He created more clear cut chances than any other player in the Prem, excluding Baines, last season. That's what I mean. What exactly do you mean? On second thoughts, I'm not going to get into a pointless debate about the semantics of "creativity". Yes, I accept he is a different type of creative to, say Hoolahan, but he is undeniably creative of a sort. None of that has any bearing on the point of my post though.
I honestly hope that he does - neither are good enough for me and the sooner they leave the sooner people can stop pinning their hopes on fading lights
I mean first of all that I don't believe statistics. Snodgrass takes virtually all of the dead ball kicks, so naturally some of those are going to end up with scoring chances. If Garrido took all the corners and free kicks, he would suddenly be deemed 'creative'.
So you want us to be Stoke? Is that what you are saying? Just hump it up to the big man and cut out all this fancy-dan continental stuff?
It seems to me that Hughton puts out his 11 best (fit) players and hopes that man for man we're better than the opposition. Lambert on the other hand selected players so that the ensemble was better than the sum of it's parts. With Fox or Wes, they perhaps aren't in our top 3 or 4 midfielders, but the qualities they do bring better complement the other players. Until we have the players fit/signed so that our best 11 players work together well, I fear what we're seeing on the pitch will continue. On the point that the 4-4-2 might have been a trial run for next week, I guess we'll see. If next week RvW and Hooper show a telepathic understanding and we win well, then fair enough, 3 points vs Hull is better than two draws, but we'll have to wait and see on that one.
Be fair, the stats are that a CCC is for a good cross and Snodgrass's delivery is undeniably decent. As I said, this is all beside the point - you were suggesting Hughton has only signed 6'4" players and has offloaded all our creative players. That's simply not the case and is very debatable as to the extent to which this has been detrimental, as opposed to, say, the formation today. Which is the point - the CCTV versus the money in the wallet.
Fox: one dimensional (a good passer, but nothing else), and was found out repeatedly two seasons ago. Should have left then. Further hampered by illnesses. Hoolahan: inconsistent, but even on his good days runs into dead ends and loses the ball 4 times out of 5. Also lacks pace and any tackling ability - the team is forced to carry an aging player. That's my justification, and my opinion. I understand it's not a popular one, but I genuinely believe that as it was with Holt, it is time to move on.
What big man? What fancy continental stuff? We have neither. That's probably the problem. We need one. Preferably the latter.
No, no, certainly not, but neither Hoolahan nor Fox has enough dimension to their play to allow us to play like that without severely weakening our side without the ball - something we really really don't need.
So get better replacements for them. Don't just dump them and take away the last tiny vestige of creativity that we have as a team.
I take that point, but there's no point holding on to them either - Fox is clearly not going to play and rightly so, so lets free up a few hundred thousand pounds of funds. You cant really replace a player who doesn't play. Hoolahan will need replacing, but IMO he's not good enough to play for us so offload him and get going. The longer they're here, the more ridiculously over-hyped they will be by some of our fans.
May I ask you if you feel the same way about Johnson, for example? A very different kind of player from Fox or Hoolahan, but many people would argue that he is 'not up to premiership class'. On the other hand, he has been consistently used by Hughton. Is that how you judge a player? How much a manager uses him?
By the way, I don't want that to be seen as an attack on Johnson. I thought he played quite well today and at least tried to stem the Everton tide. But I don't see how he is better as his type of player than Fox.
I think he has some attributes that are Premier League class. Passing obviously not, but he definitely has some and after all he did come third in our POTS last year, so the fans can't mostly see him that way
But I wouldn't want him going to a relegation rival, especially Villa! Can you just imagine the **** if he gets them playing? And can you visualize the size of the pile of **** if he scores for Villa against us ?!!!
I can see that there is an argument for that. Johnson for me adds the physical presence any bottom-half team needs (which neither Fox or Hoolahan do), and is able to tackle, shoot (a bit), and generally push people around. In my opinion it makes him slightly more useful to us. He also plays his heart out every week. He will need replacing, but I would keep him until at least the summer. With regards how much a player is used - it probably does have some effect on my perception, how could it not, but certainly in previous seasons I've believed particular players were criminally underused (Morison springs to mind), so I can say with some security that's not where my entire opinion comes from
I wouldn't want him to go to Villa either! High end championship team is probably the best either will realistically achieve for me
