Ricky scoring goals again

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

Dirk Kuyt is the epitome of hard work in every game he plays. He is player i have always admired. I think he scored against Manure several times....a splendid achievement.

[Jacko 0]

It could also be to do with the fact that the Dutch Eredivisie is statistically ranked the 13th weakest league in Europe right now.

[morty 0]

What is the Championship ranked?

[king canary 7,580]

Dirk Kuyt was never overly prolific so it does say something about the quality of the league that a 35 year old Kuyt is top scorer.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="king canary"]Dirk Kuyt was never overly prolific so it does say something about the quality of the league that a 35 year old Kuyt is top scorer.[/quote]Agreed, but Kuyt scored 51 goals at premier league level, so it shows something of his ability and also shows that the dutch league isn''t premier league level - but it surely must be considered championship level?   I don''t know, but if RVW is scoring well at that level, it suggests he has more about him than some thought.   Of course, he is in his home country at the club he grew up with so the circumstances are much better for him.  Great to see him scoring again though.  Had a hard time at Norwich in the most difficult of seasons but looks like he''s come through that. Good news.

[hogesar 9,618]

Dirk Kuyt was average in the Prem in a good team - god knows how terrible he''d have been at a Sunderland or similar.

The fact a 35 year old version of him was top scorer tells you all you need to know.

Literally, all this does is reaffirm the fact he was no where near good enough for us, or for any of the higher leagues in europe.

[king canary 7,580]

Kuyt scored those goals in his prime in a team with Gerrard, Torres and Alonso. He is now 35.

You could also mention the fact Luuk de Jong (no goals in 12 games for Newcastle) managed 26 goals last season. It isn''t a difficult league to score in.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="king canary"]Kuyt scored those goals in his prime in a team with Gerrard, Torres and Alonso. He is now 35.

You could also mention the fact Luuk de Jong (no goals in 12 games for Newcastle) managed 26 goals last season. It isn''t a difficult league to score in.[/quote]

Fair enough.  Sounds like an attractive league to go and watch, plenty of goals!

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="hogesar"]Dirk Kuyt was average in the Prem in a good team[/quote]No, he wasn''t bloody average FFS.08/09 - 12 goals, the same as Lampard and Rooney (I suppose they were average in good teams as well?), with only 5 players scoring more - Anelka, C.Ronaldo, Gerrard, Torres & Robinho10/11 - 13 goals and again only 5 players scored more - Tevez, Berbatov, Van Persie, Bent & Odemwingie - not to mention that he also outscored the likes of  Rooney, Drogba, Lampard & Torres that season - I guess they''re just $hit players aren''t they, if a bang average player like Kuyt can outscore them...Now taking these factors into account, how the f**k can you call a player average, when they''ve outscored all but the top 5 scorers in each of those seasons, not to mention scoring almost as well in 2 other seasons to boot!?!?!?I can quite happily accept that the Dutch league is not a good league, and that many players can perform well over there and flop over here, but let''s not make up BS or claim players were $hit when they weren''t just to try to argue a point that doesn''t exist. Kuyt was a highly committed player, who scored well in the prem, and I don''t think I''ve ever seen someone with his energy and work rate in all the time I''ve been watching football, he''d have dug a tunnel all the way to Holland if his clubs had asked him to, and it''s frankly insulting to the guy to claim he was nothing special when he was a highly respected player, with highly respectable records alongside this.

[hogesar 9,618]

I don''t think he was sh*t. I still think in terms of the Premier League he was an average player for most of his time, with an above average work rate.

[Buh 0]

A player can score as many as he likes when he''s not playing for us it''s when he does play for us it matters.

[AJ 1,218]

To be fairer to his stats, Kuyt also played quite a bit as a winger as well, not necessarily as an out and out striker...

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="AJ"]To be fairer to his stats, Kuyt also played quite a bit as a winger as well, not necessarily as an out and out striker...[/quote]I wouldn''t bother trying AJ, if a player can be just outside the top 5 goalscorers in not just 1, but 2 and nearly 3 seasons, and STILL be regarded as bang average by someone, then the fact that they were also playing on the right wing will make jack all difference to the situation either.I can''t wait for next week''s thread - "Sergio Aguero, and why 20 goals a season in the prem means f**k all..."

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

A top level failure scores some goals in a poor league shocker.

RVW didn''t do it when it mattered in his career - in the best leagues in the world and that''s why he''s now scoring in a much lesser league.

Enough of the ''we didn''t play to his strengths'', good players will find a way whatever system they''re forced to play in. Holt did.

[king canary 7,580]

I think if you spoke to Liverpool fans most would praise Kuyt''s work rate as his main strength. I seem to remember they bought him as a striker initially and was seen as a bit of a flop and a joke for his poor finishing- he actually went nearly a year without a league goal.

He got lots better when switched to the right wing and did a great job becoming a bit of a cult hero. He was good but never the star in that team.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

I think Dirk Kuyt was a better player than some give him credit for, quietly went about his business for Liverpool but certainly effective.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

He''s 35 Indy. What relevance is bringing up goalscoring stats from 6-7 years ago?

