Kettering Pete
Member
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/leicester_city/9306177.stm
good idea or bad. ANy thoughts?
good idea or bad. ANy thoughts?
Has he learned how to head the ball?
Stringer was in attendance at the Claridge / Heskey Q&A event at the 1884 last week when Birch asked him if he'd ever come back, to which Emile of course said yes. I'd like to believe this isn't just an extension of that, but that might be too much to hope for.
We already have a supply of strikers that don't score.
"The Leicester-born ex-England striker came through the youth ranks at his hometown club and was a crowd favourite before joining Liverpool in 2000.
After spells with Birmingham and Wigan, the striker moved to Aston Villa in January 2000. "
2000 was a busy year for Heskey
Maybe I'm naive or maybe I have have watched too much foreign football, but am I the only one who shudders at this archiac idea of the "target man" and needing a striker who can "hold the ball up" and "flick it on"? When we took Bednar off vs. Donaster and played without a target man and with Vassell up top we tore Doncaster apart by playing through them.
A lot of English fans seem to canonise target men and "old fashioned number nines" into some kind of deity, but to me its so old fashioned, none of the top teams play with target men and this old "yes, but it works in a scrappy league like the Championship" retort just seems like people stuck in their ways. Most of the teams who have gone up in the past 2 or 3 seasons have been short-passing teams rather than teams who rely on playing it high to the target men and I think that possession football dominates in the modern game that in a division where teams are so stuck in tactical ways the rest of the world left behind 30 years ago possession football will dominate a league like this (see Blackpool or Burnley who went up with teams who really shouldn't have gone up on paper, doing this).
Yes, Heskey may well be an improvement on Howard, but is that, in 2010, really the type of player that is needed in the modern game? It's not like we aren't creating chances, because we most certainly are, infact we've had the most shots this season in the entire division(!) . Yet people still hang on to this idea that we need someone for "flick ons," rather than getting someone in who can score goals. Creating chances is not the problem, finishing them is. Heskey would be no improvement on our current set up imo in regards to what we need. To me if he ever came I get the feeling of it being a negative signing and promoting an outdated style of play.
we've had the most shots this season in the entire division
Maybe I'm naive or maybe I have have watched too much foreign football, but am I the only one who shudders at this archiac idea of the "target man" and needing a striker who can "hold the ball up" and "flick it on"? When we took Bednar off vs. Donaster and played without a target man and with Vassell up top we tore Doncaster apart by playing through them.
A lot of English fans seem to canonise target men and "old fashioned number nines" into some kind of deity, but to me its so old fashioned, none of the top teams play with target men and this old "yes, but it works in a scrappy league like the Championship" retort just seems like people stuck in their ways. Most of the teams who have gone up in the past 2 or 3 seasons have been short-passing teams rather than teams who rely on playing it high to the target men and I think that possession football dominates in the modern game that in a division where teams are so stuck in tactical ways the rest of the world left behind 30 years ago possession football will dominate a league like this (see Blackpool or Burnley who went up with teams who really shouldn't have gone up on paper, doing this).
Yes, Heskey may well be an improvement on Howard, but is that, in 2010, really the type of player that is needed in the modern game? It's not like we aren't creating chances, because we most certainly are, infact we've had the most shots this season in the entire division(!) . Yet people still hang on to this idea that we need someone for "flick ons," rather than getting someone in who can score goals. Creating chances is not the problem, finishing them is. Heskey would be no improvement on our current set up imo in regards to what we need. To me if he ever came I get the feeling of it being a negative signing and promoting an outdated style of play.
An absolutely top notch, well-reasoned and thought out post. I fully agree a 'target man' approach is now obsolete although I do believe that Heskey has much more to offer than just being a battering ram. Much of the time when he played for us in the golden days, and Guppy wasn't in the team, he played down the left to great effect.
Maybe I'm naive or maybe I have have watched too much foreign football, .
P | Pld | Pts | |
1 | Leicester | 46 | 97 |
2 | Ipswich | 46 | 96 |
3 | Leeds Utd | 46 | 90 |
4 | Southampton | 46 | 87 |
5 | West Brom | 46 | 75 |
6 | Norwich City | 46 | 73 |
7 | Hull City | 46 | 70 |
8 | Middlesbro | 46 | 69 |
9 | Coventry City | 46 | 64 |
10 | Preston | 46 | 63 |
11 | Bristol City | 46 | 62 |
12 | Cardiff City | 46 | 62 |
13 | Millwall | 46 | 59 |
14 | Swansea City | 46 | 57 |
15 | Watford | 46 | 56 |
16 | Sunderland | 46 | 56 |
17 | Stoke City | 46 | 56 |
18 | QPR | 46 | 56 |
19 | Blackburn | 46 | 53 |
20 | Sheffield W | 46 | 53 |
21 | Plymouth | 46 | 51 |
22 | Birmingham | 46 | 50 |
23 | Huddersfield | 46 | 45 |
24 | Rotherham Utd | 46 | 27 |