Snodgrass Comments

[BOO 0]

lake district canary wrote the following post at 10/04/2014 11:44 PM:

Vanwalt -POTS for me. He leaves nothing on the pitch and can show some excellent quality. Shame he can''t be more consistent but he always give it is best. If he could just control his emotions a bit he would be a better player.

I wouldn''t play him. First twenty minutes that were so important last week and he was not good. He often improves as games go on, but that doesn''t help, when its the beginning of games that set the tone for a match. I''d have Redmond on the right, to link up with Martin and with Pilks or Gutierrez on the left to link up with Ollson. If we have wingers on the pitch, they need to be up to speed from the start of a match, not twenty/thirty minutes in. Consistency is what the team has been lacking. If Snodgrass is inconsistent - it could be partly why the team is inconsistent.

If he plays - and I know he gives everything - he needs to make sure he is focused from the kick off, then we might see the best of him.

There are certainly weaknesses in his game and inconsistency is one of them. I think a lot of that stems from his desire to do well and getting frustrated when things don''t. If he could learn to stay focused he would become more consistent.

My comment was in relation to POTS, I think he deserves it based on his attitude to the game, plus the fact that he has scored goals in a team that has made very few chances and missed those that it made. He has often made himself available in a team that has been hiding from the ball.

He''s far from perfect but that says more about the way the rest of the guys have struggled.

He deserves some sort of award for having the guts to turn out with that beard!

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Rock The Boat"]Interesting interview with Snodgrass in today''s pinkun.

I think he comes across as an intelligent bloke and combined with his passion for the game, I think he could make a good captain.

Making him captain might make him less petulant on the field and giving him that extra responsibility might make him more inclusive of other team members.

Of course, the only way to find out is to try it out and see if it works, but the potential is there.

I noticed he used the phrase "go out and give it a go". Which is word-for-word from the Lambert dictionary of football parlance. He also said there is no time to dwell on Chris Hughton, which seems like that era has already been consigned to history, not to be brought up again in current contexts.

Hopefully there will be a return to the fighting spirit, never-say-die attitude from the core of players that were here during the Lambert years. I hope so. We haven''t got long now to find out.[/quote]

If he is intelligent, as people seem to think he is, then he must surely

be able to recognise his strengths and weaknesses and improve on them - the petulance, the delayed crosses, dribbling into dead ends, the penalties. 

The impression I get is that if you made him captain he would take even more on himself than he does already.   Someone said he needs a strong manager and I''d agree with that - he is simply not the hub of the team that he thinks he is and needs to know that.    Important, yes, but not at the expense of the rest of the team.   Some people get annoyed when you criticise Hoolahan - but the problems are the same with both players - they only have one foot they are prepared to use 90% of the time, which makes them easily predictable.  Give the ball to Snodgrass or Hoolahan all the time - and unless they are on top form, they are a liability.  The trick for a manager is judging when to use them. Hughton used Snodgrass all the time - a player who is inconsistent - and low and behold the team is inconsistent.   Therein lies a tale.   Hoolahan he used sparingly - and got more from him, imo.    If Bennett had been fit this season, I think Snodgrass would have been used more sparingly too, mixing the team up a bit and making us less predictable.

[GJP 79]

People keep saying things like Snodgrass doesn''t hide, that he is one of the few players who don''t hide. It seems to be one of the main justifications for him to be POTS.

 

But which players do "hide"?

 

[MancCanary 0]

The rest of them?

When we have a bad game, there''s so little movement off the ball, and so little showing for the ball. Snodgrass however, despite whatever failings he does have, is always asking for the ball and shouting for it.

[ZLF 274]

[quote user="MancCanary"]The rest of them? When we have a bad game, there''s so little movement off the ball, and so little showing for the ball. Snodgrass however, despite whatever failings he does have, is always asking for the ball and shouting for it.[/quote]

Precisely this.    The only players I have not seen hide are wes & snoddy,  always wanting the ball and facing the player with the ball.   While the degree of hiding varies every other player has been guilty of this at some stage this season - increasingly so over the last 6 weeks or so 

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="ron obvious"]Not his biggest fan, but he''s got the right attitude. I wonder what Bassong would have said?[/quote]

"Hello, who''s that?? the paper? no sorry.. cant talk now.. I''m at the travel agents booking my holiday... where has a nice beach? i''m already on the ones in Norfolk"

[GJP 79]

Doesn''t sit well with me that Snodgrass and Hoolahan are the only players who don''t "hide".

 

I mean I don''t particularly rate Johnson as a player at this level but I wouldn''t say he hides. No more or less than Snodgrass does.

 

And that goes for some of the others too. Sometimes players who don''t appear to be doing much are just a victim of the system. For example, when Hooper has been played upfront on his own he has sometimes looked anonymous but that''s not his fault.

 

I would say the one that sticks out for me is probably Fer. He has had a few games when he doesn''t really look to be putting in the effort that Johnson, Howson, Tettey do. But then he is still adjusting to a new league. And while I mention them, Howson and Tettey are as good at making themselves available for their colleagues as anyone.

 

What about Ruddy? Can he hide? Does he hide?

[nutty nigel 7,536]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

[quote user="MancCanary"]The rest of them? When we have a bad game, there''s so little movement off the ball, and so little showing for the ball. Snodgrass however, despite whatever failings he does have, is always asking for the ball and shouting for it.[/quote]

Precisely this.    The only players I have not seen hide are wes & snoddy,  always wanting the ball and facing the player with the ball.   While the degree of hiding varies every other player has been guilty of this at some stage this season - increasingly so over the last 6 weeks or so 

[/quote]

 

What about Bassong? The guy gets a lot of flack some of it fair enough, but does he hide? Or is he the go to for others who want rid of the ball quickly?

 

 

[Yellow Wal 314]

There have been many times this season that I wished Snodgrass would hide!

He has demanded the ball when he has been in terrible positions and, it seems, other players feel they must give it to him. He is certainly a strong character but, I''m afraid his character is much stronger than his ability. Yes, he is useful, but to compare him to some of the outstanding players we have had in the past and to consider him undroppable is ridiculous, but that has been what he has been.

He had a miserable time for the first half of the season but as his game has now picked up we get people recommending him for POTS. As I have said before, it is Player Of The SEASON, not half season.

For that reason I would strongly recommend a player, who I feel does not ever hide, Martin Olsson.

[NWC 240]

Snodgrass??

Love him!

[ZLF 274]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

[quote user="MancCanary"]The rest of them? When we have a bad game, there''s so little movement off the ball, and so little showing for the ball. Snodgrass however, despite whatever failings he does have, is always asking for the ball and shouting for it.[/quote]

Precisely this.    The only players I have not seen hide are wes & snoddy,  always wanting the ball and facing the player with the ball.   While the degree of hiding varies every other player has been guilty of this at some stage this season - increasingly so over the last 6 weeks or so 

[/quote]

 

What about Bassong? The guy gets a lot of flack some of it fair enough, but does he hide? Or is he the go to for others who want rid of the ball quickly?

[/quote]

 

I admit I was focusing on the midfielders and strikers rather than the defenders,   their mobility is far more rigid and bassong,  as with the other defenders,  were not meant to be swept up in this.    I do think Tettey (a personal fave of mine) and Howson have been guilty of this too.

 

My view on bassong generally is that he has not been anywhere near as bad as slated on here; he starts when fit for me.    our real problems are not at the back,  but remain with the front six.  

[nutty nigel 7,536]

Pretty much agree Zip. But I''ve noticed that when the ball is a hot potato it usually ends up with Bassong.

 

 

[GJP 79]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

[quote user="MancCanary"]The rest of them? When we have a bad game, there''s so little movement off the ball, and so little showing for the ball. Snodgrass however, despite whatever failings he does have, is always asking for the ball and shouting for it.[/quote]

Precisely this.    The only players I have not seen hide are wes & snoddy,  always wanting the ball and facing the player with the ball.   While the degree of hiding varies every other player has been guilty of this at some stage this season - increasingly so over the last 6 weeks or so 

[/quote]

 

What about Bassong? The guy gets a lot of flack some of it fair enough, but does he hide? Or is he the go to for others who want rid of the ball quickly?