[westcoastcanary 173]

I simply can''t understand the venom directed at RVW. He is an honest guy who had the misfortune to be transferred to a club for which he was unsuited, by a club he had served well but which was in dire straits financially and desperately needed cash (which we were unique in offering). The transfer obviously couldn''t have happened without RVW agreeing to come, but the pressure on him was considerable and, in the event, career-wise, a disaster for him. Despite all of which the guy always did his best, maintained dignified silence and generally behaved impeccably. He deserves better than the belittlement and scorn he gets from some.

[hogesar 9,618]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]I simply can''t understand the venom directed at RVW. He is an honest guy who had the misfortune to be transferred to a club for which he was unsuited, by a club he had served well but which was in dire straits financially and desperately needed cash (which we were unique in offering). The transfer obviously couldn''t have happened without RVW agreeing to come, but the pressure on him was considerable and, in the event, career-wise, a disaster for him. Despite all of which the guy always did his best, maintained dignified silence and generally behaved impeccably. He deserves better than the belittlement and scorn he gets from some.[/quote]

What ''venom''?

All i''ve seen is people judge his football ability. Which, after the failure he''s been for us, and during his loan spells whilst under contract with us, is more than understandable.

I''m sure he''s a lovely bloke, never met him but no reason to think otherwise. Do I think he''s a pretty awful footballer though? Yep.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

''Venom'' is an interesting term, something I''d associate more with Crotalus atrox, but I think a few will understand where WestCoastCanary is coming from, Hog. He was roundly taken the p155 out of, at certain games he was sarcastically applauded when he passed the ball/took a shot, not a very nice thing to do to ''one of our own''. But agreed, he didn''t appear to possess the necessary psychological strength to overcome such pressure and adversity unfortunately - and for me, therein lies the difference between a top sportsman and an average one. Wish him well, and certainly never took the Michael out of him, he just didn''t work out for us sadly and we''ve now moved on (sort of 😉).

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="westcoastcanary"]I simply can''t understand the venom directed at RVW. He is an honest guy who had the misfortune to be transferred to a club for which he was unsuited, by a club he had served well but which was in dire straits financially and desperately needed cash (which we were unique in offering). The transfer obviously couldn''t have happened without RVW agreeing to come, but the pressure on him was considerable and, in the event, career-wise, a disaster for him. Despite all of which the guy always did his best, maintained dignified silence and generally behaved impeccably. He deserves better than the belittlement and scorn he gets from some.[/quote]

What ''venom''?

All i''ve seen is people judge his football ability. Which, after the failure he''s been for us, and during his loan spells whilst under contract with us, is more than understandable.

I''m sure he''s a lovely bloke, never met him but no reason to think otherwise. Do I think he''s a pretty awful footballer though? Yep.

[/quote]

Not so, westcoast. The Norwich move wasn''t a disaster for his career unless you mean it showed he was nowhere near talented enough for a top-five league and should have stayed in Portugal.

He was given a chance to repair any damage to his career in France, and if he had been any good that would have worked. But, as pointed out earlier, after a productive autumn, which will have restored his confidence (IF that had been the sole problem) the manifest flaws in his game meant he ended up as an unused sub.

Another start, with a clean slate, in Spain, and the same end result. I would go along with Hogesar''s ''pretty awful footballer''. He really was not very good. That was why his career has taken the trajectory it has. His time at Norwich Ciry was a symptom of his uselessness and not the cause.

Nor, despite what you have said, did he stay silent. During that - for him - hot spell at St-Etienne he made the mistake of giving an overconfident interview in which he was critical of pretty much everything to do with his time at Norwich City, apart from admitting it was a nice place to live. It made increasingly hilarious reading as he slipped towards the subs'' bench.

As for ''venom'' I think posters would be less critical if the diehards still trying to make a case for van Wolfswinkel didn''t talk about him in maudlin terms usually reserved for some departed dumb animal.

He is a professional footballer and as such I have no qualms about belittling his professional abilities.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

To a large extent I think it''s about expectations.  He was our record signing and brought in to replace an all-time legend.  We were told what a great deal it was that the club had been able to land him, how clever we''d been to wrap up the deal by getting him signed well before the end of the season.  I can''t ever remember a signing who was so eagerly anticipated (not comparing him with signing Huckerby ,where we knew he was a great player from the way he''d played already for us on loan, but most of us didn''t believe we''d actually be able to sign him). All the publicity in the close season club material was focused on RVW. 

 

So it was reasonable for us fans who''d never seen him play, to take it on faith that he was indeed a top player and just what we needed up front.  We weren''t to know that actually he was completely the wrong sort of player for the style of play we used, and in my opinion, not suited to the Prem anyway.  But the resulting disillusion is so much greater because he was expected to be so great.  And when he lost his confidence towards the end of that season, his performance dropped to worse than he was capable of.

 

It''s not an attitude I share and I don''t like it, but I can understand some fans ending up feeling angry towards RVW.  After all, if we''d bought someone who could replace Holt that season, we''d probably have stayed up.  That''s not RVW''s fault but it''s understandable some fans taking it out on him. 

