The McGoldrick Paradox and Ravel

[Punk Blade]

Plenty has been said about McGoldrick missing some good chances already, and how we can’t afford to be wasteful in front of goal when chances are at a premium at this level. Yet it was McGoldrick dropping very deep to start a move that created our first winning goal back in the Premier League. Do we need a more effective finisher, or do we need his wandering creativity?

Looking at the lineups over preseason (but not seeing the games, so please correct me if wrong here) I was working out how we had two players per position, and in my mind that was Osborn as back up for Stevens (though he can play midfield and further forward), Duffy and L Freeman for AM (completely out of the window now) and Ravel as competition for Fleck, reading that he’s played a deeper midfield role at his most recent clubs.

Seeing Freeman combine the best of Fleck and Duffy from CM on Saturday, and pondering what we do about McGoldrick’s strengths and weaknesses got me thinking. What if Ravel is competition/upgrade for McGoldrick? Began his career more as a striker and is now comfortable playing in midfield, has the creativity to go and pick the ball up anywhere to make something happen but, I believe, a more natural finisher than McGoldrick. Could this be the intention for Ravel and a potentially lethal long term plan?

 

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

McGoldrick needs to get up to speed and everything is fine & dandy.

 

[BushBlade]

Surely the long term plan is McBurnie and Mousset?

 

[CarlMcBlade]

I thought Ravel was supposed to be Norwood’s understudy?

 

[You Fill Up My Senses]

Having seen mcgoldrick pre season and first two games I’d say his overall game is pretty strong. His finishing could improve and his decision making in and around the box is sometimes suspect, often electing to shoot from tight angles when others are better positioned or favouring right foot when left is the better option like his miss on Sunday. But all our players could improve if you dig deep enough. As for Rav, I think we need to see if he really is as good as the hype before dropping anyone to make room. Bring on Blackburn

 

[Dkc]

McG hasn't been far away with his chances, most have been from tough angles. If they had fallen to any of our other strikers I wouldn't be confident they would score. The chance in front of the kop from the cross was just bad luck. Any kind of touch would probably have sent it in, McG got that touch and it was goalbound. Unlucky for him it hit the keeper, but he was there and got on the end of it.

 

[FMBlade1]

McGoldrick was like this for a bit last season, it's good that he's getting in the right positions. I'd stick with him for now, once he scores his first goal more will follow.

If we were on zero points I'd be tempted to switch it but we have time to let him settle in.

 

[Yewsman]

If you look at the chance he missed against Palace I think he was unsighted by the defender(s). As the ball comes across it looks like the defender is going to play it/cut it out - indeed it looks like it's going to be an own goal. The ball comes past the defender and hits Didsy just below the right knee so he does not actually play the ball it is more like it hits him. The ball then deflects towards the keeper (who has anticipated) rather than to the keepers right which would have gone in the goal. I don't think it's as easy as it looks at first sight.

 

[Niceguyeddie]

I thought mcgoldrick had a good game but like a few others is still finding his feet at this level
I'm.sure we'll see more from them
If I'm honest I've been a bit disappointed with Robinson if anyone. he has looked a little overawed and hasn't got himself in the positions mcgoldrick has but as with the others I'm sure once he starts to believe in himself more we will see a lot more

 

[benn5712]

See skipper's goal at Wiggin last season.
Proper goalscorer.

Didsy's superb for us.

Sharp's the one your mother warned you about.

 

[grafikhaus]

If you look at the chance he missed against Palace I think he was unsighted by the defender(s). As the ball comes across it looks like the defender is going to play it/cut it out - indeed it looks like it's going to be an own goal. The ball comes past the defender and hits Didsy just below the right knee so he does not actually play the ball it is more like it hits him. The ball then deflects towards the keeper (who has anticipated) rather than to the keepers right which would have gone in the goal. I don't think it's as easy as it looks at first sight.

Agreed. It was on him in a flash and would normally have gone in. MoTD made out it was an easy chance that McG 'missed' but they know fuck all.

Wednesday's goal last night hit their player on the thigh and went in, but of course he meant it.

 

[andy m]

Agreed. It was on him in a flash and would normally have gone in. MoTD made out it was an easy chance that McG 'missed' but they know fuck all.