 

[/quote]

This is something I was saying about the WBA game. Bassong was the only defender who kept wanting the ball. The others were all happy to pass the buck. He was the only one attempting to take responsibility and make something happen.

 

And what does he get for it? He gets some of the crowd whinging at him for over hitting a pass. When he infact deserved a bit of credit for trying to help his team do something when others weren''t.

[a1canary 0]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]If he wins POTS it just sums up how underwhelming this season has been.

Snodgrass wasn''t good until after Christmas. If someone can win POTS having only played half a season well then we should just not award it.

[/quote]

Nonsense. Lets face it, no-one has been ripping trees up all season, that''s why we''re where we are. Fact is though, without Snodgrass we''d be down already. What is also now starting to become apparent is that he may well have been playing without truly beleiving in the way we were playing and being set up. Most players in those circumstances would just fade away and stop playing.  

[kick it off 1,952]

I''ve not been overly impressed with his contribution for much of the season, but since January he''s been excellent, and the one thing no-one can ever say about him is that he hides. Good, bad or sometimes downright ugly, he wears his heart on his sleeve and embraces the flak as well as the praise. He seems like a top bloke off the pitch to be fair.

[whoareyou? 0]

POTS?I seem to remember Lee Croft winning POTS for having a decent 10 minutes in one game. [:D]

[Mr Jenkins 0]

But he had a lovely face

[The 12th Devine 0]

[quote user="hogesar"]Our fans under value Snodgrass massively.

Not very often you get a player with good Premier League quality - and then on top of that the determination and attitude you''d get from a lower-league player playing for his home club.

Top, top player and hopefully POTS.[/quote]

This nails it really. People talk about Snods not doing it for 90 minutes but if he did he''d probably be playing elsewhere. We don''t have world class players but do need Premier League class, and Snods is in that bracket – i.e. better than relegation quality AND with a give a s**t attitude. How people have bemoaned him so much on this site is absurd; like blaming the smartest kid in the school when it comes bottom of the league table. If we''re going to win tomorrow we''ll need him firing, and I reckon he will be seriously up for it.

[hogesar 9,674]

Agree completely 12th Devine.

The reality is without Snodgrass we would already be relegated. In my opinion of course. I can''t factually say that because it would require me going back in time, changing the line-ups and watching us re-play all those games.

But his goals, willingness for the ball and work rate are really important to us.

I sometimes think people on here don''t like him because he isn''t pacey and exciting - people seem to still be stuck in this view that that''s the only type of real winger there is - that''s not the case any more. Can you imagine if we had two Redmond''s either side? Lots of pace and flair - would we have defended better? No. Would we have created more? No. Would we have scored more? No.

We don''t have a better winger.

[ZLF 274]

Some very positive comments and his drivers great.

but not liking the inference of him feeling that if we get relegated he considers he has.done his part and it''s not his fault.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="hogesar"]Agree completely 12th Devine.

The reality is without Snodgrass we would already be relegated. In my opinion of course. I can''t factually say that because it would require me going back in time, changing the line-ups and watching us re-play all those games.

But his goals, willingness for the ball and work rate are really important to us.

I sometimes think people on here don''t like him because he isn''t pacey and exciting - people seem to still be stuck in this view that that''s the only type of real winger there is - that''s not the case any more. Can you imagine if we had two Redmond''s either side? Lots of pace and flair - would we have defended better? No. Would we have created more? No. Would we have scored more? No.

We don''t have a better winger.[/quote]

To say we would be relegated without Snodgrass is nonsense, imo.   He is good and bad - you get a mixed performance overall from him.   If he wasn''t in the team someone else would step up to the plate.  

I don''t mind his lack of pace.  Beckham had no pace and he did alright.  He looks like he is trying and he is persistent in attack - but he doesn''t always track back as well as he could.   His goals have been important, but if he had crossed earlier more often and more accurately  - then others might have scored more too.   Everything seems to go through Snodgrass - good or bad.    Free kicks, corners, crosses - even penalties - so what you get is a lop sided team dominated by Snodgrass - and as often there is no consistency in his play, surprise surprise the team is inconsistent.   People blamed Hughton for everything - well he picked Snodgrass every week...........

