Van Wolfswinkel...

[Indy_Bones 441]

I''ve been a staunch defender of RVW throughout and fully agree that he''s working hard in recent months for the team, but even I''m starting to wonder if he needs a move (either to a weaker league or to a side that plays to his strengths).I decided to do a bit of digging into the stats and found some surprising (and at times shocking) results.RVW gets touches in the penalty box more frequently than either of his two main competitors (Hooper and Elmander), averaging 19.2 mins per touch compared to 23.7 for Hooper and 22.5 for Elmander. He also receives opportunities to score more frequently than they do with an average time of 43.6 mins per chance, compared to 60.9 for Hooper and 59 mins for Elmander.However, despite having more frequent chances to score it actually takes him 210.7 mins on average to have a shot on target compared to 96.2 for Hooper and 413.3 for Elmander!It also takes him longer on average to make a succesful pass in the final third with 1 every 11.5 mins compared to 8 mins for Hooper and 8.5 for Elmander.His shot accuracy has been apalling with 20.7% compared to Hoopers 51.4%, but not as bad as the truly dire Elmanders 14.3%!He''s far less involved in our team goals than either player and his dribbling has also been WAY less succesful with ZERO succesful direct take-ons out of 7 attempts (0% success), compared to 4 out of 13 for Hooper (30.8% success) and 5 out of 8 for Elmander (62.5% success).But what does all this actually tell us?For me a player who has consistently scored goals throughout their career does not drop to such an awful level overnight and therefore there HAVE to be mitigating factors as to why he''s not performing.I do genuinely believe that he hasn''t regularly had the sort of supply that he thrives on as a player, and that when he has received those balls (like against Sunderland on Sat), his confidence is now so shot that he''s snatching at every single one of them, in a desperate attempt to prove his worth.At this stage however I think it''s fair to say that despite his work ethic in recent months, he''s simply NOT providing the level of threat we need in most games and should be benched tbh. I appreciate that he can''t get his confidence back sat there, but there has to be a line drawn where you say that enough is enough and it''s time for someone else to shine.I personally feel that unless we change our style of play in order to provide the balls that RVW needs (clever through balls where he can play off the defender and poach in the area), then he has to go. Not because he isn''t good enough, but because he''ll always be a square peg in a round hole under the current system.Really is bizarre that Hughton even signed him if this was how he was going to use him, especially when you consider his top choices before have been the likes of Carroll and Zigic - big, strong target men who hold the ball up, rather than a quick, lean goal-poacher such as RVW...

[Kidderminster Exile 0]

I thought he was very unlucky on Saturday, keep trying and it will come ( as the Choir girl said to the rector )

[Holtcantshoot 0]

[quote user="Herman "]

[quote user="ged in the onion bag"]I recall one E''mule'' Heskey putting in a good shift, but he was utterly useless! Just an observation! Funny old game how these inept managers see quality in a donkey![/quote]

 

Emile was quite well regarded in the footballing community. Not very well liked by fans but liked by his strike partners and many managers alike. He played the vast majority of his career in the Premiership so to say he was useless is wide of the mark. 

[/quote]Heskey alwaysc did a lot of good work for the team that often went unnoticed.

Personally I think if we had Heskey in his prime at the club right now

both RVW and Hooper would have been getting a lot more hances and goals.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Holtcantshoot"]Personally I think if we had Heskey in his prime at the club right now

both RVW and Hooper would have been getting a lot more hances and goals.[/quote]As if things haven''t been bad enough on the pitch, you''d want to throw Heskey into the mix...Jesus wept, that guy robbed a living out of football and I''ve genuinely seen more competent strikers playing sunday league pub football!Of course other strikers loved playing with him - he made even Ali Dia look like a shoo in for the Ballon D''or by comparison...JUST SAY NO!

[Guest]

Yes, of course you have seen better strikers at Sunday league level. That''s why he had a long career at the top level, including 60 odd England caps.

Jeez...

