Why do we have EIGHT strikers?

[On the Left Wing]

If we include Chris Oldroyd (on loan at Stevenage) we currently have EIGHT strikers! Why, when none of them has yet to prove he can be our 20 goals a season man!

So does this add more or less credibility to the rumours that we are about to sign Charlie Austin for £850k plus Muzza?

I would have thought we should do all we can to keep Muzza and maybe off load at least a couple of the other strikers... and sign Chris Wood?

Gus certainly has me puzzled by his thinking, loaning and buying.

 

[NMH]

Never heard about 'Oldroyd', but I'm sure there's an ointment for it.

Can't have enough competition for places - especially up front.
It's that time of year when pitches get hard or heavy, and injuries or suspensions can happen - so I'd worry a little about defenders getting hurt. It's clear we need to have AeA going strong, and GG is doing a good job too.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

FLAIR innit.

 

[tottenhamseagull]

Just in case

 

[Rookie]

Have we?
Murray, Barnes, Wood, Hart. Rest are youth or on loan

 

[KneeOn]

Sandaza, Barnes, Holroyd, Murray, Wood, Hart, Adgestien, Baz(? i can't think of the eighth...)

Well Hart is the old guard, only if needed really. Baz is more of a left mid IMO anyway, Adgestien is a future player in the dev squad so thats 3 players that you can take of the first team list of strikers.

Sandaza I think Gus has doubts on (much like Poke) Barnes and Murray are first teamers along with Wood while he's here and Holroyd can go one of two ways. He can either come back and fight for a place or he'll be stuck in the dev squad till he's sold/contract expires (i hope he comes back to fight though).

 

[Mendoza]

Barnes 7
Murray 5
Wood 1
Sandaza 1
Hart 0
Holroyd 0
Agdestein 0
Baz 0

14 goals from 18 games between them is far from ideal...

 

[Mr Banana]

So does this add more or less credibility to the rumours that we are about to sign Charlie Austin for £850k plus Muzza?

You've dropped the bomb there my lover. Not heard that one yet. It does add credibility to the possibility that I will spend the rest of this season baying for the troubled soul himself to be unleashed from his benchy asylum and onto the green surfaces where his latent genius will manifest itself in glistening, lovely goals

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Barnes 7
Murray 5
Wood 1
Sandaza 1
Hart 0
Holroyd 0
Agdestein 0
Baz 0

14 goals from 18 games between them is far from ideal...

It's got us to the top of the table with a brilliant goal difference.

 

[Acker79]

According to the club site, Baz and Hart are midfielders. We have 7 (Murray, Barnes, Sandaza, Holroyd, Agdestein, Davies, Wood), but Holroyd and Davies are not listed on the club site, so we have 5 available (Murray, Barnes, Wood, Sandaza, Agdestein).

 

[Tricky Dicky]

You don't need a 20-a-season-striker if you're scoring from all over the ptich.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It's got us to the top of the table with a brilliant goal difference.

Although on reflection we have lost LuaLau so we do need to cover for his goals.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

You don't need a 20-a-season-striker if you're scoring from all over the ptich.

and there is the correct answer.

i honestly don't understand everyones OBSESSION with the 20 goal figure.

LOTS of goals scored by a striker who has bagged over 20 in a season are often in 3-0/ 4-0 wins.

These goals are not match winners or draw savers, they are just goals.

I would MUCH rather we have someone who scores thr 1-0 goals than someone who picks up a nice hattrick every now and again, but only WINS us 15 points over a season.

WE ARE TOP. madness

 

[Springal]

Baz isn't a striker?? Agdestein is youth

 

[sten_super]

That Austin rumour sounds like rubbish. Steve Evans was on the radio at half-time last night saying that he'd directly spoken to Championship managers that had had 'bids well into 7 figures turned down for him'. £850k plus a player out of contract at the end of the season doesn't sound like it would anywhere near cut it.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

and there is the correct answer.

i honestly don't understand everyones OBSESSION with the 20 goal figure.

LOTS of goals scored by a striker who has bagged over 20 in a season are often in 3-0/ 4-0 wins.

These goals are not match winners or draw savers, they are just goals.

I would MUCH rather we have someone who scores thr 1-0 goals than someone who picks up a nice hattrick every now and again, but only WINS us 15 points over a season.

WE ARE TOP. madness

Indeed - in fact relying on one striker (mainly) is a bad thing. If he dries up, you're screwed, if he gets injured you're screwed .... and he'd probably get poached anyway.

 

[Rookie]

According to the club site, Baz and Hart are midfielders. We have 7 (Murray, Barnes, Sandaza, Holroyd, Agdestein, Davies, Wood), but Holroyd and Davies are not listed on the club site, so we have 5 available (Murray, Barnes, Wood, Sandaza, Agdestein).

Davies? As in Craig? Left on a free so that is why he is not listed

 

[Monty]

Barnes 7
Murray 5
Wood 1
Sandaza 1
Hart 0
Holroyd 0
Agdestein 0
Baz 0

14 goals from 18 games between them is far from ideal...

Dont be a donut mendoza. Only two of them start regularly!

 

[Acker79]

Davies? As in Craig? Left on a free so that is why he is not listed

I thought that was a loan deal. Whoops.

 

[Silent Bob]

and there is the correct answer.

i honestly don't understand everyones OBSESSION with the 20 goal figure.

LOTS of goals scored by a striker who has bagged over 20 in a season are often in 3-0/ 4-0 wins.

These goals are not match winners or draw savers, they are just goals.

I would MUCH rather we have someone who scores thr 1-0 goals than someone who picks up a nice hattrick every now and again, but only WINS us 15 points over a season.

WE ARE TOP. madness

But those games aren't declared over before the striker scores are they? If we had say Charlie Austin or Aaron McClean then maybe some games like Rochdale, Bournemouth, Tranmere etc WOULD have been 3 to 4 nils rather than draws.

The distinction you're drawing here doesn't really make sense. Ok, it's not purely about the number of goals, but when people talk about a 20 goal striker they just mean a top striker who can always nick you a goal. whether it's 0-0 or 4-0 doesn't change the players ability. With Barnes he's scored goals but he's missed hatfulls too, so in the proverbial tight 0-0, if you get one chance in the game, it falls to Barnes, the chances of him scoring it are less than you would like from one of your first choice strikers (in fact this actually happened in the Woking home match, he had by far the clearest chance of the game that would have won it for us but he totally scuffed it).

Indeed - in fact relying on one striker (mainly) is a bad thing. If he dries up, you're screwed, if he gets injured you're screwed .... and he'd probably get poached anyway.

Again this isn't really the point... this hypothetical striker would be in addition to what we already have, he'd be extra. Was anyone in 2001 saying that Steele should play not Zamora because Zamora was scoring too high a percentage of our goals?

It's great to be top but that doesn't mean everything is perfect. Most supporters know there are areas we need to strengthen, Gus certainly does. He's talked about a 20+ goal striker too, more than once. A top striker would arguably be the final piece of the puzzle.