Goal scorers 2006-07

[Salopian 1]

It''s depressing reading, and perhaps a reflection of having to play 4-5-1 because we have no fit and effective strikers, to look at the list:Earnshaw 13Etuhu 4Huckerby 3Croft 2Jarvis 2The season is very nearly half over. Ernie''s total is good - nobody could grumble at 25+  in a season, although  a few of these were penalties, and he has missed quite a few. The problem is among the support scorers. Dickson is so-so, but if he could make it 12 in the season rather than 8 it would be useful.You would have to say that Hux is not scoring as many as he used to, and 3 in half a season is not good. He is a major disappointment.Croft could have scorerd a few more, but for a lack of steadiness in front of goal. He did have a quiet start to the season, as he built up his fitness, and he is now injured. Chadwick looked as if he could score a few, so things may improve there.The worrying thing is how unlikely we have looked to score at all in many games. Take away the hatful against 10 man Barnsley, and 3 against Luton and Leicester, and we are struggling to score an average of one per game. Whatever happens in the January transfer window, we must somehow produce more goal power. This surely means 4-4-2, which means discovering a striker or two, and more power from the midfield. Perhaps players like Koumas don''t grow on trees, but we need to find a midfield player who can score 10+ in a full season and who can cause problems by his presence around the penalty area and in taking free kicks. We now have two good right wingers and we have Eagle as a Hux deputy on the left. Now we need better service to Ernie and a fellow striker to share the main scoring burden.

[Regime Change 0]

They are very worrying statistics, but, not that surprising since we only really have one prolific striker at the club.  It makes you wonder why signing a striker pre-season or on loan does not seem to have been more of a priority.  It''s even more worrying since it is fairly inevitable that Earnshaw will leave in January. 

Hopefully Chadwick will be scoring for us on a regular basis, but, the figures show that a striker and midfielder need to be at the top of Grant''s shopping list in January.

[Syteanric 1]

in the 1998- 1999 season we scored a  total of 43 goals... Iwan Roberts got 19 of them.... without the Big Fella we would of been well and Truly screwed. having scored just 24 goals...

 without Earnshaw we''d be relegated already.

jas :)

[GMF 736]

I think you''re dead right with many of your points. Any team with ambitions to finish at the top of the Championship needs a pair of strikers who are going to get 35  to 40 goals between them. You need a midfield to chip in 15 to 20 goals and another 10 from your back four.

We''re, sadly, no where near that and a big striker is a must come January if we''re going to get anywhere near the play-offs.

[nutty nigel 7,510]

Good post Salopian, those figures just show how well Earnshaw has done and how much trouble we would be in without his goals.

Consider this : Huckerby 5, Francis 5, Svennson 3, Bentley 1, Charlton 1, Doherty 1, Jarvis 1, McKenzie 1, McVeigh 1.

Those are the 19 goals in the 22 Premiership games before we finally signed Dean Ashton. That left us 16 games to get out of trouble.

With Ashton we got 23 goals in those last 16 games: Ashton 7, McKenzie 6, Francis 2, Bentley 1, Doherty 1, Drury 1, Fleming 1, Huckerby 1, Safri 1, Svennson 1  and OG 1.

Those figures show why I still believe we would have stayed up if we had signed Ashton before the August window closed.

 But we have learned nothing because we did the same thing last transfer window in failing to bring in a target man. The situation was then made worse by Leon McKenzie leaving as the window closed and us being unable to bring in a replacement until Dion came. Bad luck through injuries mean even he is playing in defence now!

Steve Howard has scored nine for Derby, your list would look good if we had them!

 

[ZLF 271]

In most games we have fewer chances, have fewer shots at goal and force fewer saves than our own defence faces.   Take out Earnies efforts (among the top three in the league) b and then think how much worse off we would be.

It all comes down to the midfield again.  Too defencive in its deployment,  too woeful with its passing to kep possession and create chances, even hux isnt getting the chance to score.  

We look good when the midfield get forward;  sadly that doesnt happen enough.   4-5-1 has to be abandoned, use a proper 4 man midfield without hux and get the ball passing on the ground.  With safri in teh middle against leicester we saw it work;  sadly he wouldnt drop Hughes because of his good efforts at left back nor robbo because of his good display too - but as with the last time we played a 5 man midfield (portaloo rd) with hughes and robbo we looked ineffectual - PG has to learn from that.

Its not the personnel - its the style of play we are seeing,. 

[shyster 0]

Starting on the 23rd of December against Wolves we have four fixtures in 10 days and if we seriously want to go into the second half of the season with promotion hopes, then surely it''s imperative for Grant to get a loan forward in within the next couple of weeks as it''s blatantly obvious he doesn''t rate Thorne or Jarvis.

If we continue to play 4-5-1 through the Christmas period I''m adamant the season will be as good as over for us.

I realise that getting loan players is difficult at this time of the year, but surely there''s a suitable candidate warming a bench with something to prove out there somewhere?

[ZLF 271]

The loan window period is shut until Jan 2 (closed Nov 23rd) - so we have to play those games with the forwards we have in the squad now

[Baldyboy 0]

you have all missed the most obvious thing: if you dont shoot you wont score. it is about time we started shooting then we may score more!

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="baldyboy"]you have all missed the most obvious thing: if you dont shoot you wont score. it is about time we started shooting then we may score more![/quote]

Absolutely brilliant, come on you fools why didn''t anybody else think of this ?

[chicken 0]

In all fairness it is simply down to formation. No other striker has been given more than two games this season to try and score goals and with the way things are its not exactly easy for them. Its only because Earnshaw is so good that he has scored that many because the service to him has not always been as reliable as his shooting.

[nutty nigel 7,510]

OK,  I''m gonna be statto again! [8-|]

We have had 232 attempts on goal this season 114 of which were on target. Over 1/3 of these were by Earnshaw.

Compare this with the top six: Birmingham 229 (118), Preston 253 (112), Cardiff 224 (101), Derby 249 (129), Southampton 317 (161), Burnley 226 (127).

Now think about this: 10 games under Worthington 134 (60). Ten games under Grant 86 (50).

And consider the attempts on goal against us: Ten games under NW 121. Ten games under PG 134.

These stats should make interesting points for discussion. For me they show how important Earnie is for us. That we don''t have any less goal attempts than the team leading the division. And they bear out ZLF''s prediction that Southampton are the most likely to win this league.

We have had considerably fewer attempts on goal under Grant than Worthington which would suggest we have been a tighter side and yet we have had MORE attempts at goal against us. Could it be the loss of Croft has made a huge difference?

Anyone else got any thoughts?[I]

 

[Anderz 0]

I posted something about this last week. Compared to the top 6 sides (last week anyway...) our scoring record isn''t too bad. And most of the other top 6 sides have one player who''s taken on the role of lead goalscorer.

see: http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/810953/ShowPost.aspx 

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

OK,  I''m gonna be statto again! [8-|]

We have had 232 attempts on goal this season 114 of which were on target. Over 1/3 of these were by Earnshaw.

Compare this with the top six: Birmingham 229 (118), Preston 253 (112), Cardiff 224 (101), Derby 249 (129), Southampton 317 (161), Burnley 226 (127).

Now think about this: 10 games under Worthington 134 (60). Ten games under Grant 86 (50).

And consider the attempts on goal against us: Ten games under NW 121. Ten games under PG 134.

These stats should make interesting points for discussion. For me they show how important Earnie is for us. That we don''t have any less goal attempts than the team leading the division. And they bear out ZLF''s prediction that Southampton are the most likely to win this league.

We have had considerably fewer attempts on goal under Grant than Worthington which would suggest we have been a tighter side and yet we have had MORE attempts at goal against us. Could it be the loss of Croft has made a huge difference?

Anyone else got any thoughts?[I]

 

[/quote]

Eanrie could have 232 shots in 1 game and still only score once!

jas :)

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

OK,  I''m gonna be statto again! [8-|]

We have had 232 attempts on goal this season 114 of which were on target. Over 1/3 of these were by Earnshaw.

Compare this with the top six: Birmingham 229 (118), Preston 253 (112), Cardiff 224 (101), Derby 249 (129), Southampton 317 (161), Burnley 226 (127).

Now think about this: 10 games under Worthington 134 (60). Ten games under Grant 86 (50).

And consider the attempts on goal against us: Ten games under NW 121. Ten games under PG 134.

These stats should make interesting points for discussion. For me they show how important Earnie is for us. That we don''t have any less goal attempts than the team leading the division. And they bear out ZLF''s prediction that Southampton are the most likely to win this league.

We have had considerably fewer attempts on goal under Grant than Worthington which would suggest we have been a tighter side and yet we have had MORE attempts at goal against us. Could it be the loss of Croft has made a huge difference?

Anyone else got any thoughts?[I]

 

[/quote]

Just one thought Nutty.......that is an awesome piece of work!..........[Y]

[nutty nigel 7,510]

Hey cluck ... Nice to see you here [:)] did ya get lost?? you don''t usually venture onto these football threads [:O]

Sometimes I come away from matches perplexed at what I have seen. Then I read these boards and get more confused. Then read match reports and articles and become even more confused and doubt the evidence of my own eyes. To check the stats can sometimes clear up some of the confusion.

I first did this when a poster on here slated Craig Fleming as the weakest link in our defence. I wanted to prove him wrong. But what I found was that he was right and I was wrong. I found that our first choice back four was quite solid but whenever Fleming was introduced we leaked goals bigtime.

I am still confused by the stats that say we have had 48 less attempts on goal under Peter Grant and yet more shots on our goal in his 10 games. Apart from losing Lee Croft through injury, do you have any ideas what other reasons there could be for this??

Stats can be misleading but if these are to be taken at face value then the entertainment levels have dropped since Grant took over. Which is something that I had noticed when watching games. I put this down to the new manager trying to tighten up our defence first,  but as yet the stats don''t back this up either.

 

 

 

 

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Hey cluck ... Nice to see you here [:)] did ya get lost?? you don''t usually venture onto these football threads [:O]

Sometimes I come away from matches perplexed at what I have seen. Then I read these boards and get more confused. Then read match reports and articles and become even more confused and doubt the evidence of my own eyes. To check the stats can sometimes clear up some of the confusion.

I first did this when a poster on here slated Craig Fleming as the weakest link in our defence. I wanted to prove him wrong. But what I found was that he was right and I was wrong. I found that our first choice back four was quite solid but whenever Fleming was introduced we leaked goals bigtime.

I am still confused by the stats that say we have had 48 less attempts on goal under Peter Grant and yet more shots on our goal in his 10 games. Apart from losing Lee Croft through injury, do you have any ideas what other reasons there could be for this??

Stats can be misleading but if these are to be taken at face value then the entertainment levels have dropped since Grant took over. Which is something that I had noticed when watching games. I put this down to the new manager trying to tighten up our defence first,  but as yet the stats don''t back this up either.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

That was hurtful Nutty...and after I''d been so complimentary to you as well..................[:)]