Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
raktoni

To all those saying we missed Holt....

Recommended Posts

raktoni wrote the following post at 10/02/2013 2:03 AM:

Please remind me how many goals he has this year and assists???

Becchio didnt play badly, we just dont play to the strikers strengths currently. No matter what striker we had they would would struggle to score with the way Chris Hughton plays. It is unfair to say becchio played badly he did just as much as Holt usually does and like Holt he didnt score because of a lack of service and ultimately a lack of attacking football.

Absolutely spot on, and what so many have been advocating for weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]We did miss Holt he is being asked to play in a different way and the number of chances being created is less. I am looking forward to seeing him and Becchio playing together[/quote]

This is exactly right. Holt is beign told try and creat space for the midfield to run into. GH used the word "Isolated" which he is. The lack of goals this year has a lot to do with the lack of chances; look at the headers scored from open play last year, and cast your mind back to how many chances we have created in the air from open play in the last four games.

Holt will get more goals, if he gets more chances and this will happen if he plays through the middle. Remember us all laughing at Nottingham Forest for playing him on the left wing? At least the Forest manager that made him do that has long gone...... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Becchio was not so bad. He was as much a threat as grant, we had more efforts on goal and the formation left becchio as isolated as grant has been.

Its the lack of attacking threat that is the problem, movement from the attackers and pace from midfield, not grant or becchio themselves. Saying we missed grant suggest becchio had a poor game - he did not and that suggestion is unfair on him.

with grant we are still 4 months since a prem home strikers goal, 11 prem games in total and 1 prem goal in 6 overall - that is with and without grant. As yesterdays attacking display was if anything better than most home games at least in terms of efforts on goal if not quality hwo can we have missed holt?

move the team 10-20 yards up pitch and get the midfield near whoever the striker is, add in movement and pace and we will score - sit deep and soak up pressure and we wont

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="raktoni"]and what exactly has Holt done in the last 8 games?[/quote]

If you went to the games you would see.

If you didn''t go you have an excuse.

If you went and still didn''t see then there is very little hope that you''ll ever understand anything about football.
[/quote]

This is as far as i got down this thread and basically it is ALL anyone needs to read about Holt and this team.

So i haven''t read any more lest i put my fist through my monitor at the latest clueless dumb@ss...!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holt (who clearly has his card marked by the Refs Assc) in a match with Webb as Ref...we could have had a TOTE for fouls against starting with the number 20 !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We still have no striker at the club who is as good as an in-form Grant Holt.

Rather than suggest that we don''t need him, or that he isn''t good enough, we should be supporting him and hoping that he can rediscover his goalscoring form.

Because I for one believe that his poor form is a result of a slight lack of confidence rather than a lack of desire.

If Grant can rediscover his form and start scoring again, especially in a 4-4-2, then his goals would keep us up.

I have a sneaky feeling that there are a few goals to come from Holt this season, and it wouldn''t surprise me if next season he has a stormer, because Hughton must surely be planning a return to two strikers at some point..... we have four at the club and a desire to sign Hooper in the summer.

For me he would flourish alongside somebody like Hooper, and may even flourish alongside Becchio or Kamara.

And let''s face it.... if we go for Becchio and Kamara, who better to come off the bench in the 70th minute than the man beast that is Grant Holt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree Singup... But do you really think that he would come on at 70 ?

Not sure if anyone has stats on (tactical) subs this year , have we made any changes before 75 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone who judges a striker on purley ''Goals and Assists'' is a compete moron and should be banned from writing on football forums.

Holt brings so much more to us than that, he is our first line of defense, he dicates our teams attacks, wins free kick after free kick and is our leader. We look so much weaker when he is on the pitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Step, well he has brought Holt on at 45 this season!

CDMullins, agree completely, especially as he has been stuck up front in a 4-5-1, but upon a return to a 4-4-2 it would be fair to start judging him more on goals. My very first post on this board a couple of weeks ago compared Holt to Davies, in the respect that Davies seldom reached double figures for Bolton in a 4-5-1 and even Drogba sometimes didn''t reach double figures as a lone striker.