Wednesday's goal last night hit their player on the thigh and went in, but of course he meant it.

Sorry but it was an easy chance. No getting away from it.

 

[stringer]

Sorry but it was an easy chance. No getting away from it.

Absolutely. Should have buried it. He’ll know that

 

[Punk Blade]

I think Sharp would have buried that chance against Palace.

Didsy had a great season last season and deservedly won player of the year. But he missed a lot of good chances. I’m not suggesting dropping him as a result of (or in spite of) his performance on Sunday, I just wonder if a forward who doubles up as a deep playmaker is another important dimension to how we play, and can we ultimately get someone playing that role who is more clinical in front of goal.

Will be interesting to see how the forwards are utilised over the next couple of months.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

I just don’t consider McGoldrick as a striker. I think he’s a great player and makes a great contribution to the team. I like him a lot. But he’s not a natural finisher. Last season I found myself hoping he would get his missed sitter out of the way early so we could look forward to a goal.

He scored plenty, but Billy would have put far more of those chances away. It’s not about ability, it’s about instinct. A few have it, but not all.

 

[coaxingstar71]

Goldie is a proper baller, an absolute joy to watch and I guarantee that he'll be playing from the start on Saturday.

 

[Sheff de party]

Plenty has been said about McGoldrick missing some good chances already, and how we can’t afford to be wasteful in front of goal when chances are at a premium at this level. Yet it was McGoldrick dropping very deep to start a move that created our first winning goal back in the Premier League. Do we need a more effective finisher, or do we need his wandering creativity?

Looking at the lineups over preseason (but not seeing the games, so please correct me if wrong here) I was working out how we had two players per position, and in my mind that was Osborn as back up for Stevens (though he can play midfield and further forward), Duffy and L Freeman for AM (completely out of the window now) and Ravel as competition for Fleck, reading that he’s played a deeper midfield role at his most recent clubs.

Seeing Freeman combine the best of Fleck and Duffy from CM on Saturday, and pondering what we do about McGoldrick’s strengths and weaknesses got me thinking. What if Ravel is competition/upgrade for McGoldrick? Began his career more as a striker and is now comfortable playing in midfield, has the creativity to go and pick the ball up anywhere to make something happen but, I believe, a more natural finisher than McGoldrick. Could this be the intention for Ravel and a potentially lethal long term plan?

So, replace our Player of the Season with someone who plays in a completely different position who no one knows if he can be relied upon to turn up on match day, let alone put a good 90 minutes?

McG has his faults finishing-wise but if he could finish, he really wouldn’t be playing for us.

He’s been excellent so far and a big part in our goals and performances. I really don’t understand why we’re looking at dropping him.

 

[Punk Blade]

So, replace our Player of the Season with someone who plays in a completely different position who no one knows if he can be relied upon to turn up on match day, let alone put a good 90 minutes?

McG has his faults finishing-wise but if he could finish, he really wouldn’t be playing for us.

He’s been excellent so far and a big part in our goals and performances. I really don’t understand why we’re looking at dropping him.

Well, no, that’s not what I said. I’m not suggesting dropping McG or throwing Ravel in. I’m wondering if that deep playmaking role for one of the forwards is more important than having a more clinical finisher, and if longer term the deeper creativity and better finishing can be combined. I wondered if we had anyone in the squad who may fulfil these criteria and opined that Ravel may be the most likely candidate. I didn’t say anything about dropping McGoldrick. In fact I did say:

I’m not suggesting dropping him

 

[Bladeinleeds]

I’m not sure how we can suggest that Morrison is a better finisher than mcgoldrick yet.

Mcgoldrick got more goals last season than Morrison has in his entire career to date.... let’s let him get fit and earn a place in the starting 11 before pigeon holing him in. I’m sure he’s been brought in for a midfield role given we have sharp, mcgoldrick, Robinson and mcburnie. Fingers crossed we see something of mousset soon too!

 

[Sheff de party]

Well, no, that’s not what I said. I’m not suggesting dropping McG or throwing Ravel in. I’m wondering if that deep playmaking role for one of the forwards is more important than having a more clinical finisher, and if longer term the deeper creativity and better finishing can be combined. I wondered if we had anyone in the squad who may fulfil these criteria and opined that Ravel may be the most likely candidate. I didn’t say anything about dropping McGoldrick. In fact I did say:

You can see how I wondered if you’re suggesting dropping McGoldrick for Ravel when you said:

“...I believe, a more natural finisher than McGoldrick. Could this be the intention for Ravel and a potentially lethal long term plan?”

