Question on strikers in general

[Guest]

In terms of top scorers, the Championship hasn't changed that much really:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_EFL_Championship_seasons

 

Although lance corporal Guy Whittingham stands out from 1992-93! 

[Concrete Owl]

Strikers still score goals, you just have to pay top dollar for them. Ivan Toney being a good example. Don’t see why we can’t get a lower league striker who would make the step up. There must be others as well  waiting for an opportunity to prove they can do it at a higher level. 

[gurujuan]

1 minute ago, Concrete Owl said:

Strikers still score goals, you just have to pay top dollar for them. Ivan Toney being a good example. Don’t see why we can’t get a lower league striker who would make the step up. There must be others as well  waiting for an opportunity to prove they can do it at a higher level. 

Guess Marriott and Rhodes are examples of lower League strikers for whom the modern day championship might be a step too far

[theowlsman]

It used to be all about the team, getting results for the team, as a manager / head coach.

 

Now its about egos, building reputations, who can be the most innovative and impressive with their coaching, tactics, to get results, then move on to a better job, with a higher salary. More about the manager / head coach now and not about the team. Managers / head coaches desperate to prove how clever they are and how their designer formations and tactics are better than everybody else’s.

 

Football played best is when it’s at its simplest. Players aren’t clever enough to adapt to convoluted systems of play. All that is needed is for players to pass to a team mate in space, then moving into space after passing. Keep repeating until a shooting chance presents itself, then shoot.

 

Have your strikers in and around the box, waiting for the opportunity to shoot or get on the end of crosses, not dancing and piroetting around all parts of the field, dropping back to defend, that’s for the other mugs in the team. 

 

Leave strikers up top to do their jobs, they just need to lurk about, concentrating on shooting or heading towards goal at every opportunity, not getting involved in intricated link play. They’re not workhorses, they’re there to score goals and keep central defenders occupied for 90 minutes, not just 15 minutes in each half, spending the rest of the game picking the ball up in midfield, or waiting out wide.

 

Ruud Gullitt started all this sexy football nonsense but then it got old, got wrinkles, got a wheelchair, took its false teeth out. There’s only so much pishing about you can do before coming back to basics and keeping it simple, keeping a consistent formation, putting players with the right attributes in the right positions, let them get to know their roles by consistently playing in a settled team where everyone knows what they’re doing. No constant squad rotation, no changes in formation on a regular basis. 

 

Strikers must be told just wait for the ball up top, and tvvat it towards goal when you get chance. Stay in and around the penalty box. When a cross comes in, you need to be waiting to get on the end of it, not be stood on the wing or deep in midfield. 

 

Back to basics please, not this interchanging 3 and 5 at the back and rotating striker partnerships crap. Two strikers getting a chance to form an understanding please, and the workhorses of the team working on a consistent approach with a settled team, and a simple system, learning to play together effectively, knowing each other’s game inside out, and starting to do things without thinking due to familiarity and repetitiveness of process. All honed in training by practice and not deviating away from what the players are comfortable with. 

 

Such a simple game played in such a complicated manner. Back to basics please.

 

Starts with a good keeper, a good solid central defensive partnership, a good central midfield partnership, and a good partnership up front. Don’t get that right and you’re playing a team of strangers every week. No wonder they seem disconnected from each other.

 

And in the same way strikers are told to wait for opportunities to shoot or head towards goal, the work horses also told to shoot when a chance is there to do so, not overcomplicate things by trying to walk the ball over the line.

 

 

[davetherivelinowl]

1. For those of you harking back to 442, do you not remember how wide open we were under Jos when we only had Bannan and Pessy in the middle? Most teams at our level (including us) are now harder to break down because they put at least 3 in midfield - and therefore typically fewer players up front.

 

2. Remember that most strikers don't get as much game time nowadays. How many strikers are substituted around the 60-70 minute mark? Or get many of their minutes by coming on as subs.

[2soon]

Have only checked the top two leagues for this season. Most of the top twenty goal scorers are averaging one in two. 

 

Based just on this I would suggest the reason is more rotation and subs.

[davey_wells]

10 hours ago, gurujuan said:

Interesting mate. My take is, that the role of the striker has changed nowadays. Statistically, more goals are scored today, as witnessed clearly by some of the crazy scores in the Premier League this season. It’s become more of a team game, which was always the plan anyway surely? A good striker these days, will help the side function as a unit, whereas one who hasn’t adapted to the modern game will contribute little to that team dynamic. Our own Jordan Rhodes is an example. There is no doubt that he was at one time a prolific goal scorer, but you could argue, not always to the benefit of the team. He has struggled to adapt his game to the new demands required from strikers in the game today. I always look for more in a striker than just a previous goals record

Trust us to get Rhodes just at the same time the game started these new demands... *tuts*

[One De Bilde]

13 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

Not specifically Sheffield Wednesday but definitely applies to us too

So here's my question

Why don't strikers in football score anymore?

