Has the football been better without Hammond?

[Jimmy Grimble]

Hasn't been many interesting football threads lately so I thought I'd give this one a go, even if there is still 2 games left.

Right, the question is, do you think the team has played better football since Hammond left?

IMO, I think our passing foobtall has been slightly better. With Hammond in the team most of our play seemed to revolve around him. Now we see a greater variety of passing and some spells of really slick football.

 

[Beach Hut]

I wouldn't single him out as a scapegoat as I understand he virtually had to go as there was price to be had.

 

[Withdean Wanderer]

It's been better since he left, but not BECAUSE he left.

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

I wouldn't single him out as a scapegoat as I understand he virtually had to go as there was price to be had.

I'm not singling him out as a scapegoat, it's just a question as I was bored and wanted the views of NSC. Dont get me wrong he was a decent player, but all it is, is a question.

 

[Skaville]

Not much difference. it was good before, it's good now.

 

[Skidmarks]

The passing may be slick at times but there's been way too many games where we've been over-run in midfield. He may not of added to the prettier side of the game so much, but he did add alot more steel and energy to the team as well as goals.
For me, I'm gonna say we play better with the ball but off the ball worse.
Its a draw.

 

[The Large One]

It's been better since he left, but not BECAUSE he left.

Utter spoon thought this character normally is, I do agree with him on this one.

Whether our midfield has been better is another matter, and not a road I am going to go down right now...

 

[Withdean Wanderer]

Utter spoon thought this character normally is, I do agree with him on this one.

.

My life is complete.

 

[BensGrandad]

I think that what we have missed from him is his goals from midfield and having an additional striker when needed as none of the midfielders get forward as much as he did. What we havent done is conceed so many free kicks just outside of our box as he couldnt tackle fairly to save his life.

 

[Da Man Clay]

I think that what we have missed from him is his goals from midfield and having an additional striker when needed as none of the midfielders get forward as much as he did. What we havent done is conceed so many free kicks just outside of our box as he couldnt tackle fairly to save his life.

didn't get many goals though, how many did he get other than penalties? Hammond was a decent box to box player and would still get in our side, but didn't really get as many goals as he should have this year IMO.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

The previous worry for us was the lack of goals coming from our strikeforce. It is quite possible to push for promotion without a 20+ goal a season man as Bristol City, Forest and Yeovil proved last season. Hammond was a very useful player to have as he was always popping up with vital goals.

Now we have a strikeforce that are scoring and quite a bland midfield on the goals front.

Anyway, I think the football is better/similar and perhaps more direct. The big loss, in my opinion, was O'Callaghan. He added a bit of bite to the midfield and opened up the game a bit more and played our players into the game. He was hungry and demanded the ball and brought it out from the defence.

To summarise, I think Hammond was a loss to us, but not a devastating loss to us.

 

[backson]

I always thought he blew hot and cold, he could be good, but could go missing at times.

I don't think we're quite as good as when he was on top of his game, but I don't think the poor performances haven't been quite as bad as when he used to have a mare.

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

Results have been better since he went. The football has generally been better. We have looked harder to beat and more likely to win.

It's not just down to him, but I would say since January we've played better football.

Sadly, the effects of a busy March took their toll in a couple of games and the side just looked tired. Shame, because the season was coming to a boil nicely.

 

[Simon Morgan]

The previous worry for us was the lack of goals coming from our strikeforce. It is quite possible to push for promotion without a 20+ goal a season man as Bristol City, Forest and Yeovil proved last season. Hammond was a very useful player to have as he was always popping up with vital goals.

Now we have a strikeforce that are scoring and quite a bland midfield on the goals front.

Anyway, I think the football is better/similar and perhaps more direct. The big loss, in my opinion, was O'Callaghan. He added a bit of bite to the midfield and opened up the game a bit more and played our players into the game. He was hungry and demanded the ball and brought it out from the defence.

To summarise, I think Hammond was a loss to us, but not a devastating loss to us.

I agree, O'Callaghan is the one we could do with right now. I always liked Hammond as a player, but the fact is that before he left he was underperforming compared to last season's very high standards. I'm disappointed for the player himself that he didn't get a better club, because he is a Championship-quality player IMO.

 

[Stinkers Bridge]

He was never the same after he had crashed that jet powered car on Top Gear.

 

[Mendoza]

I dont think we are better without him.
Since he left, we have been playing with 2 central midfielders put in the team to break up the attacking moves of the other team before they reach our defence.

That tactic has worked well with El Abd, Racon, Thomson etc, but the problem with having 2 defensive midfielders is that

1) we sit too deep, inviting players to run at us - which has lead to a few goals this season

2) when we win the ball back, there is little in the way of attacking creativity or tendencies, meaning that our attacks rarley happen, and we lose pocession or pass the ball backwards or sideways, losing momentum going forward


he was our attacking in the midfield, and the only one who bust a gut to get into the box for crosses

 

[seagullsss]

strangely i think it has. Cant quite put my finger on why or how though

 

[Silent Bob]

The passing may be slick at times but there's been way too many games where we've been over-run in midfield. He may not of added to the prettier side of the game so much, but he did add alot more steel and energy to the team as well as goals.
For me, I'm gonna say we play better with the ball but off the ball worse.
Its a draw.

I agree we miss his steel, but the football we played with O'Callaghan and Hammond in the middle was at least as good as anything we've played since.

 

[Lush]

It was better in those precious weeks after he left AND El-Abd was playing in midfield.