I''d be expecting goals from him in a 4-4-2 though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="singupcarrowroad"]Step, well he has brought Holt on at 45 this season! CDMullins, agree completely, especially as he has been stuck up front in a 4-5-1, but upon a return to a 4-4-2 it would be fair to start judging him more on goals. My very first post on this board a couple of weeks ago compared Holt to Davies, in the respect that Davies seldom reached double figures for Bolton in a 4-5-1 and even Drogba sometimes didn''t reach double figures as a lone striker. I''d be expecting goals from him in a 4-4-2 though.[/quote]

Another good comparison team i''ve made before is with the Everton team that got to the Champs league in about 2005, with 1 up which resulted in a prolific midfield containing Osman, Cahill, Arteta and the like. The one up front was Marcus Bent and later Yakubu. Bent only ever got a handful of goals but he did the job of the lone front man effectively allowing the midfield to do their stuff. This is precisely what we were doing until the whole apple cart was upset by Holt doing his hamstring against Wigan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Suppose we could argue that Lambert didnt fancy Holty as a Lone either as Morro started a lot of the early games in that role. I agree in a 4-4-2 we will see a different Holty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4-5-1 isn''t working for us for a variety of reasons, with Holt''s unsuitability for the role being one of them.

Another reason is the lack of goals that come from Hoolahan, and in fact even Snodgrass and Pilkington from open play.

Of course the likes of Chelsea can play 4-5-1, they have always had a few prolific goalscoring midfielders (especially Lampard, more recently Mata).

Everton had Tim Cahill who scored almost 1 in 4, and Arteta who knew where the net was, even Leon Osman can crack them in from 30 yards seemingly a few times per season.

Liverpool also used to play a 4-5-1 with Torres..... but Torres at the time was sublime, not the Torres that we see today, and Gerrard used to get well into double figures most season.... and they also had the likes of Bellamy and Kuyt on the left and right side of a 5 man midfield who would get somewhere near double figures.

We just have to accept that there are not enough goals in our midfield to make 4-5-1 reliable enough to score goals and win games..... and won''t do until we have somebody like Cahill in the middle.

It works for teams with prolific goalscoring midfielders, we just don''t have any..... when we do have some I''d support giving it another go, but for now the only way that we will score goals is to have the likes of Snodgrass and Pilkington providing goals for Holt, Becchio, Kamara, and possibly even Jackson who still hasn''t had a decent crack at the whip in a 4-4-2 this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="step"]Suppose we could argue that Lambert didnt fancy Holty as a Lone either as Morro started a lot of the early games in that role. I agree in a 4-4-2 we will see a different Holty.[/quote]

Jeesus wept - how many times do people have to have this explained to them? 

Holt in the 4-5-1 formation that took us on our unbeaten run is an absolutely integral part of a TEAM that is both hard to beat and dynamic enough in midfield and defence to get the better of most teams in this division. It is because of him that that midfield is able to do its stuff. He will have far fewer chances in this formation but so long as the team is winning and picking up points, as it was, IT DOESN''T MATTER if he isn''t scoring. He is still doing a vital job that is a big part of making it WORK.

Now, let''s look at some FACTS that might help a few of you. The last time we played the formation and personnel that took us on our unbeaten run was Wigan at home. Ooo, wouldn''t you know, that was also the last time we won. At the end of that game, Holt did his hamstring.

Next game, Morison replaced Holt and we lost. After that, Holt returned for Chelsea at home but it was still not quite our strongest side, missing as we were Stephen Whittaker, whose influence had been growing impressively on our unbeaten run. Evenso we only lost by one to an in-form Chelsea. Against Man City next we were again without Holt (and Whittaker) and despite the close score were well beaten by a team who played more than half the game with 10 men. Then it was Kane playing the lone striker role up front for West Ham and if that wasn''t enough to show some of you people the difference between Holt as the lone striker and a boy who wouldn''t look out of place on Hackney Marshes on a Sunday morning... then i don''t know what is. Holt was introduced after 70 minutes against Newcastle while for Liverpool we were shorne of the all important Bassong, and by now the team was suffering a severe dip in confidence.  By the time of Tottenham at home, we were back to the personnel we had for Chelsea at home with Whittaker the only absentee from our team that last won against Wigan. That was a great performance against a bang in form Spurs side and if we are able to play that team (ideally with Whittaker back in it) we''ll be fine. The last two goalless draws, again still not our strongest possible teams but close, are reflective of a team that hasn''t won for a long time - cautious, timid, and lacking the dynamism you naturally get from a team that has gone 10 games unbeated and beaten some of the best teams in the division. Yes, we need to get that confidence back. Holt IS NOT the problem, he is a big part of the solution. As the above shows, he has had prescious little to do with our recent poor run, didn''t even feature for much of it, and yet some of you STUPID DULLARDS (sorry but i''ve just run our of patience to keep being polite about this) still think some or part of the problem resides with Holt. Totally absurd. Totally clueless.

Ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A1canary, have you finished your keyboard assault?