[hogesar 9,674]

You got good and bad from Snodgrass because he always showed for the ball. He always tried to attack. What `good` have we seen from any of our other wingers this season? Anything productive. They''ve all played, some more than others. The only person I would occasionally play if Snodgrass is out of form is Bennett on the right - and he''s been out all season. Picking Snodgrass week in week out is one of the few things Hughton got right.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="hogesar"]You got good and bad from Snodgrass because he always showed for the ball. He always tried to attack. What `good` have we seen from any of our other wingers this season? Anything productive. They''ve all played, some more than others. The only person I would occasionally play if Snodgrass is out of form is Bennett on the right - and he''s been out all season. Picking Snodgrass week in week out is one of the few things Hughton got right.[/quote]

The good is good - mainly his goals - the bad is bad - his lack of enough quailty crosses at the right time.   Last week against WBA, he had several occasions he could have whipped the ball in when he had acres of space, but he time and time again ran on and into players and in the process giving time for defenders to organise - and as quite often - as he has all season - he just runs into trouble and falls over. Its no wonder we don''t score many goals...........unless it is Snodgrass scoring them.   There is a message there.  

[hogesar 9,674]

Tell me than LDC, since you choose to use West Brom as an example...who was better than him? Who created more? Who ran at the defence?

If you''re going to use terrible team performances as an example of when Snodgrass isn''t his best then I can''t take you seriously.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Rock The Boat"]Interesting interview with Snodgrass in today''s pinkun.

I think he comes across as an intelligent bloke and combined with his passion for the game, I think he could make a good captain.

Making him captain might make him less petulant on the field and giving him that extra responsibility might make him more inclusive of other team members.

Of course, the only way to find out is to try it out and see if it works, but the potential is there.

I noticed he used the phrase "go out and give it a go". Which is word-for-word from the Lambert dictionary of football parlance. He also said there is no time to dwell on Chris Hughton, which seems like that era has already been consigned to history, not to be brought up again in current contexts.

Hopefully there will be a return to the fighting spirit, never-say-die attitude from the core of players that were here during the Lambert years. I hope so. We haven''t got long now to find out.[/quote]

If he is intelligent, as people seem to think he is, then he must surely

be able to recognise his strengths and weaknesses and improve on them - the petulance, the delayed crosses, dribbling into dead ends, the penalties. 

The impression I get is that if you made him captain he would take even more on himself than he does already.   Someone said he needs a strong manager and I''d agree with that - he is simply not the hub of the team that he thinks he is and needs to know that.    Important, yes, but not at the expense of the rest of the team.   Some people get annoyed when you criticise Hoolahan - but the problems are the same with both players - they only have one foot they are prepared to use 90% of the time, which makes them easily predictable.  Give the ball to Snodgrass or Hoolahan all the time - and unless they are on top form, they are a liability.  The trick for a manager is judging when to use them. Hughton used Snodgrass all the time - a player who is inconsistent - and low and behold the team is inconsistent.   Therein lies a tale.   Hoolahan he used sparingly - and got more from him, imo.    If Bennett had been fit this season, I think Snodgrass would have been used more sparingly too, mixing the team up a bit and making us less predictable.

[/quote]

Are you sure you meant to write that Hoolahan is predictable? I''d have said Hoolahan''s career has been built around his unpredictability. That he can create chances and make passes that other players don''t see. Hoolahan is an enigma for many managers because they don''t know how to get the best out of him, Lambert was one of the few who came to realise what Hoolahan is capable of. I''d challenge your claim that Hughton got the best out of Hoolahan, too. I suggest the Hoolahan-Holt partnership undr Lambert was one of the best pairings we''ve seen at CR in recent years.

As for Snodgrass, you are asking for improvement in his all round play. Fair enough, LDC, but I would argue as others have, that Snodgrass HAS improved in the second half of the season, so much so that many are claiming him as their choice POTS.

Truth is we don''t know how Snodgrass would react if he is made captain. You think he would become more selfish player-wise. I think he would become more mature and more of a team-player. We can only know the answer if he gets the appointment. I can''t ever imagine Snodgrass wishing the season were over, I think he has done enough to deserve the chance.