Hammond.....again

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

Champagneblade said:
I think you are being very generous there regarding 4-4-2.

In suggesting Hammond and a Basham type then considering Coutts you are already restricting the midfield to less than 5 goals.

It puts a heck of a lot of pressure on the left winger and strikers to get 50-60 goal between them.

I'd simply say Hammond hasn't got the legs for 4-4-2 and therefore I'm out. Morsy maybe, but that ship sailed when Adkins continued and still continues to fawn over Hammond.

Losing out on Morsy is another Kevin Davies moment. Right on our doorstep yet we did naff all.
Click to expand...


According to Wiki, Sam Morsy is yet to score more than 4 goals in a season. When saints got back to back promotions, Hammond averaged 5 goals per season (6 and 4).
 



Alfreton14Blade said:
Adkins goes into Southampton five years ago, & finds Hammond the "model pro" there, the player that all others look up to, whose attitude, approach & application are spot on.

Fast forward five years. No surprise at all that Adkins doesn't find that sort of character in the SUFC changing room. No surprise that he's desperate to have that sort of exemplary leadership brought into the club, in trying to put right the mental weakness & the shoddiness that prevails.

But should it be Hammond, five years older & wearier, as the man to fill that role? Or should a younger, more effective version be scouted & recruited?

I suppose it's the quick fix vs. the longer term dilemma. Do we have an exemplary professional, whose attitude is important as his waning performance, brought in, knowing he'll have an instant impact on the dressing room? Or do we recruit someone to "grow into" that "They Shall Not Pass" defensive role, with leadership qualities respected by his peers? (All this assumes, in defeatist fashion, that the money's just not there to buy a Sam Morsy.)

In all honesty: who knows?

We certainly need the right characters in there, including shining lights like Hammond is meant to be.

Longwindedly, I'm saying I can see the logic of Hammond being here, however frustrated I am at him because of his old-man limitations.
Click to expand...


I like the idea of finding a younger version. I think the difficulty is identifying the personality type when you've not worked with them before. You're essentially taking other people's word for it. Clough talked about his desire to only sign players of the right temperament and ended up with a right bunch of wasters who only bothered putting the effort in for big cup games.
 
1danewhitehouse said:
I like the idea of finding a younger version. I think the difficulty is identifying the personality type when you've not worked with them before. You're essentially taking other people's word for it. Clough talked about his desire to only sign players of the right temperament and ended up with a right bunch of wasters who only bothered putting the effort in for big cup games.
Click to expand...
And it's very difficult to predict what happens when you sign a kid who was probably on about £200 a week and pay him £2k a week, or more.
 
1danewhitehouse said:
I like the idea of finding a younger version. I think the difficulty is identifying the personality type when you've not worked with them before. You're essentially taking other people's word for it. Clough talked about his desire to only sign players of the right temperament and ended up with a right bunch of wasters who only bothered putting the effort in for big cup games.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Cloughy was always going on about the "character" necessary in potential signings. Complete bollocks in his case.
 
1danewhitehouse said:
I'm sure he thought they would be good characters at the time he signed them. But he was wrong.
Click to expand...

It's funny, isn't it? - you think of someone like Neil Warnock who positively relishes the challenge of managing a character like Colin Kazim-Richards. Then, on the opposite pole almost, you get a Cloughy - insistent on signing players with "good character" on the face of it at least, but ending up with God knows how many questionable characters (or crocks) and unable to mould them into a performing whole.

It's got to be easier to find players with good characters, if that is one of your primary criteria, than Clough made it, surely?
 
1danewhitehouse said:
According to Wiki, Sam Morsy is yet to score more than 4 goals in a season. When saints got back to back promotions, Hammond averaged 5 goals per season (6 and 4).
Click to expand...
Different points mate.

The point on Coutts, Hammond and Basham is lack of goals from midfield.

The point on Morsy is that he could play 4-4-2 unlike Hammond and you wouldn't need to consider another deep lying middy as he's younger, fitter and quicker.

I don't mind one player not chipping in much but you can't carry three.
 
A massive percentage of Hammond's career goals have been penalties.
 
1danewhitehouse said:
Interesting that you bring Warnock/Paddy into it. Warnock has a few players like this but Paddy is the best example because he has followed him to most clubs but there’s also people like D’Jaffo, Bullock, Short, Derry, Hill etc. that he took to more than one club. He also tried to sign Monty and Morgs’ from us. Hardly a who’s who of footballing geniuses but players who all played at the top levels and certainly levels higher than you would think their footballing ability would take them.


