Goalscorers

[Barry.C]

Southend boast 4 strikers officially in Coulthirst, Barnard, Corr and Layne. The first 3 official goalscorers have knocked in a pathetic 4 goals.
After practically every match we here how we should have scored more from the 17 shots at goal, but we didnt. It wouldnt surprise me if our shots at goal ratio to goals scored is actually the worst in the league. Still the official line is it will come good. Barnyard has scored 1 goal from a penalty and Bazzer has to be nursed through games mainly due to his back. We are now at practically the quarter the way through the season mark so can assess our scoring capabilities and whether any changes needed in personnel or style

Approach to strikers=
Southend have 4, Bury 6, Wimbledon 6, Burton 6, Plymouth 6, Luton 7, Morecambe 5 amongst the top clubs.
Northampton only have 4 like us, but guess what the leagues top scorer is their Richards with 8 goals, yep 8 !!!
Not in the top 7, Wimbledons Tubbs and Akinfenwe have notched up a mere 11 goals between the two of them. Ellison has smacked in 5 for Morecambe ( a midfielder by the way ) our top midfield scorers have 2. Cureton and Howell have scored 7 for Dagenham and Hayes and Murphy 9 for Wycombe. Gray and Naismith 8 between them for Accrington. Atkins 4 for Burton, Ruben Reid 4 for Plymouth and so on.

Southend still do not have a goalscorer near the top 25 in the league. I find it hard to believe that all these teams are playing a significantly different style each week to us. Given most teams have 50% more strikers than us have we got the balance emphasis right? We have more midfielders than you can shake a stick at? Those teams with 6 or 7 strikers do not also include many callow strikers like Layne but genuine experienced strikers. Sorry rather lengthy but is it time for a liitle re-shaping in style or personnel. Goodbye Barney for a start, bring in 2 new strikers on loan or otherwise?

 

[mrsblue]

Southend boast 4 strikers officially in Coulthirst, Barnard, Corr and Layne. The first 3 official goalscorers have knocked in a pathetic 4 goals.
After practically every match we here how we should have scored more from the 17 shots at goal, but we didnt. It wouldnt surprise me if our shots at goal ratio to goals scored is actually the worst in the league. Still the official line is it will come good. Barnyard has scored 1 goal from a penalty and Bazzer has to be nursed through games mainly due to his back. We are now at practically the quarter the way through the season mark so can assess our scoring capabilities and whether any changes needed in personnel or style

Approach to strikers=
Southend have 4, Bury 6, Wimbledon 6, Burton 6, Plymouth 6, Luton 7, Morecambe 5 amongst the top clubs.
Northampton only have 4 like us, but guess what the leagues top scorer is their Richards with 8 goals, yep 8 !!!
Not in the top 7, Wimbledons Tubbs and Akinfenwe have notched up a mere 11 goals between the two of them. Ellison has smacked in 5 for Morecambe ( a midfielder by the way ) our top midfield scorers have 2. Cureton and Howell have scored 7 for Dagenham and Hayes and Murphy 9 for Wycombe. Gray and Naismith 8 between them for Accrington. Atkins 4 for Burton, Ruben Reid 4 for Plymouth and so on.

Southend still do not have a goalscorer near the top 25 in the league. I find it hard to believe that all these teams are playing a significantly different style each week to us. Given most teams have 50% more strikers than us have we got the balance emphasis right? We have more midfielders than you can shake a stick at? Those teams with 6 or 7 strikers do not also include many callow strikers like Layne but genuine experienced strikers. Sorry rather lengthy but is it time for a liitle re-shaping in style or personnel. Goodbye Barney for a start, bring in 2 new strikers on loan or otherwise?

I feel your pain,

I have often been ridiculed for suggesting the above(I know I went on and on)yet the fundamental part of the game is scoring goals.Since Phil arrived we have struggled to find the net throughout his tenure and yet agin this season is identical to last season.

Recently Phil's Echo interview stated he wanted a 20 goal man yet he gave Barney the subs gig on Saturday ignoring the other forwards yet again.

The 451 system is boring and designed solely not to concede yet when we played Oxford last season we went 442 and smashed them to bits.