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]I''ve been a staunch defender of RVW throughout and fully agree that he''s working hard in recent months for the team, but even I''m starting to wonder if he needs a move (either to a weaker league or to a side that plays to his strengths).I decided to do a bit of digging into the stats and found some surprising (and at times shocking) results.RVW gets touches in the penalty box more frequently than either of his two main competitors (Hooper and Elmander), averaging 19.2 mins per touch compared to 23.7 for Hooper and 22.5 for Elmander. He also receives opportunities to score more frequently than they do with an average time of 43.6 mins per chance, compared to 60.9 for Hooper and 59 mins for Elmander.However, despite having more frequent chances to score it actually takes him 210.7 mins on average to have a shot on target compared to 96.2 for Hooper and 413.3 for Elmander!It also takes him longer on average to make a succesful pass in the final third with 1 every 11.5 mins compared to 8 mins for Hooper and 8.5 for Elmander.His shot accuracy has been apalling with 20.7% compared to Hoopers 51.4%, but not as bad as the truly dire Elmanders 14.3%!He''s far less involved in our team goals than either player and his dribbling has also been WAY less succesful with ZERO succesful direct take-ons out of 7 attempts (0% success), compared to 4 out of 13 for Hooper (30.8% success) and 5 out of 8 for Elmander (62.5% success).But what does all this actually tell us?For me a player who has consistently scored goals throughout their career does not drop to such an awful level overnight and therefore there HAVE to be mitigating factors as to why he''s not performing.I do genuinely believe that he hasn''t regularly had the sort of supply that he thrives on as a player, and that when he has received those balls (like against Sunderland on Sat), his confidence is now so shot that he''s snatching at every single one of them, in a desperate attempt to prove his worth.At this stage however I think it''s fair to say that despite his work ethic in recent months, he''s simply NOT providing the level of threat we need in most games and should be benched tbh. I appreciate that he can''t get his confidence back sat there, but there has to be a line drawn where you say that enough is enough and it''s time for someone else to shine.I personally feel that unless we change our style of play in order to provide the balls that RVW needs (clever through balls where he can play off the defender and poach in the area), then he has to go. Not because he isn''t good enough, but because he''ll always be a square peg in a round hole under the current system.Really is bizarre that Hughton even signed him if this was how he was going to use him, especially when you consider his top choices before have been the likes of Carroll and Zigic - big, strong target men who hold the ball up, rather than a quick, lean goal-poacher such as RVW...[/quote]A balanced view. Having seen so little of RvW I had a look at a compilation video of his goals. Apart from the few penalties (confidently put away...) the goals I saw were all scored inside the penalty area and almosr all were one-shot or one-header finishes from a pass or cross supplied by a teammate. RvW just put the ball in the net. Not to be sniffed at, of course.There didn''t seem (although hard to be certain) to be goals that came from a move in which he had earlier been involved. Ad there weren''t solo goals, with him driving  at the defence, or playing  a one-two to get through. And by definition what were not shown were misses, on which one could assess a ratio of chances taken, or - if there were any - goals he created for someone else.From my 100 minutes of watching and from the great deal I''ve read that seems to be the kind of player he. An old-fashioned goal poacher who doesn''t do much else. For himself or for others. And who is finding in the Premier League that he gets far fewer chances than he did in the lower leagues in which he has prospered. Partly because of the Premier League being better and partly because of the way we play tactically.If so, did we realise this when we paid £8.5m and thought there was a role for him, or did we not sufficiently analyse his strengths and weaknesses?

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="I.S."]Yes, of course you have seen better strikers at Sunday league level. That''s why he had a long career at the top level, including 60 odd England caps.

Jeez...[/quote]Ah, the old classic of "well he kept being picked so he must have been good enough" argument...Crouch has managed three times this amount in half the amount of years, Darius Vassell managed 6 in 22 and even Darren "Sicknote" Anderton managed seven goals - and that was in 30 apps NOT 62...7 goals in ELEVEN YEARS for England - seriously, just f**k off.

