Early days but the Cannon signing baffles me.

[ekke287]

Caveat #1 - I understand it’s early days for Cannons career at SUFC, so this may be somewhat irrelevant however I feel it’s a valid discussion point.

Caveat #2 - This is no criticism of Cannon as a player, I understand his play style and what he offers to a team that play to his strengths.

——

So I was at the derby game, in the home end, and at the Portsmouth game yesterday, so admittedly it’s a small sample size, however both games felt very similar in terms of approach and tactics. Both we seemed adamant to go forward, especially first halves, and we created little chances outside of spells of individual quality.

Cannon obviously got the assist at Derby and had a good one on one yesterday, but outside of that he’s not hugely impacting the games imo, again, not his fault.

The point of contention for me is why sign a player that needs chances when we create little for them? I thought with the Cannon signing it might signal an intent to slightly change the attacking play style to play to his strengths, but it seems we’re opting for a cautious approach and relying on that individual quality to pull us through games (eg Hamer, JRS, BBD etc).

I just find it baffling to spend on such a player, when others are already filling that role, and as a counter argument, possibly able to make more of that role (eg Moores hold up play or Campbells pace to get in behind). Obviously it’s a bit irrelevant when you’re winning games but it’s a big outlay to then see little to no adaption of that persons play style.

Am I overthinking this? Is it too early to tell? I’m not sure, but yesterday watching Portsmouth go through the middle to Ogilvie (?) and crosses in to him to have chances, you could see what they were trying to do (and a better finisher we’d have been behind at HT).

Our response then is to either get it to Hamer and hope for some magic, or pass it across the back line out to the wings and back again until we can fashion some sort of forward play.

What do you think? Personally at this point I can’t make sense of it.

 

[3Cheers4Ramirez]

He'll be decent backup for Moore...

 

[Snake]

This reminds me of the Ryan Leonard signing a few years ago. Wilder seemed to chase him for ages and he was eventually signed for a relatively big fee (for us at that time). He just didn't seem to fit into any of our playing patterns at all. We were fortunate to more or less get our money back when we offloaded him to Millwall. Not sure we'll get £10m back for Cannon though. It's very early days of course, but so far the poor guy looks totally lost.

 

[Bell4]

Caveat #1 - I understand it’s early days for Cannons career at SUFC, so this may be somewhat irrelevant however I feel it’s a valid discussion point.

Caveat #2 - This is no criticism of Cannon as a player, I understand his play style and what he offers to a team that play to his strengths.

——

So I was at the derby game, in the home end, and at the Portsmouth game yesterday, so admittedly it’s a small sample size, however both games felt very similar in terms of approach and tactics. Both we seemed adamant to go forward, especially first halves, and we created little chances outside of spells of individual quality.

Cannon obviously got the assist at Derby and had a good one on one yesterday, but outside of that he’s not hugely impacting the games imo, again, not his fault.

The point of contention for me is why sign a player that needs chances when we create little for them? I thought with the Cannon signing it might signal an intent to slightly change the attacking play style to play to his strengths, but it seems we’re opting for a cautious approach and relying on that individual quality to pull us through games (eg Hamer, JRS, BBD etc).

I just find it baffling to spend on such a player, when others are already filling that role, and as a counter argument, possibly able to make more of that role (eg Moores hold up play or Campbells pace to get in behind). Obviously it’s a bit irrelevant when you’re winning games but it’s a big outlay to then see little to no adaption of that persons play style.

Am I overthinking this? Is it too early to tell? I’m not sure, but yesterday watching Portsmouth go through the middle to Ogilvie (?) and crosses in to him to have chances, you could see what they were trying to do (and a better finisher we’d have been behind at HT).

Our response then is to either get it to Hamer and hope for some magic, or pass it across the back line out to the wings and back again until we can fashion some sort of forward play.

What do you think? Personally at this point I can’t make sense of it.

Good post

I hope , sincerely, that there is a much greater mind than mine that has a master plan re Tommy , because I just can’t see it . Yes he contributed an assist at Derby but so far other than that , he looks like a lost, confused pub league player . Perhaps that’s because , despite , somehow , us being 2nd , our manager is recently behaving like a lost , confused pub league manager . Blaming our players rather than his tactics and team formation.

It really is a £10m head scratcher isn’t it .

 

[CrookesBlade]

Aye, early days indeed.

 

[utd4ever]

STRIKERS GRAVEYARD

Apart from Billy Sharp, every centre forward we have signed in Wilders era has been poor scoring wise.

 

[coaxingstar71]

STRIKERS GRAVEYARD

Apart from Billy Sharp, every centre forward we have signed in Wilders era has been poor scoring wise.

And Wilder didn’t sign him.

 

[bruce]

STRIKERS GRAVEYARD

Apart from Billy Sharp, every centre forward we have signed in Wilders era has been poor scoring wise.

Adkins signed Sharp.
However, Wilder did sign Clarke who performed quite well for us.

