http://www.cafc.co.uk/news/article/20130517-harriott-contract-826720.aspx Signs a new deal till 2016 great news for the club. Has really sorted out our LM problems
It would if he were a proper left-midfielder. He is clueless at defending which is why CP refrained from playing him until we were fairly safe from relegation, preferring other fairly mediocre players who are not even naturals on the left (Pritchard and Wagstaff) rather than risk Harriott there, because they could be relied on to put in a stint defending and not give the ball away too much. In fact he is a winger/striker and CP will not rely on him to hold down the LM position. I am still hoping that Evina will be the one to sort out that problem position but the fact he has rarely played there in two seasons despite it being a perennial problem must throw doubt on that idea. No chance of Harriott playing 90 minutes match after match next season. I see him starting selected matches and coming off the bench if we need a goal or two in other matches.
Great news. He's just signed a new 3 year contract, he'll be playing plenty of games next season. He obviously has some weaknesses but he was the best player at left midfield last season. Powell tried various senior players in Jackson, Cook, Kerkar and Wagstaff but none were convincing (don't remember Pritchard really playing there?). Hopefully we'll bring in better competition but with games he should keep improving. Not sure it was a great deal to do with his defensive game. Last season he wasn't regular starter for the U18s, Pigott, Azeez and Sho-Silva often started ahead of him. This season he got regular games for the U21s and eventually forced his way into the first team. Evina played left midfield ahead of Wiggins in the Carlisle cup game last season, admittedly it was only one game but they looked a bit too similar to play together. Happy with him as cover at left back, but can't imagine him being much of a goal or creative threat from midfield.
Harriott was playing in a front 3 for the under-21's, with a pretty free role, same with Michael Smith. Strangely enough Smith is by far the better crosser of the two, in fact Smith's crossing is very good indeed. Nathan Jones knows what he's doing and I believe he got the best out of Harriott this way. As Eddie says, he is not a good defender, but what he does in this role is to buzz around making a nuisance of himself when the opposition have the ball, something which does not require the sort of defensive nous that was one of Wilson's strengths earlier in the season. And he did not fade from the game in this role, the way he has been doing. Maybe having to face better full-backs is something to do with that. Anyway when I saw him he would usually make a telling contribution in the last 10 minutes, because he'd always be trying something new, and eventually it would come off. I think it helped him having such a workhorse as Smith in the front 3 as well.
Exactly, he is a forward, and potentially a very good one. We are lucky to have him and I am delighted he has signed a long contract, but he will do nothing to sort out one of our midfield problems as Eastbounre suggested. There will be few matches where CP will want to kick off with three out-and-out forwards, leaving our midfield three to cope with four, sometimes five, opposing midfielders. I see his main value as buzzing around on both wings and off our main striker. A "free role" as FHB puts it. But that would work better if we had a conventional centre-forward up front rather than an Obika/Haynes/BWP/Azeez type. Maybe the season after next Pigott or Smith will ready to take on that role. At present we have only Kermorgant and he is better used playing a bit deeper as at present. So I can see Harriott starting no more than a dozen matches next season and coming off the bench for another 10 to 20. (Following season, a different story if he is still with us). Of course, if we are really in financial trouble and have to use a minimal squad it will be all hands to the pumps and CP will have to field whoever he has available without being too picky about pattern of play. Which reminds me that it was not so long ago that we were (on the old 606) seriously contemplating starting the season with Ewell and Tosan Popo as our main strikeforce and putting a brave face on it. That was after a clear-out and before we started the rebuild. Had we then known that Ewell was totally finished and that Popo would never get started we would have been more panicky.
Do you pick players to fit your preferred pattern of play? Or do you choose a pattern of play which suits your best players? That is the old chicken and egg question which has existed in soccer (and probably most other team sports) since the lads of "Levesham" took on their neighbours from "Blæchǣth" at dribbling with pigs bladders. (Where's Ponders? He would be proud of me.) The answer, of course, with any sensible manager is "a bit of both". I assume you are referring to Harriott as the "1" behind the "2" for the u21s? They can play that way in the u21s because three of their strongest players (Pigott, Smith, Azeez) can share the two front spots and they still have to accommodate Harriott. It is a very attacking formation and they can get away with it in that league because our midfield of Jordan plus two out Cousins, Poyet and Courtney Harris could cope with anything thrown at them. Also playing an open, attacking game helps the young players develop faster and shows what they can do in an environment where if they concede a goal, or even lose a match, it is not a disaster. In our first team we don't have three strikers who are as dominant at their level as the above three are at theirs. So playing three up front (one of them Harriott) wouldn't be as productive. Similarly our midfielders aren't better than most of our opponents in the way our u21 midfielders are. (In fact, I would say our midfield is one of the weakest in the division). If we played only three in midfield we would be overrun. The reason I don't see Harriott starting too many games is the same reason CP rarely started with Green, although he had more natural talent than Pritchard, Wilson, Kerkar or Wagstaff. He would be too much of a luxury in a close hard-fought game, as most are in the division. Barcelona can give Messi a free role and never expect him to chase back or tackle only because their other 10 players are good enough to match 11 opponents.
But in a close hard fought game he could be the difference by producing a bit of skill.Harriott is certainly not the worst for tracking back and producing some defensive cover.He can't tackle but he does get back into defensive positions and his energy levels are second to none.
I think if Powell and the staff can improve Harriott's defending over the summer and further improve his link up play with Wiggins, then I can see him occupying the LM spot for most of the season, especially with funds being tight
I was referring to Harriott as the 1, when i last watched the under 18s Tobi and Piggot played up front but very wide and the '2' in midfield played very narrow. IMO Hughes, Jackson and Pritchard would suit this roles perfectly. It also stops the other teams full backs pressing forward because the are worried about the 2 forwards so in effect your left 3v2 in the middle. With the players we have its a perfect system, just need a forward to partner Yann although it could be one of last seasons u21s or Tobi by the end of the season. Oh and Gower would be a good signing for the 'Poyet' position until the young man is ready.
