Josh Magennis | Page 3 | Vital Football

Josh Magennis

TRUE BELIEVER said:
Surely if the manager wanted them to play more passing football he would be pushing for that but there is no evidence that he is. In your own posts you bemoan the fact that we continue to play long ball, doesn't this indicate that that is the way LR and the coaching staff want the players to play at present.

I have no doubt that the players we have are capable of playing a passing game but as I said in my post there was little time pre-season to drill this into players. I also have no doubt that you and I would like to see us playing a passing game, but I think LR is the better judge of when to instigate that and no matter how much debate we have on this matter that will not change.

As I say if LR wanted them to play passing football there is no doubt in my mind he would be setting the side up to play that way, but he isn't and in my opinion that is because he fears that if he tries to change the set up it could come back to bite us in the bum. I understand your position and I have said before you are entitled to think that way.
Click to expand...

I don't think the point you made about it being hard to implement a passing system or us having to wait to preseason fits in this instance as we've already proven that we are can do it by switching to it with great effect regularly. It's not something we haven't done before, it's not something we need to learn to do, we already have it and we just choose not to use it.

It's obvious long ball is the way Richardson wants us to play - but it seems completely counter intuitive when we we create more chances and perform better using plan B than plan A. So many of our goals are coming from set pieces and getting down the flanks, i can't recall many goals coming from the striker winning a knock down or flicking on a long ball but we persist with the latter despite it giving drastically really low returns. Our long balls lose possession drastically more than they keep it and whatever style you choose to lose the last thing you want it to be turning over possession easily to the opposition.

There is a direct correlation between how much long ball we play and how many chances we create. When things are going wrong we are switching to playing more passing football to get us out of jail and make a come back rather than going long more often. I think that tells it's own story.
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
How is Magennis going to get up to speed if he is not playing first team football ?

Surely the only way for him to get up to speed is to play, not be sitting on the bench or playing in the U23's.

As far as Humphry's goes, he is a different type of player and is unlucky not to get more minutes at present, in my opinion. He is not the type of player to play in the same role as Magennis or Wyke, he is an energetic, all action, ball playing forward and is more akin to the role that Keane plays within the side. Magennis is there to put pressure on opposition CB's and to compete for high balls, something that Humps is not adept to.
Click to expand...
How was Jordan Jones meant to get up to speed when he was never given a chance of first team football?
Surely the only way we could have got him up to speed was for him to be play and not be sitting on the bench.
 
jeffs right said:
How was Jordan Jones meant to get up to speed when he was never given a chance of first team football?
Surely the only way we could have got him up to speed was for him to be play and not be sitting on the bench.
Click to expand...

The truth is that there is always a double standard in football at all clubs.

Some players will get plenty of starts despite playing poorly while others who show promise struggle to get picked. Some get unlimited faith and chance after chance they haven't earned while others can't get a fair crack of the whip no matter what.

To us watching just on match days it makes no sense why certain players are not always treated in the way their performances merit.

But I think what happens off the pitch we dont see has a huge influence; how hard they train, how much the manager likes a player on a personal level, if the manager wants to justify a player they pushed for, if a manager trying to make a point on a player he didn't want or probably many other reasons, if a manager wants to push a player out to free up space for someone new, etc.

Managers always have favourites and players are never all treated equally. It's the nature of the game.
 
moonay said:
I'd have stuck this in a new thread, but it seem quite pertinent to put it here.

Maybe, the Fun Boy Three were right ... It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it .....

https://twitter.com/x/status/1495827454212067332
Click to expand...

Agreed, possession stats mean very little, you can pass the ball around the back 4 all game to get your numbers up without doing anything. Hull away when Martinez famously talked about having 70%+ possession but we barely were in the opposition half and lost is a prime example of how meaningless possession can be if you don't do anything with it.

We were superb at long ball under Bruce and dreadful at it under Joyce, we played some amazing attacking passing that cut through teams at times under Martinez and utterly toothless dour passing that was all backwards and sideways many others.

The debate is never passing football is always better than long ball, the question is if passing football or long ball creates more chances and gets better performances out of the players you have.
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
How is Magennis going to get up to speed if he is not playing first team football ?

Surely the only way for him to get up to speed is to play, not be sitting on the bench or playing in the U23's.