If you read ‘The Gaffer’ by Neil Warnock he talks at length about these players being his captains (despite not generally wearing the armband). You get a perspective of how important they were to what he was trying to achieve. These were the big influences in the dressing room who provided the environment to allow players like Taarabt to thrive (he talks at length about the amount of hand-holding Taarabt needed and that he couldn’t have harnessed his talent without the help of his ‘captains’).


Over the years, I’ve come to accept that our team will have players like this (it used to drive me mad that we paired Jags with Monty in midfield instead of Quinn or Tonge who were better footballers) in it and that there’s a lot more to managing a football team than picking your 11 most talented players and sending them to do their stuff. Robson did that and look at the result!


Personally, I (and some other fans it seems) don’t think his performances are as bad as you make out. I agree Baptiste has made a big difference to us defensively too. Not because of exceptional ability but because he is quick enough and strong enough for us to play a higher line than we did previously meaning we are a tighter unit. With the defence so deep before, there was a huge area for Hammond to try to protect between midfield and defence and as everyone points out, he’s slow. This meant his weaknesses were being highlighted. I think he’s looked infinitely better since the team has become more compact and he’s not been involved with 40 yard foot races with players 10 years younger than him and has been able to do what he is best at, winning and recycling possession (and breaking up opposition counter-attacks when there is a threat of being outnumbered).
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that.

Hammond hasn't been alone with below par performances this season, there's been a whole host of others who for one reason or another haven't performed or have consistently been poor to average.

I think he can play a bigger part behind the scenes next season than actually on the pitch itself due to the aging process taking away what he previously had a few seasons ago elsewhere.

Time will tell and the summer/pre-season even more so on the direction we aim to take next season.
 
The football club NEEDS a leader on the pitch.

Whilst one of Hammonds critics, I also think we haven't had that type of leader since Morg's hung up his boots.

Doyle had his problems, but it is the belief of most that he held the respect of the other players and I really don't see McEv has been "inspirational" in the leadership qualities this season.

We need a leader on the pitch...............

UTB
 
1danewhitehouse said:
Interesting that you bring Warnock/Paddy into it. Warnock has a few players like this but Paddy is the best example because he has followed him to most clubs but there’s also people like D’Jaffo, Bullock, Short, Derry, Hill etc. that he took to more than one club. He also tried to sign Monty and Morgs’ from us. Hardly a who’s who of footballing geniuses but players who all played at the top levels and certainly levels higher than you would think their footballing ability would take them.


If you read ‘The Gaffer’ by Neil Warnock he talks at length about these players being his captains (despite not generally wearing the armband). You get a perspective of how important they were to what he was trying to achieve. These were the big influences in the dressing room who provided the environment to allow players like Taarabt to thrive (he talks at length about the amount of hand-holding Taarabt needed and that he couldn’t have harnessed his talent without the help of his ‘captains’).


Over the years, I’ve come to accept that our team will have players like this (it used to drive me mad that we paired Jags with Monty in midfield instead of Quinn or Tonge who were better footballers) in it and that there’s a lot more to managing a football team than picking your 11 most talented players and sending them to do their stuff. Robson did that and look at the result!


Personally, I (and some other fans it seems) don’t think his performances are as bad as you make out. I agree Baptiste has made a big difference to us defensively too. Not because of exceptional ability but because he is quick enough and strong enough for us to play a higher line than we did previously meaning we are a tighter unit. With the defence so deep before, there was a huge area for Hammond to try to protect between midfield and defence and as everyone points out, he’s slow. This meant his weaknesses were being highlighted. I think he’s looked infinitely better since the team has become more compact and he’s not been involved with 40 yard foot races with players 10 years younger than him and has been able to do what he is best at, winning and recycling possession (and breaking up opposition counter-attacks when there is a threat of being outnumbered).
Click to expand...

The bit about 40 yard foot races was a genuine lol.
 
I do not buy into "WE NEED A LEADER ON THE PITCH" and "HE'S A GOOD EXAMPLE TO THE YOUNG PLAYERS" as reasons alone to sign Hammond, despite his appaling performances. Ever player should be selected because they are one of the best eleven players in the squad, which Hammond is not. Being a "HONEST HARDWORKING FOOTBALL PLAYER, WHO DOES THE UGLY THINGS NOBODY ELSE WANTS TO DO" is not enough on its own, to obtain automatic selection. We cannot afford to carry passengers like Hammond, who are clearly been selected for reasons other than their performances on the pitch, such as because they are mates with the manager.
Adkins overlooks or does not see what the fans see, regarding Hammond. He is a slow, over rated player who is well past his sell by date. If Adkins cannot see this then he is even more delusional that I thought. He seems to think that if he keps repeating in the press how great Hammond is, the fans are so stupid that they will eventually believe him, however this is not the case. He is clearly putting in the ground work, preparing us for a one or two year contract for Hammond.
What a prospect, Hammond lumbering his way around the pitch for possibly two more seasons, as he gets slower and slower, due to age. The worst part is that when we are not in the top six after ten games next season, Adkins will be sacked and the new manager will be left with Hammond. He will be on wages only Adkins would give prepared to pay, so we wont be able to move him on, even if we want to. We will end up having to pay him off, like Higdon. Total waste of money and will rank alongside Higgo and Wallace as one of the worst value for money signings ever made. Hopefully the board will veto the signing, because unless none of them watch any of the games, there is no way they they can believe he would be a good signing for the club.
 