 

[Den Den]

Caveat #1 - I understand it’s early days for Cannons career at SUFC, so this may be somewhat irrelevant however I feel it’s a valid discussion point.

Caveat #2 - This is no criticism of Cannon as a player, I understand his play style and what he offers to a team that play to his strengths.

——

So I was at the derby game, in the home end, and at the Portsmouth game yesterday, so admittedly it’s a small sample size, however both games felt very similar in terms of approach and tactics. Both we seemed adamant to go forward, especially first halves, and we created little chances outside of spells of individual quality.

Cannon obviously got the assist at Derby and had a good one on one yesterday, but outside of that he’s not hugely impacting the games imo, again, not his fault.

The point of contention for me is why sign a player that needs chances when we create little for them? I thought with the Cannon signing it might signal an intent to slightly change the attacking play style to play to his strengths, but it seems we’re opting for a cautious approach and relying on that individual quality to pull us through games (eg Hamer, JRS, BBD etc).

I just find it baffling to spend on such a player, when others are already filling that role, and as a counter argument, possibly able to make more of that role (eg Moores hold up play or Campbells pace to get in behind). Obviously it’s a bit irrelevant when you’re winning games but it’s a big outlay to then see little to no adaption of that persons play style.

Am I overthinking this? Is it too early to tell? I’m not sure, but yesterday watching Portsmouth go through the middle to Ogilvie (?) and crosses in to him to have chances, you could see what they were trying to do (and a better finisher we’d have been behind at HT).

Our response then is to either get it to Hamer and hope for some magic, or pass it across the back line out to the wings and back again until we can fashion some sort of forward play.

What do you think? Personally at this point I can’t make sense of it.

You say, play to his strengths, I personally haven’t seen that he has any strengths, offered nothing in the three games he’s played.
Need a big improvement from him

 

[Jimmy Fleck]

STRIKERS GRAVEYARD

Apart from Billy Sharp, every centre forward we have signed in Wilders era has been poor scoring wise.

Yeah mcgoldrick was shit

 

[Slim Man]

I said this while we were linked with him, and when we signed him.

It's a lot of money to pay for a player when we don't have anyone, bar Hamer, who will create chances for him. And we don't play a style that is controlled pressure, chance after chance. We are incapable of that.

But he'd piss goals for Sunderland so at least they didn't sign him.

 

[AnstonBlade1]

The problem is it doesn’t matter who we have up front we don’t create chances!!

There were areas of the side that needed strengthening more than a striker i.e a defender to break up the bombscare partnership of Anel and Robbo.

 

[10p]

Is it really Cannon, or is he Archer in disguise?

If he’d played for Portsmouth they’d have pasted us yesterday.
Perhaps that strange idea of playing a winger, on his correct wing (e.g. Murphy yesterday) and crossing into t.he box would help him?

 

[Tanny1889]

He is useless. Never gonna change, same for stoke

 

[YES Blade]

He’s played 3 matches and 2 of those Hamer was suspended and Rak-Sakyi has been returning from injury.

With those two in the team I reckon he’ll get more chances and goals.

 

[DronnieBlade]

We have overpaid. Only time will tell by how much.

Many will argue if he contributes between now and the rest of the season to help get us over the line, then its job done.

Maybe that’s it in a nutshell ?!.

UTB

 

[Blademan89]

We are going to need to chsnge either the system/formation or our attacking play/patterns of play to see any profit from Cannon.

Playing him as a lone striker with slow build up play and opting to recycle ball isn't going to suit him (from what little I've seen of him).

Funny thing is cannon would probably work best in our old system 3412.

 

[The Bear]

STRIKERS GRAVEYARD

Apart from Billy Sharp, every centre forward we have signed in Wilders era has been poor scoring wise.

Slightly ambiguous post as Billy signed by Madkins.

 

[ISZA ⚔️]

Barely even notice he’s playing. Early days.

 

[Fjortoft's Aeroplane]

Caveat #1 - I understand it’s early days for Cannons career at SUFC, so this may be somewhat irrelevant however I feel it’s a valid discussion point.

Caveat #2 - This is no criticism of Cannon as a player, I understand his play style and what he offers to a team that play to his strengths.

——

So I was at the derby game, in the home end, and at the Portsmouth game yesterday, so admittedly it’s a small sample size, however both games felt very similar in terms of approach and tactics. Both we seemed adamant to go forward, especially first halves, and we created little chances outside of spells of individual quality.

Cannon obviously got the assist at Derby and had a good one on one yesterday, but outside of that he’s not hugely impacting the games imo, again, not his fault.

The point of contention for me is why sign a player that needs chances when we create little for them? I thought with the Cannon signing it might signal an intent to slightly change the attacking play style to play to his strengths, but it seems we’re opting for a cautious approach and relying on that individual quality to pull us through games (eg Hamer, JRS, BBD etc).