 

Again I don't want to just look at SWFC but football in general

I don't wanna get all 'back in MY day', and I could be completely wrong (in which case please let me know) but it feels like most (not all - most) strikers in football just don't seem to score as many goals as strikers have over previous years?

Some stats would be good if anyone's got some - e.g. average number of goals scored by strikers in the championship over the last 20/30/40 years

Again I don't have a memory at all, but in my mind a striker for any/all clubs used to score between 15 and 20 goals a season? Does that sound about right?

Am I barking up the wrong tree entirely here or did strikers in football used to score way more goals overall and on average than they score in modern football?



 

The days of the out and out striker are gone (Henry, Fowler, shearer, Nuhiu etc). Look at Kane for instance - admittedly he scores a lot of goals and has again today, however he is dropping a lot deeper now, allowing forward runs from midfield, especially from Son. When Spurs attack it's not uncommon to have 2 or 3 bodies in front of Kane centrally.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, One De Bilde said:

The days of the out and out striker are gone (Henry, Fowler, shearer, Nuhiu etc). Look at Kane for instance - admittedly he scores a lot of goals and has again today, however he is dropping a lot deeper now, allowing forward runs from midfield, especially from Son. When Spurs attack it's not uncommon to have 2 or 3 bodies in front of Kane centrally.

 

Aguero and Vardy don't concentrate on doing a great deal of dropping deep and all that business. Admittedly Aguero has had to get a but more involved in the general play under Pep but strikers do still exist, though there are less of them. 

[One De Bilde]

Just now, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Aguero and Vardy don't concentrate on doing a great deal of dropping deep and all that business. Admittedly Aguero has had to get a but more involved in the general play under Pep but strikers do still exist, though there are less of them. 

Yep Vardy possibly the exception to the rule as with his pace he will always play on the last man

[Errol Flashman]

I liked it in the old days of strike partnerships. 

[Incognito Owl]

21 hours ago, Derick Mills said:

I'd love to see how the old 235 line up would fair in today's play

I've wondered this myself, I tried figuring it out, but gave up.

[Guest hirstysfags]

Arse and elbows. Bombing up and daaarn.

[fpowl]

Football used to be direct or putting the balls down the flanks and crossing into the box 

 

now it’s possession football and with the non contact sport set pieces 

 

so you tend to get a multitude of goal scorers 

 

and for some reason over the last 10 years m  as managers always take of their attacking players so it reduces their time on pitch

 

go back further there was only ever one sun named on the bench and people could play the ball into a direct area and let the forward and center back tussle with the ball to see who come out on top

 

its a different game now days 

 

if we had Davis Hirst in our team he wouldn’t haven’t half the chances because we would be tip tapping it about and when it did go into the box he’d concede so many free kicks away by challenging for the ball 

[Dutch McLovin]

There is no such thing as a strike partnership anymore. But strikers do score. No point talking about our 'strikers' as there either not strikers, shot strikers and we dont even give them chances.

 

But look at the prem, Kane, Vardy, Aguero, Salah, Lukaku , Ings they all score regularly. Our league Watkins scored last year, Toney is this. Pukki the year before that.  

 

However the days of a striker partnership with both getting 20 goals or close are gone especially higher up the league you go. Not that I think that is right i think 442 with players knowing there roles is still the strongest formation. Look at Burnley, they have never had the premier league players that others have have always played 442 and never really been in trouble of going down. I still dont think they will this year.

 

[gurujuan]

4 minutes ago, Dutch McLovin said:

There is no such thing as a strike partnership anymore. But strikers do score. No point talking about our 'strikers' as there either not strikers, shot strikers and we dont even give them chances.

 

But look at the prem, Kane, Vardy, Aguero, Salah, Lukaku , Ings they all score regularly. Our league Watkins scored last year, Toney is this. Pukki the year before that.  

 

However the days of a striker partnership with both getting 20 goals or close are gone especially higher up the league you go. Not that I think that is right i think 442 with players knowing there roles is still the strongest formation. Look at Burnley, they have never had the premier league players that others have have always played 442 and never really been in trouble of going down. I still dont think they will this year.