1danewhitehouse said:
I'm sure he thought they would be good characters at the time he signed them. But he was wrong.
Click to expand...
In the case of the kids, yes, but as I've said, it's difficult to predict how they're going to react to being at a 'big' club and earning good money. I think, on the whole, the senior players have been quite professional, enough for Adkins to play most of them regularly; Bash, McEv, Brayford, Done are all what you'd call honest pros, even Coutts looks like he's trying to fit in.

I suspect it's more that Clough liked players who did exactly what he told them to do whereas Adkins tends to like players that think for themselves and don't want to hide behind rigid patterns of play. It's like anywhere, in that you have managers who like their staff to just pick up work and get on with it with the minimum of supervision and others who like to micro-manage.

Either can be successful if you get the right people but try to micro-manage a 'self manager' and they will resent you for it, leave someone who's used to being micro-managed to just get on with it and they shit theirselves.
 
Champagneblade said:
Different points mate.

The point on Coutts, Hammond and Basham is lack of goals from midfield.

The point on Morsy is that he could play 4-4-2 unlike Hammond and you wouldn't need to consider another deep lying middy as he's younger, fitter and quicker.

I don't mind one player not chipping in much but you can't carry three.
Click to expand...



Ah fair enough, I get what you mean now.


Yeah I take that point and for what it’s worth, in pure footballing terms, I’d take Morsy over Hammond but it’s hard to measure the dressing room element as a fan. I’d repeat the point about Warnock and his favourites and the struggles he had with players like Taarabt compared to the model professionalism of Clint Hill (a crap footballer who has made a good career out of being a great pro).
 
Alfreton14Blade said:
It's funny, isn't it? - you think of someone like Neil Warnock who positively relishes the challenge of managing a character like Colin Kazim-Richards. Then, on the opposite pole almost, you get a Cloughy - insistent on signing players with "good character" on the face of it at least, but ending up with God knows how many questionable characters (or crocks) and unable to mould them into a performing whole.

It's got to be easier to find players with good characters, if that is one of your primary criteria, than Clough made it, surely?
Click to expand...




You’d think so wouldn’t you?


I think Warnock is exceptional when it comes to resurrecting the careers of players not living up to their potential. His man management skills are second to none whereas I think Clough and Adkins are much more of the mindset that they only want a player with the right attitude and they want to use their tactical knowledge/ coaching ability to get the best out of them. Warnock style man management is a dying art and realistically, the effect is becoming more diluted in the modern game with the rights and power players have now coupled with the cushy time they have from academy onwards. Warnock has said as much himself and indicated his sympathy for managers starting out.
 



1danewhitehouse said:
You’d think so wouldn’t you?


I think Warnock is exceptional when it comes to resurrecting the careers of players not living up to their potential. His man management skills are second to none whereas I think Clough and Adkins are much more of the mindset that they only want a player with the right attitude and they want to use their tactical knowledge/ coaching ability to get the best out of them. Warnock style man management is a dying art and realistically, the effect is becoming more diluted in the modern game with the rights and power players have now coupled with the cushy time they have from academy onwards. Warnock has said as much himself and indicated his sympathy for managers starting out.
Click to expand...
But for every Gillespie or CKR there's an Owen Morrison or that other dodgy one we signed from the pigs, Shane Nicholson? Warnie, as much as I love him, was always signing players and then binning them.

Which is pretty much what most managers do tbf. That's football, not all signings work. I suspect that's more or less what Clough said when he asked the board for more money to sign more players. It doesn't always go down well but it's a fundamental truth.
 
