Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Mullet said:

Settle at what? The football pitch is the same as always and the ball is ball and his job is to kick that that ball in the net. He knew that before he came, its his job. Why do you not accept some people having a degree of expectations. Are you concerned Hugill will read this and get upset. I'm bloody upset because he needs to pull his finger out

Settle at a new club with a new manager with new ideas and new teammates, it’s happened to many players over many years at many clubs and in most cases they have adapted given time particularly when proven at that level like Hugill. Frustrating of course as supporters want players to hit the ground running but how it often works in the real world. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am inclined to agree with Mullet. We can overstate this need to settle in. It's part of the package needed to be a professional footballer and Wiki tells me that the move to Carrow Road was Hugill's 14th. of his career. He should be used to it by now.

There may be something in it, and adapting to the new environment is easier for some than others, so I do feel for the player but, at the same time,  I am inclined to have more sympathy for those German boys like Stiepperman, Zimmermann, Trybul and now Rupp who had far more adaption to do. Their's was a massive leap compared with Hugill's and it was easier to give them time.   

Dennis Sbreny had a hard time to begin with and was afforded less sympathy than Hugill by some. In the end I feel he was showing more than Hugill currently does.

Ron Davies, our ultimate target man, scored on his debut and kept on scoring for us from then onwards.

 

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hugill will now suffer from Steve Morison syndrome. That was that he wasn’t someone else. Grant Holt. 
 

Hugills problem is he isn’t Pukki. 
 

let the lad settle. It’s far to harsh to judge him on the few minutes he’s had. We all knew he would be back up to pukki or alongside. Let’s face it, the shape isn’t changing, so it’s going to be back up. 
 

a great option to have. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again if Hugill has had 14 clubs in 12 seasons it indicates he doesn’t settle in very well! Maybe there’s an underlying issue which brings into question why was Hugill the best we could bring into the club?

I’ve really not seen any quality in any part of his game so far, could well see a couple new strikers in January and Hugill down the pecking order looking for club number 15. Or he could surprise us and find his touch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Srbeny seemed to fit our system better and had a better touch.

Still early days for Hugill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we have to give Hugill time to settle. Iwan was the great case of that. I'm not convinced our style of play suits Hugill, but you aren't an awful player as some are saying on here, and still score as many goals as he did last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CUSDP said:

Hugill will now suffer from Steve Morison syndrome. That was that he wasn’t someone else. Grant Holt. 
 

Hugills problem is he isn’t Pukki. 
 

let the lad settle. It’s far to harsh to judge him on the few minutes he’s had. We all knew he would be back up to pukki or alongside. Let’s face it, the shape isn’t changing, so it’s going to be back up. 
 

a great option to have. 

Thats not a good comparison at all.

Morison actually came in, played well and scored goals- he was proper competition for Holt and some didn't like it as they didn't think Morison worked as hard.

Hugill has come in and shown, certainly in our system so far, that he is a solid notch below Pukki and doesn't look like much of a plan b.

I get he may settle and improve but we're over 25% of the way through the league season, its perfectly fair to offer an opinion on a player at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope he settles in shortly although I always thought his signing was a little odd as he just sticks out as a player who doesn’t really fit into the way we play.

if he is now injured though, I don’t see that we can do anything but bring Drmic back into the squad. This run of games is hectic and even if Pukki manages to get through them he will be shot by Xmas. The young lad is a great option too but I don’t think you can start with him where as you can Drmic.

you never know sometimes these things happen and if Drmic rolls a few in early then we have another option that we hadn’t planned for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well West Ham (David Moyes) reportedly paid Preston £10m for Hugill.

This suggests that there's more to his game than we have witnessed, even though his stay at the Hammers was brief. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CUSDP said:

Hugill will now suffer from Steve Morison syndrome. That was that he wasn’t someone else. Grant Holt. 
 

Hugills problem is he isn’t Pukki. 
 

let the lad settle. It’s far to harsh to judge him on the few minutes he’s had. We all knew he would be back up to pukki or alongside. Let’s face it, the shape isn’t changing, so it’s going to be back up. 
 

a great option to have. 

