PH wants big physical striker

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Why this has been red crossed is beyond me? Another excuse for the defenders to lump it to Lennie/whoever and bypass the midfield.

Red crossed by PH ?

After a few seasons watching Conference football, a couple of things occur to me:

1. The referees don't tend to be very good and often allow all sorts of manhandling of the forwards by defenders.
2. The defenders in this division tend to be big and brutish.

The quotes from Hurst in the GET article show nothing but common sense. Have people even bothered to read it? It's like there is a disconnect with reality and this board sometimes.

Saying it would be useful if we had a striker with strength to hold up the ball is sensible. Saying it would be helpful to have a striker who can win some headers at times is sensible.

Somehow, these comments seem to have been conflated into the theory that we are going to play route one every game when we get a new striker in, which is clearly utter nonsense!

He doesn't even mention getting a tall player in, just somebody with some physicality and the comments from the Halifax game were that we needed a bit more strength up front, so what the heck is wrong with Hurst's comments in the GET?

The mind really boggles sometimes.

Quoted from Maringer

After a few seasons watching Conference football, a couple of things occur to me:

1. The referees don't tend to be very good and often allow all sorts of manhandling of the forwards by defenders.
2. The defenders in this division tend to be big and brutish.

The quotes from Hurst in the GET article show nothing but common sense. Have people even bothered to read it? It's like there is a disconnect with reality and this board sometimes.

Saying it would be useful if we had a striker with strength to hold up the ball is sensible. Saying it would be helpful to have a striker who can win some headers at times is sensible.

Somehow, these comments seem to have been conflated into the theory that we are going to play route one every game when we get a new striker in, which is clearly utter nonsense!

He doesn't even mention getting a tall player in, just somebody with some physicality and the comments from the Halifax game were that we needed a bit more strength up front, so what the heck is wrong with Hurst's comments in the GET?

The mind really boggles sometimes.

Hi paul.

Quoted from Mighty_Mariner

Michael Gash would be ideal - good size, strong, can hold it up well and can finish! Seems ideal but doubt Kiddy will let him go!

Of course they will but not for Saturdays game he is just what we want and Kiddy will want the money, he is out of favour with their manager it seems, oh hang on we want a freebie don`t we?

Quoted from Maringer

After a few seasons watching Conference football, a couple of things occur to me:

1. The referees don't tend to be very good and often allow all sorts of manhandling of the forwards by defenders.
2. The defenders in this division tend to be big and brutish.

The quotes from Hurst in the GET article show nothing but common sense. Have people even bothered to read it? It's like there is a disconnect with reality and this board sometimes.

Saying it would be useful if we had a striker with strength to hold up the ball is sensible. Saying it would be helpful to have a striker who can win some headers at times is sensible.

Somehow, these comments seem to have been conflated into the theory that we are going to play route one every game when we get a new striker in, which is clearly utter nonsense!

He doesn't even mention getting a tall player in, just somebody with some physicality and the comments from the Halifax game were that we needed a bit more strength up front, so what the heck is wrong with Hurst's comments in the GET?

The mind really boggles sometimes.

He does make comment on Hannah's weakness in the air and although he praises Pittman for his abilities you only need to read between the lines to see what he really wants is a LJL clone. PH is traditional - big lad to lead the line plus nippy lad up front for the flick ons. Nothing wrong with that as long as the passing is good and accurate. Trouble is that your LJL type does encourage defenders to launch it up there in the hope he can turn a hopeful punt into a good ball and we seem to breed defenders who don't need much encouragement to do that.

Quoted from jonnyboy82

Hi paul.

Embarrassing.

Quoted from Maringer

After a few seasons watching Conference football, a couple of things occur to me:

1. The referees don't tend to be very good and often allow all sorts of manhandling of the forwards by defenders.
2. The defenders in this division tend to be big and brutish.

The quotes from Hurst in the GET article show nothing but common sense. Have people even bothered to read it? It's like there is a disconnect with reality and this board sometimes.

Saying it would be useful if we had a striker with strength to hold up the ball is sensible. Saying it would be helpful to have a striker who can win some headers at times is sensible.

Somehow, these comments seem to have been conflated into the theory that we are going to play route one every game when we get a new striker in, which is clearly utter nonsense!

He doesn't even mention getting a tall player in, just somebody with some physicality and the comments from the Halifax game were that we needed a bit more strength up front, so what the heck is wrong with Hurst's comments in the GET?

The mind really boggles sometimes.

I agree with you on this one, in this league you do need a strong person up front,

He does not have to be 6ft 3in but able to withstand a battering from the thugs that call themselves defenders,

Not that our defenders are thugs mind you.

My advice to PH for Saturday (assuming he can't get his physical striker, and he's having problems there according to GET) is:

Play Toto up front, and tell Hannah to stay close to him and onside (Pearson & Magnay CBs). Tell the fullbacks (Walker & Winfarrah)
to launch it up to him as soon as they get inside the opponent's half (this stops them being caught too far forward out of position) and
instruct Nielson to get to the edge of the box to knock in the weak defensive headers which will drop there periodically.

I estimate this will yield 3 goals which ought to win us the game.

B*gger the fans' desire to see the ball passed around on the deck - this works best with with a pressing game which our players
seem unable to achieve consistently (top players are athletes with footballing skills; our players are footballers with varying amounts
of athleticism). It may not be pretty but if it gets 3 points...

Quoted from 137

My advice to PH for Saturday (assuming he can't get his physical striker, and he's having problems there according to GET) is:

Play Toto up front, and tell Hannah to stay close to him and onside (Pearson & Magnay CBs). Tell the fullbacks (Walker & Winfarrah)
to launch it up to him as soon as they get inside the opponent's half (this stops them being caught too far forward out of position) and
instruct Nielson to get to the edge of the box to knock in the weak defensive headers which will drop there periodically.

I estimate this will yield 3 goals which ought to win us the game.

B*gger the fans' desire to see the ball passed around on the deck - this works best with with a pressing game which our players
seem unable to achieve consistently (top players are athletes with footballing skills; our players are footballers with varying amounts
of athleticism). It may not be pretty but if it gets 3 points...

no. sorry but just No

Size doesn't matter it's technique that's important