washsaint Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I just don't get it...............people seem to wet their pants over John yet today he was total pants and McGoldrick was superb. Mcgoldrick held the ball up well, laid it off nicely and looked a real threat going forward and in front of goal. In short, everything JOhn was not. John is yesterdays man and every time I've seen him play in pre-season and regular season he's looked terrible. I hope this new loanee is good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I thought McGoldrick did well and was unlucky... he needed more support... White and Dyer failed to deliver and only Holmes and Lallana linked up well with him, but with Gillett and Schneiderlin also off the boil he had a tough time. John needs to get into a game from the start IMO and is not someone who'll change a game from the bench. Our failure today was further back, and of course failing to take the few chances we did create (mainly Lallana). Otherwise I don't think McGoldrick could've done much more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_ed Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 The times that John is brought on means its very difficult for him to get into the game. You will find that a player that is always coming on for the last 15 minutes or so will very rarely have an impact. If you were to play John for the number of games McGoldrick has played, then I guarantee he will have scored the same number of goals, if not more. However, I take nothing away from David, as he was one of the few who can come out of todays game with any credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stepgar Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 From what I saw of David today, he was very greedy and made some bad choices at key times. He should have squared the ball or passed it to some one in a better position on more than one occasion. Wants to be the hero. Still some growing up to do maybe? I think we should go for 442. Simple. We have the wingers now. No excuses. All in my hoenst opinion of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I thought DMG did well today and he has been scoring pretty regularly of late, hence I'd keep him in the side. John is a good player, but there just isn't a suitable partner for him. With BWP there is just no work rate and we concede goals through not pressurising the opposing defence. I am pretty sure the John - DMG partnership has yet to yield a goal in a dosen or so attempts. My personal choice would be DMG with Skacel playing just off him. I know many on here do not like the latter, but in his last 2 appearances in midfield he was by far and away the best player on the pitch. He was deadly in the supporting role at Hearts and whatever your oppinion of him, he can't be worse than White today. That's not a dig at White, but the guy just isn't ready yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I thought DMG did well today and he has been scoring pretty regularly of late, hence I'd keep him in the side. John is a good player, but there just isn't a suitable partner for him. With BWP there is just no work rate and we concede goals through not pressurising the opposing defence. I am pretty sure the John - DMG partnership has yet to yield a goal in a dosen or so attempts. My personal choice would be DMG with Skacel playing just off him. I know many on here do not like the latter, but in his last 2 appearances in midfield he was by far and away the best player on the pitch. He was deadly in the supporting role at Hearts and whatever your oppinion of him, he can't be worse than White today. That's not a dig at White, but the guy just isn't ready yet. White looked lost today, Skacel has to prove he wants to play, he was pretty poor in the reserves last week before his injury. He has to play some games and get matchfit before he comes back - if he does. I heard JP saying tonight, they are waiting for several developments before committing to bringing more players in, hopefully before Monday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 Pekhart is the answer as centre forward leading the line with McGoldrick in the whole as the second striker with a licence to roam then Lallana and Surman as the two wide midfielders putting in the crosses and through balls and with licence to get into the box to make the third man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintwarwick Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I thought McGoldrick did well and was unlucky... he needed more support... White and Dyer failed to deliver and only Holmes and Lallana linked up well with him, but with Gillett and Schneiderlin also off the boil he had a tough time. John needs to get into a game from the start IMO and is not someone who'll change a game from the bench. Our failure today was further back, and of course failing to take the few chances we did create (mainly Lallana). Otherwise I don't think McGoldrick could've done much more. I agree he should of started the game or at least started the second half, he cannot get into a game 15 minutes frrom the end. With their (Blackpool) big defenders we needed someone like John with Mcgoldrick feeding off him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_ed Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 (edited) Pekhart is the answer as centre forward leading the line with McGoldrick in the whole as the second striker with a licence to roam then Lallana and Surman as the two wide midfielders putting in the crosses and through balls and with licence to get into the box to make the third man I agree with that, and it would go some way to solving our lone striker problem. However, we have no alternative left back so Surman can't play there and Lallana's best position is definitely in the hole. EDIT: In fact, I would like to see Cork played at LB purely so we can try that. Edited 30 August, 2008 by saint_ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MatthewStiles Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 Well, the "expert" on Sky whoever it was, spoke very favourably of Stern John. Good in the air, strong, held off the centre backs etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch01 Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I thought McGoldrick was quality - confident, running at them, I saw new dimensions to his game today. Very impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSteve Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I thought McGoldrick was quality - confident, running at them, I saw new dimensions to his game today. Very impressed. Not sure what match you were watching.. we will win nothing with McGoldrick up front and his body language is dreadful.. need to try Pekhart with lallana in the hole and find