Higgo's Belly said:
I do not buy into "WE NEED A LEADER ON THE PITCH" and "HE'S A GOOD EXAMPLE TO THE YOUNG PLAYERS" as reasons alone to sign Hammond, despite his appaling performances. Ever player should be selected because they are one of the best eleven players in the squad, which Hammond is not. Being a "HONEST HARDWORKING FOOTBALL PLAYER, WHO DOES THE UGLY THINGS NOBODY ELSE WANTS TO DO" is not enough on its own, to obtain automatic selection. We cannot afford to carry passengers like Hammond, who are clearly been selected for reasons other than their performances on the pitch, such as because they are mates with the manager.
Adkins overlooks or does not see what the fans see, regarding Hammond. He is a slow, over rated player who is well past his sell by date. If Adkins cannot see this then he is even more delusional that I thought. He seems to think that if he keps repeating in the press how great Hammond is, the fans are so stupid that they will eventually believe him, however this is not the case. He is clearly putting in the ground work, preparing us for a one or two year contract for Hammond.
What a prospect, Hammond lumbering his way around the pitch for possibly two more seasons, as he gets slower and slower, due to age. The worst part is that when we are not in the top six after ten games next season, Adkins will be sacked and the new manager will be left with Hammond. He will be on wages only Adkins would give prepared to pay, so we wont be able to move him on, even if we want to. We will end up having to pay him off, like Higdon. Total waste of money and will rank alongside Higgo and Wallace as one of the worst value for money signings ever made. Hopefully the board will veto the signing, because unless none of them watch any of the games, there is no way they they can believe he would be a good signing for the club.
Click to expand...

Bad times ahead
 
BushBlade said:
But for every Gillespie or CKR there's an Owen Morrison or that other dodgy one we signed from the pigs, Shane Nicholson? Warnie, as much as I love him, was always signing players and then binning them.

Which is pretty much what most managers do tbf. That's football, not all signings work. I suspect that's more or less what Clough said when he asked the board for more money to sign more players. It doesn't always go down well but it's a fundamental truth.
Click to expand...

Agreed

Beckett, Cas, Boussatta, Hayles, Cullip, Tens Heuvel, Flitcroft, Thirlwell, Onoura, Ward etc. plenty that didn't work out to balance out the Geary, Kabba, Webber, Shipps. McCall, Ndlovu, Brown, Santos etc.
 
1danewhitehouse said:
We’ll probably never know what wage he will be on. I imagine it will be 1 year at the upper end of our wage structure or 2 years at a slightly lower wage. I think most of us who support the decision to sign him would only do so on sensible wages. Despite not knowing what he’ll be on, I predict that a large section of this forum will lambast him for being on £8k, 10k, £12k (depends what they decide he’s on that day) whilst not contributing enough.
Click to expand...


I am sure Hammond will be looking for a decent deal as it will probably be his last one as a player, whether that is in wages contract length or signing on fee which is his right. For me not a player we should be signing, KM did state the present Technical Committee wouldn't have signed the majority of the 6 players we recruited this year and I would be amazed if Hammond was signed permanently. What NA thinks of that statement I would love to know.
 
A Premier League winners medal is on its way to Dean Hammond I think.
 
1danewhitehouse said:
I'm sure he thought they would be good characters at the time he signed them. But he was wrong.
Click to expand...

Which brings us back to Adkins. A lot of clubs have 'difficult' players, but good managers know how to handle them. It would appear that Sean Dyche knows how to deal with Joey Barton?
 
If Hammond stays on a permanent it will signal another bad season cause if he's the best our scouts, manager and new 'technical' committee can come up with we are well and truly fooooooooked
 
The one hope is that McCabe suggested certain players wouldn't have been signed had our brilliant technical board been in place at the time - hopefully that includes Hammond.

On the flip side though I think they'll be extremely reluctant to sanction signing anybody at all. As I said on another thread, it has to be the way forward after what happened with Clough - if signing 30 players doesn't work, try signing nobody at all! Intelligent.
 



derryblade said:
I am sure Hammond will be looking for a decent deal as it will probably be his last one as a player, whether that is in wages contract length or signing on fee which is his right. For me not a player we should be signing, KM did state the present Technical Committee wouldn't have signed the majority of the 6 players we recruited this year and I would be amazed if Hammond was signed permanently. What NA thinks of that statement I would love to know.
Click to expand...
Hammond s last big pay deal has gone he will fall in line with our pay structure if he signs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Callum O’Hare - It’s happening again
Replies
7
Views
957
Champagneblade
Champagneblade
FATTYFOULKE
Simon Jordan at it again
2 3
Replies
75
Views
11K
MKY
MKY
Ball_Sup (Phil)
Ball Sup Blog... v Sheffield Wednesday (h)
Replies
2
Views
216
Ball_Sup (Phil)
Ball_Sup (Phil)
Silent Blade
Distance from your house to BDTBL according to Google Maps
7 8 9
Replies
247
Views
8K
Super Furry Blades
Super Furry Blades
Champagneblade
Impact of Phillips
Replies
27
Views
2K
Kenilworth
Kenilworth

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