The little gazette reports..

[overseas shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ April 13 2004,13:08)]P.S. Happy for the mark to be 20 in the league. It's the only true reflection of how well a striker is doing; and it's the only measure of whether we're likely to be at the business end of the table come May 2005.

So you're telling me that if a striker scores bucket loads of goals that get us to another LDV final, that's not a measure of how well he does? Even if he clocks up 18 or 19 goals in the league?

And another final could help us at the business end of the league with more wonger!

Granted, 2 league goals and a bucket full to get us to the final isn't any good though.

way I see it, we need two strikers capable of getting 15 - 25 goals a season... then we're in biz!

 

[Shagster69]

I think Constantine and Dudfield work quite well together - they ripped Bostons defence to pieces!

 

[Exiled Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Hawkwell Blue @ April 13 2004,12:13)]You cannot dismiss a 20 goal plus striker with "despite his goals" etc. Without him, and particularly his ability to score from 12 yards, we would be conference bound. Goals are quite important for a striker aren't they?

I admit he is an unlikely looking goalscorer but who gives a ****  and perhaps if he wasn't stuck out on the wing he would have bagged a few more.

Which is exactly what I said - for this season. I cannot see him scoring as many next season, and without the goals, he brings absolutely zilch to the team. Then he is about as useful as Bramble, whose performance yesterday meant that we played with ten men for the entire game. As I have said, if he carries on scoring, I don't have a problem with him being selected ahead of Dudfield (when he returns). It's when the goals dry up that I'm worried about, and that's looking forward to next season. I really hope that they don't, because then we could be Division Two-bound. I'm just not as confident in his ability as many others are.

 

[Hawkwell Blue]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:16)]

Quote[/b] (Hawkwell Blue @ April 13 2004,12:13)]You cannot dismiss a 20 goal plus striker with "despite his goals" etc. Without him, and particularly his ability to score from 12 yards, we would be conference bound. Goals are quite important for a striker aren't they?

I admit he is an unlikely looking goalscorer but who gives a ****  and perhaps if he wasn't stuck out on the wing he would have bagged a few more.

I cannot see him scoring as many next season

Why not?

Can we therefore also assume that Warren, Bentley, Gower wont do it next season. On that basis do we get rid of our top scorer and sign an unproven striker who MAY do the business? Errrmmm.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:09)]If Drewe isn't scoring his all-round play gets him in there.

I presume you were at Huddersfield on Saturday.  If so, pray tell me what "all-round play" Drewe exhibited.  He was woeful, frankly - redolent of Graeme Jones in his "pomp"...

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:09)]Dudfield I'm yet to form an opinion on in that respect, but an initial instinct is that he will create bucket loads with his off-the-ball running and by taking defenders away.

Exactly.  Bearing in mind that we don't really have a decent crosser from the flanks in the entire squad bar Nicolau, why don't we play to our strengths?

We have buckets of pace, movement, and passing ability in the squad - including Connie, who worked tirelessly on Saturday yet who, all too often, found no-one working off him, because Drewe was off grazing elsewhere on the McAlpine turf. Why not create opportunities through movement and pace, rather than trying (and invariably failing) to cross to a large ineffectual lump?

It has to be Dudders and Connie up front for me.  I don't know why we pretend that we need a "PBB" up front where all too often he offers nothing but sweat (admirable, but ultimately not match-winning) and which suggests that we should play a style (knocking it long) which in fact is not one that our squad is adept at - being mostly small, fast, and good with the ball at their feet?

Don't get me wrong.  I shall be eternally grateful to Drewe for getting us to Cardiff - his goal against the Scum at Roots Hall will be one of the most wonderful sepia-tinted moments of my SUFC supporting career.

But on too many occasions in the League when Drewe has been up front for us, he has not been the sort of player who has used his size and strength to carve open defences and lay opportunities on a plate for a partner in the way that (say) Ian Benjamin did for us.  Instead, Drewe has just looked like a large lumbering lump.

However, that's only my view - and I recognise that, having seen only a fraction of the number of games you've seen this season, my view may well be wrong or lop-sided.  If so, I look forward to seeing the positive critique of Mr. Broughton, and what he brings to SUFC...

Matt

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (overseas shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:15)]So you're telling me that if a striker scores bucket loads of goals that get us to another LDV final, that's not a measure of how well he does? Even if he clocks up 18 or 19 goals in the league?

Just my view, but I have always understood the phrase "20-a-season striker" to mean 20 goals in the league.

That, and only that, is the measure of whether you've got a guy up front who can fire you to promotion.

As I've said elsewhere, I'm eternally grateful to Drewe for getting us to Cardiff. But I can't see how having him up front is a recipe for being in the top 7, when he simply can't find the net in the League.