 

[LennySUFC]

I feel your pain,

I have often been ridiculed for suggesting the above(I know I went on and on)yet the fundamental part of the game is scoring goals.Since Phil arrived we have struggled to find the net throughout his tenure and yet agin this season is identical to last season.

Recently Phil's Echo interview stated he wanted a 20 goal man yet he gave Barney the subs gig on Saturday ignoring the other forwards yet again.

The 451 system is boring and designed solely not to concede yet when we played Oxford last season we went 442 and smashed them to bits.

and started two strikers including barnard.. NOT a winger whose got pace!

 

[Ricky Otto]

I feel your pain,

I have often been ridiculed for suggesting the above(I know I went on and on)yet the fundamental part of the game is scoring goals.Since Phil arrived we have struggled to find the net throughout his tenure and yet agin this season is identical to last season.

Recently Phil's Echo interview stated he wanted a 20 goal man yet he gave Barney the subs gig on Saturday ignoring the other forwards yet again.

The 451 system is boring and designed solely not to concede yet when we played Oxford last season we went 442 and smashed them to bits.

This isn't ridiculing your post but Phil has used his budget with the 4-5-1 system in mind. As Barry C says we have 4 strikers and a wealth of mindfielders and that is the correct squad balance for the style of play. 4-4-2 is used less and less these days as games are more often than not won in midfield and that area needs to be flooded, I don't think the system is the problem more the fluidity when switching from defence to attack and the speed in which the midfield get up to support the lone striker. We don't have the squad for 4-4-2 and should look towards getting the 4-5-1 to 4-3-3 transitition right.

 

[chapperzUK]

Ah the "we need a 20 goal a season striker" myth sneaks up again.

Just because a player plays well for one team doesn't mean he will keep scoring for fun at another.

Marc Richards managed 8 last season in a promoted Chesterfield team. Matt Tubbs got 9 last season too, with 6 of those coming in a 5 game run (since stat manipulation is allowed these days), that means he only got 3 in 34 games.

Some were saying we should have got Tyrone Barnett on loan. 11 games, 1 goal and 1 red card for Oxford so far - we've really missed out there!

Do you think having more strikers in the squad means more goals? What is the point of having 7 strikers if only 1 or 2 can play?

Of course we all want to have a striker or two that constantly score buckets every season, but that rarely happens especially in League 2.

 

[mrsblue]

This isn't ridiculing your post but Phil has used his budget with the 4-5-1 system in mind. As Barry C says we have 4 strikers and a wealth of mindfielders and that is the correct squad balance for the style of play. 4-4-2 is used less and less these days as games are more often than not won in midfield and that area needs to be flooded, I don't think the system is the problem more the fluidity when switching from defence to attack and the speed in which the midfield get up to support the lone striker. We don't have the squad for 4-4-2 and should look towards getting the 4-5-1 to 4-3-3 transitition right.

Our style of play is far too slow allowing the opposition to get behind the ball.We play 451 not because of personnel but because Phil wants defensive football.

We had the squad when we beat Oxford 3 0 and has the squad changed so much since that game?

 

[danburyshrimper]

The problem isnt with the strikers we have in our squad , its the way the system isnt suiting them.
Shaq was asked to play left wing most of the season , so has Barney on the odd occasion hes played. Hurst doesnt look sure where hes playing - is it midfield or up front ? With Payne needing to play in the messi role + not deep like on saturday we get terribly overran in midfield thus creating very few genuine chances. I keep hearing stats on how many chances we missed but really we had only 1 shot ( Clifford , from 30 yards ) and Worrell was inches away from sliding in Prossers flick at the end of the game. Other than that . we created diddly squat.and this was against a fat pub team who will no doubt still finish bottom 6. Weston looks like a fish out of water in the middle or on the right wing . We need Corr or Barny alongside Coolthirst , with Payne tucked in just behind ... in the number 10 role . Thats the only place Payne should play , otherwise bench him. We need players like Atkinson , Worrell , Lenny to get back in the team and run the midfield in order to boss the game in the right areas. The only possession we had saturday was between our defence and our 3 deep midielders. We need to play a 4-1-3-2 system as this would suit the players we currently have in our squad.

