Billy's goal drought

[finlaytheblade]

Sharp were'nt too sharp last nite,is he feeling the pressure.

Ithink you've got it this means lot to him (promotion)

 

[Sean Thornton]

Can I say it for you? Hanson is crap!

Conor Sammon (15/16) - 6 goals
James Hanson (16/17) - 5 goals

Says it all for me, I honestly think you could put Sammon in a team as good as us he wouldn't do any worse than Hanson. If Hanson had been signed last season he would have got as much stick as Sammon

You're genunely suggesting that Sammons input to the team matches that of Hanson?

Those phone lights look as if they do cause problems after all.

Btw. 2015/16 Hanson scored twice as many goals as CS.

 

[GrayBlade]

Sharp were'nt too sharp last nite,is he feeling the pressure.

No.

How many times is it that you've written old fat arse off this season Chippy?

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

Can I say it for you? Hanson is crap!

Conor Sammon (15/16) - 6 goals
James Hanson (16/17) - 5 goals

Says it all for me, I honestly think you could put Sammon in a team as good as us he wouldn't do any worse than Hanson. If Hanson had been signed last season he would have got as much stick as Sammon

Suggesting Sammon would contribute the same as Hanson in this team makes any footballing opinion you have null and void.

Perhaps one of the most bizarre/ridiculous comments I have ever seen on this forum. Seriously.

 

[I should coco]

If we don't get a better striker than Billy in the summer , i will conclude my Club has lost its ambition.
And with McCabe in charge , i have every right to be vigilant on that score.

You said that yesterday, so you must be really pleased with yourself to repeat it.

Do you really think it is such a portentous couple of sentences that it must be rehashed for us all to marvel at?

 

[DronnieBlade]

Sammon vs Hanson.

A conundrum between a CF that doesn't win headers and one that does win them, but they most often go to an opponent.

Come back Matt Done. All is forgiven fella !!

UTB

 

[YES Blade]

Suggesting Sammon would contribute the same as Hanson in this team makes any footballing opinion you have null and void.

Perhaps one of the most bizarre/ridiculous comments I have ever seen on this forum. Seriously.

Yes that's right, I think Hanson is as crap as Sammon! Sorry about that.

Both got poor goalscoring rates (Hanson 0.26 per game, Sammon 0.15 per game), both big lumps that just "put themselves about"

 

[DronnieBlade]

Yes that's right, I think Hanson is as crap as Sammon! Sorry about that.

Both got poor goalscoring rates (Hanson 0.26 per game, Sammon 0.15 per game), both big lumps that just "put themselves about"

I see where you are coming from. Neither player is any good in a team set up to play, through our excellent midfield, possession based, passing progressive football.

Tufty. I hold my hands up. I just don't get why you have gone noticeably more direct, in so doing changing a winning formula that has seen us go from bottom to top in a very short time, and reduced to the role of bit part player, the country's leading goal scorer. You would think you would have learned lessons from the doomed from the start Sharp /Clarke partnership. But what do I know eh !

In Tufty I trust.

UTB

 

[Sean Thornton]

I see where you are coming from. Neither player is any good in a team set up to play, through our excellent midfield, possession based, passing progressive football.

Tufty. I hold my hands up. I just don't get why you have gone noticeably more direct, in so doing changing a winning formula that has seen us go from bottom to top in a very short time, and reduced to the role of bit part player, the country's leading goal scorer. You would think you would have learned lessons from the doomed from the start Sharp /Clarke partnership. But what do I know eh !

In Tufty I trust.

UTB

Bit part player?

Lol. Come on Dronnie, enough is enough.

 

[DronnieBlade]

Bit part player?

Lol. Come on Dronnie, enough is enough.

OK. Bit part too strong a description. I'll take that back.

But noticeably less effective than has been the case in our most recent games. 0 in 4. Games which, coincidently, we have hoofed it to Hanson a lot more.

Unlike others, I won't put this down to tiredness. You gotta read between the lines fellas.