And

“What if Ravel is competition/upgrade for McGoldrick?”

 

[coaxingstar71]

It seems McGoldrick is becoming the new Duffy in terms of every week there's a group of posters suggesting he should now be replaced. McGoldrick is a quality player, I'm not talking about goals, I'm talking about all-round play. Like Duffy, we play better when McGoldrick is playing as he's not a poacher type of player.

 

[blade too long]

Mcgoldrick is pivotal in our system . He not only provides a goal threat but drops deep to cover the over lapping centre backs .He has enough creatvty to switch play from midfeld to wide or goes wide and plays it centrally. His work ethic is a beacon to the entire team .At the time he earns he place. Others will get there chance as Wilder does rotate but will have to be giving 100 per cent to dislodge him

 

[Kev Gee]

McG to start against Leicester for me. Rav on the bench.
Freeman to start in place of the injured Fleck.

 

[Balham]

Sorry but it was an easy chance. No getting away from it.

Absolutely. Should have buried it. He’ll know that

Unfortunately, McGoldrick isn't a natural finisher. Someone with that instinct - Sharp being an obvious example - would have anticipated the defender missing the ball and been ready for it; McGoldrick got caught on his heels and couldn't sort his feet out quick enough once the ball came to him. That said, McGoldrick's link up play, positioning and movement are excellent and he'll deservedly keep his place on Saturday.

 

[Bennyand the Blades]

Then why not put a finisher in the line up ? put a goal scorer on in place of either Morrison or McGoldrick who appear to be doing the same job .

 

[Sheffsteel]

Then why not put a finisher in the line up ? put a goal scorer on in place of either Morrison or McGoldrick who appear to be doing the same job .

Because if you swap a finisher for McGoldrick, then you lose the hold-up play and link play, so we won’t look as dangerous up front.

Sharp is the best finisher at the club but needs setting up or needs a game where we are dominating regularly putting the opposition defence under pressure. Suppose you could put Sharp there in place of Morrison but CR provides better movement and better pace...better for counter attack. Both have fantastic work rate.

All the strikers are good and offer something different...i’d be happy with any of them.

 

[Tony Currie]

Because if you swap a finisher for McGoldrick, then you lose the hold-up play and link play, so we won’t look as dangerous up front.

Sharp is the best finisher at the club but needs setting up or needs a game where we are dominating regularly putting the opposition defence under pressure. Suppose you could put Sharp there in place of Morrison but CR provides better movement and better pace...better for counter attack. Both have fantastic work rate.

All the strikers are good and offer something different...i’d be happy with any of them.

Agreed totally - that's why we should leave it up to Chris Wilder. We know he regularly adjusts things and if they don't work he is willing to change it. All those who called for Lundstram not to be included have been proven wrong. Chris will go horses for courses and gradually make adjustments making players earn and retain the shirt. One below par performance from a player will not cause a knee jerk reaction.

 

[blade too long]

Unfortunately, McGoldrick isn't a natural finisher. Someone with that instinct - Sharp being an obvious example - would have anticipated the defender missing the ball and been ready for it; McGoldrick got caught on his heels and couldn't sort his feet out quick enough once the ball came to him. That said, McGoldrick's link up play, positioning and movement are excellent and he'll deservedly keep his place on Saturday.

sharp misses sitters too, this mcgoldricks not as good bit , well theres very few who are as good as Sharp
was a very difficult chance coming from behind a defender at knee height, ,was not a sitter

 

[Akinbiyi]

Surely the long term plan is McBurnie and Mousset?

McBurnie + A.N Other is the long term plan, let's not forget Robbo cost £6/7mil

 

[8lade]

Sharp is the best finisher at the club.
Morrison will be the best ball player but is one of the poorest finishers (his weakness from what I've seen).
McG falls between the two.
Robinson is easily the quickest (not seen Mousset yet).
McBurnie is the only aerial threat other than Sharp, by rights he should be the best but the jury is out on that (for me).