Matt

 

[W4 Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:11)]I'm spoiling for a fight here today - but without Drewe we wouldn't have had such a wonderful day/weekend out in Cardiff. That's gotta count for something? And I think that now he has broken his Roots Hall duck we will see much more out of him (otherwise I'm gonna get burned on the stake!!!).

True. But equally, his c*ck-up when one-on-one with the Scarborough keeper saw us miss out on a home FA Cup tie with Chelsea!
I hope he continues to improve for Southend, but there's only so much you can do when your first touch goes further than a Flahavan goal kick.

 

[Exiled Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Hawkwell Blue @ April 13 2004,12:22)]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:16)]I cannot see him scoring as many next season

Why not?

Can we therefore also assume that Warren, Bentley, Gower wont do it next season. On that basis do we get rid of our top scorer and sign an unproven striker who MAY do the business? Errrmmm.

It's a personal opinion based on his style of play and his record before he joined Southend United of a mighty three goals in 35 games. I don't think that he will score as many as he has done this year - he might not get the huge slices of luck a la his second against Sc**thorpe and having the chance to take a penalty against Carlisle, his penalty taking technique which is comparable to Kevin Maher's (who everyone vilifies) might let him down.

His record before he joined Southend was poor. He looked good at the start of his career he and Steve Wignall signed him. He has done well. I want him to carry on doing well. But if next season he can't reproduce what he has done this year, then I feel for the guy because the very same people that have been crucifying Drewe all season will be on his back.

As for the others, Bentley aside thewy have all proved in the past that they can do it at this level - Constantine hasn't before. Gower was the key man in Barnet's side for two or three years and Warren could have won PotY at Colchester last season in Division Two. Only injury stopped him. There's not much more praise than that. I hope Constantine reproduces the form, but IMHO he won't.

Or am I not allowed to express an opnion?

 

[Exiled Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ April 13 2004,12:24)]I presume you were at Huddersfield on Saturday.  If so, pray tell me what "all-round play" Drewe exhibited.  He was woeful, frankly - redolent of Graeme Jones in his "pomp"...

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:09)]Dudfield I'm yet to form an opinion on in that respect, but an initial instinct is that he will create bucket loads with his off-the-ball running and by taking defenders away.

Exactly.  Bearing in mind that we don't really have a decent crosser from the flanks in the entire squad bar Nicolau, why don't we play to our strengths?

We have buckets of pace, movement, and passing ability in the squad - including Connie, who worked tirelessly on Saturday yet who, all too often, found no-one working off him, because Drewe was off grazing elsewhere on the McAlpine turf.  Why not create opportunities through movement and pace, rather than trying (and invariably failing) to cross to a large ineffectual lump?

 

It has to be Dudders and Connie up front for me.  I don't know why we pretend that we need a "PBB" up front where all too often he offers nothing but sweat (admirable, but ultimately not match-winning) and which suggests that we should play a style (knocking it long) which in fact is not one that our squad is adept at - being mostly small, fast, and good with the ball at their feet?

Don't get me wrong.  I shall be eternally grateful to Drewe for getting us to Cardiff - his goal against the Scum at Roots Hall will be one of the most wonderful sepia-tinted moments of my SUFC supporting career.

But on too many occasions in the League when Drewe has been up front for us, he has not been the sort of player who has used his size and strength to carve open defences and lay opportunities on a plate for a partner in the way that (say) Ian Benjamin did for us.  Instead, Drewe has just looked like a large lumbering lump.

However, that's only my view - and I recognise that, having seen only a fraction of the number of games you've seen this season, my view may well be wrong or lop-sided.  If so, I look forward to seeing the positive critique of Mr. Broughton, and what he brings to SUFC...

Matt

Well he managed to keep the March Player of the Month away from the action for 95% of the ninety minutes. Drewe went up there and was a bl**dy nuisance to Huddersfield, and that's why their boss Peter Jackson is reputed to have said that we were one of the best teams to have played at the McAlpine this year. It is a team effort.

That said, he didn't get any efforts away on goal. But by the same token Matt, if you are singling out one match, what did Constantine do against the Terriers? He was anonymnous for large chunks of the game and was pittiful out of position on the right (although why he had to go out there and Tes up front I'll never know).

I think we can do well against the lesser teams in Division Three with Connie and Dudders up front - your Bostons, Kidderminsters, Maclesfields. But when there's some effective defending required, you need your Professional Big Bloke there to cause havoc - to take people's attention away from Dudfield or Constantine. And there are very few in Division Three better than Broughton at that.

 

[Napster]

Napster in agreeing with Exiled shocker!

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:35)]Or am I not allowed to express an opnion?

