Jackson and team selection

[lake district canary 4,830]

Early in the season, the main problem we had in three matches - Liverpool, Fulham, Chelsea - was the defence.   Other than that the performances have been quite consistent - never losing a match by the odd goal and usually winning or drawing.  

The team selection, though, has become predictable.   Why?  Obviously because of results.    However, if you look at our performances, the problems we have had are less the defence - which is strong - it is more the link up play and final delivery from midfield.    There have been games where this has been fantastic -  first halves against Sunderland and Swansea for instance - but the inconsistency is there for all to see.   So regarding team selection, my contention is that we could afford to play two strikers again regularly, without compromising results.   Hoolahan has become a first choice player and there is no doubt he can deliver, but he is so frustrating sometimes.   Yesterday he could have put Jackson through - but delayed and then gave him a poor pass - but Jackson still turned it into a chance. 

The Liverpool game, where to many Jackson was the best player for us in the first half,  was a turning point - Hoolahan came on and Jackson hadn''t had much of a look in since (until yesterday).  Results were good and Morison (for reasons I don''t understand) became the first choice sub.  But Holt and Jackson up front still works for me - our best combination up front imo - but the rest of the team has to be right too.  

Have we put out a team where   the front four have been  Snodgrass Holt Jackson and Pilkington?    For me that has to be a good combination.  The first half against Liverpool was a turning point for Jackson - but has he been unlucky?     As a layman, my preferred line up would be -

              Bunn (Ruddy when fit)Whittaker, Turner, Bassong, Garrido           Tettey   JohnsonSnodgrass              Pilkington           Holt   JacksonHas this been tried?     Hoolahan has been deservedly in the team, but has my alternative been on the pitch?   To me it is obvious, play the team that gave us our ten match unbeaten run, but bring on Jackson for Hoolahan, not  Morison for Holt.  

[Mickdundee 0]

I''d like that lineup, with Benno an early sub(not gonna happen)

If things aren''t going so well

[AJ 1,358]

I''d like to see us drop Hoolahan too. He was oh so very poor yesterday, and it would have been nice to switch to 4-4-2 for the final 15 or so but no... The system was never going to get us a goal yesterday, switching to 4-4-2, bringing Benno on earlier and lumping it into the box might have.

[can u sit down please 0]

Sorry but Jackson just isn''t good enough. He''s a championship player at best as we saw in his purple patch TWO YRS AGO!

If any other forward went from fulham on nye to villa on the last game, without scoring they would have been crucified.

[Hannibal II 0]

Jackson is probably not good enough but that being said i don''t think we have played him in a formation to suit his strengths which are in behind and being a predator in the box not playing up front on his own doing all the leg work

[whoareyou? 0]

To succeed at being a quality Premier League striker i think you need to be more than a one-trick pony.Holty manages that just about but not sure many of the others do.

[lake district canary 4,830]

[quote user="can u sit down please"]Sorry but Jackson just isn''t good enough. He''s a championship player at best as we saw in his purple patch TWO YRS AGO!

If any other forward went from fulham on nye to villa on the last game, without scoring they would have been crucified.[/quote]

He scored against QPR and has only 5 starts this season.     5 goals in all competitions.    That people write him off beggars belief.    Many thought he was unlucky to be substituted against Liverpool.    The system may not suit him this season, but as he proved last season he does score when in an attacking line up - scored four from limited appearances last season.   

Yesterday he was not helped by his team mates with a lack of awareness of  the runs he makes and delaying passes.   So people have to have a scapegoat and Jackson is it for some people.    But  he has a role to play and i wouldn''t write him off, personally.    The squad is strong - and he is one of the reasons why it is strong. 

