What is it about not scoring goals?

[Billy Bests boot laces]

And to add to the original point, its not just an absence of goals, but an absence of a genuine goal scorer. My nostalgic memories are built on the likes of Best, Garner, Guthrie, Parker (both Stuart and Derrick) Spence, Phillips, Cadette, Crown, Angell, Collymore etc etc where we knew that if we played well one of the afore-mentioned would have an opportunity (or two) to excite us and give us something to cheer. I look at the team sheet now and struggle to see where the goals will come from, however well we play. One goal from midfield in over 450 minutes of football is a concern.

Agreed. Just with 2 examples of the above, Stan & Freddie. If they were playing you always had the expectation of 'something happening' from no-where.
Appreciate that players like that are hard to come by on a regular basis, but alas there is no-one in the current side who to me give off that vibe.

 

[turkishm]

What i dont understand is if PB wants to play with one striker, that can hold the ball up, to bring in the midfield, why let Corr slip away, who was ideal to play that role, then sign three forwards that are not suited to that role.

 

[Pak Power]

It now seems that hard work under PB is not to be desired. Perhaps you would like to see the same effort Col U put in, up at Fleetwood.

Plenty of us attend RH because there are no p*** takers. If its just goals you want, stay in and watch sky. Southend's work rate and commitment is to be admired and something to be proud of. Its the reason we got 'lucky' over teams with a players on much bigger wages than ours

The title of the thread is what's it about not scoring goals, my reply was my opinion. Your opinion I s stay in and watch goals on sky. Well that's probably what some on here will do, if you read the thread through about people not renewing their season cards etc:smile:

 

[Thundersley Blue]

Work rate is excellent, no complaints there. Brown has also made us very hard to beat. However, to win games we have to score and I think he is guilty of muddled thinking in that respect.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Some seem to equate no goals with no entertainment. Personally I appreciate the players effort and they regularly show bits and bobs of ability/flare that is entertaining. The issue of goals is that they are the point of the game. PB would be a wonderful practitioner if the goalposts were removed and it was about tippy-tapping the ball around the pitch.

Ask yourself this; when PB sets up his pseudo 4-3-3 (4-5-1 in reality), how many of the 'forward' players would you feel confident about beating the keeper in a one on one situation? Or adversely, how many would you not be surprised by if they blew the opportunity in a one on one situation? We put players in forward-ish positions whose trademark is supply and then wonder why they do not get many goals.

Yesterday Hunt was the lone striker and by anyones imagination he is not noted as a scorer. His asset is to bring other people into the game and he does that very well. For it to work he has to have personnel around him that are on his wavelength, can collect his flicks and know how to finish. That means a striker and not a make-shift attack force.

 

[WESTY_SUFC]

Cannot understand why people are so confused with this so called negative/boring style. We have created plenty of chances so far this season but the finishing has been very poor.

 

[Mick]

Work rate is excellent, no complaints there. Brown has also made us very hard to beat. However, to win games we have to score and I think he is guilty of muddled thinking in that respect.

Indeed.

But it is hardly surprising that we're not scoring goals. At the risk of stating the obvious,you need goalscorers to score goals. Look at our 6 midfielders and frontmen who started Saturday: Atkinson 17 goals in 220 appearances, Worrall 20 in 241, Leonard 11 in 127, Timlin 16 in 266, Payne 6 in 46. Hunt has the best career record but has got 3 goals in the last two and a half years. From the bench, Weston's record is just as bad.

 

[fbm]

It's not just about goals though, is it? We scored loads under Sturrock but look at the slating that style of football produced!

I think we have to look at League 2. It is a dire league where most teams come and play anti-football.

This year may well be harder than last year, but the football will be better, even if it will be played by the opposition!

For the die hard Southend fans, who I reckon number about 3000 who would come regardless of how we were playing, it is all about going through the weekly ritual in the faint hope that sometimes, just sometimes, the players actually get it together and give a side a tonking. Or we get those rare moments when we upset the odds and get to Wembley, or beat Man Utd, or draw at Chelsea, or win the play offs, which is what makes it all worthwhile.

If you want to support a winning side, go and follow Chelsea, Arsenal or one of the Manchester clubs.

