Jebbison Mystery

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


For me, this would be one of the most important new deals at the club. Even though a lot on here seem to have written him off, there's huge potential there and he's never really been given a consistent run of games so his game to goal ratio isn't relevant.

He's big, strong, quick and will only get better. Both he and Osula just need a bit of composure in front of goal and that will come with time, but the future looks bright with those 2 up front for a few years to come.

Two, tall, strong, fast, athletic young lads, up front, racing towards goal and scaring defenders?

It'll never catch on.......

;)
 
With all talk of Jebbison’s age and the time he needs, a piece on The Athletic today about Dominic Solanke finally starting to deliver on the promise he showed at youth level at the age of 26 feels relevant. Linked below for anyone with a login. There may be differing views as to whether Solanke is the heir to Harry Kane but what’s beyond doubt is that he’s now scoring regularly at Premier League level for one of the lower achieving sides. Emphasises the point that players do often need time.


Solanke was a banter player at one time. I think being at Chelsea for ages not getting played then moving to Liverpool for 20 something matches held him back a bit. So it meant it took a couple of seasons at Bournemouth for him to get going. He certainly smashed the Championship last time they were down there, nearly 40 goals over two seasons.
 
Lys Mousset was big, strong and quick.


Will he get better though ?

It’s always been a puzzle to me why a good number of posters on here seem to think that the attributes of being big , strong and quick are almost essential requirements in the make up of a top quality striker .

Down the years , I can think of quite a few who were none too shabby in the latter respect but who lacked at least two or in some cases all three of the former .

They include Ferenc Puskas , Alfredo de Stefano , Pele , Jimmy Greaves and Lionel Messi to name but a few……
 
It’s always been a puzzle to me why a good number of posters on here seem to think that the attributes of being big , strong and quick are almost essential requirements in the make up of a top quality striker .

Down the years , I can think of quite a few who were none too shabby in the latter respect but who lacked at least two or in some cases all three of the former .

They include Ferenc Puskas , Alfredo de Stefano , Pele , Jimmy Greaves and Lionel Messi to name but a few……
4 of the players you name played over 50 years ago, when athleticism was far less important than it is today.

The other player is probably the best player this century. He is an exception that proves the rule. For every Messi there are dozens of Bennie Traores.

People think that being big, strong and quick is important because nowadays the vast majority of top flight forwards who are successful are indeed big, strong and quick. One of the reasons we are doing poorly this season is because we are physically inferior as a team to most of the other sides.
 
It’s always been a puzzle to me why a good number of posters on here seem to think that the attributes of being big , strong and quick are almost essential requirements in the make up of a top quality striker .

Down the years , I can think of quite a few who were none too shabby in the latter respect but who lacked at least two or in some cases all three of the former .

They include Ferenc Puskas , Alfredo de Stefano , Pele , Jimmy Greaves and Lionel Messi to name but a few……
Look at the opposition our next PL game, nearly every player will be "big, strong and quick". Athleticism is vital in the sport these days.

I remember Everton at home and all the midfield 3 for example were strong athletic fuckers. Not saying it guarantees you to win every week but it helps you compete more often.
 
It’s always been a puzzle to me why a good number of posters on here seem to think that the attributes of being big , strong and quick are almost essential requirements in the make up of a top quality striker .

Down the years , I can think of quite a few who were none too shabby in the latter respect but who lacked at least two or in some cases all three of the former .

They include Ferenc Puskas , Alfredo de Stefano , Pele , Jimmy Greaves and Lionel Messi to name but a few……
'Down the years '
 
4 of the players you name played over 50 years ago, when athleticism was far less important than it is today.

The other player is probably the best player this century. He is an exception that proves the rule. For every Messi there are dozens of Bennie Traores.

