duncanjwitham Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 I think this point becomes invalid when playing centrally as part of a forward three - the central striker is there to score goals AND act as a focal point/ physical presence. Sammon provides the physical presence, Bamford provides the goals ... Unfortunately for Bamford we are capable of goals from all over the pitch however we cannot get the physical presence upfront from these other positions. Bamford offers goals but he's not GUARANTEED to score which makes it a tough call. Even so I'm certain McClaren will edge towards Sammon though it wouldn't surprise me if he goes for something none of us have suggested! That's pretty much my take on it, We need the physical presence up front to create space for everyone else to play. And I also thought England played better with Heskey than without him. From what I can see, Millwall seem to be playing with 2 up front, so there's an argument that we could afford to go with 2 up front as well and not get overrun in midfield. But I'm not keen on Bryson and Hughes as a central 2, Hendrick and Hughes played well together there against Bournemouth, but I can't see Bryson not playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom2 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 defo sammon, russell and dawkins either side, bennett a close second for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 This is such a blinkered view mostyn and I usually respect your posts and enjoy reading them. If you believe Bamford is better then that's fine - if you believe he should play that's also fine. What isn't fine is you questioning the mentality of fans who disagree with you - that isn't okay. I was a massive fan of Heskey in the England team. England always played better when he was a foil. Sammon has come off the bench, fed off scraps and scored a couple of very important goals. I'd go for him because of this. I do agree with the point you stress in many other articles about not rating players on their secondary duties ie fullbacks on attacking, wingers on defending etc.... And I think we can afford to 'carry' Bamford when he is on the side of the front three because Eustace or Thorne should be able to come over and cover. I think this point becomes invalid when playing centrally as part of a forward three - the central striker is there to score goals AND act as a focal point/ physical presence. Sammon provides the physical presence, Bamford provides the goals ... Unfortunately for Bamford we are capable of goals from all over the pitch however we cannot get the physical presence upfront from these other positions. Bamford offers goals but he's not GUARANTEED to score which makes it a tough call. Even so I'm certain McClaren will edge towards Sammon though it wouldn't surprise me if he goes for something none of us have suggested! That's pretty much my take on it, We need the physical presence up front to create space for everyone else to play. And I also thought England played better with Heskey than without him. From what I can see, Millwall seem to be playing with 2 up front, so there's an argument that we could afford to go with 2 up front as well and not get overrun in midfield. But I'm not keen on Bryson and Hughes as a central 2, Hendrick and Hughes played well together there against Bournemouth, but I can't see Bryson not playing. A 'physical presence' and a 'bloke who runs around uncontrollably' are two different things. A player with pace is a 'physical presence'. Kevin Phillips was always a physical presence, Jamie Vardy at Leicester is a physical presence. Don't get all wrapped up in the myth that a physical presence HAS TO BE someone who jumps for headers against big central defenders! IS Ross McCormack a physical presence? of course he is, because he's physically present. ALL, (yes ALL) Sammon consistenly offers is good practice for opposition central defenders winning headers. He's not a threat, just someone to jump next to, and beat in the air! I do despair. Have people become out of touch with the basic requirements of football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 This is the dilemma, do you play the best players or the best team? Its not necessarily the same! The object is to win the game so the manager will have to decide which group of available players gives him the best chance of winning that game. This is where Mac earns his corn by running through the options on the training ground before making his decision. I can make the decision whilst running through the options of what to have for breakfast! Steve agrees with me - bacon and black pudding sandwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 A 'physical presence' and a 'bloke who runs around uncontrollably' are two different things. A player with pace is a 'physical presence'. Kevin Phillips was always a physical presence, Jamie Vardy at Leicester is a physical presence. Don't get all wrapped up in the myth that a physical presence HAS TO BE someone who jumps for headers against big central defenders! IS Ross McCormack a physical presence? of course he is, because he's physically present. ALL, (yes ALL) Sammon consistenly offers is good practice for opposition central defenders winning headers. He's not a threat, just someone to jump next to, and beat in the air! I do despair. Have people become out of touch with the basic requirements of football? Translation - Mostyn is ALWAYS right, and everyone who disagrees is an idiot. Not only that, their points raised WILL be ignored because they will be deemed both invalid and irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcnram Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Translation - Mostyn is ALWAYS right, and everyone who disagrees is an idiot. Not only that, their points raised WILL be ignored because they will be deemed both invalid and irrelevant. To be fair to Mostyn, he does say that he sees things that other people don't see. I would suggest that he might not necessarily be looking at what is happening on the pitch when he sees these things. It is a good question though and I would probably go Sammon. I have no concerns at all about the physical side of the game I am more interested in their movement and how they bring others into play. No doubt Bamford will already have been tried up front on the training pitch and it may well be that he gets the shout instead. Either way I am comfortable with the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TobyWanKenobi Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 I don't see why we can't play Bamford and Sammon together. Sammon has worked hard enough to earn a chance. Bamford and Martin worked well together. Hopefully Bamford and Sammon will to given some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackNwhites Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 What's all this rubbish that Bamford can't compete physically. I saw evidence to the contrary against Burnley, he's capable of holding his own. Yes, Martin's a bigger lad but Bamford is quicker. If he's getting pushed about, it's a foul, simple as. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 To be fair to Mostyn, he does say that he sees things that other people don't see. I would suggest that he might not necessarily be looking at what is happening on the pitch when he sees these things. It is a good question though and I would probably go Sammon. I have no concerns at all about the physical side of the game I am more interested in their movement and how they bring others into play. No doubt Bamford will already have been tried up front on the training pitch and it may well be that he gets the shout instead. Either way I am comfortable with the decision. It doesn't matter where I'm looking. Sammon barely troubles the scorers whether I'm viewing intently or I've plucked my eye-balls out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Sammon has the 3rd best goals per minute on pitch ratio for us this season, miles behind Bamford, but only slightly worse than Chris Martin (a goal every 224 minutes, compare to every 191 minutes for Martin). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 It doesn't matter where I'm looking. Sammon barely troubles the scorers whether I'm viewing intently or I've plucked my eye-balls out. Well, it might have helped a little if you had been looking in the general direction of Turf Moor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 **** it go Bamford, Sammon, Dawkins, Ward!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 and russell! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlsonDerby Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Mostyn you've answered your own criticism! You state that a physical presence isn't always someone who jumps for headers etc I have a similar view of a physical presence not always being a Steven Howard type CF. I wonder if at the end of 90minutes a defender will say they've had a tougher game playing against Sammon or playing against someone like Howard. Sammon's physical presence is that he is always breathing down the last defender's neck. No one in an oppositions back 5 (inc keeper) have a spare second on the ball. He does not allow teams to play out from the back. This is a good quality - we should be happy we have a mixture of different strikers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbrianRam Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Sammons plays works better when being an impact sub, heck we even saw this last season. I'd start Bamford and bring Sammon on at 60-70 mins if we still need an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Well, it might have helped a little if you had been looking in the general direction of Turf Moor. Oh, okay, how many did he score? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfb Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Its about who you face, im all about horses for courses.... and with Millwall i would hope we would go for it, and play Bamford/Dawkins/Russell or ward as part of an aggressive forward line, score 3/4 and then use the fish........ the problem with Sammon, is he appears to be splay footed, he runs and sadly shoots as though he is, and because of that, for me, he cant shoot... you will never see him score a goal like Bamford did against the Owls. His shots are always (99%) using the inside of his foot, with not a lot of power.... So for me if you want goals you would choose Bamford, if you want a guy who will hussle and disrupt defence's and defend from the front,as well as get the ball and bring in those around him, to score the majority of the goals then Sammon is your man.... In Steve we believe..... lets see what he thinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombo Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 I genuinely don't know. Sammon does deserve his shot, He has most certainly earned it with his sub appearances. But then I want to see how Bamford plays when he's more in the centre. And besides, I'm haunted by some of Sammon's awful first touch showings last season. He just couldn't control a ball. It's a real toughie, no doubt. But in the vote I went with Bamford, because he's the pacier option and we play a high tempo and high energy style. Sammon showed last season that his batteries run dry within the first 30 minutes when he starts whereas Bamford showed at Sheffield Wednesday that he can be a threat, all the way to the end. But Sammon is deadly from the bench. REALLY deadly. We don't feed the fish, we unleash him and he batters teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted March 4, 2014 Author Share Posted March 4, 2014 at least 67 of you are idiots! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayram Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 It's got to be Bamford. He can score a goal out of nothing whereas Connor is more of an impact player, coming off the bench to cause problems late on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.