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Hank shoots Skyler"]He''s 35 Indy. What relevance is bringing up goalscoring stats from 6-7 years ago?[/quote]Maybe you should try reading the thread and you should already know the answer, but to clarify:[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]Let''s put this in context - Dirk Kuyt was

the leading scorer in the division last season and his record over here

wasn''t overly brilliant.[/quote]So in response to the BS statement that Kuyt''s record in the prem wasn''t great, I used the relevant data from his time in the prem to show otherwise.It''s called providing factual data to backup an opinion, sadly the vast majority of posters on here can''t manage the former yet have the latter in spades...

[hogesar 9,618]

Again Purple, thanks.

Think I might leave this whole ''words'' thing to you from now on and just become an avid reader [:D]

[westcoastcanary 173]

"A pretty awful footballer" is not a balanced assessment of RVW. "Not good enough for a top five European league" is something most would probably now agree with, but are we to describe every player not good enough by that criterion as "pretty awful"? Puts the great majority of Championship players in their place for sure. And if so, I wonder what people would feel about having a similar yardstick applied to themselves in their own particular walk of life. I imagine it would leave many of those critical of RVW tarred with an even worse brush.

[hogesar 9,618]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]"A pretty awful footballer" is not a balanced assessment of RVW. "Not good enough for a top five European league" is something most would probably now agree with, but are we to describe every player not good enough by that criterion as "pretty awful"? Puts the great majority of Championship players in their place for sure. And if so, I wonder what people would feel about having a similar yardstick applied to themselves in their own particular walk of life. I imagine it would leave many of those critical of RVW tarred with an even worse brush.[/quote]

It''s balanced. Balanced against what I saw with my own eyes, week in and week out. Then only reaffirmed by reports on his loan spells.

As for my own particular walk of life? I''ve written rubbish software. I''ve been told my rubbish software was f*cking rubbish. So I worked on it. I was then told my software was no longer rubbish.

[Big Vince 318]

[quote user="Jools"]Okay, I''ll bite...This club wastes a lot of money and makes poor decisions - such is the state of the modern game we''re hardly alone.£250,000 per week for Pogba [:(]

NEXT!!![/quote]

This is precisely why you need to have the best academy in the country so that you don''t have to rely on the transfer market that contains all the wasters who just come for the money.

Norwich City have spent £19 million on Naismith, Canos and Pritchard. Are any of them pulling up trees for the club at the minute?

But the boy Jacob however...................

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="hogesar"]It''s balanced. Balanced against what I saw with my own eyes, week in and week out.[/quote]Should have gone to Specsavers...If you couldn''t see the good runs he was making and the total lack of supply he was getting, then it''s pointless even trying to debate it with you Hog.The facts are simple, he was played in a totally unsuitable role, given little to no supply (of which most of it was useless to him), and then criticised for not being Holt (or a player like Carroll who WOULD have fitted Hughton''s dog$hit system). He made good runs, is a good finisher and was given virtually no chance to show it.Frankly, I''m just as sick of debating the subject as everyone else, but I''m not going to see a professional player who did his best for us despite the dire position we put him in, slandered for no good reason, especially when it was blindingly obvious that neither he, nor Hooper suited the system, yet both got blamed for underperforming instead of the clueless tw@ who orchestrated it...

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="hogesar"]It''s balanced. Balanced against what I saw with my own eyes, week in and week out.[/quote]Should have gone to Specsavers...If you couldn''t see the good runs he was making and the total lack of supply he was getting, then it''s pointless even trying to debate it with you Hog.The facts are simple, he was played in a totally unsuitable role, given little to no supply (of which most of it was useless to him), and then criticised for not being Holt (or a player like Carroll who WOULD have fitted Hughton''s dog$hit system). He made good runs, is a good finisher and was given virtually no chance to show it.Frankly, I''m just as sick of debating the subject as everyone else, but I''m not going to see a professional player who did his best for us despite the dire position we put him in, slandered for no good reason, especially when it was blindingly obvious that neither he, nor Hooper suited the system, yet both got blamed for underperforming instead of the clueless tw@ who orchestrated it...[/quote]

What was it you said about the vast majority of posters not being able to use facts to back up their opinions? The fact is that in three different leagues under three different managers van Wolfswinkel scored just seven goals in 69 or 70 (there are differing statistics) matches. That is one goal every 10 games, give or take.

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="westcoastcanary"]"A pretty awful footballer" is not a balanced assessment of RVW. "Not good enough for a top five European league" is something most would probably now agree with, but are we to describe every player not good enough by that criterion as "pretty awful"? Puts the great majority of Championship players in their place for sure. And if so, I wonder what people would feel about having a similar yardstick applied to themselves in their own particular walk of life. I imagine it would leave many of those critical of RVW tarred with an even worse brush.[/quote]

It''s balanced. Balanced against what I saw with my own eyes, week in and week out. Then only reaffirmed by reports on his loan spells.

As for my own particular walk of life? I''ve written rubbish software. I''ve been told my rubbish software was f*cking rubbish. So I worked on it. I was then told my software was no longer rubbish.

[/quote]But what league are you in hog? [;)]