Is JFH any better than Ramsey

[Stanley]

Stanley, I understand your point, but he's played him in a 442 for 80 minutes in two games, alongside Polter. The system didn't work for us as a squad, which is more important than assessing an individual. Additionally, the individual didn't accomplish anything in that time. The fact that we scored in both cases where he started in a 442 after he was subbed off and we reverted to a 4231 speaks volumes to me. We cannot allow ourselves to be forced to adapt the whole game plan for one player. Perhaps the reason he hasn't been given "significant" game time (I say that with hesitance as I feel he's had plenty of chances) is because JFH and Les are teaching him to play the lone striker. Perhaps they see something in him and getting him into it on the training pitch.

I disagree.

How many games did Charlie Austin play before he scored for us? And I'm talking full 90 min games.

Judging Washington like you have after two 80 min games in a 442 is totally unreasonable.

Playing him as a lone striker is a completely futile exercise. He can't be coached into that role (as you surmise) because he simply doesn't have the required physical attributes for it i.e. height and build.

[nasser95]

Plenty of chances? As I said before thank god we had patience back in the day with Les Ferdinand the best centre forward I have seen in the hoops in 37 years!

Once again, in 6 starts Polter got 4 goals and an assist. Of course we should show patience with Conor but when we play 442, we don't play well, that's provable. We've played 442/4411 with a second striker 6 times this season and won twice, one of those wins coming from a goal scored after we reverted to a 4231. We lost 3 and drew 1. Why would I want to put the result in further doubt by changing the style to adapt to one player? thinking from a manager's perspective. We have a long term future aimed at utilising a 4231, that's how JFH plays, that's how we're going to play. Why should we revert that?

[1973 ranger]

Remember Les before Gerry Francis and then after Nass?

[1973 ranger]

Washington is very raw but after spending 3 million is worth perservering with. In my opinion anyway.

[nasser95]

I disagree.

How many games did Charlie Austin play before he scored for us? And I'm talking full 90 min games.

Judging him like you have after two 80 min games in a 442 is totally unreasonable.

For Washington to play as a lone striker is a completely futile exercise. He can't be coached into that role (as you surmise) because he simply doesn't have the required physical attributes for it i.e. height and build.

As I've said, I haven't judged him, merely stated that he hasn't taken the chances he's had. Polter took those chances. Suggesting that a player can't take that role because he doesn't have the height and build for it. Ever watched Man City play with Aguero up top? Perhaps I'll get criticised for using such a big team as an example, lets look smaller to the championship. Nakhi Wells, the man we all want, 17 goals, 170 cm playing the lone striker role in a 4231 for a team much worse than us. How about Gary Hooper? Built similar to washington but with less pace, scored 11 goals in a 4411. This whole thing about players needing to be a certain height to play a certain system is just nonsense to me. If a player positions himself well, he'll get chances and if he's a good enough finisher, he'll score them. Conor needs to do this, it will hopefully be coached into him. Charlie did indeed take his time but we have to adapt our system to play him. Many claimed he couldn't do a 1 striker formation and yet he consistently pulled it off. It's not about the physical attributes of the player, but about his mentality, where he goes, how he sets himself and how composed he is. Conor can learn these things but it will take time. Until then, he'll have to wait his turn.

[1973 ranger]

You will always use stats and polter as a comparison and will not accept anyone saying differently to you. I asked about Les who was rubbish until Gerry got working with him and then came good back in the day but then he had Bardsley and Wilson and two wingers crossing as well as Ray Wilkins sliding passes into him. Had we had given up on him who knows where he would have ended up.

[hal9thou]

I said at the time that there was little evidence that JFH would succeed at this level, and at this level he has proved himself no better than Ramsey (and obviously far less successful than NW). Given the reasons given for sacking Ramsey, it was an appointment which made little rational sense.

I think a lot of people want things to work out so badly that they blind themselves to the reality. Just because the guy is young and had some success at a lower level didn't justify the confidence placed in him. If you haven't got what it takes, you can't build for the future no matter what age you are. Apart from anything else the days when a young manager was appointed and stayed for years have gone. A club like Watford for example has had six managers since Zola left right at the end of 2013. And yet they're not doing so badly compared to where they were when he left. People have said that Warnock wasn't the future, but if he had stayed and got us up this term or next, we would have had to re-appoint (he isn't keen on the EPL) - at which point there would have been some serious candidates.

This isn't JFH's fault, because he is working alongside a DoF with insufficient DoF experience. Neither of these people appointed themselves. Les and JFH are simply the latest in a long line of irrational decisions.