Handbag away, Mr. C!

In fact, your opinion is precisely the thing we want you to express... in many respects these are all sensible grounds for believing that Connie may be less successful next season than he has been this season. Carruthers was poor in his second season at the club, after a barn-storming first season (for instance).

However, since he has bagged a hatful of goals this season, it may be that we're simply the right club for him. Some strikers are brilliant in one place, but rubbish elsewhere - simply because they're happy at a particular club, they like the way their team-mates play, they know about the length of grass on a particular surface etc. etc.

What is unarguable, however, is that Connie has 19 in the league this season; Drewe has 2. What is also unarguable is that you need goals to go up.

At the moment - and especially given Drewe's recent performances (I've not seen a decent one since we played Col Ewe) - I'd have Connie & Dudders up front every day of the week, and twice at 3.00 p.m. on a Saturday...

Matt

 

[Hooly]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:11)]And I think that now he has broken his Roots Hall duck we will see much more out of him (otherwise I'm gonna get burned on the stake!!!).

Much as I defended Drewe & accept his workrate is good, if I were you I'd get that asbestos suit dusted down.  The phrase barn door with banjo (or something like that) comes to mind.

I'm still gloating about my win off Skoda Man last year by offering Graeme Jones to score no more than 5!!  In fact I think I started at 8 & then took pity on him after about 10 games as that was an utterly ridiculous for Jones to score.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:41)]Well he managed to keep the March Player of the Month away from the action for 95% of the ninety minutes. Drewe went up there and was a bl**dy nuisance to Huddersfield

But by the same token Matt, if you are singling out one match, what did Constantine do against the Terriers? He was anonymnous for large chunks of the game and was pittiful out of position on the right.

Well, that's just an example of two people seeing a game in a different light... The power of personal opinion - or, in my case jaundice (I'll hold my hands up and say that there's too much about Drewe as a package I dislike) - is remarkable.

I thought that:

*Sodje had a bad day at the office, rather than being kept busy by Drewe.

* If Sodje looked nervous about one striker, it was Connie rather than Drewe - because Connie had pace to burn him, which Drewe doesn't.

*When Connie went wide right, he still linked up well with Jupp & Bentley.

*Connie got into dangerous areas with the ball up front, but all too often had no one with him.

But there you have it. As for your other assessment (Connie & Dudders vs. the weak teams, Drewe for when spoiling strong opposition is important)... I might be able to agree with that. Drewe was excellent in the air in defence on Saturday, I'll concede that. But that was (for me) the only thing which he brought to the party on Saturday.

Matt

 

[Andu]

I would have to go with Matt here. A striker is there to score goals and thats what Constantine has done.
At the moment he is the only one of our current strikers who has earned his start next year. Broughton while having a good work rate misses too many chances.
If I was Constantine I would be well peeved to be stuck out on the wing having to watch Bramble and Broughton fanny about up front missing chances.
Lets see how the Constantine / Dudfield pairing works out, you never know it may turn out really good.

 

[Hooly]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:35)]Warren could have won PotY at Colchester last season...

Oh dear!  Now we know this argument is getting silly.  

Pikey (A12 division) of the Year is not much to boast about.  This year Dobbin is up for this prestigous award, he's the donkey who is resposible for simultaneously cutting & fetilising the pitch & also plays in goal occasionally under his alias of S Brown.  

 

[Exiled Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Hooly @ April 13 2004,13:04)]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,12:35)]Warren could have won PotY at Colchester last season...

Oh dear!  Now we know this argument is getting silly.  

Pikey (A12 division) of the Year is not much to boast about.  This year Dobbin is up for this prestigous award, he's the horse who is resposible for simultaneously cutting & fetilising the pitch & also plays in goal occasionally under his alias of S Brown.  

Fair point. I have been talking b*llocks haven't I?

 

[Shrimper Zoo]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,13:05)]I have been talking b*llocks haven't I?

 

After all those years of telling you that, you finally agree.

As some reprobate shouting from a car on the A127 said yeterday "Craven Out!"

 

[Hooly]

Quote[/b] (Exiled Shrimper @ April 13 2004,13:05)]Fair point. I have been talking b*llocks haven't I?

As they say "takes one to know one"!!  Very few people talk more b*llocks than me, or indeed more quantity of b*llocks!!  

 

[Hooly]

Obviously that last statement excludes our resident Arse!!  He takes b*llocks to a (so far) unrecognised level.  

 

[Shrimper Zoo]

Quote[/b] (Hooly @ April 13 2004,13:17)]Obviously that last statement excludes our resident Arse!!  He takes b*llocks to a (so far) unrecognised level.  

What you do in your prvate life with other consenting adults is entirely your own business and not for public forums like this