 

[Barry.C]

I carefully avoided saying we needed a 20 goal striker and was unaware Phil had said this himself. I also take on board King Shrimpers point about playing 4 -5-1 . Neither do I expect to thrash anyone with regularity. However many teams are playing 4 -5-1 and scoring far more frequently than us as I have illiustrated . Therefore beyond style I am beginning to think about the adequacies of our recognised strikers who regularly find it near impossible to find the back of the net. Each game I check the match stats. It stands out like a toothache that we somehow regularly manage 15 -20 shots at target or even more if you include off target. I then have to read each week how one of the team concludes we should have scored 4 , or a lot more, or even a couple. This happens far more for us than others as the scoring charts indicate. So I think we are actually getting forward but we cant hit a barn door and I dont see this changing hugely without Phil making some changes to personnel. Do we need 10 midfielders ( including Bridge) ?

 

[Ricky Otto]

Our style of play is far too slow allowing the opposition to get behind the ball.We play 451 not because of personnel but because Phil wants defensive football.

We had the squad when we beat Oxford 3 0 and has the squad changed so much since that game?

We do play 4-5-1 because of it is Phil's preference, yes. Because this is his preference he has assembled the squad with this in mind.

playing 4-4-2 in one game doesn't validate your point, you build a squad for the season to cover injuries and suspensions and we have a squad for 4-5-1, we are not in a bad position so there isn't a need to deviate from this plan.

 

[Ricky Otto]

I carefully avoided saying we needed a 20 goal striker and was unaware Phil had said this himself. I also take on board King Shrimpers point about playing 4 -5-1 . Neither do I expect to thrash anyone with regularity. However many teams are playing 4 -5-1 and scoring far more frequently than us as I have illiustrated . Therefore beyond style I am beginning to think about the adequacies of our recognised strikers who regularly find it near impossible to find the back of the net. Each game I check the match stats. It stands out like a toothache that we somehow regularly manage 15 -20 shots at target or even more if you include off target. I then have to read each week how one of the team concludes we should have scored 4 , or a lot more, or even a couple. This happens far more for us than others as the scoring charts indicate. So I think we are actually getting forward but we cant hit a barn door and I dont see this changing hugely without Phil making some changes to personnel. Do we need 10 midfielders ( including Bridge) ?

I'd agree it's a personel issue rather than a problem with the system

 

[Norwichshrimper]

I carefully avoided saying we needed a 20 goal striker and was unaware Phil had said this himself. I also take on board King Shrimpers point about playing 4 -5-1 . Neither do I expect to thrash anyone with regularity. However many teams are playing 4 -5-1 and scoring far more frequently than us as I have illiustrated . Therefore beyond style I am beginning to think about the adequacies of our recognised strikers who regularly find it near impossible to find the back of the net. Each game I check the match stats. It stands out like a toothache that we somehow regularly manage 15 -20 shots at target or even more if you include off target. I then have to read each week how one of the team concludes we should have scored 4 , or a lot more, or even a couple. This happens far more for us than others as the scoring charts indicate. So I think we are actually getting forward but we cant hit a barn door and I dont see this changing hugely without Phil making some changes to personnel. Do we need 10 midfielders ( including Bridge) ?

Maybe they are better than us?

 

[TTS]

In the words of the great (whether you like him or not you cant argue with his success) Alex Ferguson

“Attack wins you games, defence wins you titles.”

You can bleat on and on (and on) about goalscorers, but I will take entertainment second and success first and I stand by the fact that Phil has it spot on, ie set up your team to conceed as few goals as possible !

This topic will run and run, as peoples own opinions will never ever change.

 

[mrsblue]

In the words of the great (whether you like him or not you cant argue with his success) Alex Ferguson

“Attack wins you games, defence wins you titles.”

You can bleat on and on (and on) about goalscorers, but I will take entertainment second and success first and I stand by the fact that Phil has it spot on, ie set up your team to conceed as few goals as possible !

This topic will run and run, as peoples own opinions will never ever change.

Being fair

Fergie had the luxury of top defenders and even better forwards who scored for fun !

The best form of defence is to attack IMO.

