Jump to content

Our Last FIVE Extremely Poor Performances


Recommended Posts

We all know it, but when looking at what's changed in the last 3 games I think it's fair to assert that Coloccini's absence has had a far more detrimental effect than Harewood's inclusion. Colo has an eye for the better pass and it's been pretty obvious to me that the midfield as whole hasn't been as confident pushing forward with Zurab behind them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also agree with Tron about ball retention. Ranger is, oddly enough, the best striker we have for stickability, he can run down loose passes, has a good touch, is strong, and plays it back to midfielders sensibly. Carroll is a bit more raw, and doesn't do the basics as well as Ranger, but on the other hand he takes more risks and is more creative for others (as well as scoring more so far). These are our two 'second strikers' and one of them should be played alongside one of either Harewood or Lovenkrands, our current 'number 9' type forwards who play on the shoulder. Since Carroll and Harewood were poor on saturday i'd be inclined to try Ranger and Lovenkrands. Gol said Scunthorpe's centre halves are liable to being turned and these two are also our fastest forwards. But until Shola returns none of the 4 stand out as being dead certs for a starting position.

 

Agree with you on Ranger. I also agree with the logic that it has to be one of Carroll/Ranger alongside one of Harewood/Lovenkrands.

 

The worrying thing is Lovenkrands was every bit as poor as Harewood and has been like that all season. OK he's not a winger but his application and body language has been very poor - he offered nowt.

 

If we're going to persevere with one of them then I actually think - poor as he was against Forest - Harewood has more in his locker. He also has more evidence that he can do it at this level if we're going to look at their pedigree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's total horse s*** like, really frustrating for a professional footballer to basically not have a first touch. He literally doesn't have any 'footballing' ability.

 

That said, saying he's the sole reason for the last few games' poor performances is just making a link that isn't there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest firetotheworks

We changed a winning formula of Carroll/Ranger and Nolan up top for Harewood and Carroll, its not bringing goals like the original.

 

Colo and Taylor are injured.

 

Hughton is fairly limited.

 

 

 

These are the problems as I see them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've been utter shit for 4 and a half games.

 

We bench Harewood and bring in Ranger and we actually start playing well. I don't think it was coincidence, he gave them an outlet and he actually fought around the ball.

 

I think we've found our partnership for now - Carroll and Ranger.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the two combinations up front that I wouldn't play are Harewood and Lovenkrands, and Harewood and Carroll. In the first combination you have two direct players who don't keep the ball or play it back to midfielders, it effects our ball retention and means we can't advance high up the pitch. with the second you have two players with a shit touch leading to the same problem. ATM you have to put Ranger in there because he's the only all rounder, he's fairly fast, pretty strong and the ball sticks to him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't even have Harewood making the tea at half time.

He'd be sitting on his arse moaning, with two teabags in the pot and no hot water in !

 

When Shola is back Harewood is history here. Seems he has fallen out with Hughton, cant see his loan being extended.

I'd like to see it shortened. Come to think of it, the other two loanees haven't been hugely better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Heneage

When Shola is back Harewood is history here. Seems he has fallen out with Hughton, cant see his loan being extended.

What makes you think they've fallen out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason Hrewood gets a sniff is very likely because Ashley says he does. Hughton is a clueless cunt and should never ever even be considered as management material/

 

We were complete and utter shit again today.

 

:lol:

 

Ridiculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason Hrewood gets a sniff is very likely because Ashley says he does. Hughton is a clueless cunt and should never ever even be considered as management material/

 

We were complete and utter shit again today.

 

:lol:

 

Ridiculous.

 

C'mon then.....give me an alternative reason why Harewood might be getting a start.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason Hrewood gets a sniff is very likely because Ashley says he does. Hughton is a clueless cunt and should never ever even be considered as management material/

 

We were complete and utter shit again today.

 

:lol:

 

Ridiculous.

 

C'mon then.....give me an alternative reason why Harewood might be getting a start.

 

Because we've got 4 rubbish strikers, and he's one of them. He's no worse than the rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason Hrewood gets a sniff is very likely because Ashley says he does. Hughton is a clueless cunt and should never ever even be considered as management material/

 

We were complete and utter shit again today.

 

:lol:

 

Ridiculous.

 

C'mon then.....give me an alternative reason why Harewood might be getting a start.

 

Because we've got 4 rubbish strikers, and he's one of them. He's no worse than the rest.

 

Sholas not rubbish ....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

just misunderstood!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason Hrewood gets a sniff is very likely because Ashley says he does. Hughton is a clueless cunt and should never ever even be considered as management material/

 

We were complete and utter shit again today.

 

:lol:

 

Ridiculous.

 

C'mon then.....give me an alternative reason why Harewood might be getting a start.

 

Because we've got 4 rubbish strikers, and he's one of them. He's no worse than the rest.

 

Sholas not rubbish ....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

just misunderstood!

 

Well I wasn't actually including Shola. Shola's the shit, he's just crippled. The rest are all unable to score goals. I think Harewood has the best chance of being a moderately consistent scorer, when in form.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're dffinitely missing Shola, never thought I'd say that, but we REALLY need him back and fit as soon as possible as he's the only striker we have who seems to have the confidence to take someone on and score.

 

Not to mention he actually has a fair degree of nous around him having played in the PL and unless memory decieves me the CL under robson as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...