Naismith & Jerome = Consistent Failure

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="king canary"]@ldc

Movement is fine but you do have to do something when you get the ball.

Watkins moved well but as soon as he got the ball all Sunderland had to do was apply some pressure and he was easily knocked off the ball. If we''re keeping this formation I''d like to see Nelson and Jerome together at some point to give us more physicality up front to hold it up and to link the play with midfield.[/quote]I didn''t focus that much on Watkins, but I watched Naismith quite closely against Sunderland - Maddison was easy to appreciate, but watching Naismith led me to think he was fulfilling instructions very well - excellent movement into gaps and spaces and some very good passing - and for large parts of the match the link up play was good. It''s still early days this season and although many will have seen more of Naismith than me, on Sunday''s performance, I would say he is doing ok.  We need to make more chances, but Maddison is a bit of a playmaker and he will more likely be the main creator of chances - or Wes or Vrancic.  Naismith will more likely be the foil and part of what makes the team tick.  I didn''t see a player lacking in fitness or legs - quite the opposite, although as the match wore on I think he got a bit frustrated and less effective. 

[Indy 3,300]

Well Lakey you saw a different Naismith to me, his move,net was 5 yards and stop, not to mention their second goal, he stood off their player, who got the square ball and even then was slow to get any challenge in before he hit that ball......it''s not like it was a snap shot, Naismith was lacklustre in that tackle!

Still we all see things differently....... :-)

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Indy"]Well Lakey you saw a different Naismith to me, his move,net was 5 yards and stop, not to mention their second goal, he stood off their player, who got the square ball and even then was slow to get any challenge in before he hit that ball......it''s not like it was a snap shot, Naismith was lacklustre in that tackle!

Still we all see things differently....... :-)[/quote]For the second goal, I thought Naismith did his best to get across.  What bothered me more about that goal was that no defender in front of McGeady anticipated the danger and rush out to get in the way of the shot - and there were plenty of defenders there....one of them had to take responsibility.

[Indy 3,300]

But it was Naismith''s player he left move across and he was so slow to react, he did have time to dive in, he didn''t just made a half arsed challenge.

Like I said I can appreciate you see it differently.

I''d drop him tomorrow and in his place start with Vrancic, Wes & Oliviera for Jerome, Naismith and Watkins.

I''d consider pushing Wes, Maddison and Wids just behind Oliviera and Reed / Vrancic just in front of a back four. Just my opinion.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Fair enough Indy, it will be interesting to see what Farke does.

[Indy 3,300]

I suppose I have a negative on Naismith and he''s got to do much more to get me onside given his transfer & wage, so I admit on being harsh.

Wilds has changed my opinion, he''s now looking like the player I thought he would be, great to see him looking good.

As for Farke I think he''ll persist with three at the back two wing backs and right.y so, he''s our manager, I''m just a fan with an opinion. :-)

[king canary 7,606]

@indy

It''s funny I''d say Wildschut showed me nothing I didn''t already know on sunday- he can run fast with the ball but has no end product or vision. His crossing was woeful (twice he basically side footed a cross to the keeper at the near post).

[king canary 7,606]

@ldc

I guess in some ways I need to let go of the amount Naismith has and is still costing us. Just for that amount of money I''d expect something more than essentially an average central midfielder giving 6/7 out of 10 performances.

He was OK against Sunderland but if that''s all he''s going to be I''d get shot.

[Baldyboy 0]

I actually thought those two crosses were in the right place if we had a striker who could attack the near post but sadly on too many occasions on Sunday players either put balls in or looked up ready to cross and there was nobody in the box because we don''t get forward quickly enough!

[Indy 3,300]

Again it''s all about what we see and expect, Wilds hit the box and got into a position to do so. Yes I''d like to see more from him, but I''d like to see more from all our players to be honest.

[The gut 0]

I''m in tune with you Indy. All my chat at work today has been about how poor Naismith is. I''d love it if he proved me wrong. But so far he is dreadful. It''s like we still talk about him as if he''s new and will settle in soon. He''s been here 18 months. Had what? 2 good games, and one of them was his debut? I have absolutely no doubt he was to blame for their second. That was a glory boy in a Sunday league side the way he sauntered across and put in such a half hearted attempt to stop the player from getting a shot off. That was a disgrace. What added to the disgrace was how he told nearly every other player how, when and where they should''ve played the ball or moved to. Especially when he gets it wrong more than most. At the moment he is nothing more than a gobsh1te.

[daly 501]

Would imagine Sunderland are pleased they didn''t invest 8 million in him

We''re stuck with another Jarvis

[Matt Morriss 69]

Last night proved exactly my issues with Jerome and especially Naismith.

Vrancic and Wes played very well and showed exactly what an Attacking Midfielder should do.

Naismith should take note.

As for Oliveira, well we all know about him and he''s a far better option than Jerome. He''s a constant goal threat.

[hogesar 9,673]

Vrancic had a poorer first half than Naismith did against Sunderland. Was better second half though.

As for Oliveira, great finish but ''far better option '' is simply not true and the stats show it too. Oliveira seems in the right frame of mind and is working hard so deserves his place at the moment but Jerome is quicker, stronger and works harder for the team generally.

[Guest]

Oliveira is clearly the better finisher, and has more poise/calmness than Jerome when in front of goal.

However, I thought his all round play was mostly dreadful last night; too many flicked passes out of play/to the opposition, really poor crossing, and struggled to hold the ball up.

He''s got to be in the team, but I''m not sure he''s that well suited to the lone striker role. Yes, he was isolated last night, but he seemed to choose the wrong option time and time again.

I would like to see both him and Jerome in the same line-up.

[king canary 7,606]

@Hoegsar

Nelson is a much better option for the way Farke seems to want to play. His touch, close control, interplay and general hold up are far superior to Jerome''s which suits the more intricate play around the box we seem to favour and allows him to bring more out of Wes, Maddison and others.

I agree about the speed and work rate (although Nelson isn''t a slouch) but strength wise there isn''t much in it. Nelson is also a far superior finisher.

[hogesar 9,673]

Completely disagree about the first bit. Other than maybe his first touch Oliveira does little for the attacking mids and this was massively reflected last season when you saw Jeromes assist tally vs Oliveiras...which was 0.

Jerome is just as good at holding the ball up and if anything his unselfish attitude means the ball sticks up top longer as he waits for support in comparison to Oliviera who on a couple of occasions tried to run through 5 players and we immediately conceded possession.

Its those reasons why i think youll find Jerome and Oliviera get about the same match time this season.

[king canary 7,606]

Assists seems an odd stat to pull out- it''s always a bit of a nothing stat and there is far more to link up play than just that.

Statistically Jerome had the worst pass completion rate of any outfield player last season (64%) while Nelson sat at 77%, so is far more likely to find a team mate than Jerome.

Jerome is definitely more selfless that Nelson but I don''t think selfishness is a bad trait in your striker (within limits obviously). A few of Nelson''s goals came from ''selfish'' efforts from outside the area.

Finally the most obvious stat that suggests Nelson might be a better fit for the style of play is the fact he''s managed 2 goals in 3 league games despite only starting once, compared to Jerome having got no goals in those same three games.