[Guest]

So the numerous managers and clubs who signed, paid and played him at the top level, and at international level, were all complete morons? Or have you perhaps considered that his primary role maybe was not to score goals?

No one is suggesting Heskey is a worldbeater, but when you speak utter garbage like "you''ve seen better Sunday league pub players" no amount of cherry-picked stats without context are going to make you sound less deluded.

[MancCanary 0]

Just re-watched one of the Wolfswinkel goal compilations on Youtube, and it''s like watching a different player.

Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdUL4v2xps4

There are numerous goals in this where he has to beat a player or two, and finish from really tricky angles. Also, some of the finishes are class - little lobs and chips etc. I''ve seen him get into lots of positions like these this season but he just loses the ball, or can''t get it out from under his feet quickly enough. It''s a mystery.. but one thing''s for sure from watching these goals - he''s not just a one-touch poacher, he can do things that give himself that bit of extra space to get the shot away. He just can''t at Norwich yet for some mystery reason.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="I.S."]So the numerous managers and clubs who signed, paid and played him at the top level, and at international level, were all complete morons? Or have you perhaps considered that his primary role maybe was not to score goals?[/quote]Of course some strikers create more rather than being out and out goalscorers, but when a chance comes up you expect them to deal with it - Heskey failed miserably to do this year after year, having one of the worst goal ratios of any striker playing that many games in the top flight. [quote]No one is suggesting Heskey is a worldbeater, but when you speak utter garbage like "you''ve seen better Sunday league pub players" no amount of cherry-picked stats without context are going to make you sound less deluded.[/quote]Cherry-picked???It''s a BASIC stat that in 62 games over 11 years he managed a miserable 7 goal return for England, and no amount of manipulation will make that look any better...

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]It''s a BASIC stat that in 62 games over 11 years he managed a miserable 7 goal return for England, and no amount of manipulation will make that look any better...[/quote]Indy just loves his STATS. [:D]Makes you wonder why England bother employing a manager at all. Why not just a committee of statisticians and a couple of MOTD pundits. We''d win the Euros, the World Cup and the X-Factor. [:D]

[Guest]

So to get back to my actual point - you said that you have seen "Sunday League pub players" that are better than Heskey, which is total nonsense. I don''t need stats to assure me of that point.

[Tetteys Jig 830]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="I.S."]Yes, of course you have seen better strikers at Sunday league level. That''s why he had a long career at the top level, including 60 odd England caps.

Jeez...[/quote]Ah, the old classic of "well he kept being picked so he must have been good enough" argument...Crouch has managed three times this amount in half the amount of years, Darius Vassell managed 6 in 22 and even Darren "Sicknote" Anderton managed seven goals - and that was in 30 apps NOT 62...7 goals in ELEVEN YEARS for England - seriously, just f**k off.[/quote]

Okay then, how many did Sutton, Collymore, Andy Cole and Kevin Phillips combined manage for England?

Heskey had a good England career compared to the football geniuses above. I don''t think Heskey should be considered an out and out striker really. In his best years at Liverpool and Leicester, he got 1 in 4, about 10 a season all pretty much in the premier league, not bad going for a second striker, better than any of our lot!

He got older, wiser but indeed slower and transformed to be the defensive forward he is now. He is someone who puts the effort in, wins just about everything in the air and provides a lot of assists for a striker who is nippy and good off the ball (Owen, Hernandez, Bellamy).

I do think he played too long (about 2 years too long) for England but at his peak he was a worthy selection.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="I.S."]So to get back to my actual point - you said that you have seen "Sunday League pub players" that are better than Heskey, which is total nonsense. I don''t need stats to assure me of that point.[/quote]Just like we''ve already seen, it''s more than possible to come up from non-league football to the very top of the game, e.g.:A) Ian WrightB) Les FerdinandC) Kevin PhillipsD) Stan CollymoreI''ve seen 2-3 players in actual Sunday League teams that I genuinely felt offered a greater goal threat (even against such pathetic opposition) than Heskey did in the majority of his career and as this is my personal opinion - it simply can''t be wrong (although I can''t deny your right to disagree with it either).Heskey was a joke of a striker, and quite why you''re defending him so strongly I simply don''t know - what''s next, a group to extol the all round game of Dean Coney (even if he couldn''t hit a cows backside with a banjo)...