 

While you have to respect what Sean Dyche has done at Burnley, I wouldn’t want them to be our role model. Back to the strikers, yes you are right, there’s pretty much only Burnley who operate a pairing these days, and most of those other goal scorers you mention, bar Salah, operate as a lone striker. 
The thing that stands out with all of them, none of them are dependent on crosses from the wing. 
Our seeming obsession with getting crosses into the box means that we are ignoring other routes to goal. Looking for the head of Paterson, as our main means of attack, strikes me as being a bit too much of a blunt instrument. 

[Dutch McLovin]

2 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

While you have to respect what Sean Dyche has done at Burnley, I wouldn’t want them to be our role model. Back to the strikers, yes you are right, there’s pretty much only Burnley who operate a pairing these days, and most of those other goal scorers you mention, bar Salah, operate as a lone striker. 
The thing that stands out with all of them, none of them are dependent on crosses from the wing. 
Our seeming obsession with getting crosses into the box means that we are ignoring other routes to goal. Looking for the head of Paterson, as our main means of attack, strikes me as being a bit too much of a blunt instrument. 

Agree with everything there apart from the burnley point. I think Dyche works with what he has, a couple of years ago he had Defour, a fit Brady a younger Boyd and they played good football playing 442 and i think they got in Europe. Whilst the Burnley model of lack of investment i wouldnt want to follow - having a manager like Dyche who gets the best out of players and plays a front 2 is something i would love at wednesday.

 

The highlighted point above is one that stands out about how ridiculous our tactics are, we do seem to be obsessed with it, yet we play no wingers and wing backs like harris and palmer whos crossing ability is shall we say Woeful.

[gurujuan]

27 minutes ago, Dutch McLovin said:

Agree with everything there apart from the burnley point. I think Dyche works with what he has, a couple of years ago he had Defour, a fit Brady a younger Boyd and they played good football playing 442 and i think they got in Europe. Whilst the Burnley model of lack of investment i wouldnt want to follow - having a manager like Dyche who gets the best out of players and plays a front 2 is something i would love at wednesday.

 

The highlighted point above is one that stands out about how ridiculous our tactics are, we do seem to be obsessed with it, yet we play no wingers and wing backs like harris and palmer whos crossing ability is shall we say Woeful.

No I have massive respect for what Dyche and Burnley have done, but it isn’t a route I’d want us to go down. What changes can we reasonably make to get the best out of the resources we currently have? 
From what I’ve seen of our strikers, none have shown any sort form for their previous clubs in recent times. The strikers Monk has recruited are poor, and don’t look capable of playing the managers preferred system. Only Marriott, do I recall, ever looking likely to have what it takes. Not so far for us, he looks dreadful, and in truth, rarely for Derby. He did though score a few real quality goals in big cup games for Derby, that suggests he has it in him. His problem though was, he’d do it in those cup games, looking the part, but then go five games looking like he didn’t have a clue. Can remember thinking when watching him in those cup games, that his style reminded me a little bit of Maupay, when he was at Brentford. I don’t know, probably clutching at straws here, as I said, he’s looked pretty dismal here, but other than a dip into the free agents, we have to find a solution from within

[Guest]

23 hours ago, Derick Mills said:

I'd love to see how the old 235 line up would fair in today's play

 

Liverpool and City get into this shape a lot when attacking,

For City 2 of the centre mids push through the middle and the wide forwards stay wide.

For Liverpool Salah and Mane come inside and TAA and Robertson get right to the byline.

[yeadonowl]

1 hour ago, gurujuan said:

While you have to respect what Sean Dyche has done at Burnley, I wouldn’t want them to be our role model. Back to the strikers, yes you are right, there’s pretty much only Burnley who operate a pairing these days, and most of those other goal scorers you mention, bar Salah, operate as a lone striker. 
The thing that stands out with all of them, none of them are dependent on crosses from the wing. 
Our seeming obsession with getting crosses into the box means that we are ignoring other routes to goal. Looking for the head of Paterson, as our main means of attack, strikes me as being a bit too much of a blunt instrument. 

issue we have is that we have a team that is completely devoid of creativity unless Bannan manages to get one of his hollywood passes on target

 

When you then add zero pace up front you soon start to see why crosses, own goals and penalties are going to be our only way of scoring goals. 

 

The recruitment this summer was nothing short of negligent. A method of play was designed by the management and coaching team and then players were brought in who can't play that way. if we are going to play this way then a mobile tall central striker was required and 2 players who can play wing back. What we got was a mixture of crocks and utility players