For the real football, it's teams like Southend and places like Roots Hall. Is it fun? Not often. Entertaining? Occasionally. Exhilarating? Very rarely. Is it dull? More often than not. Frustrating? Always.

But that is exactly why we do it. Football teams get into your blood and you just can't let them go. It's like a marriage (and looking at the description above that probably explains a lot!).

We're Southend. We're sometimes rubbish. And we're proud of it.

 

[colonelnutter]

Cannot understand why people are so confused with this so called negative/boring style. We have created plenty of chances so far this season but the finishing has been very poor.

Hooray! Sanity! Well said Sir.

 

[colonelnutter]

It's not just about goals though, is it? We scored loads under Sturrock but look at the slating that style of football produced!

I think we have to look at League 2. It is a dire league where most teams come and play anti-football.

This year may well be harder than last year, but the football will be better, even if it will be played by the opposition!

For the die hard Southend fans, who I reckon number about 3000 who would come regardless of how we were playing, it is all about going through the weekly ritual in the faint hope that sometimes, just sometimes, the players actually get it together and give a side a tonking. Or we get those rare moments when we upset the odds and get to Wembley, or beat Man Utd, or draw at Chelsea, or win the play offs, which is what makes it all worthwhile.

If you want to support a winning side, go and follow Chelsea, Arsenal or one of the Manchester clubs.

For the real football, it's teams like Southend and places like Roots Hall. Is it fun? Not often. Entertaining? Occasionally. Exhilarating? Very rarely. Is it dull? More often than not. Frustrating? Always.

But that is exactly why we do it. Football teams get into your blood and you just can't let them go. It's like a marriage (and looking at the description above that probably explains a lot!).

We're Southend. We're sometimes rubbish. And we're proud of it.

Totally agree. I am frustrated but, sadly, not surprised by the negativity so early in the season. I actually don't like Brown much after his Hull antics and the way Sturrock was brutally treated but he has delivered. The quality of play is way better than under Sturrock but bottom line is that top quality finishers go for top quality money. People seem to think managers should be able to just go and summon up a new Eastwood or Collymore. I don't think we have had a genuine high quality striker since Barnard at his best. I think we put out an attacking side on Saturday and created about 8 good chances but our conversion rate, as last season, is poor. The difference this season is the the opposition conversion rates are going to be much higher meaning our ability to keep clean sheets is going to be under loads more pressure. Face it guys most newly promoted sides struggle, we are no different. What annoys me is the moaning about results and style, sounds too Wet Sham mentality.

 

[OldBlueLady]

And to add to the original point, its not just an absence of goals, but an absence of a genuine goal scorer. My nostalgic memories are built on the likes of Best, Garner, Guthrie, Parker (both Stuart and Derrick) Spence, Phillips, Cadette, Crown, Angell, Collymore etc etc where we knew that if we played well one of the afore-mentioned would have an opportunity (or two) to excite us and give us something to cheer.

Not forgetting Eastwood of course! I honestly think Hunt and Pigott could work very well as a partnership, it just needs a bit of time to develop, not sure where that leaves Mooney, did he come here to be back up?

 

[MR G]

Just heard brown on radio saying he's still on the lookout for a striker - bet hunt, piggot and mooney pleased to hear him say that. Thought that's what they were brought in for!!

 

[Pubey]

Just heard brown on radio saying he's still on the lookout for a striker - bet hunt, piggot and mooney pleased to hear him say that. Thought that's what they were brought in for!!

They've all had minutes and aren't producing. They should be concerned with their performances, not with what brown is saying in the news.

 

[TTS]

Just heard brown on radio saying he's still on the lookout for a striker - bet hunt, piggot and mooney pleased to hear him say that. Thought that's what they were brought in for!!

As Pubey said. Pig should have done a better job with the lob when he was through against Doncaster. If he scored that he would have started on Saturday. I wouldn't be concerned if I was Hunt, as its my impression that Hunt will be the "partner" of any new guy coming in.

Players need to sometimes take responsibility themselves as well to make the managers job harder to make decisions not easier .