Re. the bit in bold, the same problem also applied to Srbeny and Drmic. Pukki really did hit the ground running, but the team is built around him. Hugill's a plan B striker. He's better at attacking balls played across, not holding balls up.

Think Lukaku. Get him running onto crosses and he's a completely different player compared to when you ask him to hold it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hugill is performing exactly as I expected he would, which is not pleasant because as a fan you really want to be proved wrong about players you don't rate and hope they come good, but I've literally seen NOTHING from him to suggest he's even a decent champs striker, looks more like league 1/2 level at present.

No pace, not strong enough, awful first touch and simply isn't on the same wavelength as the rest of the team. Now of course, the last part can and should develop over time, but at present we're left desperately hoping that Pukki not only stays fit, but continues his form, because if we have to rely on Hugill at the moment, then things look grim from a striker perspective.

There's a reason he's jumped round clubs so much and a reason why he was relatively cheap, and it's not because he's a solid 15-20 goal a season striker at this level.

Can't fault his effort or work rate, and I have nothing personal against the guy, but as a player he just doesn't do it for me, and he isn't doing it for the club since he arrived either.

Losing Idah for 10+ weeks is a massive blow, because I'd much rather he'd have been given the chances than Hugill tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bill said:

the good news is there is money to strengthen in January

and if scoring might not be our strongest point then we don't look like we need to score a hatful to compensate for a previous sieve like defence

Is there? We may have enough for a back up centre half but not a proven goalscorer. Unless of course we sell someone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Indy_Bones said:

Losing Idah for 10+ weeks is a massive blow, because I'd much rather he'd have been given the chances than Hugill tbh.

The signing of Hugill didn't excite me at the time and so far I haven't seen anything to alter that judgement.

I would like to see him come good but I fail to see where his style ever fitted into the way we play, other than for a plan B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

Hugill is performing exactly as I expected he would, which is not pleasant because as a fan you really want to be proved wrong about players you don't rate and hope they come good, but I've literally seen NOTHING from him to suggest he's even a decent champs striker, looks more like league 1/2 level at present.

No pace, not strong enough, awful first touch and simply isn't on the same wavelength as the rest of the team. Now of course, the last part can and should develop over time, but at present we're left desperately hoping that Pukki not only stays fit, but continues his form, because if we have to rely on Hugill at the moment, then things look grim from a striker perspective.

There's a reason he's jumped round clubs so much and a reason why he was relatively cheap, and it's not because he's a solid 15-20 goal a season striker at this level.

Can't fault his effort or work rate, and I have nothing personal against the guy, but as a player he just doesn't do it for me, and he isn't doing it for the club since he arrived either.

Losing Idah for 10+ weeks is a massive blow, because I'd much rather he'd have been given the chances than Hugill tbh.

I'm with you, I never felt Hugill would set the world alight here and it always felt an odd signing.  I'm hoping he proves me wrong.  In his defence, it's not down to lack of effort, in fact I think at times he's trying too hard.  He is not exactly missing chance after chance either but I think therein lies the problem and to some extent, he's being set up fail.  I think back to an interview on BT Sport Webber gave before the Chelsea match early last season.  He was asked about Pukki and how his 30 goal season and good start to life in PL was a bit at odds with some of his career previously.  Webber stated that the scouting had identified that the type of goals he did score where similar to the majority of chances we had created in Farke's first season.  So basically, he slotted in like part of jigsaw puzzle.  I don't where Hugill fits in that jigsaw.  Just taking yesterdays game as example, I'm sure that most would agree that Buendia and Striepermann were the 2 most creative players we had on the pitch, neither of which are known for whipping in the early crosses from wide areas Hugill wants.  In fact, we don't have many players where you would say that's their strength.  Quintilla is probably the only player in our squad that is likely to put the ball in at even the slightest invitation.  The rest, not so much so.  We're now in Farke's fourth season and he's spent that time building a team that is prepared to be patient in possession and wait for the right opportunities.  In Farke's time, we have always been more creative through the middle.  I don't see how that suits Hugill's game.  I get that we needed a plan B but at the same time, you've got to be able to utilise what Hugill can do, rather than highlight his deficiencies and just play the same as if Pukki is up front.  It's kind of like swapping a petrol car for diesel but still insisting on filling it with petrol and wondering why it's not working. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking to a mate about this yesterday. On paper, I thought it was sensible to sign a 'Plan B' striker who's a proper target man, but the reality of Hugill's game has been underwhelming thus far. If you're going to have a big, strong striker who's maybe a little lacking in touch and pace, you at least want him to be an absolute bloody nuisance to defend against, in the Grant Holt mould. Hoping he improves as the season goes on, but at the moment he just doesn't look like he's posing defenders any problems at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