UTB

 

[Revolution]

But noticeably less effective than has been the case in our most recent games. 0 in 4. Games which, coincidently, we have hoofed it to Hanson a lot more.

Unlike others, I won't put this down to tiredness. You gotta read between the lines fellas.

UTB

Small
Sample
Size

 

[DronnieBlade]

Small
Sample
Size

Trending
In
The
Wrong
Direction ?!

UTB

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Quite a lot to take in on this thread, but to summarise I feel like we're down:

• Sharp scores goals
• Sharp scores goals alongside Hanson
• Sharp scores goals when not alongside Hanson
• We are quite good at winning when Sharp plays with Hanson, and when Sharp plays with most of our other strikers

Illuminating stuff when all said and done.

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

OK. Bit part too strong a description. I'll take that back.

But noticeably less effective than has been the case in our most recent games. 0 in 4. Games which, coincidently, we have hoofed it to Hanson a lot more.

Unlike others, I won't put this down to tiredness. You gotta read between the lines fellas.

UTB

The only long balls to Hanson on Tuesday I saw were goal kicks or clearances.

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

No.

How many times is it that you've written old fat arse off this season Chippy?

No..

His arse still looks grand Gray,but he was defo off form,passes going astray,having a hard ruff time against either Cooper or Webster whoever was picking him up,and as usual referee turning a blind eye

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

Ithink you've got it this means lot to him (promotion)

Yes lot of weight on his shoulders,we are on the vinegar stroke now and Billy knows it.

 

[DronnieBlade]

The only long balls to Hanson on Tuesday I saw were goal kicks or clearances.

1st half your almost right.

2nd half ???????

UTB

 

[Revolution]

Trending
In
The
Wrong
Direction ?!

UTB

Maybe, but given that we are virtually promoted and the goalless spell has still seen us get 10 points from 12 it's something I find difficult to get worked up about.

 

[DronnieBlade]

Maybe, but given that we are virtually promoted and the goalless spell has still seen us get 10 points from 12 it's something I find difficult to get worked up about.

Whereas I must admit to concerns when both our strikers are consistently not scoring. It doesn't bode well going forwards, let's just say that when we are having to rely on CBs at set plays and Wing Backs in open play.

UTB

 

[Revolution]

Whereas I must admit to concerns when both our strikers are consistently not scoring. It doesn't bode well going forwards, let's just say that when we are having to rely on CBs at set plays and Wing Backs in open play.

UTB

"Going forwards" is 6 games.

Plus, you know what? I am pleased that wing backs and CBs are scoring. For years I have been saying that we do not score enough goals to get promotion, and that one of the reasons for this was that since about 2012 our managers (most notably Clough and Adkins) have seemingly gone out of their way to (i) collect midfielders with poor scoring and assist records and (ii) play ponderously, which does not allow midfielders to get forward to score goals. Wilder has got more out of some of these players and has signed midfielders who score and/or assist (Duffy and Fleck, most notably).

All promoted teams "rely" on CBs and midfielders to score. It is a feature, not a bug.

 

[Blend-it-like-Harris]

Fans who can't see the connection between fluidity of movement, direction and positional play of two front men and goals coming from midfielders and defenders obviously don't understand the principles on which Wilder has set about winning the league. We have fans complaining our defence isn't good enough - they don't understand either. We've conceded 14 goals at home (including the 3 when we were all at "Southend-sea") - they should look at our goal difference and try to get their heads round the logic of how Wilder chooses to play. Would they prefer Billy now being on 30-plus goals and the rest managing about 20 between 'em? How do they think a right-back has managed to pop up all over the shop and grab 10? How do they explain a right-back crossing from wide-deep to a left-back getting on the end of it to score?
I'm not going to bother trying to explain it to them.... if they have no intention of opening their minds to try to understand it.

 

[super_pig]

can i nominate this thread as most pointless ever?? even more pointless than the Shed thread.

 

[Fanny magnet]

Fans who can't see the connection between fluidity of movement, direction and positional play of two front men and goals coming from midfielders and defenders obviously don't understand the principles on which Wilder has set about winning the league. We have fans complaining our defence isn't good enough - they don't understand either. We've conceded 14 goals at home (including the 3 when we were all at "Southend-sea") - they should look at our goal difference and try to get their heads round the logic of how Wilder chooses to play. Would they prefer Billy now being on 30-plus goals and the rest managing about 20 between 'em? How do they think a right-back has managed to pop up all over the shop and grab 10? How do they explain a right-back crossing from wide-deep to a left-back getting on the end of it to score?
I'm not going to bother trying to explain it to them.... if they have no intention of opening their minds to try to understand it.

Great post
Isn't it great that our play is so complex now that even some of our fans struggle to compartmentalize it in to what they have been used to seeing for their life as a paying customer

 

[GrayBlade]

His arse still looks grand Gray,but he was defo off form,passes going astray,having a hard ruff time against either Cooper or Webster whoever was picking him up,and as usual referee turning a blind eye

It's what he's done all season Chippy in fact it's what he's always done.. can't stop scoring followed by 3 or 4 game blanks.

I think he'll score against Cov and be back on track for his 200 up maybe even 30.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

to compare hanson with Akinbiyi is ridiculous
Akinbiyi was a selfish player who yes scored more goals but that was because he never helped the team
Hanson works every secomd hes on the pitch , does all the support work and laying off

Hes there to feed the others
a slight clue in in the fact we are now ELEVEN games unbeaten

some of the best money weve ever ever invested
we are going up because CW signed him

it really is that clear
Billy Sharp ask him his thoughts on Hanson
see if he thinks hes useless

I don’t for a minute think Hanson is useless. However, when Sharp was interviewed after the Oxford game (I think) he talked about how Lavery had helped turn the game and must be pushing for a start. Just my perception but I got the impression that he was willing Wilder to play him and that he would rather play alongside him. I think Billy prefers playing with a quick partner who will turn defences as opposed to an archetypal target man such as Hanson. His goals record alongside Done/Lavery compared to playing alongside Clarke/Hanson (or even Henderson during his last spell) would back this up.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

If that's aimed at YT, I will happily admit to a healthy prejudice (or even an unhealthy one) against players, professional players, paid tens of thousands of pounds a year who cannot, repeat cannot demonstrate an ability to consistently control a simple ball, or make a simple straight pass. Consistently this is the case with James Hanson. Sorry if this upsets a few but the evidence is very very clearly there.

I prefer my footballers to be able to play football. I prefer to support a football team that plays football. I do not, unlike hundreds (if not thousands) of our paying fans choose to clap and cheer when our CF heads it straight to an opponent. Throughout the game. Consistently.

That's NOT football. Not in a month of Sundays.

UTB

Ps just to add to my prejudice, does this look like a side that's wobbling around 10 games ago and in desperate need of a Hanson ? Or does it look like a side superior to all comers in this league, destined for promotion with or without a Hanson ?

View attachment 24970

I would say the truth lands somewhere in between those two scenarios. We did have a little wobble in January. Then we signed Hanson and haven’t lost since. However, it’s down to a lot more than just Hanson and I think we would still be in the top 2 without him. We are the best team in the league. Hanson provides us with an option that is different to what we had in Sharp, Done, Lavery and McNulty whilst Clarke was out injured. I think it’s handy for clubs to have a player like Hanson or Clarke in their squad (not that they are that similar but both are big and could be described as target men).