[Nexus_Canary 1,206]

To be fair we can not write Jackson off. To say he is not "Prem" standard is yet to be seen. He has not been given a decent chance and the chances he has had have seen him playing a role that is by no means his strongest !In a case of yesterday he did everything he possibly could and in fairness had a very good game. His movement was perfect, he utilised his pace and performed at least 3 delightfull flick and turn moves to release Wes or Snoddy. He is in fact getting better and better.To say he played badly when he was expected to win headers vs the Newcastle back two is frankly unfair. Its like sticking Ruddy in midfield and complaining about his passing ! The lone striker roll is not his preference.I would actually expect that if Hoots had taken off Wes for Holt and played 2 up or even told Jackson to sit up and Holty to float ( he does this anyway rather well ) we would have seen a goal yesterday.Jackson was limited by the performance of the team and the formation we played.I do sometimes wonder what game people were watching or what their expectations are. Never in 1,000,000 games will Jackson be able to play the lone striker roll. And never in 1,000,000 games will he be able to offer what Holt does ( or Moro for that matter ! ) in that roll.Hughton made the error yesterday. He should have started with Kane and Jackson or taken of Wes at half time. It was obvious that Wes was going to marked out yesterday and that Newcastle would defend all day long. As we saw our best chances were when we broke with pace against them. All 3 of these movements started with a Simeon Jackson flick and ended with Wes taking one touch to many !I just really really question Hughton''s ability to change the flow of a game or take a gamble. Perhaps in his mind and the greater scheme he is sat with a mathmatical magic number to hit (40) and feels he can get there with 1 point draws. Whatever the case I hope that once we are a) safe b ) established he decidedes to actually unleash his team. The fact he is more adventureous in cup games hints towards this being the truth.It just really confounds me how he bascially sets a plan up and does not waiver. One thing about the last bloke which I loved was his ability to see soemthing wasnt working and change it. Was this what actually made him so successfull with us ?

[ZLF 335]

Curious that 2 good premier league managers have deceided Jackson is a bit player for us yet he has not had his chance?     A prem player is not just about being on the pitch - he has to work and shine in training to earn pitch time;   clearly what he does there (and also on the pitch) is not impressive enough to force the managers to change their views.   

 

The same managers have valued Morison ahead of Jackson.    Who are we to argue with them?

 

 

[Baldyboy 1]

Jackson plays better off a big man like Holt which is why he should have brought Holt on for wes on Saturday and gone with 2 up front, it was Newcastles first clean sheet away on Saturday which tells me there defence wasnt tested enough

[Mickdundee 0]

Exactly this, even if he''s not going to get as many goals as holty he carries enough threat when we''re at home to occupy one of the centre backs. The game on Saturday was crying out for two up top, and until if/ when we sign another striker, then the best option is holt & Jackson

[GJP 79]

[quote user="AJ"]I''d like to see us drop Hoolahan too. He was oh so very poor yesterday, . [/quote]

Hoolahan had one of those games on Saturday where basically nothing went right for him but he never stopped trying and I think he''s bit unlucky to have someone calling for him to be dropped after only one performance when his use of the ball has really let him down.

 

[Graham Humphrey 13]

The thing with Hoolahan Saturday... yes it wasn''t his best match but let''s be fair, how much movement was there from the other players?  Who got forward to help him out?  Nobody, that''s who.  It''s not just him either - when one of our attacking players has the ball they need more help from the midfielders and just more movement generally.  Like in the first half, when Pilkington but in a few decent crosses in succession but there was nobody in the area to attack them.Sorry but Wes is still our best player.  He keeps the ball better than anybody else and can always make things happen even when having a bad day.  We need him on the pitch.  We have seen games like against Man City and West Ham where any chance of getting something from the match basically went up in smoke after we subbed him, because suddenly we lacked any ability to retain the ball.  At West Brom we took him off and barely had another attack all match and ended up losing to a late goal.  The only time we benfitted was at Everton but even that was more in spite of the subs than because of them.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]Sorry but Wes is still our best player.  He keeps the ball better than anybody else and can always make things happen even when having a bad day.  We need him on the pitch.[/quote]Well said that man. Prefering Jackson to Wes is laughable.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Drop Wes and bring in Jackson?

 

Really???

 

On what basis?