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Because there''s so much more to Heskey than his goals.

What does RVW provide other than being a ''goalscorer'' supposedly?

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]Okay then, how many did Sutton, Collymore, Andy Cole and Kevin Phillips combined manage for England?

Heskey had a good England career compared to the football geniuses above.[/quote]How many games did the majority of those players actually play for England...Sutton - 1Collymore - 3Phillips - 8Cole - 15Out of those 4 only Cole is a genuinely fair comparison (due to actually playing more than handful of games), and even though Phillips didn''t score in those 8 games, he''s still within reach of Heskey''s 1 in 9 goal ratio (assuming he got picked again and scored in that match)...I''ll also point out that each of those players had a considerably better league ratio than Heskey did as well.Now if you can find me another well known forward who''s played that many England games (whilst playing as a striker) with such a poor scoring record then you may have an argument, but until then - get real, Heskey was useless.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]Because there''s so much more to Heskey than his goals.[/quote]You mean his ability to fall over at the slightest touch despite being built like a brick $hithouse?Maybe it''s his outstanding 3 assists per season that you''re raving about instead? I''m sure top strikers were just itching for that great pass once every 12 or so games...Hardly scored, hardly assisted, wasn''t skillful, fast or an amazing passer of the ball either, so exactly what else did he have to his game that was so great?The answer must be the ability to distract defenders who were either too busy laughing at his selection (or too dumbstruck to believe it), in order for his strike partner to have an easier chance - I knew there must have been something...

[kirku 1,332]

Opinions most certainly can be wrong, especially when they are based on incredibly inaccurate facts and misunderstandings.

For example, a 62-cap international forward with combined transfer fees of over £32m and 110 Premiership goals is categorically not worse than a Sunday league player.

To suggest otherwise is laughable.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]Because there''s so much more to Heskey than his goals.

What does RVW provide other than being a ''goalscorer'' supposedly?[/quote]

I think the fact that we beat Spurs directly because of his harassing of defenders counts for something.  His on target shot against Southampton led directly to our second goal, which put us back in the game....he was also in a winning team against Sunderland.   That is why Heskey kept getting picked by so many managers imo - because when he was  picked, he was often in a winning side - and you don''t change a winning side without good reason.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="MancCanary"]Just re-watched one of the Wolfswinkel goal compilations on Youtube, and it''s like watching a different player.

Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdUL4v2xps4

There are numerous goals in this where he has to beat a player or two, and finish from really tricky angles. Also, some of the finishes are class - little lobs and chips etc. I''ve seen him get into lots of positions like these this season but he just loses the ball, or can''t get it out from under his feet quickly enough. It''s a mystery.. but one thing''s for sure from watching these goals - he''s not just a one-touch poacher, he can do things that give himself that bit of extra space to get the shot away. He just can''t at Norwich yet for some mystery reason.[/quote]I''ve just watched this video, which is different from the one I saw, although many of the goals are the same. The bit of yours I''ve highlighted  simply isn''t true. Out of the 15 goals I counted (excluding penalties) there is one where he runs from the halfway line and holds off a defender and turns him before shooting. And there is another where he beats the offside trap (so the defenders are all trailing behind) and latches on to a long through-ball and shoots past the keeper.But the rest are poacher goals (almost all one-touch), being on the end of a move and scoring with a shot or a header. He is not beating a player on numerous occasions to score.What I would agree with is that some of the finishes are pretty cute.

[Google Bot 3,255]

That youtube vid, thought it at the time when he signed, the defence and keepers look quite weak.  No-one is trying to out muscle him off the ball.. Or, Block his movement - it''s all quite static… Keepers are on the floor before he''s even thought of shooting.

