Why does it only seem to be us that people say this about? I never hear "where would Newcastle be without Ba's goals (below us without fletchers!) Or where would Utd be without RVP's goals? (They'd have 26 goals, same as 8th position) I agree Fletchers goals are important but I never hear pundits or commentators say this about anyone else. Ba has 10 of Newcastle's 18 goals. Fletcher has 6 of our 17. So without Fletcher we'd have 11 goals. Without Ba Newcastle would have 8. Great win tonight. Good performance but would've liked us to go for the jugular and try to get 4 or 5.
If Fletcher didn't score them, then whoever else was playing instead of hin might of done. He's scored a third of our goals, hardly most of them.
Anyone who says where would you be without so and so's goals is talking ****e. You sign a striker to score your goals. That's what they are there to do. Simple as that. You haven't signed a striker to not score goals. Pundits and papers write **** like that to wind people up. If you scored 50 goals a season and a fletcher or Ba scored 45 of them, so ****ing what, that's why they are signed and what they are payed to do. It's why Man U relieved arsenal of their best striker and left them Chamak. You don't sign a striker to not score. Does my head in when I hear **** like that.
I seem to remember that's all your lot said to to us when we had Bent though, during the old 606 days? I agree with your sentiments though and you could argue that every team would struggle without their best striker? Michu at Swansea for one example.
Can't argue with that jarra - but, as cest says, certain affiliates of yours were slating us for having Bent score over 50% of our goals. Wonder where these people are now that we have scored more goals from other players than Newcastle (Not aimed at you by ther way) - it's the pundits and commentators that piss me off as you hardly ever hear it about anyone else!
It really depends on your depth of strikers surely? If you have players underneath who can come in and fill the role a Fletcher or Ba is fulfilling, then it could be bollocks really. The player coming in could score even more, like Cisse did last season. If you have zero quality back up then they may have a point. But even that can be countered by a clever manager using his attacking midfielders differently. You guys do need another striker but Wickham is a good young player. Unfortunately Campbell and Ji look a little below par, and you seem to have caught Saha just the wrong side of his best. End of the day its only a discussion when Fletcher is out. He has only missed 2 games. I get the notion anything can happen and I'm sure O'Neill will look to rectify it at some point. He won't want more than three options though because his tactics only employ 1 striker, so there is little point having loads sitting round twiddling their thumbs.
Campbell and Ji are simply not good enough for the EPL. Campbell is a good lad though and I hope he finds somewhere to play games. Ji jsut isnt a top flight footballer imo and Saha is finished at this level now and his legs have less pace in them than my 78 year old dad. We need a back up for Fletcher and have him, Wickham and a new lad in. We also need a pacy midfielder and a centre half, although if Bardo is ruled out for the season, we may need a right back as well.
It has been said about Ba just not much. The comments are pointless though, plus many great teams have a focal point for their goals, when we had Shearer we relied on him at times but that was his job. I don't hear many people saying "Where would Barcelona be without Messi's goals". However, it isn't only Sunderland and Fletcher that people say this sort of thing about, you probably just notice it more as its your team/player. ps. There's plenty of Mags who will happily spout any **** just to get a rise. Same for all sets of fans, doesn't make any of it true though! pps. The only occassions I've noticed Campbell he's looked ok. Maybe I only notice him when he has good games.