I, like you, think we over-utilise Hanson and his aerial prowess. I think it’s taken a little bit of the flair out of our attacking play. Persnally, I prefer Lavery as a partner for Sharp most of the time and I suspect Sharp does too. I think Hanson is well worth a place on the bench though because as I say, he brings a different option and allows us to mix it up despite his technical limitations. His presence proved invaluable at Peterborough for example. He got another assist at Oldham on Saturday too.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Oh dear , i have gone and upset the Billy men , and I'm not even a Catholic !
I didn't say "fuck him off" if we go up.
I said he's my hero captain this season and will stay , in some capacity , maybe sub.
I said bye-bye McNulty , Clarke & Done for reasons too obvious to rehearse here.
I said Billy will start if the Board don't buy younger faster strikers of a higher quality than Billy.
God knows how much that costs and whether we'll spend it.
Lavery has time to develop , if not crocked by Gerrard's block which i was about 15 yards from and heard as much as saw. Lav put his full force into a goalscoring shot and hit the brick wall that is Gerrard.
After that , who've we got ?
Billy , an ex-Championship scorer (so he has the pedigree) who remains remarkably injury-free , but isn't getting any younger. He could help us struggle to survive , but our future progress can't depend on him.
Hanson , a willing presser and winner of the majority of his headers (which Billy rarely feeds off) but who has never played above this level.
If that is our first-choice pair in the higher division , will we score enough to survive ? Barely.
So logically we must get at least one , if not two strikers - and if the Club has ambitions , it is no good getting strikers who are older or slower or lower quality than Billy.
This is not being disrespectful to Billy , it is just logic.
If we don't get a better striker than Billy in the summer , i will conclude my Club has lost its ambition.
And with McCabe in charge , i have every right to be vigilant on that score.

The only slight contention I have here is that the striker might not necessarily be “better” in terms of a goalscorer but we will need a player who offers more in general play, ideally to partner him. Ideally, I’d like a player who is quick and skilful like Lavery but big and good in the air like Hanson to play alongside Sharp. It's then possible that Sharp could be the main man for goals but that the partner is the main creative force.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Never known a player in the history of Sheffield United have so many excuses made for him
If he doesn't score in a couple of games it's the other players fault his previous two spells were the managers fault I suppose if he gets pissed and locked up it's heinikens fault

As I’ve said before, I don’t see it as a matter of fault. Just an observation that some players complement each other better than others. Because Billy is neither big nor fast, it makes it difficult to select the right partner or system for him. But he’s a clever player and has qualities which are above league 1 standard so it also makes it hard not to play him.


I don’t think it’s Hanson’s “fault” that Billy hasn’t scored for a few games. But I do think he would have hit 30 by now if he’d played all season alongside Done or Lavery. Whether the team as a whole would have done better or amassed more points is debatable.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Suggesting Sammon would contribute the same as Hanson in this team makes any footballing opinion you have null and void.

Perhaps one of the most bizarre/ridiculous comments I have ever seen on this forum. Seriously.

In fairness, a lot of Sammon’s problems were mental as when his confidence went, he became woeful. Early on in the season, when he was enjoying his football, he actually looked good for us (for about a month). So in a team that was winning regularly and playing good football, it’s not unfeasible that he would do well. That said, he’d still be crap in the air.

 

[BushBlade]

Fans who can't see the connection between fluidity of movement, direction and positional play of two front men and goals coming from midfielders and defenders obviously don't understand the principles on which Wilder has set about winning the league. We have fans complaining our defence isn't good enough - they don't understand either. We've conceded 14 goals at home (including the 3 when we were all at "Southend-sea") - they should look at our goal difference and try to get their heads round the logic of how Wilder chooses to play. Would they prefer Billy now being on 30-plus goals and the rest managing about 20 between 'em? How do they think a right-back has managed to pop up all over the shop and grab 10? How do they explain a right-back crossing from wide-deep to a left-back getting on the end of it to score?
I'm not going to bother trying to explain it to them.... if they have no intention of opening their minds to try to understand it.

I can simplify this. For years we've moaned about boring, safe, 'you start with a point' football. Now we've got exciting football which delivers goals and, more importantly, results. So people moan that 'we can't defend'.
It's one of the most basic principles in football; to score a lot you have to commit men forward. If you do, you're more likely to concede.