Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
yellows74

Ricky Van Wolfswinkel - Predicted to be a flop!

Recommended Posts

Just read this interesting article about RVW from way back in August. I would say it turned out to be spot on!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1744071-why-ricky-van-wolfswinkel-will-be-a-premier-league-flop-with-norwich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fella should have bought a lottery ticket whilst writing that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My word, how prophetic. Is there any part of that article/prediction which didnt ring true?

Can we please get this guy to replace Ewan Chester as chief scout. He seems to have more insight than most of the footballing world (on this particular issue anyway), certainly more than the people we paid to make these decisions.

That was like reading the story of our season - cant believe that was written a year ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]My word, how prophetic. Is there any part of that article/prediction which didnt ring true?

Can we please get this guy to replace Ewan Chester as chief scout. He seems to have more insight than most of the footballing world (on this particular issue anyway), certainly more than the people we paid to make these decisions.

That was like reading the story of our season - cant believe that was written a year ago[/quote]Ewan Chester is leaving at the end of the season anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s not prophetic at all!

RVW flopped because he was asked to play as a target man far too often, and by the time he was adjusted into a more suitable role he had lost every shred of confidence he had.

The article is right when it says we needed a striker more suited to playing as a target man, as opposed to one of the poacher style of Ricky. But that''s Hughton''s failure, not Ricky''s. Our obdurate nature, as the article puts it, didn''t diminish because Hughton did neither of the two things the article said.

By suggesting that Hughton would in some way adapt in an attempt to get the best out of the poachers he''d bought, that''s where its sorely misled as he never ever attempted to do that, just kept hammering their square pegs into round holes.

Ricky flopped because Hughton entirely mismanaged him. He did not flop because he''s not strong enough for this league or because he''s not aggressive enough or because he hasn''t got much of an all round game.

There are plenty of slight poachers very successful in the world''s top leagues because their managers set up to get to the byline and give them the cutback deliveries their excellent movement merits.

I would argue our tactical approach engineered his flop as opposed to Ricky''s own abilities, which is not what the article predicts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]My word, how prophetic. Is there any part of that article/prediction which didnt ring true? Can we please get this guy to replace Ewan Chester as chief scout. He seems to have more insight than most of the footballing world (on this particular issue anyway), certainly more than the people we paid to make these decisions. That was like reading the story of our season - cant believe that was written a year ago[/quote]

The main error was predicting we would still finish mid-table. Great observations though after only 1 game. A PL striker needs to have either a burst of pace to beat a man, or be a brute (like Holt) and be able to bully defenders. Unfortunately for us the Sheep in Wolf''s clothing is lacking on both accounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I remember reading this article and dismissing it.

In reality he pretty much called it right. RVW has proven to be an expensive waste. It''s not the players fault he was just totally unsuited to the job he was asked to do.

I actually think if we''d persevered with Hooper from the start and through the majority of games he would have scored more goals and we may not have been in this position. I''m not really sure why he gets so much stick, 6 goals in 22 starts in a struggling team isn''t that bad a return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think what you''ve posted and the article are mutually exclusive though. This article is incredibly prophetic and perceptive in predicting the major issues that we as fans have only begun to understand during the course of the season. Dont forget this was written after just one game of the season, when we were all happy our new boy had got off the mark and we were all predicting huge success.

He has highlighted the dilemmas we took months to realise - ''why are our two major outlays not not going to be on the pitch at the same time, or do we now need a shift in tactics. Why has he bought a striker type that does not suit his style of play. And the biggest thing, that many are only just beginning to appreciate, that Grant Holt was a massive loss, and whose role was never replaced - probably the biggest influence on our lack of success this season, not the lack of a number 10.

He did correctly predict that Gary Hooper would supplant RvW though, and of course, Hooper has outscored him.

And he doesnt actually predict we''ll finish mid-table, he states Hughton ''has enough at his disposal to secure a mid-table finish once again'' - do any of us argue with this? Hughton had the tools to do the job, but mis-used them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And he didn''t predict that if Hughton persisted with a system which used two inverted wingers that no striker, or creative midfielders would have a good season.

Hughton brought in six goalscoring strikers who scored a total of eight goals for him.

Jonny Howson has scored 2, having scored 11 in his last full season at Leeds and Leroy Fer, who gets so much criticism, has scored 4 whereas his previous two seasons he was in double figures. Wes has only managed one this season.

The system employed has done nothing to help any central attack minded player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This article is scary in how prescient it is. Hughton did indeed spend all season switching between 451 which didn''t suit any of our strikers - Elmander looking better in the role than any other except for the glaring omission of a goal threat - and 442 which was the only way to get anything out of our two expensive signings, albeit that only the Hooper/Elmander combo was really effective at scoring for a period last autumn.

Sad truth is that the team has never looked as effective as the year before and none of our strikers contributes as much as holt. Hence Redmond being put up front yesterday. Which is a real indictment of Hughton.