As far as Humphry's goes, he is a different type of player and is unlucky not to get more minutes at present, in my opinion. He is not the type of player to play in the same role as Magennis or Wyke, he is an energetic, all action, ball playing forward and is more akin to the role that Keane plays within the side. Magennis is there to put pressure on opposition CB's and to compete for high balls, something that Humps is not adept to.
Click to expand...
He can play first team football without starting games, just like Humphrys did for the first 6 months of the season where he was limited to 5-10 mins at the end of games, if lucky. Humphrys had earned his chance before Magennis came in but even then he was still battling to start games. Keane got injured and then Magennis was the main number 9, sometimes on his own, and Humphrys still on the bench. The sharpness will also come through training, learning our systems, getting settled into the team. All of that takes some time, it's no surprise Magennis isn't scoring or playing especially well, some of that will come through minutes in competitive games, and so of it will come through integrating with the squad and practicing on the training pitch.

I think Humphrys is absolutely fine playing up front with say Lang and Edwards either side, he can play the target man role and bring people into the game. He is probably better off playing off someone like Magennis which means he can play a touch deeper and not have to do so much chasing, but that's the same for any striker really, they'd all like to conserve their energy a bit more and have less off the ball responsibility, and then be able to be threatening with the ball to feet, or have another body in the box for crosses etc.
 
I think Evatt is trying to justify his job. His dig yesterday at I assume ourselves and Rotherham was a bit embarrassing. His team sit in mid table and despite his claims to the contrary aren’t the best team in the league. The local journo is now at it publishing form tables, including ourselves on it despite having played three games less over his chosen time period. Iles should give Putin a bell, I reckon he could get a contract in his propoganda department.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
I don't think the point you made about it being hard to implement a passing system or us having to wait to preseason fits in this instance as we've already proven that we are can do it by switching to it with great effect regularly. It's not something we haven't done before, it's not something we need to learn to do, we already have it and we just choose not to use it.

It's obvious long ball is the way Richardson wants us to play - but it seems completely counter intuitive when we we create more chances and perform better using plan B than plan A. So many of our goals are coming from set pieces and getting down the flanks, i can't recall many goals coming from the striker winning a knock down or flicking on a long ball but we persist with the latter despite it giving drastically really low returns. Our long balls lose possession drastically more than they keep it and whatever style you choose to lose the last thing you want it to be turning over possession easily to the opposition.

There is a direct correlation between how much long ball we play and how many chances we create. When things are going wrong we are switching to playing more passing football to get us out of jail and make a come back rather than going long more often. I think that tells it's own story.
Click to expand...

I can't actually disagree on any of that KDZ, although I do think you missed the point of my post. I am simply saying that it seems to me that LR wants to play long ball rather than passing football at present, he is obviously comfortable with the system and doesn't see it as a problem.

It is only my opinion that he will wait until the pre-season to make the change when there will be more time on the training pitch than at present, as I have said you obviously see it differently and believe the change can be made now. The point is that regardless of what we think the final decision will be made by the manager who seems to favour my scenario at present.
 
Pubey said:
He can play first team football without starting games, just like Humphrys did for the first 6 months of the season where he was limited to 5-10 mins at the end of games, if lucky. Humphrys had earned his chance before Magennis came in but even then he was still battling to start games. Keane got injured and then Magennis was the main number 9, sometimes on his own, and Humphrys still on the bench. The sharpness will also come through training, learning our systems, getting settled into the team. All of that takes some time, it's no surprise Magennis isn't scoring or playing especially well, some of that will come through minutes in competitive games, and so of it will come through integrating with the squad and practicing on the training pitch.

I think Humphrys is absolutely fine playing up front with say Lang and Edwards either side, he can play the target man role and bring people into the game. He is probably better off playing off someone like Magennis which means he can play a touch deeper and not have to do so much chasing, but that's the same for any striker really, they'd all like to conserve their energy a bit more and have less off the ball responsibility, and then be able to be threatening with the ball to feet, or have another body in the box for crosses etc.
Click to expand...

I agree that he could play first team football without actually being played constantly, but playing the system we do with a fair amount of long ball passes, it seems that LR prefers Magennis, who is after all proven at this level, as opposed to Humphry's who still has to prove himself having come from a lower division.

You seem to agree with me that Humphreys is a different type of player and your solution of playing him with Lang and Edwards either side seems to suggest we bench our top goalscorer, Will Keane.