Watch any video of Hooper at celtic and the guy is a goal machine, not sure how the level differs between SPL and Portuguese prem though, but comparing them before they signed i would have Hooper as the starter if i wanted goals.   He''s scored over 150 professional goals and he''s barely midway through his twenties!

RvW looks too delicate, and although he''s doing all he can he''s never going to get the chances like in that vid - Even his finishing lacks pace, majority of shots he''s getting his foot under the ball and lifting it up and over.  Would love to see him really get his foot round a ball and see what he''s got in those legs.

However, as a side - i don''t care what he looks like in training…. (By all accounts Holt was useless unless it was match day) ….But Becchio should be in the mix, especially with Howson and Snoddy being integral parts of our team.   Why he''s been allowed to half retire from football while we struggle for goals really makes me angry, clearly de-moralised.

[Buh 0]

"He''s crap, but I hope to be proven wrong"ers are out in force.

[Juggy 0]

"It''s a BASIC stat that in 62 games over 11 years he managed a miserable 7 goal return for England, and no amount of manipulation will make that look any better"

Can you back up your argument with further stats? I''d be interested in knowing how many of those 62 games were out of position, I can remember Heskey being used on the left wing quite often. Also interested to know how many times he has been used as a substitute, and his goals per minute ratio in comparison with his contemporaries.

If you can''t give any sort of contextual statistical analysis then your stat is useless, ''basic'' being a huge understatement.

Heskey created a lot of goals and it was a statistical fact that Rooney scored more goals alongside Heskey than he did with a fading Michael Owen between 2008 - 2010. So perhaps your argument should be based around who our best strike partnership was, and for at least a while it was Rooney and Heskey.

In Heskey you have a player who has played 516 Premier League games for five different clubs, scored 110 Premier League goals, over 19 seasons, with his only relegation coming in his first season (1 game he played that year).

He should be considered a Premier League legend.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Jimmy Smith"]Because there''s so much more to Heskey than his goals.[/quote]You mean his ability to fall over at the slightest touch despite being built like a brick $hithouse?Maybe it''s his outstanding 3 assists per season that you''re raving about instead? I''m sure top strikers were just itching for that great pass once every 12 or so games...Hardly scored, hardly assisted, wasn''t skillful, fast or an amazing passer of the ball either, so exactly what else did he have to his game that was so great?The answer must be the ability to distract defenders who were either too busy laughing at his selection (or too dumbstruck to believe it), in order for his strike partner to have an easier chance - I knew there must have been something...[/quote]

Emile Heskey played most of his career in the top division as well as at world cups.... all those managers must have been wrong...

of course Heskeys physical presence up front, runs off the ball to pull defenders out of position were all terrible....

if you ever meet Michael Owen ask him why he scored so many for England and who was responsible for most of those???

we must have missed your tenure as a manager of anything above fm 2014....

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Le Juge"]I''d be interested in knowing how many of those 62 games were out of position, I can remember Heskey being used on the left wing quite often[/quote]I can''t remember him on the wing at all (not saying he wasn''t used there on the odd occasion), and almost all of his match time was part of a front two strike force.[quote]Also interested to know how many times he has been used as a substitute, and his goals per minute ratio in comparison with his contemporaries.

If you can''t give any sort of contextual statistical analysis then your stat is useless, ''basic'' being a huge understatement. [/quote]40 Starts, 22 apps as SubGetting minutes data is a MUCH more time consuming task (unless I can find someone with the relevant data to hand), especially over longer periods, but I will see what I can do.[quote]Heskey created a lot of goals and it was a statistical fact that Rooney scored more goals alongside Heskey than he did with a fading Michael Owen between 2008 - 2010.[/quote]Completely ignoring the fact that:A) Owen was an out and out goalscorer and used as our primary focus point in attack, thus giving Rooney less chance to scoreB) Rooney played BEHIND Owen, rather than alongside or infront of Heskey[quote]In Heskey you have a player who has played 516 Premier League games for five different clubs, scored 110 Premier League goals, over 19 seasons, with his only relegation coming in his first season (1 game he played that year).