 

[chapperzUK]

Didn't we play 4-4-2 during that winless streak last season?

 

[chapperzUK]

Being fair

Fergie had the luxury of top defenders and even better forwards who scored for fun !

The best form of defence is to attack IMO.

That's because he signed them! If he said that "defence wins you titles" then surely he would have signed the top defenders.

 

[Jam_Man]

Our style of play is far too slow allowing the opposition to get behind the ball.We play 451 not because of personnel but because Phil wants defensive football.

We had the squad when we beat Oxford 3 0 and has the squad changed so much since that game?

Total nonsense.

Whatever fromation you think we play, whether you want to say its 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 you just have to look at the players he puts in to see thats not true.

With Coulthirst/Weston/Hurst and Payne behind them you have 4 players, 3 of which sit in your 5 man midfield who are attacking players.

How is that going out to be defensive?

And your idea is to drop one of the attacking players and play an extra defender. Hmmn.

As for Oxford, they were in terrible form without a manager,we played 442 at other times against teams not quite shambolic and didnt smash people to bits.

Didn't we play 4-4-2 during that winless streak last season?

Yes we did, and after Oxford we reverted to 451 and shot to the top of the form table again.

I carefully avoided saying we needed a 20 goal striker and was unaware Phil had said this himself. I also take on board King Shrimpers point about playing 4 -5-1 . Neither do I expect to thrash anyone with regularity. However many teams are playing 4 -5-1 and scoring far more frequently than us as I have illiustrated . Therefore beyond style I am beginning to think about the adequacies of our recognised strikers who regularly find it near impossible to find the back of the net. Each game I check the match stats. It stands out like a toothache that we somehow regularly manage 15 -20 shots at target or even more if you include off target. I then have to read each week how one of the team concludes we should have scored 4 , or a lot more, or even a couple. This happens far more for us than others as the scoring charts indicate. So I think we are actually getting forward but we cant hit a barn door and I dont see this changing hugely without Phil making some changes to personnel. Do we need 10 midfielders ( including Bridge) ?

Indeed, its not the system thats at fault, its players not converting chances. It doesnt matter if its a striker scoring (Corr says in his interview today he has to play with his back to goal), but what matters is we do score.

 

[mrsblue]

That's because he signed them! If he said that "defence wins you titles" then surely he would have signed the top defenders.

Quite!

He also signed highly expensive forwards who delivered in spades.

 

[WESTY_SUFC]

I'd agree it's a personel issue rather than a problem with the system

Fully agree. The system is not conceding many and creating plenty of chances. It's the finishing which is the problem. We don't have many clinical finishers in our midfield and certainly not in attack. The problem is every team in every league will want a striker who can finish well. Unfortunately this isn't easy to find.

 

[Barry.C]

After the Morecambe game Kevan Hurst said "We threw the kitchen sink at them and weve got to FINISH the chances we create" Phil Brown said "We created enough chances to win this game" and "the fans are frustrated with thee chances we had" and more tellingly " its that bit of quality we needed with someone more relaxed up front" Phil clearly must be thinking we havent got it either.
On the long run of not winning last year I actually predicted we would only get 6 points in total, no matter what system we played ! , whilst many others thought we would notch up 2 points a game! as I believed then as now the striking capability was insufficient, the pitches would get tougher for our style and it would be harder for the youngsters. I predict this will happen again!

 

[mrsblue]

Total nonsense.

Whatever fromation you think we play, whether you want to say its 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 you jsut have to look at the players he puts in to see thats not true.

With Coulthirst/Weston/Hurst and Payne behind them you have 4 players, 3 of which sit in your 5 man midfield who are attacking players.

How is that going out to be defensive?

And your idea is to drop one of the attacking players and play an extra defender. Hmmn.

As for Oxford, they were in terrible form without a manager,we played 442 at other times against teams not quite shambolic and didnt smash people to bits.

Did you think Saturday was even reasonable fare for the entrance fee ?

We created nil
We never looked like scoring
We could play the finest players in the world but under Phil's system they would look ordinary.

Saturday was the 49th game from Phil's total of 75 we scored one or less..Too defensive IMO.