I was talking to a mate about this yesterday. On paper, I thought it was sensible to sign a 'Plan B' striker who's a proper target man, but the reality of Hugill's game has been underwhelming thus far. If you're going to have a big, strong striker who's maybe a little lacking in touch and pace, you at least want him to be an absolute bloody nuisance to defend against, in the Grant Holt mould. Hoping he improves as the season goes on, but at the moment he just doesn't look like he's posing defenders any problems at all.

I don't disagree with any of that. What I would say though is that if you want to get more out of Hugill, we need to play a bit more like we did against Derby. I think Hugill creates a problem because the way he want to play is at odds with how we actually play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Indy said:

Hugill reminds me of Iwan’s first season, he looked utterly lost, but look how he turned out.......saying that Hugill doesn’t look very good does he? But when a player has 14 clubs on his cv in 12 years you have to ask yourself why a Premiership relegated club bought him at 28 years old?

The trouble is Roberts had a history of scoring a copious amounts of goals at this level whereas Hugill has had one half decent season.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Indy_Bones said:

Hugill is performing exactly as I expected he would, which is not pleasant because as a fan you really want to be proved wrong about players you don't rate and hope they come good, but I've literally seen NOTHING from him to suggest he's even a decent champs striker, looks more like league 1/2 level at present.

No pace, not strong enough, awful first touch and simply isn't on the same wavelength as the rest of the team. Now of course, the last part can and should develop over time, but at present we're left desperately hoping that Pukki not only stays fit, but continues his form, because if we have to rely on Hugill at the moment, then things look grim from a striker perspective.

There's a reason he's jumped round clubs so much and a reason why he was relatively cheap, and it's not because he's a solid 15-20 goal a season striker at this level.

Can't fault his effort or work rate, and I have nothing personal against the guy, but as a player he just doesn't do it for me, and he isn't doing it for the club since he arrived either.

Losing Idah for 10+ weeks is a massive blow, because I'd much rather he'd have been given the chances than Hugill tbh.

I totally agree. I think the club have made a mistake here which is fair enough these things happen. But Hugill is a league 1, league 2 standard player not a championship team looking to win this league. We are in the driving seat here to get straight back into the premier league but Hugill is no back up to Pukki so we have one striker to get us promoted. I hope we can attract another striker in January because we desperately need it as Pukki can't do it alone. If we do get promoted with the team we have plus two viable alternative strikers to Pukki I think we'll establish there. January is now key and could define our future

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, seanthecanary said:

I don't disagree with any of that. What I would say though is that if you want to get more out of Hugill, we need to play a bit more like we did against Derby. I think Hugill creates a problem because the way he want to play is at odds with how we actually play. 

Yes, I agree with that. He'd probably be more effective if we had Onel and Placheta out wide pinging crosses in, but that isn't really how we roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

Yes, I agree with that. He'd probably be more effective if we had Onel and Placheta out wide pinging crosses in, but that isn't really how we roll.