People think that being big, strong and quick is important because nowadays the vast majority of top flight forwards who are successful are indeed big, strong and quick. One of the reasons we are doing poorly this season is because we are physically inferior as a team to most of the other sides
Agreed. West Ham on Sunday were the least athletic team we'd played and we were better than them. I thought they were the opposite of Bournemouth. Ward-Prowse must be up there as one of the slowest midfielders in the league.
 

It’s always been a puzzle to me why a good number of posters on here seem to think that the attributes of being big , strong and quick are almost essential requirements in the make up of a top quality striker .

Down the years , I can think of quite a few who were none too shabby in the latter respect but who lacked at least two or in some cases all three of the former .

They include Ferenc Puskas , Alfredo de Stefano , Pele , Jimmy Greaves and Lionel Messi to name but a few……
If you watch old football it is played at a much much slower pace. It's like comparing tennis with modern racquets Vs the old wooden ones.

People talk about the premier League being physically tougher than almost every overseas league and I include the championship in that.
 
If you watch old football it is played at a much much slower pace. It's like comparing tennis with modern racquets Vs the old wooden ones.

People talk about the premier League being physically tougher than almost every overseas league and I include the championship in that.
Modern players wouldn’t have survived on pitches of yesteryear’s and tough you are joking
 
Modern players wouldn’t have survived on pitches of yesteryear’s and tough you are joking
Drop a player from the early 90s into the premier league and they would be brushed aside let alone before. The science, professionalism and global transfers has completely transformed it.

What overseas league is as physically demanding? Even in the harsher rules of today the premier league is still way more physical than any other major league
 
Drop a player from the early 90s into the premier league and they would be brushed aside let alone before. The science, professionalism and global transfers has completely transformed it.

What overseas league is as physically demanding? Even in the harsher rules of today the premier league is still way more physical than any other major league
Arsenal would bite your hand off for prime shearer 93-96 version
 
Modern players wouldn’t have survived on pitches of yesteryear’s and tough you are joking
If you drop an average player into the game 50 years ago they'd shine. They'd be fitter, faster and stronger.

There would be things alien to them - the tackling and the pitches - but the game has come on leaps and bounds.
 
Two, tall, strong, fast, athletic young lads, up front, racing towards goal and scaring defenders?

It'll never catch on.......

;)
On that basis you may as well just sign a couple of sprinters from the sports academy down cliff because the two your on about can't Finnish/score
 
If you drop an average player into the game 50 years ago they'd shine. They'd be fitter, faster and stronger.

There would be things alien to them - the tackling and the pitches - but the game has come on leaps and bounds.
But there's no reason to think that the stars of 50 years ago, raised and trained identically to today's modern players, wouldn't be able to adapt? Innate skill is innate skill after all.
They'd have to pack in the 40 a day habit though.
 
But there's no reason to think that the stars of 50 years ago, raised and trained identically to today's modern players, wouldn't be able to adapt? Innate skill is innate skill after all.
They'd have to pack in the 40 a day habit though.

Yes, you're correct. Of course they could. But one would suspect that smaller players would have a harder time making an impact. The average height of players has gone up.
 
If you drop an average player into the game 50 years ago they'd shine. They'd be fitter, faster and stronger.

There would be things alien to them - the tackling and the pitches - but the game has come on leaps and bounds.
As soon as they ran on to the pitch 50 years they’re bottle would go all that lovely mud start them off at the old Baseball Ground
 

It’s always been a puzzle to me why a good number of posters on here seem to think that the attributes of being big , strong and quick are almost essential requirements in the make up of a top quality striker .

Down the years , I can think of quite a few who were none too shabby in the latter respect but who lacked at least two or in some cases all three of the former .

They include Ferenc Puskas , Alfredo de Stefano , Pele , Jimmy Greaves and Lionel Messi to name but a few……
Interesting point, but I suspect the games moved on. Players are so much more athletic these days, and I doubt those players would excel in the modern game. That's not to say they wouldn't have adapted their physiques if they were in the modern era, but that we'll never know.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom