Hooper

[Holmowl]

Played very well yesterday. Great link play, and got himself 4 really decent chances.

 

Started and finished the move first half when he slid the shot wide.

 

Got above the defender to head down but the goalie saved.

 

Great move with Hunt second half, and only the defenders flick header stopped it going in.

 

The fast ball across the box, which he should and usually would have buried.

 

As long as he is making chances we know they will soon start to go in. I would be very worried if he wasn't getting chances. Remember Bolton last year. Got himself 5 chances and finally buried the 4th and 5th.

 

He looks great with Fletcher.

[darren906]

Completely agree. He played well today (apart from finishing), goals will come and at least he's making chances. As soon as he came off, I thought we went more direct and lacked that link between midfield and forwards. Thought it worked well when he dropped behind the two strikers

[ash60s]

On 9/24/2016 at 17:50, Beholder said:

Hooper was good today.

 

And he looks exactly the same as he did last season.

end of thread IMHO

[Rathmoreowl]

On 24/09/2016 at 17:34, Jowl said:

Is twice the player he was last season. 

 

Which means he struggles to physically move. Who did he eat pre-season ?

Would explain where Melo went

[IstillhateSteveBould]

We don't look a very good side when he's alongside Fletcher. We look static, pedestrian and never win the ball back high up the pitch like we do with FF up there. The Birmingham goal aside, there's been nothing really to suggest we should be persisting with that partnership.

 

Burton away, Hooper/Fletcher, we lose 3-1.

Leeds at home, best team first half, switch to Hooper/Fletcher at ht and lose 2-0.

Bristol C at home, Hooper/Fletcher start, 2-0 down. Hooper goes off, we win 3-2. 

Forest at home, Hooper/Fletcher start, go behind again, fight back, Hooper goes off and we win the game.

 

You could even highlight the Birmingham game. Looked a class above with Fletcher/FF, in control. Change things when Hooper comes on (ok he scores) and we suddenly look vulnerable and lose again. 

 

Theres only really the Wigan game you could argue he came on and our performance just about improved. Considering his goal at Brum came after coming on and we've looked poor every time he's started, the only option at the moment is to use him from the bench.

 

Ignoring his goal ratio last season (because it's irrelevant), can anybody really claim he deserves to start based on his form this season? No chance. He's made 10 appearances already, he's scored 1 goal from open play and created 0. We don't create much when he's on, yet concede goals, chances and territory for fun. 

[FreshOwl]

1 hour ago, bigdan2003 said:

Fast becoming the next scape goat. 

 

Intelligent player, and his link up play is excellent. Him and Fletcher are very experienced strikers, they both need to get on the score sheet more, but we also need to create for them as well.

 

Exactly, feed them both and they will score, both capable of getting 15+ minimum

[Holmowl]

9 minutes ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

We don't look a very good side when he's alongside Fletcher. We look static, pedestrian and never win the ball back high up the pitch like we do with FF up there. The Birmingham goal aside, there's been nothing really to suggest we should be persisting with that partnership.

 

Burton away, Hooper/Fletcher, we lose 3-1.

Leeds at home, best team first half, switch to Hooper/Fletcher at ht and lose 2-0.

Bristol C at home, Hooper/Fletcher start, 2-0 down. Hooper goes off, we win 3-2. 

Forest at home, Hooper/Fletcher start, go behind again, fight back, Hooper goes off and we win the game.

 

You could even highlight the Birmingham game. Looked a class above with Fletcher/FF, in control. Change things when Hooper comes on (ok he scores) and we suddenly look vulnerable and lose again. 

 

Theres only really the Wigan game you could argue he came on and our performance just about improved. Considering his goal at Brum came after coming on and we've looked poor every time he's started, the only option at the moment is to use him from the bench.

 

Ignoring his goal ratio last season (because it's irrelevant), can anybody really claim he deserves to start based on his form this season? No chance. He's made 10 appearances already, he's scored 1 goal from open play and created 0. We don't create much when he's on, yet concede goals, chances and territory for fun. 

 

My favourite line is "(ok he scores)".

[Lionel Fessi]

24 minutes ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

We don't look a very good side when he's alongside Fletcher. We look static, pedestrian and never win the ball back high up the pitch like we do with FF up there. The Birmingham goal aside, there's been nothing really to suggest we should be persisting with that partnership.

 

Burton away, Hooper/Fletcher, we lose 3-1.

Leeds at home, best team first half, switch to Hooper/Fletcher at ht and lose 2-0.

Bristol C at home, Hooper/Fletcher start, 2-0 down. Hooper goes off, we win 3-2. 

Forest at home, Hooper/Fletcher start, go behind again, fight back, Hooper goes off and we win the game.

 

You could even highlight the Birmingham game. Looked a class above with Fletcher/FF, in control. Change things when Hooper comes on (ok he scores) and we suddenly look vulnerable and lose again. 

 

Theres only really the Wigan game you could argue he came on and our performance just about improved. Considering his goal at Brum came after coming on and we've looked poor every time he's started, the only option at the moment is to use him from the bench.

 

Ignoring his goal ratio last season (because it's irrelevant), can anybody really claim he deserves to start based on his form this season? No chance. He's made 10 appearances already, he's scored 1 goal from open play and created 0. We don't create much when he's on, yet concede goals, chances and territory for fun. 