It's going to be tough at this level next year. Has anyone seen any solid evidence that Les or JFH are the men for the job? Have we improved during their tenancy?

[Stanley]

As I've said, I haven't judged him, merely stated that he hasn't taken the chances he's had. Polter took those chances.

Going by all your posts it reads as if you're writing him off.

The Polter comparison is unreasonable because Polter is more naturally suited to that role and has had more game time in it.

[1973 ranger]

The concern would be do we have a plan for next season? Because the manager has a style of play he sticks with so how many players do we need to make the system a success?

[nasser95]

You will always use stats and polter as a comparison and will not accept anyone saying differently to you. I asked about Les who was rubbish until Gerry got working with him and then came good back in the day but then he had Bardsley and Wilson and two wingers crossing as well as Ray Wilkins sliding passes into him. Had we had given up on him who knows where he would have ended up.

You must be on a wind up mate, read everything I say and then come back to me. I've said lets give him a chance. I've said we need to coach him to succeed in our formation. I've said that he should get time when he's shown the manager on the training pitch that he's ready for the role required, which is a lone striker role. I have faith that he will be capable of that. Right now, he isn't capable of it. What is the point of putting him into a 442 when we don't want to play that long term? All we're doing is setting him up to fail in the future when we change our formation back to the preferred 4231. I really want CW to succeed, I don't know how many times I have to say that before you bother getting it into your head. Les probably was rubbish until Gerry worked with him, so what? We're getting Les and JFH working with CW to make him a better player, more suited to our style. Nothing wrong with that. I really don't get your argument here, you're criticising me unnecessarily, making sh it up about how I won't accept anyone else's opinion when I have done consistently throughout this argument and saying all I do is compare with Polter and stats. Of course I compare with Polter, they're our only 2 real options right now. It would be incorrect of me not to compare him to polter.

[nasser95]

Going by all your posts it reads as if you're writing him off.

The Polter comparison is unreasonable because Polter is more suited to that role and has had more game time in it.

Almost every post of mine regarding him has stated openly that I really hope he does succeed.
I don't think it's particularly unreasonable, Polter had even less game time this season before his first start for the club playing 4231. He's no more suited to the role as the role is done differently based on different players. CW can receive the ball and run at the opposition, Polter can play back to goal. Neither is more suited to the role, they just both do it differently. The difference is that when polter finally got his first start, he got an assist. In his third start, he got a goal, in between those, he got a goal in a sub appearance. What I want to see is that initiative from CW, the same initiative that brought Chery back into contention when he looked out for the count and the same initiative that got Nasser an assist on his debut to win us a match.

[1973 ranger]

Now now Nass you are telling porkies as you clearly stated he had his chance and had not delivered! My point about Les and Gerry is had we had given up on Les we would not have the memories we do and he most likely would not have the England caps either.

[nasser95]

Now now Nass you are telling porkies as you clearly stated he had his chance and had not delivered! My point about Les and Gerry is had we had given up on Les we would not have the memories we do and he most likely would not have the England caps either.

Here's a quote from my post that you seemed to ignore

I have faith that he will be capable of that. Right now, he isn't capable of it.

No porkies here, no chance you're going to wind me up any further by not bothering to read my post and then criticising me for nothing. He has not taken his opportunities on the pitch so now he can't ride on those to stay in the line up. He's got to do it on the training pitches. When he's shown he's capable of handling the role, he'll get another chance and hopefully do well.
I haven't once said to give up on him here so I don't know why you felt the need to bring that up. Hoping for the nostalgia vote of support to back your argument?

[1973 ranger]

And you have based he is not capable on what? Your stats and Polters! You chuck your stats on here and think anyone who does not agree with you must be wrong. Sorry Nass but not for me as I have watched us for nearly 40 years and do not buy into all that.

[nasser95]

And you have based he is not capable on what? Your stats and Polters! You chuck your stats on here and think anyone who does not agree with you must be wrong. Sorry Nass but not for me as I have watched us for nearly 40 years and do not buy into all that.

Once again, you're coming across a right WUM mate. I'm accepting your opinion, I understand your point of view. That doesn't make mine or yours wrong ffs. If there is factual proof of something you can't just dig your head in the sand to ignore it. With CW that isn't the case, it's very mixed on him. I use the stats to help aid my views. If anything, you're coming across as being rather hard headed on that perspective, but I understand the desire not to consider numbers. It's opinions at the end of the day. I've given mine and hopefully backed it up, you've done the same. We both want the same thing at the end of the day, for CW to succeed. We just see different routes to it.