The problem is that there are not enough places to play everyone and the players who are in possession at present have been able to accumulate sufficient points to get us into second place. It is going to be difficult to shift them other than through injury. Although I agree that Humphreys deserves more game time he will have to bide his time and take his chances as they come, and when he gets in, stay in.
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
I agree that he could play first team football without actually being played constantly, but playing the system we do with a fair amount of long ball passes, it seems that LR prefers Magennis, who is after all proven at this level, as opposed to Humphry's who still has to prove himself having come from a lower division.

You seem to agree with me that Humphreys is a different type of player and your solution of playing him with Lang and Edwards either side seems to suggest we bench our top goalscorer, Will Keane.

The problem is that there are not enough places to play everyone and the players who are in possession at present have been able to accumulate sufficient points to get us into second place. It is going to be difficult to shift them other than through injury. Although I agree that Humphreys deserves more game time he will have to bide his time and take his chances as they come, and when he gets in, stay in.
Click to expand...
Keane is also struggling a bit for form and fitness and so needs to be managed carefully. I'd happily play a 343 formation with Humphrys + Lang + Edwards in the attacking roles, and we can switch things around if necessary with Keane and Magennis as great options from the bench.

Tonight's team selection will be interesting with Humphys in form, Magennis needing a good game, Keane needing minutes as he comes back from his injury, Lang running a booking tight-rope etc.
 
Pubey said:
Keane is also struggling a bit for form and fitness and so needs to be managed carefully. I'd happily play a 343 formation with Humphrys + Lang + Edwards in the attacking roles, and we can switch things around if necessary with Keane and Magennis as great options from the bench.

Tonight's team selection will be interesting with Humphys in form, Magennis needing a good game, Keane needing minutes as he comes back from his injury, Lang running a booking tight-rope etc.
Click to expand...

TBH mate, I think Keane is definitely struggling at present, his touch seems to have deserted him a little and I for one wold not be surprised to see him left on the bench for tonight's game.
 
Made in Wigan said:
However all showed far more in those initial barren spells than Magennis. It’s not his lack of goals that is disappointing me, but his level of performance.
Click to expand...
If I had to be critical of anything, it would be that he rarely seems to be in the best position - especially on the end of crosses - to get a goal. Too often, he seems to be at the back post, when the front is obviously the one to go for.

However, both the manager and James Beattie know way better than me, so I'll let them both keep on doing the selecting/coaching.
 
If I had to be critical of anything it's the lack of effort, failure to get off the deck, constant backing into players rather than attacking the ball, failure to score, failure to assist and general lack of interest.
Other than that he's great
Needs hitching up to a brewery dray and waving on his way.
 
moonay said:
If I had to be critical of anything, it would be that he rarely seems to be in the best position - especially on the end of crosses - to get a goal. Too often, he seems to be at the back post, when the front is obviously the one to go for.

However, both the manager and James Beattie know way better than me, so I'll let them both keep on doing the selecting/coaching.
Click to expand...


Which is why I presume they took him off tonight at one down and we went on to win 3-1.
 
Ooohaaahdonniepage said:
Which is why I presume they took him off tonight at one down and we went on to win 3-1.
Click to expand...
..... you mean, after he'd knackered the central defenders, meaning they were
a) slow to react to to Max's free kick
b) nowhere to be seen for Callum's first, and
c) all over the shop for Callum's second ?

:hmmm:
 
moonay said:
..... you mean, after he'd knackered the central defenders, meaning they were
a) slow to react to to Max's free kick
b) nowhere to be seen for Callum's first, and
c) all over the shop for Callum's second ?

:hmmm:
Click to expand...

Knackered the central defenders? They had an easy time whilst he was on. For a big lad he ain’t as weak as piss. Contrast his performance to that of Vokes. Or big Charlie when he was fit. A bit of effort and fight wouldn’t go amiss.
 
Made in Wigan said:
Knackered the central defenders? They had an easy time whilst he was on. For a big lad he ain’t as weak as piss. Contrast his performance to that of Vokes. Or big Charlie when he was fit. A bit of effort and fight wouldn’t go amiss.
Click to expand...
Recommendation ..... proof read what you've written before you post. If he "ain't a weak as piss", what is he as weak as? ;)

The 3 bullets are right though, aren't they.

PS: Agree re Vokes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.