We need a poacher.

[Ray 111]

IMO,we need a goal poacher, a la a certain Mr. A Clark of many years ago. At the moment our best poacher is RM? Is Wes a poacher, no, is Redmond, no. We need one, possibly more than we need to strengthen at the back. Outside of NR with 4 and RM with three who in our team scores? Mbokani may be half way there but we need more than one with potential. Personally I''d go for Defoe (if released) or do we have one lurking in our loanees or the U21''s. Someone who knows where the goal is and is unknown by other defences?

[Canary Wundaboy 1,423]

We only put the ball in their box about half a dozen times all game, what use is a poacher if the opposition have the ball?

[Ray 111]

Wundaboy, Thanks, you''ve answered my call. That is exactly why we need a poacher, someone who can score with scraps, with limited chances. Although I wasn''t specifically referring to last Saturday.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Celtic used to have a goal poacher Ray, I think his name was Hooper ..............

By the way, are you an insomniac? At least it''s only 7:30 in the evening here! :-))

[daly 551]

Try Argos or Curry''s both have a sale on at the moment

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

Alan Partridge wouldn''t agree! ............................................................................................... Poor.

............................................................................................... Very.

[AJ 1,358]

We have this guy named Lafferty on the bench, I''ve heard he''s been pretty good at poaching the odd goal for his country...

[mrs miggins 0]

I''m afraid we let Hooper go.

(although, strangely enough we never used him as that anyway; we either played him upfront on his own or behind the target man)

[mrs miggins 0]

Also, obviously very surprised no-one has mocked the Defoe suggestion

[Crafty Canary 547]

There''s plenty in rural Norfolk no doubt.

[unique 466]

Oh for a Jamie Vardy!

He may have spent most of his career in non-league football, but he''s certainly making up for it as a so-called ''late developer''.....

His work-rate, confidence and finishing puts Hooper to shame.....

[mrs miggins 0]

I wouldn''t say finishing, but his confidence and certainly work rate. Apparently the fans of his new club aren''t happy with his work rate- well get used to it.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

I''ve got a poachers pocket, it''s huge!

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]I wouldn''t say finishing, but his confidence and certainly work rate. Apparently the fans of his new club aren''t happy with his work rate- well get used to it.[/quote]

Surely, no poacher worthy of the name gives a damn about his work rate, and if he does what he''s best at nobody else gives a damn either. The only work rate that matters is what his team mates put in.

[Ray 111]

Westcoast,

Not an insomniac, not since CH left anyway but not in the UK at the moment, back at CR for the Arsenal match.

Will you get to see it?

[westcoastcanary 173]

@Ray

I was once believed to be an insomniac by a poster on another forum who assumed I hailed from California by Scratby! I guess he thought lack of sleep was the only explanation for the ridiculousness of some of my posts -- with which view some on here would clearly sympathise. :-)

Yes, I will "see" the Arsenal match. with the aid of Stream2Watch.

[westcoastcanary 173]

Re. the OP, is it not the case that the game (at the highest level) has evolved in such a way as to make poachers an extinct species? For two reasons: (1) improved defending, and (2) the high cost of carrying a "luxury" player. A young Darren Bent would never make it in the EPL today?

[Ray 111]

westcoast,

I tend to agree re a poacher being an extinct species because in the modern game so much more is required from each player, that said I do believe we would benefit from someone who can turn scraps and limited chances into goals, I''m not sure we have that player. Also not sure an old fashioned poacher would be a luxury, not if they had a high conversion rate. I don''t have the figures to hand but from memory, earlier in the season our goal to shot ratio was quite poor. We dominated in some games, or certainly had plenty of possession and shots but came away with very little.

Mbokani may be the closest we have but there has been many a player, and probably will always be many a player, who just have the knack of being in the right place at the right time to pick up the odd loose ball and stab it home. I''m not talking about worldies, I''m talking about scruffy make them pay for their small mistake type goals, a keeper''s spill, etc. Although as I said above, that player needs to bring a bit more to the game than being a ''goal hanger'', unless of course he was a certainty to bag 20 plus in a season, then we could possibly set up to deal with it?

[westcoastcanary 173]

We are currently mid-table in the conversion rate league, marginally below Arsenal (who in contrast lie second to our 17th in the meanest defence league). If you think, as I do, that forking out big money for a "better" RCB will not miraculously drive us up the latter league, I fear there are sleepless nights ahead!

[Ray 111]

Westcoast,

Having read you last couple of lines a couple of times I''m in couple of minds over what your point is. Could you make it simpler for me!!

Cheers

[westcoastcanary 173]

Three options:

1) Convert more of our chances (= poacher)

2) Create more chances while maintaining current conversion rate (= revert to earlier attack-minded approach)

3) Seek to climb up the meanest defence league so the chances we do convert garner us more points (= continue with current emphasis on defensive solidity)

But 4) no poachers so forget 1), leaving 2) or 3)

But 2) can only work if at the same time we improve defensively; and 3) can only work if we continue to create the same number of chances and maintain the same conversion ratio, neither of which scenarios have CH, NA or AN (so far) been able to pull off. In which case months of bitten fingernails and lost sleep surely lie ahead.

[Ray 111]

Blimey westcoast,

That simplified it for me!

I have posted elsewhere that I think that the system we played against Man City would work for us against all teams. Basically two at the back with RM as sweeper, then two ''attacking'' full backs, a holding midfielder and then four others as seen fit. This affords us a greater flexibility by allowing the full backs to bomb on to create chances whilst the sweeper covers left or right as appropriate, or indeed to step up into a flat back three (or four or five) or indeed the holding midfielder can also drop into the back four leaving the full backs greater opportunity to venture forward. It almost worked against Man City away but wasn''t used against Swansea or Chelsea because of RM''s unfortunate absence. I am of the opinion that if we do play this system then RM is currently the only player able to fulfill the sweeper role.

He will of course be the last line of defence, besides the keeper which will expose him to even more abuse on here.

This system could the answer to No. 3

[westcoastcanary 173]

As I see it, our problem is less to do with formation than with our ability to keep offence in mind when we defend or defence in mind when we attack, whichever formation we are playing. Situational awareness and reading of the game often seem to me to be lacking, not just individually (e.g. Redmond) but as a unit. Switching off at the free kick on Saturday was just one example of this persistent failing.

[Ray 111]

Westcoast,

No argument from me there but if the players we have, or possibly the management team, although I doubt that, are not of the quality to think about two football scenarios at the same time, then we have serious problems, it''s not like they have to explain quantum physics whilst looking for a pass! After all they can all walk and talk at the same time. I hope!!

Anyhow, on the move soon so may not be able to respond for 12 hours or so.

Cheers

Ray

[westcoastcanary 173]

Safe journey Ray.

Maybe we can revisit this when we''ve seen AN''s selections and strategy over the next three matches.