For me it was clear at the start that both RVw and Hooper are poacher type strikers essentially in competition for one starting spot, which is fair enough as injuries mean you need two quality strikers in the Prem. But what is unforgivable is that having spent £8.5m on RVW it is now clear that Hughton didn''t really have a clear idea of how to use him effectively in our squad. The upshot is that he''s been asked to play in a way that doesn''t suit him and has got progressively worse as the season has gone on until he''s now a shadow of his former self and not worth having on the pitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What surprises me a little is that when Adams was announced as manager, someone who claimed to be close to his son leaked a few things which were dismissed at the time but have proven to be on the nail - most notably his desire to play Redmond up front and play the diamond. This individual also claimed that Adams'' view of RvW was that he was a 20 goal a season striker (or thereabouts) who had just been misused. This person stated Adams rated him.

If Adams does believe this, Im surprised (especially being an ex-winger) that Adams'' first move wasnt to play RvW with conventional wingers (say Redmond right, Pilkington left and maybe Snoddy as the number 10) and get RvW playing to his strengths again. Maybe this is what he would have done in different circumstances

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]

He did correctly predict that Gary Hooper would supplant RvW though, and of course, Hooper has outscored him.

And he doesnt actually predict we''ll finish mid-table, he states Hughton ''has enough at his disposal to secure a mid-table finish once again'' - do any of us argue with this? Hughton had the tools to do the job, but mis-used them.[/quote]

When one of those ''tools'' was Gary Hooper, yeah I argue the complete opposite. He absolutely didn''t have the ''tools'' of success. If you actually think Hooper was any better than RvW this year I have no clue what to say to you, other than you aren''t brighht.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point being, both of them have been crap this year. I''d bet a large amount of money given the same starts RvW would have 3 goals from run of play, especially given one of Hooper''s goals was only put away due to a completely idiotic goalie error leaving a wide open net.,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''m so glad that after all these years we finally replaced Dave the striker. We''ve missed him badly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Great Mass Debater wrote the following post at 05/05/2014 7:59 PM:

What surprises me a little is that when Adams was announced as manager, someone who claimed to be close to his son leaked a few things which were dismissed at the time but have proven to be on the nail - most notably his desire to play Redmond up front and play the diamond. This individual also claimed that Adams'' view of RvW was that he was a 20 goal a season striker (or thereabouts) who had just been misused. This person stated Adams rated him.

If Adams does believe this, Im surprised (especially being an ex-winger) that Adams'' first move wasnt to play RvW with conventional wingers (say Redmond right, Pilkington left and maybe Snoddy as the number 10) and get RvW playing to his strengths again. Maybe this is what he would have done in different circumstances

For exactly these reasons it would be very foolish to make any rash decisions about the future of expensive plays RvW, Hooper and Fer.

All of them have been terribly used this year and been shadows of their previous selves.

A new manager (or the confirmation of Adams) needs to be in place earlier rather than later so that the future of these players, and others who appear to no longer want to be associated with the club, can be correctly sorted.

To move potentially good players on too early could be a very expensive mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooper has outscored RvW this season, that is not a matter of opinion it is a cold hard fact. Whether this means he has been ''better'' is the only point that can be argued and depends on how you judge a striker. Seeing as Hooper outscored RvW, to argue that RvW has been better would involve highlighting what else, aside from his goalscoring, RvW brings to the table. Neither of them seem to do much else other than put the ball in the back of the net, unlike a player like Grant Holt, who offers much more than how often he scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]Hooper has outscored RvW this season, that is not a matter of opinion it is a cold hard fact. Whether this means he has been ''better'' is the only point that can be argued and depends on how you judge a striker. Seeing as Hooper outscored RvW, to argue that RvW has been better would involve highlighting what else, aside from his goalscoring, RvW brings to the table. Neither of them seem to do much else other than put the ball in the back of the net, unlike a player like Grant Holt, who offers much more than how often he scores.[/quote]

I get what you are saying more, and to the above I agree. I wouldn''t argue that RvW has been better by the way, nor would I argue that Hooper has been better than RvW. Honestly if Hooper had scored 6 from run of play with or without the 2 penalties and fluke deflection, I''d probably be more impressed by him. It was a poor year by the entire frontline, if you want to blame tactics I won''t argue. None of them have any confidence and that affected them, however I have a harder time blaming tactics for people scuffing shots from 5 yards out (I can count 6 occasions of Hooper doing this). I would choke that up to having no confidence in what you are being told to do but I''d also put the majority of that on just not being good for the level you are playing at or not being good at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Without doubt Grant Holt has qualities that neither RvW or Hooper possess but even he, after having a season''s experience of the Premiership, suffered under Hughton, scoring half the number of goals under his management than he scored the previous season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Loads of excuses about the system. At the end of the day being able to pass and trap the ball is a key aspect irrespective of the role. He has been terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Barossa"]Loads of excuses about the system. At the end of the day being able to pass and trap the ball is a key aspect irrespective of the role. He has been terrible.[/quote]

You can slice it any way you like but this is the truth.

How the hell did we sign a guy for 8.5 million who''s basic game seems so unsound.

I can''t see him staying if we can get over 3 million he has to go as failing again in the champs would be diabolical.

He must know this also one season is a mistake two bad seasons and its ????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Fromage Frais"][quote user="Barossa"]Loads of excuses about the system. At the end of the day being able to pass and trap the ball is a key aspect irrespective of the role. He has been terrible.[/quote]

You can slice it any way you like but this is the truth.

How the hell did we sign a guy for 8.5 million who''s basic game seems so unsound.

I can''t see him staying if we can get over 3 million he has to go as failing again in the champs would be diabolical.

He must know this also one season is a mistake two bad seasons and its ????[/quote]

That''s kind of the reason I want us to stick with him next season. Sod getting three million for him and then potentially watch him come good somewhere else. We should see our gamble through further.

Sign a completely different striker to him and Hooper in summer to compete/ replace Becchio and then give him a few games to sort himself out. He might yet become good.

To use a recent example, Coloccini arrived at Newcastle with many in disbelief they had attracted one of the worlds best defenders. To put it bluntly, he was absolutely shocking initially in Newcastles demise but instead of selling up and giving up on him, they stuck with him. Around a more confident team that won more, Coloccini blossomed and when they came back up he maintained his impressiveness Indeed one game I saw him play against us, I wondered if anything ever again would get past him. One of the best performances i''ve ever seen.

Yes he could flop again and we waste another £5m in wages and lost transfer value but I''d rather we took the gamble if it''s an option. As long as we don''t 100% rely on our attacking line up and tactics this year, i''d be prepared to give most of them a second chance in a different set up with some tweaks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched him closely in pre-season last summer and in our early games.  His touch and general play were excellent.  He was running endlessly pointing for early balls to be played down the channels on the ground... passes which were rarely played.

 

As a result we had the embarassing statistics charting that he was barely getting a touch of the ball during games, never mind chances to score.

 

What we''re now seeing is the shadow of the player that we bought, worn down by a season of misuse.  His confidence is completely shot and as a result people are making these sorts of comments.

 

Well, it''s not that our scouts were shown footage of a different player... it''s just that our (former) manager has turned a quality striker into a wreck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the majority of fans still feel that there is a great striker lurking somewhere within RvW but this season has been hugely damaging for his reputation. I still maintain that if you buy a prize orchid then give it to a 5 year old who doesnt water it, you dont conclude that there is something wrong with the species of plant. RvW has been badly misused this season. The question is, was he the kind of player we should have been buying. It seems that if you need a Grant Holt, you buy a Grant Holt, or you change the system so it needs an RvW. What you dont do is put a RvW in a team that needs a Grant Holt and expect things to all work out. There was always a feeling that Hughton never really had a plan on how we were supposed to score and kind of hoped that if he threw enough money at the problem, the stikers could just sort out scoring themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marked man from the moment he came in

Price tag demanded too much, series of unfortunate events have shattered him.

He could come good but he is still marked by some fans and no amount of championship goals will change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]

I think the majority of fans still feel that there is a great striker lurking somewhere within RvW but this season has been hugely damaging for his reputation. I still maintain that if you buy a prize orchid then give it to a 5 year old who doesnt water it, you dont conclude that there is something wrong with the species of plant. RvW has been badly misused this season. The question is, was he the kind of player we should have been buying. It seems that if you need a Grant Holt, you buy a Grant Holt, or you change the system so it needs an RvW. What you dont do is put a RvW in a team that needs a Grant Holt and expect things to all work out. There was always a feeling that Hughton never really had a plan on how we were supposed to score and kind of hoped that if he threw enough money at the problem, the stikers could just sort out scoring themselves

[/quote]

This is spot on and the most annoying thing is that Hughton spent a club record sum on him.  When will we next be able to spend £8.5m on on one player ? 

 

Clearly having spent that money on him, plus another £5m on another poacher-type striker in Hooper, it was crazy that Hughton didn''t rebuild the team to service poacher-type strikers, but he didn''t.  As you say, he kept on playing as if we had Holt up front, why on earth didn''t we spend a few million on a quality player in the Holt mould instead ?

 

Makes me really angry now....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should he have picked one of either Hooper or RvW and then spent the remainder on a Holt type player or a Quagliarella type player? Why spend the bulk of our transfer budget on two players unlikely to be on the pitch at the same time. Its almost like Hughton said, ''Hmmm, my system really keeps the goals from going in, but we cant score any ourselves. Hmmm, 14m - job done, we''ll always have a good striker up fron now whicheve one plays, theyll get me plenty of goals, almost by default leaving me to focus on the defence.;

 

All season we''ve lamented the lack of a number 10 in the Quagliarella mould to link up the midfield and the attack. But looking back on the way we''ve played this season, I dont think that would have solved the problem. A Quagliarella is probably what you need if you''re planning to be on an equal footing as your opposition or dominating possession, or even planning to counter attack with pace. Hughtons teams were always set up to defend deep with lots of positional discipline and no creative freedom. In this kind of set up you need a bully up front to win you fouls, hold the ball up, gain terriory and provid an outlet so your team can get up the pitch. This is the player we have missed all season, not a Quagliarella type.

 

Not replacing Holt like-for-like having decided to move him on is probably Hughtons biggest mistake, and maybe reveals that perhaps he didnt really ''get'' strikers

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...