a wide right player with pace (and a brain) which excludes Dyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the scud Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I thought McGoldrick was quality - confident, running at them, I saw new dimensions to his game today. Very impressed. Then losing the ball after taking on 3 or 4 defenders by himself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toofarnorth Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 The commentators almost spunked when John came on. He misses a header and they go on about why hadn't he been on earlier. He missed a **** easy header, so that was exactly why he wasn't on earlier. I would definitely stick with McGoldrick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithy Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 John did ok and has a place in this squad. We don't have a better player to hold the ball up and he knows where the goal is. He's a very useful option and should have been brought on earlier today, we needed to adapt our game as we were found out a bit. The problem was that we still tried to play to the ''system" but we needed to to go 4 4 2 to get anything today. People who say John is **** have no clue what they are talking about. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but their are an awful lot of 'fans' that know very, very little about the game of football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not On My Watch Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I was impressed by McGoldrick today. It was the first time I was convinced that he can make it at this level. I thought he looked like he might create something but I don't think his best position is leading the line. When John came on it also seemed to make Lallana disappear from the game. In the first half the front two did look sharp (especially Lallana who looked like the most skillfull player on the pitch) and with more games they will only get better. It was at the back that we struggled today and I don't think that Saints and McGoldrick are a long way away from scoring a lot more goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 Like most others, I was impressed today by DMG. He didn't do everything right every time, no player can, but he did make some very clever moves at times and he was a threat. But I tend to agree that the single striker system does put a lot of pressure on one player and today the attacking midfield were not always with him when they were needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint hawk Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 Mcg has been to greedy lately does'nt pass the ball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Englesaint Posted 30 August, 2008 Share Posted 30 August, 2008 I'm with NOMW. There's a really good player (DMcG) in there somewhere but it might not be as sole striker. As others have said, too unwilling to release the ball quickly and still looks a bit like he's playing for himself. Playing sole striker is a very demanding role (unless you're Drogba and the like) and its not the same as "playing on my own" which is how young David (at least to me) appears to be doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mitch01 Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 Not sure what match you were watching.. we will win nothing with McGoldrick up front and his body language is dreadful.. need to try Pekhart with lallana in the hole and find a wide right player with pace (and a brain) which excludes Dyer. Absolutely disagree. Dyer didnt have a great game, no doubt about that, he struggled to beat his man, but McGoldrick looked great to me. These are the players we need to rely on to improve and grow over the season if we are to survive. They both had better games than Gillett, who barely put a foot right all game. Svensson had a nightmare trying to deal with their big forward, who won every header. We need to be much less dramatic with our reactions to these games, a win and a great performance doesnt mean we're safe from relegation, in the same way as a disappointing defeat doesnt mean we'll never recover. McGoldrick looks ten times the player he was last season or the season before, I hope he continues to improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 you cannot compare john to DMG....they are completely different type of players... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobM Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 John can't work well as a lone striker. He needs a second striker close to him to feed off his flick ons and the chances he creates. When he came on McG was playing too far away from him to make it work effectively. McG is a better lone striker, John is a better striker when you have two upfront. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 John can't work well as a lone striker. He needs a second striker close to him to feed off his flick ons and the chances he creates. When he came on McG was playing too far away from him to make it work effectively. McG is a better lone striker, John is a better striker when you have two upfront. in what way? he goes "wandering" too much...there were a few times we broke and Lallana was the most advanced central player.... I think McGoldrick would work well WITH john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyNorthernSaints Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 Whoever plays, needs to be in the box on the end off crosses from our wide players which didn't happen yesterday. John at least looked a threat in the air when he came on and gave their centre halves some problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 Whoever plays, needs to be in the box on the end off crosses from our wide players which didn't happen yesterday. John at least looked a threat in the air when he came on and gave their centre halves some problems. indeed...on telly, they commented in the first half how holmes got a few good crosses in that should have been attacked at the near post..basics!!!! with mcgoldrick, he goes wandering, i really really rate him by the way, and I think he would be a great partner for john....I would try lallana out on the right ala, belmadi type of role... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyNorthernSaints Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 indeed...on telly, they commented in the first half how holmes got a few good crosses in that should have been attacked at the near post..basics!!!! with mcgoldrick, he goes wandering, i really really rate him by the way, and I think he would be a great partner for john....I would try lallana out on the right ala, belmadi type of role... Should have gone 4-4-2 when John came on but McGoldrick dropped deeper which meant their defence only had to deal with John in the box most of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 in what way? he goes "wandering" too much...there were a few times we broke and Lallana was the most advanced central player.... I think McGoldrick would work well WITH john Great, so after all this we're going back to 4-4-2 :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 Great, so after all this we're going back to 4-4-2 :cool: no...just the ability to mix it up during a game when things are not going well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 How on can you say John was pants? There was nothing wrong with his performance and he was only given about 15 minutes. We were badly lacking any presence in the box until Stern came on. McGoldrick had a deecnt game in the first-half, but faded badly in the second. You people who post on here are a bunch of morons sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