Perhaps if you spent a little more time working on your comprehension and less time ranting and raving, you would have been able to ascertain that step was himself pointing out the limitations that Holt is forced under by the 4-5-1 formation under the acknowledgement that he gets less chances whilst playing a lone striker role.

I hope that you feel better after your rant, but it wasn''t warranted and didn''t teach step anything that he doesn''t already know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s not only aimed at him - it''s aimed at anyone who thinks that because Holt gets few chances as a lone striker - and is scoring less as a result - that this is at the root of our current malaise. It simply isn''t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well your points are valid, but were unfairly aimed at somebody who AGREES with your point.

If you took your time to read the thread you would have seen that step is supportive of Holt and just wants to see him in a 4-4-2, like me.

It would have made more sense if you had aimed your diatribe at somebody who was actually being critical of Holt, there are no shortage of them. Step was not, he was agreeing that Holt remains important.

Could you start an argument with yourself in the mirror?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And it is true that Lambert didn''t fancy Holt as a lone striker.

He tried it out a few times in the Championship, we didn''t do very well with the 4-5-1, and then reverted back to 4-4-2.

Holt never looked to excel in a 4-5-1, and in the Premier League season Lambert never called on it again with Holt leading the line.

Instead we relied on Holt''s goals to win us games.

So what step was saying is correct..... Lambert didn''t like to play Holt alone up front. And to be honest, as much as I appreciate that he can''t be judged on goals in a 4-5-1, you can add me to the list of people who don''t believe that we are getting the best out of him in that role.

Acknowledge that Holt can''t be judged on goals this season: YES.

Want to see Holt in a front two: YES.

Those two opinions are compatible, and I believe that this is the one that step holds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez, are you his brother or something?

Ok, he was in the firing line and i felt like mouthing off because people have been told these things by many more people than me many many times and yet still they lay a lot of the ''blame'' (if it where every appropriate to look for blame among our players) at Holt''s door or still question his value to the team in the lone striker role. As i''ve shown, he has barely even featured in our recent poor run so it''s totally absurd to be looking at him.

I have no problem seeing him in a front two as well but if Hughton could field the team that took us on our unbeated run i wouldn''t bemoan him doing that. People forget he simply hasn''t been able to do that since our last win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...i also mistakenly thought he was the OP, for whom my earlier post is definitely among those for who it''s meant.

Since you seem to be his spokesman, perhaps you can pass on my heartfelt apologies!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure I''ll fax it to his PA.

We pretty much have been fielding the exact same team and system that took us on a 10 game unbeaten run.

That''s precisely the problem. Same tactics constantly, same players constantly, same substitutions constantly, at the same time constantly.

Hardly difficult for teams to develop a game plan against us when they know precisely what the line up will be, precisely what the formation will be, and precisely how we will attempt to play football.

We became a one trick team and soon got found out.... it took 10 games to suss us, in fact.

The ability to switch between 4-5-1 and 4-4-2 will help immensely, I just hope that Hughton shows a willingness to do it. Not just for ten minutes at the end, and not even for the occasional game, but even at half-time.

Other teams change systems a hell of a lot from game to game, in mid-game, for the end of the game, even playing one system for the first 20 minutes of a game before sucker punching with another.

Such is Hughton''s sheer unwillingness and stubborness to change anything at all that we don''t even switch the wingers once and a while.....

.... When you play a left footed midfielder on the right, and a fleet-footed midfielder on the left, surely switching the wingers around once and a while is one blatantly obvious thing that a manager can elect to do throughout a game to bamboozle the opposition?

We are predictable, ridiculously predictable, and that''s our biggest problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, sorry that''s just wrong. Now you''re the one not reading posts. Go back to my run down of all the games since we beat Wigan. It hasn''t been the same players. We haven''t had the same frontmen for even two consecutive games since Wigan. For a system that almost pivots around the lone striker, it all goes to sh*t if that lone striker doesn''t function. By function, i mean  hold up the ball, high up the pitch and occupy the opposition defence. Morison couldn''t do it, Kane did it about as well as you or i could, and Holt hasn''t actually featured much post Wigan. He has started THREE out of 9 games since Wigan. In those games, Bassong has also been in and out, Whittaker hasn''t featured once, Pilkington has been out and as i said, we''ve been shuffling the front men around from game to game.

Now where i would agree with you is that Hughton should have abandoned the lone striker formation when Holt hasn''t been available because as all this clearly shows there is no-one who can do it properly other than Holt. (Although it sounds as if Kamara might be able to). CH should have realised that if the lone striker isn''t doing that role of roughing up the opposition and holding the ball high up the pitch, it simply isnt'' worth bothering with. He should have looked for alternative formations. But hindsight''s easy and it''s hard to know what else might have worked. Back to the diamond maybe with Morison and Jackson but really how well would we even have done last season if we''d had to rely on Morison and Jackson with Holt out?