I can only assume that the plan was to completely change the forward line depending on whether Pukki or Hugill were in the pitch. Like you say, if Hugill is on you play Argos and Placheta as conventional wingers getting wide, putting crosses in with Quintilla and Aarons overlapping and doing the same. Without Onel and Quintilla, that plan is out of the window. As well as Sorensen has played, he's not going to be pinging in early left footed crosses and Buendia/Cantwell are just not conventional wide players. 

In some ways I feel for Hugill because his strengths don't align with what our creative players do. Pukki and the runs he makes are a perfect fit for the type of passes the likes of Buendia and Stiepermann want to play. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all my criticism, I do hope he comes good because if he doesn't it could end up a costly mistake. If, and it's big if, we do get promoted it's my understanding that we have to pay West Ham another couple of million. If Hugill doesn't pick up for us we are left a £5 million player with little hope of stepping up to PL standards and has depreciated in value. The last thing we need is another expensive mistake that make the board baulk at spending 

Edited by seanthecanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Spillay said:

The classic case of a player who isnt playing suddenly becoming a better option when people were offering to drive him out of Norwich last season. Becchio anyone?

Sounds like you don't realise that Hugill and Idah are injured? 

So yes, people think Drmic may be a better option than the invisible man... we can't just have one striker.

It either has to be a kid from our youth team, Drmic or a free agent if there are any left. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, seanthecanary said:

For all my criticism, I do hope he comes good because if he doesn't it could end up a costly mistake. If, and it's big if, we do get promoted it's my understanding that we have to pay West Ham another couple of million. If Hugill doesn't pick up for us we are left a £5 million player with little hope of stepping up to PL standards and has depreciated in value. The last thing we need is another expensive mistake that make the board baulk at spending 

If we go up I don't think we need to worry too much about that £5m, sure Preston will give us £1m for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

Yes, I agree with that. He'd probably be more effective if we had Onel and Placheta out wide pinging crosses in, but that isn't really how we roll.

But we do usually have Xavi delivering some beautiful balls into the box. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Is there? We may have enough for a back up centre half but not a proven goalscorer. Unless of course we sell someone

How do you know? Lewis and Godfrey sales were not included in last accounting period. 

Gutted that we didn't sign Akpom for £2.7m instead, looked a decent player yesterday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

How do you know? Lewis and Godfrey sales were not included in last accounting period. 

Gutted that we didn't sign Akpom for £2.7m instead, looked a decent player yesterday. 

Because I looked at note18 to the accounts which details our forthcoming liabilities. As things stand and including the sales of Godfrey and Lewis we are about even. Covid is going to cost us a minimum of £25m over 2 seasons, probably more like £30m. And we lost £35m in the year to June 2019. We're not as bad as some clubs but Covid has had a dramatic effect 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Because I looked at note18 to the accounts which details our forthcoming liabilities. As things stand and including the sales of Godfrey and Lewis we are about even. Covid is going to cost us a minimum of £25m over 2 seasons, probably more like £30m. And we lost £35m in the year to June 2019. We're not as bad as some clubs but Covid has had a dramatic effect 

If Famewo continues in this form then we don't need the centre back that you mention. 

It would be Gibson and Famewo left side, Zimmermann and Hanley right back. 

The forthcoming liabilities were potential and a little ambiguous, they probably include fees that we'd have to pay for Gibson and Xavi if we succeeded in winning promotion this season. 

That said, I suspect if we do look for a striker it will be a loan with view to buy (or commitment to buy it we win promotion) unless we can magically get Drmic off the payroll in January.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, king canary said:

Thats not a good comparison at all.

Morison actually came in, played well and scored goals- he was proper competition for Holt and some didn't like it as they didn't think Morison worked as hard.

Hugill has come in and shown, certainly in our system so far, that he is a solid notch below Pukki and doesn't look like much of a plan b.

I get he may settle and improve but we're over 25% of the way through the league season, its perfectly fair to offer an opinion on a player at this point.

Whilst we may be over 25% of the season - Hugill has only notched 300 minutes - I would say any judgement at this stage is definitely premature. Doesnt escape the fact that so far he hasn't really delivered.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...