I just find it baffling to spend on such a player, when others are already filling that role, and as a counter argument, possibly able to make more of that role (eg Moores hold up play or Campbells pace to get in behind). Obviously it’s a bit irrelevant when you’re winning games but it’s a big outlay to then see little to no adaption of that persons play style.

Am I overthinking this? Is it too early to tell? I’m not sure, but yesterday watching Portsmouth go through the middle to Ogilvie (?) and crosses in to him to have chances, you could see what they were trying to do (and a better finisher we’d have been behind at HT).

Our response then is to either get it to Hamer and hope for some magic, or pass it across the back line out to the wings and back again until we can fashion some sort of forward play.

What do you think? Personally at this point I can’t make sense of it.

Isn't it a bit weird to say "our style of play isn't to create chances" though? I'm not convinced about Cannon at all, but if the key issue is "our playing style isn't about creating chances" then it's fair to say our playing style is a bag of shit and in need of a huge overhaul.

 

[RecordBreakers]

The lad will score goals if we stop with the tippy tappy shit

 

[LudlamBlade]

Peck desperately needed a rest, Davies isn't back fit, Blaster is obviously not an option...of course we've had to play the two CDMs, even though it's not ideal and even though I'm sure it's not what Wilder wants.

The result? Very little creativity, meaning a striker like Cannon will never get many chances.

Either of Davies, Peck or Blaster next to either of Souza or Choudhury and I feel we'll start to create more and Cannon will start bagging goals for us, especially once BBD has properly reintegrated himself.

I expect this "slump" to be gone before we know it, and that autos will be confirmed at an early opportunity.

(Feels strange to describe 1 loss in 6 as a slump, especially for anyone with memories of League One or further back, but that seems to be the general mood on here)

 

[Keen Blade]

The problem is it doesn’t matter who we have up front we don’t create chances!!

There were areas of the side that needed strengthening more than a striker i.e a defender to break up the bombscare partnership of Anel and Robbo.

And a properly creative midfielder to replace Blaster.

 

['Doc' Pace my hero]

In view of the observations about Cannon,perhaps we can now be a bit less critical of Brewster.It is almost certain that Hamer will be the top scorer this season,we could well have £30m worth of championship ‘strikers’ who don’t score double figures between them and we still get promoted !!

 

[Keen Blade]

The problem is it doesn’t matter who we have up front we don’t create chances!!

There were areas of the side that needed strengthening more than a striker i.e a defender to break up the bombscare partnership of Anel and Robbo.

And a properly creative midfielder to replace Blaster

Isn't it a bit weird to say "our style of play isn't to create chances" though? I'm not convinced about Cannon at all, but if the key issue is "our playing style isn't about creating chances" then it's fair to say our playing style is a bag of shit and in need of a huge overhaul.

Yeh but some on here can't handle the truth put in stark terms.

Better to say
We love farting about in our own box.
We are reluctant to get over the halfway line with any speed.
We prefer to face a fully prepared opposition defence , rather than try to catch them out with any pace.
We don't hold with putting in dangerous crosses or corners
We like to stick to what we know - our slow build-up play is all we've been taught.
We avoid hamstring injuries by never running too quickly , especially if we have the ball.
We've spent £10m on a striker for whom trying to jump for a header is just not in his repertoire (like Campbell) but unlike Campbell he has no strength on the ball.
And though they are similar style , we'll play both of them together and provide them with none of the appropriate service.
Make it sound like a deliberate style.

 

[Mumbo]

Peck desperately needed a rest, Davies isn't back fit, Blaster is obviously not an option...of course we've had to play the two CDMs, even though it's not ideal and even though I'm sure it's not what Wilder wants.

The result? Very little creativity, meaning a striker like Cannon will never get many chances.

Either of Davies, Peck or Blaster next to either of Souza or Choudhury and I feel we'll start to create more and Cannon will start bagging goals for us, especially once BBD has properly reintegrated himself.

I expect this "slump" to be gone before we know it, and that autos will be confirmed at an early opportunity.

(Feels strange to describe 1 loss in 6 as a slump, especially for anyone with memories of League One or further back, but that seems to be the general mood on here)

15 points from 18…..I’ll take that.
I’d like to be entertained but it’s more like a dental appointment.
Surely performances will pick up?
You never know what you’ve got till it’s gone and for me the importance of O’Hare,Peck, Davies,Saki and Seriki all of whom provide us with energy and forward momentum has been highlighted.

 

[AdamSufc1997]

Cannon got boot on at end of the game

 

[s20Blade]

With Moore coming back he's 4th choice behind Brewster for me.

 

[71Blade]

Cannon got boot on at end of the game

Think he would be better wearing that one?? Harsh but couldn't resist

 

[Derek1889]

To be fair he helped the first goal. Not saying that makes up for it. But credit for that. Still needs to do more. He needs to get in the positions that ohare gets in. The amount of headers or been in box at the right time needs cannon to be there. Be some good options when Moore is back.