This Dubai trip is ideal, will help bed the new boys in to the team, and now gives us genuine forward options to work on that we simply don''t have when Holt is out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for sticking up for me Singup, Im a big boy and get far more abuse at work so water off a ducks back.

I havent ever said Holty cant work as a lone and feel he does a fantastic Job with little or no support coming from Midfield. I for one would love to see how it works with Holty work in a 4-4-2 again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="step"]Thanks for sticking up for me Singup, Im a big boy and get far more abuse at work so water off a ducks back. I havent ever said Holty cant work as a lone and feel he does a fantastic Job with little or no support coming from Midfield. I for one would love to see how it works with Holty work in a 4-4-2 again.[/quote]

Oh dear, do you work in 1p5wich or something step?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a1canary wrote the following post at 11/02/2013 2:22 PM:

...i also mistakenly thought he was the OP,

Apologies accepted a1, thinking I was OP was possible more hurtful !!

http://services.pinkun.com/forums/pinkun/cs/emoticons/emotion-5.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"No, sorry that''s just wrong. Now you''re the one not reading posts. Go back to my run down of all the games since we beat Wigan. It hasn''t been the same players"

If Hughton has developed a system which relies on the exact same eleven being available for all 38 games of the season, then that''s a set up for failure. How is it exactly that you are disagreeing with me then? I''m saying that playing one system constantly is bad. You are saying that it is not, we have just missed players. I think we all know who is right then, if his 4-5-1 relies entirely on the exact same 11 players being available every week. Every team in the league has injuries and suspensions, that is a fact.

"For a system that almost pivots around the lone striker, it all goes to sh*t if that lone striker doesn''t function. By function, i mean hold up the ball, high up the pitch and occupy the opposition defence"

Sure, so he should have changed the system. Hence we shouldn''t play the same system every week, constantly. Did somebody say that on here? Oh yeah, think it was me, about 20 minutes ago.

"He has started THREE out of 9 games since Wigan. In those games, Bassong has also been in and out, Whittaker hasn''t featured once, Pilkington has been out and as i said, we''ve been shuffling the front men around from game to game"

You get to register a squad of 25 players, as we have, one of the few teams in the league to register a full 25. And if you can''t manage to use that squad of 25 to your advantage over the course of the season then it will be to your detriment. We have numerous players who don''t fit into a 4-5-1.... Howson has been ineffective, it doesn''t work with Fox, it doesn''t work with Jackson. You are doing nothing but proving my point..... we play the same very limited group of 14 to 15 players in precisely the same system, every week, we don''t leave the opposition guessing about anything, ever.

"Now where i would agree with you is that Hughton should have abandoned the lone striker formation when Holt hasn''t been available because as all this clearly shows there is no-one who can do it properly other than Holt"

Even Holt isn''t fantastic at playing it, hardly Didier Drogba. Hughton should have bought a striker in the summer, everybody was saying that we needed a striker. If Hughton is unable to devise a system which allows for a Holt injury then the blame should lay at the feet of Hughton. Again thanks for agreeing with my point..... we have been a one system team.

"This Dubai trip is ideal, will help bed the new boys in to the team, and now gives us genuine forward options to work on that we simply don''t have when Holt is out"

Yes but did you notice how Hughton stated that the intention is to train the team to be more effective in the final third? Sounds to me like he is persevering with the 4-5-1.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear, do you work in 1p5wich or something step?

Thank god no but I do have to speak to a lot of Villa supporters though, think at some point last week I was the shoulder to cry on. At one point took me 30 seconds to place an order and 45 minutes to explain Lamberts tactics !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, the OP is clearly not someone you''d want to share an opinion with!

He would do well to note the stat re the games Holt has started in our winless run. THREE of NINE. So he has been pretty useless, largely because for 60% of those games he hasn''t been on the pitch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stats are in the 7 games that holt has not started we have scored 7 goals,   in the 19 he has started we have scored 18,  ie exactly the same goal threat / performance.       

 

Given a uniformity of system its shows that our strikers are all fairly similar in their ability to play the lone role and that the main problem is our failure to get enough support close or quickly enough around the lone player. 

 

That we have not scored any more or even looked better as an attacking unit when we have gone 442 suggests its not either formation that is the problem but the way the team is approaching the attacking element of the game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grant Holt is a very good player and an essential component of our team whether playing with one up front or three up front, perhaps we can just agree on that a1canary?

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...