 

[RobM]

Cannot understand why people are so confused with this so called negative/boring style. We have created plenty of chances so far this season but the finishing has been very poor.

Have we? Cripes, I must go for a pee 15 times a match and miss most of them. The striker are totally isolated. Maybe nobody likes their aftershave.

 

[turkishm]

Just heard brown on radio saying he's still on the lookout for a striker - bet hunt, piggot and mooney pleased to hear him say that. Thought that's what they were brought in for!!

My thought to, when they play in pairs up front, these strikers will be ok. PB continues to play with a lone striker, but these front men are not suited to that role, as Corr, wether he liked it or not was. I do wonder why he went for them in the first place. Maybe down the line PB will revert to playing 442, if only to give the strikers he has signed, some sought of chance of proving themselfs.

 

[Sleaford Shrimper]

Whilst most of the postings on this thread have, understandably, centred on strikers not scoring, I think we also need to look at players in other positions not scoring. Our more successful teams in the past and, indeed, many other more successful clubs at present, had at least one or two midfield players who could be relied upon to score 7 to10 goals a season and centre backs with a good scoring record at set pieces. We don't seem to have midfield players with the nous to ghost into or find space in the penalty area and the composure to put chances away. Instead, our present midfielders seem to have it in their heads that the only way to score is to belt the ball as hard as they can in the general direction of the goal from 25 to 30 yards out. I am sure that someone on here can tell me exactly how many goals our various centre backs have scored from set pieces over the past 24 months, but I'm sure I wouldn't need too many more fingers to count them on.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Whilst most of the postings on this thread have, understandably, centred on strikers not scoring, I think we also need to look at players in other positions not scoring. Our more successful teams in the past and, indeed, many other more successful clubs at present, had at least one or two midfield players who could be relied upon to score 7 to10 goals a season and centre backs with a good scoring record at set pieces. We don't seem to have midfield players with the nous to ghost into or find space in the penalty area and the composure to put chances away. Instead, our present midfielders seem to have it in their heads that the only way to score is to belt the ball as hard as they can in the general direction of the goal from 25 to 30 yards out. I am sure that someone on here can tell me exactly how many goals our various centre backs have scored from set pieces over the past 24 months, but I'm sure I wouldn't need too many more fingers to count them on.

You make valid points and although I am not trying to defend the mids I think their opportunity to score would be increased if we had two strikers on the pitch, pulling defenders with them, and making space in key areas. I am sure 4-4-1-1 with Hunt just behind the main striker is the way to go and is not too far removed from PB's insisted 4-5-1. Hunt with it is the key as I think his nous and experience is vital for the role. I think then you would see mids with more opportunity in better areas.

 

[Jam_Man]

Some seem to equate no goals with no entertainment. Personally I appreciate the players effort and they regularly show bits and bobs of ability/flare that is entertaining. The issue of goals is that they are the point of the game. PB would be a wonderful practitioner if the goalposts were removed and it was about tippy-tapping the ball around the pitch.

Ask yourself this; when PB sets up his pseudo 4-3-3 (4-5-1 in reality), how many of the 'forward' players would you feel confident about beating the keeper in a one on one situation? Or adversely, how many would you not be surprised by if they blew the opportunity in a one on one situation? We put players in forward-ish positions whose trademark is supply and then wonder why they do not get many goals.

Yesterday Hunt was the lone striker and by anyones imagination he is not noted as a scorer. His asset is to bring other people into the game and he does that very well. For it to work he has to have personnel around him that are on his wavelength, can collect his flicks and know how to finish. That means a striker and not a make-shift attack force.

With Payne in the side we actually played 4231, not 433, and out of the 4 players Id expect to get goals from Worrall, Payne and Hunt. Atkinson looks like a little boy lost when he gets in the final third though.

 

[onceknownasrab]

With Payne in the side we actually played 4231, not 433, and out of the 4 players Id expect to get goals from Worrall, Payne and Hunt. Atkinson looks like a little boy lost when he gets in the final third though.

4231 or 451? The key issue is PB claimed it is 4-3-3 and it could never be with the personnel selected. Payne was lost too and was in Hunts role. Being pedantic, the majority of play was nearer 4141 as Leonard was plonked in front of the back four.