 

Completely agree.

 

Hooper is a great finisher, there's no arguing that, and i'm sure if he started 46 games a season and had the whole team focusing on giving him the ball in the box he could go on to score 20 goals a season. But we other players that can do that and contribute more.

 

It's what happens off the ball which is the difference, yes he's an intelligent player and links up the play well. But for us to play him upfront alone or with somebody else, off the ball he can't hurt teams, he isn't fast, powerful or holds up the ball well, the opposite of other options Fletcher and FF for example.

His work rate isn't as good as Fletcher's off the ball, when we aren't creating much and he isn't getting the ball its hard to tell what he's contributed - which was the case in some of his performances last season.

 

Now we have proper wingers in the side we can stop forcing FF into a position where he isn't best.

FF behind Fletcher is our strongest attacking option.

 

Edited September 25, 2016 by Del_Liles

[Holmowl]

2 minutes ago, Del_Liles said:

 

Completely agree.

 

Hooper is a great finisher, there's no arguing that, and i'm sure if he started 46 games a season and had the whole team focusing on giving him the ball in the box he could go on to score 20 goals a season. But we other players that can do that and contribute more.

 

It's what happens off the ball which is the difference, yes he's an intelligent player and links up the play well. But for us to play him upfront alone or with somebody else, off the ball he can't hurt teams, he isn't fast, powerful or holds up the ball well, the opposite of other options Fletcher and FF for example.

His work rate isn't as good as Fletcher's off the ball, when we aren't creating much and he isn't getting the ball its hard to tell what he's contributed - which was the case in some of his performances last season.

 

Now we have proper wingers in the side we can stop forcing FF into a position where he isn't best.

FF behind Fletcher is our strongest attacking option.

 

 

But FF doesn't score many as a striker. He scores freely from wide.

 

Why would you want to play him in a role where he doesn't score as many goals?

 

[IstillhateSteveBould]

7 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

But FF doesn't score many as a striker. He scores freely from wide.

 

Why would you want to play him in a role where he doesn't score as many goals?

 

 

Because we look a better side. It's pretty simple. You play well, you have a better chance of gaining the points you need to challenge. At the very worst it gives you a foundation from which you can change things and go on and win. 

 

Stop focusing on individual goal tallys. They're irrelevant. 

 

You seem to want Hooper to score more than anything else.

[Lionel Fessi]

17 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

But FF doesn't score many as a striker. He scores freely from wide.

 

Why would you want to play him in a role where he doesn't score as many goals?

 

 

How do you know that? - Has he ever had a full season playing in that #10 role behind a striker? No.

 

Look at this goals he has scored for us, how many of those are from getting the ball out wide and cutting in? Very very few.

He scores by being in and around the box and us getting the ball to him in the box.

 

Not sure why you would want to play him out wide when we have other players who are natural wingers, Fletcher needs a quick striker to compliment his ability to flick on and hold up the ball, Hooper can't do that, FF can.

[oldishowl]

It is obvious that Reach has to start on the left of midfield when a left back is fit. 

Although people seem to think FF could start on the right , to me that is a non starter. The only plus of him playing wide at all is at least on the left he can cut in onto his strong right foot. Take that away and he is not any value wide

 

Fletcher is a shoe in so it means a choice between Hooper and FF.

I think we will see both spending time on the bench .

[IstillhateSteveBould]

10 minutes ago, Del_Liles said:

 

How do you know that? - Has he ever had a full season playing in that #10 role behind a striker? No.

 

Look at this goals he has scored for us, how many of those are from getting the ball out wide and cutting in? Very very few.

He scores by being in and around the box and us getting the ball to him in the box.

 

Not sure why you would want to play him out wide when we have other players who are natural wingers, Fletcher needs a quick striker to compliment his ability to flick on and hold up the ball, Hooper can't do that, FF can.

 

Bang on. Great post.

[Costello 77]

21 hours ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

Wow some of you really over rate Hooper's performances. 

 

And this....

 

 

...is a ridiculous thing to say.

 

So you're saying FF doesn't do those things?

 

He does all that......on top of working his rounduns off, harassing defenders, dribbling past players and running in behind. He's also much quicker. 

 

 

So we've got two great players then. Hooray!

[bigdan2003]

Looks reyt fat. Almost obese.

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

Looks reyt fat. Almost obese.

 

 

 

 

This, would love to see some of you who are calling him fat, I'm pretty sure his response in person would be to look at you and say "yeah cheers slim" 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2016 by Guest

[JoshTheOwl]

Bloke in front of me hates his guts 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, JoshTheOwl said:

Bloke in front of me hates his guts 

Bloke in front is no doubt a knob ? 

[Chardron]

25 minutes ago, bigdan2003 said:

Looks reyt fat. Almost obese.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah I don't get the overweight thing. Looks exactly the same as last season to me. 

[Holmowl]

1 hour ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

 

Because we look a better side. It's pretty simple. You play well, you have a better chance of gaining the points you need to challenge. At the very worst it gives you a foundation from which you can change things and go on and win. 

 

Stop focusing on individual goal tallys. They're irrelevant. 

 

You seem to want Hooper to score more than anything else.

 

Pretty football doesn't win matches. Goals do.