to be having trouble though.
5waller5 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Are we going to have the games vs starts vs minutes on the pitch argument again? Last time we had it Waghorn had a better minutes per goal ration than Beckford in the Championship and only marginally worse than Nugent, really can't be arsed to go through it all again. Beckford 1 goal every 286 minutes, Waghorn, 1 goal every 262 minutes http://www.transferm...8874_61674.html Nugent is 1 goal every 233 minutes. Fryatt for comparison purposes is 1 goal every 273 minutes in the championship My Apologies - he's definitely good enough now.
Mark_w Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 I've been saying it since Beckford went, and we do need another striker it is blatent. I said a lot, I know you've stuck to your opinion, but many have changed it based on a few games. Season Apps Gls 2009-2010 46 12 2010-2011 32 4 2011-2012 5 1 2012-2013 13 1 Totals 96 18 If we were linked with someone for £3m with these stats would anyone be pleased?? Are we going to have the games vs starts vs minutes on the pitch argument again?
5waller5 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 My Apologies - he's definitely good enough now. I guess i should have been considering a different unit of time .... If games don't suit you let's do it in years instead ..... Since 2009 he's been signed for £3m, been paid who knows what ...... and has scored 18 goals. In a few weeks time it will be 2013.
Mark_w Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 I guess i should have been considering a different unit of time .... If games don't suit you let's do it in years instead ..... Since 2009 he's been signed for £3m, been paid who knows what ...... and has scored 18 goals. In a few weeks time it will be 2013. No, let's do it on minutes on the pitch.
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Are we going to have the games vs starts vs minutes on the pitch argument again? Last time we had it Waghorn had a better minutes per goal ration than Beckford in the Championship and only marginally worse than Nugent, really can't be arsed to go through it all again. Beckford 1 goal every 286 minutes, Waghorn, 1 goal every 262 minutes http://www.transferm...8874_61674.html Nugent is 1 goal every 233 minutes. Fryatt for comparison purposes is 1 goal every 273 minutes in the championship Take out his little purple patch three years ago and what are you left with. More like 600 odd I bet. As I've said I work with Statistics, they are bollocks, you can maniuplate them to prove anything you want, Waghorn had a flurry of goals 3 years ago and it is keeping his average down. I could use that to make Beckford look like a top European striker with a goal every 174 minutes :-/ It's rubbish. The fact of the matter is simple, he is not scoring enough goals, and if he doesn't start to score goals we need someone in in January.
5waller5 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 No, let's do it on minutes on the pitch. In years ...... 18 goals in 3 and a half years. In games ..... 18 Goals in 96. In minutes I don't know ..... You can tell me that stat Martyn. I just don't know why you need to justify a "striker" that scores 1 in over 5 games or an average of 5 goals a season since we started paying his wages.
Mark_w Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 In minutes I don't know ..... You can tell me that stat Martyn. You're so funny.
Babylon Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Yes that's right. 18 goals in 96 games = 5.33 games to goal ratio. I believe I said under Pearson. He has not played 96 games under him.
5waller5 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 OK. I'm so curious how you can justify that Waghorn (blazes over) is good enough I've done the research and counted the bloody minutes on the pitch in each game this season!! Leeds 77 Sheff Weds 85 Ipswich 74 Forest 95 Bolton 85 Watford 30 Brighton 71 Birmingham 72 Huddersfield 12 Hull 18 Burnley 17 Wolves 21 Burton 94 751 minutes. 1 Goal. Can you think of another criteria to justify that he's good enough - because it seems minutes isn't working either!!!!!!!
Mark_w Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 OK. I'm so curious how you can justify that Waghorn (blazes over) is good enough I've done the research and counted the bloody minutes on the pitch in each game this season!! Leeds 77 Sheff Weds 85 Ipswich 74 Forest 95 Bolton 85 Watford 30 Brighton 71 Birmingham 72 Huddersfield 12 Hull 18 Burnley 17 Wolves 21 Burton 94 751 minutes. 1 Goal. Can you think of another criteria to justify that he's good enough - because it seems minutes isn't working either!!!!!!! I'm not judging whether or not he should be sold on one season though. So far this season he hasn't scored enough goals, but he is capable of scoring goals, and in recent weeks has been one of our better player, but you'd drop him instantly and sell him which I just can't agree with. If you think it's fair to judge a player on goals scored in 13 games why were you not desperate for us to sell Beckford this time last year?
Babylon Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 It isn't a hard concept to understand Waghorn and Vardy will not score a sufficient amount of goals probably 15 between them if they get confidence and are clinical. Getting a quality striker at this level is key in January otherwise you can kiss goodbye to getting those automatic promotion slots imo. Surely we can afford Chris Wood he is only valued at a £1m and scores goals at this level! Cardiff are top and only have Helguson with 7 league goals and no other striker anywhere near that from what I can see. What they do have are goals from defence with 7 from Connolly and Hudson alone let alone a few from others. We have two goals from defenders so far this season. So you could argue our inability at set pieces is costing us as much as our forward line.
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 Cardiff are top and only have Helguson with 7 league goals and no other striker anywhere near that from what I can see. What they do have are goals from defence with 7 from Connolly and Hudson alone let alone a few from others. We have two goals from defenders so far this season. So you could argue our inability at set pieces is costing us as much as our forward line. So Cardiff are top and therefore in order to get anywhere we have to be just like them? Well they finish top? I heavily, heavily doubt it.
5waller5 Posted 29 November 2012 Posted 29 November 2012 I'm not judging whether or not he should be sold on one season though. So far this season he hasn't scored enough goals, but he is capable of scoring goals, and in recent weeks has been one of our better player, but you'd drop him instantly and sell him which I just can't agree with. If you think it's fair to judge a player on goals scored in 13 games why were you not desperate for us to sell Beckford this time last year? I think you should scroll up for my previous posts - I'm judging him on his previous 96 games and 18 goals, or 3 and a half years and 18 goals. It was you that wanted to use minutes instead.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.