He should be considered a Premier League legend.[/quote]Legendary donkey.Heskey''s seemingly acquired cult status over the years (much like the Doc did for us), and with each passing year his contribution seems to be over-rated more and more.Give it another 20 years and you''ll have people claiming Heskey was more influential than the likes of Pele...

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]Give it another 20 years and you''ll have people claiming Heskey was more influential than the likes of Pele...[/quote]

No give it another twenty years and people will still claim he  was an effective player who was strong, held the ball up well and a good partner for a more potent striker.  They would be right imo.

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Sheringham - 51 caps, 11 goals, had a fine partnership with shearer, but not many goals there.

Stanley Matthews, supposedly a forward and as much of one as Heskey but a whole lot more legendary 54 caps 11 goals.

Peter Beardsley, played a similar role and was a very good player, 59 caps, 9 goals.

Them three are absolute legends and only scored a couple more than Heskey, so to call him completely rubbish because of his scoring record is absurd. How about combine the records of the four strikers above it''d read something like 30 caps, 1 goal.

[MancCanary 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="MancCanary"]Just re-watched one of the Wolfswinkel goal compilations on Youtube, and it''s like watching a different player.

Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdUL4v2xps4

There are numerous goals in this where he has to beat a player or two, and finish from really tricky angles. Also, some of the finishes are class - little lobs and chips etc. I''ve seen him get into lots of positions like these this season but he just loses the ball, or can''t get it out from under his feet quickly enough. It''s a mystery.. but one thing''s for sure from watching these goals - he''s not just a one-touch poacher, he can do things that give himself that bit of extra space to get the shot away. He just can''t at Norwich yet for some mystery reason.[/quote]I''ve just watched this video, which is different from the one I saw, although many of the goals are the same. The bit of yours I''ve highlighted  simply isn''t true. Out of the 15 goals I counted (excluding penalties) there is one where he runs from the halfway line and holds off a defender and turns him before shooting. And there is another where he beats the offside trap (so the defenders are all trailing behind) and latches on to a long through-ball and shoots past the keeper.But the rest are poacher goals (almost all one-touch), being on the end of a move and scoring with a shot or a header. He is not beating a player on numerous occasions to score.What I would agree with is that some of the finishes are pretty cute.[/quote]

OK, "numerous" was being a bit generous - but the fact he does clearly have it in him to take a good touch (see the one where he takes it down in his stride before dinking it over the keeper with the wrong foot), and make space for himself, before shooting - something he appears not to be able to do at city.

Plus as we agree his finishing in this video is great - and at Norwich his movement has been good enough to get in some of those tap-in type positions, but his finishing - arguably his strongest point - has been non-existent. It baffles me. I think there is obviously a strong case for Norwich not being as competitive as Sporting in the 2 respective leagues - but then he should still get 5-10 goals a season in my opinion.

If he can bulk up over the summer, that should help. Whatever happens, next season is the decider on him.

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Only if we stay up. If we went down, I think we''d cut our losses.

[Juggy 0]

"Legendary donkey"

Idiot. He was excellent at what he did, a 30 year old Heskey is exactly the type of player that Hooper or Van Wolfswinkel would love to play alongside.

He was one of the best around at holding up the ball and bringing a number 9 into the game. I''d have thought that a Norwich fan in particular would be able to watch the complete ineffectiveness of our two number 9''s and understand that.

Heskey would have been the perfect player to drop into our squad as a partner for Hooper.

Next you are going to tell me how rubbish 40 goals in 154 games for Leicester is, or 39 in 150 for Liverpool, and tell me that he could "do everything but score", and then follow that up by telling me how class Van Wolfswinkel is or tell us that Hooper will challenge for an England spot next season.

Heskey was unfairly used as a scapegoat by England fans but appreciated by the fans of his first four Premier League clubs.