washsaint Posted 31 August, 2008 Author Share Posted 31 August, 2008 Unlike you eh Wilko who is gods gift? What a moron! I based my opnion on my opinion....doesn't mean it's right, doesn't mean it's wrong but I said it how I saw it. John has no pace, falls over a lot and misses plenty of chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 Unlike you eh Wilko who is gods gift? What a moron! I based my opnion on my opinion....doesn't mean it's right, doesn't mean it's wrong but I said it how I saw it. John has no pace, falls over a lot and misses plenty of chances. Keep your knickers on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 Pekhart and mighty Mac. Mac is good and only getting better but still needing when to lay off and when to go for it, experience will get him there. But if John does not go then you have the experience but we have to have the right games for right combination. Over to JP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modern matron Posted 31 August, 2008 Share Posted 31 August, 2008 John did ok and has a place in this squad. We don't have a better player to hold the ball up and he knows where the goal is. He's a very useful option and should have been brought on earlier today, we needed to adapt our game as we were found out a bit. The problem was that we still tried to play to the ''system" but we needed to to go 4 4 2 to get anything today. People who say John is **** have no clue what they are talking about. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but their are an awful lot of 'fans' that know very, very little about the game of football. Stop being so bloody pompous!! John is slow and overrated - thats why he's had so many clubs.................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 1 September, 2008 Share Posted 1 September, 2008 Stop being so bloody pompous!! John is slow and overrated - thats why he's had so many clubs.................. Wrong. John is massively underrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
once_bitterne Posted 1 September, 2008 Share Posted 1 September, 2008 With Holmes and Dyer on the pitch we have good opportunities to put in a lot of good crosses. The problem is that without John on the pitch we have little hope of turning any of these into goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintkiptanui Posted 1 September, 2008 Share Posted 1 September, 2008 Wrong. John is massively underrated. You have just massively over rated him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 1 September, 2008 Share Posted 1 September, 2008 Who scored the goals that kept us up last season? Short memories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 1 September, 2008 Share Posted 1 September, 2008 I kept thinking of the Rooney situation where he coems too deep adn does too much work in areas not required. McGoldrick does the same only with far less work rate. Time after time he dropped off to recieve the ball and then failed to bust a gut to get into the box. John certainly takes up better positions but everything is back to goal. Perhaps thats what you need playing one up front but we need to turn defences once in a while and John is just too bone idol to make the type of runs. Why on earth did we bring John on only for McGoldrick to drop into centre midfield. Pointless and clueless move by Jan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintMike Posted 1 September, 2008 Share Posted 1 September, 2008 Sky seemed to think we were stupid not to bring on John at halftime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyNorthernSaints Posted 2 September, 2008 Share Posted 2 September, 2008 Would it still have been pointless and clueless if John has scored his header? he might have had a better chance if there were other Saints players in the box for defenders to deal with. John was isolated and outnumbered everytime the ball went into the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 2 September, 2008 Share Posted 2 September, 2008 I kept thinking of the Rooney situation where he coems too deep adn does too much work in areas not required. McGoldrick does the same only with far less work rate. Time after time he dropped off to recieve the ball and then failed to bust a gut to get into the box. John certainly takes up better positions but everything is back to goal. Perhaps thats what you need playing one up front but we need to turn defences once in a while and John is just too bone idol to make the type of runs. Why on earth did we bring John on only for McGoldrick to drop into centre midfield. Pointless and clueless move by Jan. John is very much a back to the goal forward. If you pass it into his feet, he can hold it up, wait for the cavalry to arrive and make things happen. The trouble is playing up front on his own, he has nobody to work with. As you say, DMG never really busted a gut to get into the box. This is partly why he has only ever scored with any really profficiency playing along side Saganowski. All the others we have tried lack work rate. I don't think John suits this system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithy Posted 3 September, 2008 Share Posted 3 September, 2008 Stop being so bloody pompous!! John is slow and overrated - thats why he's had so many clubs.................. You are an excellent example of one of the fans I was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Bones Posted 3 September, 2008 Share Posted 3 September, 2008 I'm liking what i've seen of McGoldrick but to say John is passsed his use-by-date is a bit over the top to me. Im not a massive fan of only one up front and would prefer the more physical John there. In saying this I wouldnt want to drop McD and find it hard to drop him behind John as lallana is playing well there. Gees - Who be a Saints manager hey ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now