Hemed- Nowhere near Championship standard

[luge]

Not a kneejerk thread but you wait until we lose a couple of games to post it. Looking at this thread and others on here, I think a lot of our so called fans don't deserve promotion. When we have a couple of poor results, after a fantastic season, they turn on the players and the manager. It is a sad reflection on our supporters.

agreed

 

[Bold Seagull]

I totally agree that the formation didn't help Hemed. Hughton got it wrong by playing such a defensive 451.

You can understand why Hughton did it though. Goldson coming in at the back, already weakened with Calderon doing his best, plus our wingers not quite firing and Kayal and Stephens looking a bit overrun in midfield in recent games. The logic being Crofts would give both Kayal and Stephens more support going forward.

I'm actually pleased Hughton is able to show tactical flexibility depending on the players available - not just sticking to a tactical formation regardless of who he has available, also taking into account the opposition. You can say he got it wrong because we lost and we have no way of knowing how we'd have done with our more typical 4-4-2.

Will be interesting to see what he does on Friday, perhaps he will feel he got it wrong and will go back to 4-4-2 against Wolves. He'll probably feel it was worth trying last night.

 

[Deano's Invisible Pants]

Ah yes....the now familiar 1 in 4 striker that adorns our game. They play plenty of games for all manner of teams and hover around the 8-10 goal mark every season. They are accompanied everywhere by the usual platitudes.....
1) X works so hard.
2) X only needs one to go in off his backside and he'll go on a run.
3) X brings other players into play
4) X would score more goals if the service was better
5) X has been so unlucky this season
etc etc etc
Lets face it folks, in this era of diminishing quality ( generally ) in football (and believe me if you don't think the quality is dropping, you ain't watched much football ) we seem to have a plethora of bang average footballers plying their trade as strikers. Most are pretty hopeless at heading the ball. Most can't use their chest properly. Most can't play on the half turn. Most fail to hold onto the ball with their back to goal and most have no idea how to beat the keeper in a one on one, so take the easy option of going down at the slightest touch.
Asked to name how many top strikers there are in the PL, you would struggle to get past the fingers of one hand. As for the Championship, the same applies. Austen is a poacher and good at it. Rhodes is slow but has very good positional sense. Martin is ok but would struggle at the higher level. McCormack is a decent all round player with an eye for goal. Gray is still raw but has potential. Nugent, tried and trusted but past it and Afobe needs a strong man alongside him. Murphy doesn't do a lot for me.
There you are, a handful of names and no one else worth talking about. Austen the stand out striker. A pathetic indictment of current football.
One in four....my goodness....how times have changed....when one in two was the benchmark....oh, hang on...that was in prehistoric times before football was invented by the PL and has developed into this glorious, high quality, value for money spectacle, that it is today.

Interesting point-of-view. However, if the incidence '1 in 4' goal strikers is higher now than historically, this implies that other players are scoring more - either that or fewer goals are scored overall - I suspect the former rather than the latter may be the case.

Haven't we have always had 1 in 4 strikers adorning the game (and the Albion)? To name just a few notable ones for BHA from different eras: Kevin Bremner, Ian Mellor, John Byrne.

Two major differences: 1) We didn't rely on these players to score 30 goals a season and appreciated the qualities they brought to the team; 2) They played alongside someone who did bang in 20 - 30+ goals.

If you don't score the goals, you've got to bring something different, like skill and creativity (e.g. Byrne), or muscle and aerial prowess (Bremner). Hemed has a decent first touch and can beat a man (like for the disallowed goal last night), but the jury's still out on whether he brings enough to warrant a place in a top championship side.

 

[luge]

You can understand why Hughton did it though. Goldson coming in at the back, already weakened with Calderon doing his best, plus our wingers not quite firing and Kayal and Stephens looking a bit overrun in midfield in recent games. The logic being Crofts would give both Kayal and Stephens more support going forward.

I'm actually pleased Hughton is able to show tactical flexibility depending on the players available - not just sticking to a tactical formation regardless of who he has available, also taking into account the opposition. You can say he got it wrong because we lost and we have no way of knowing how we'd have done with our more typical 4-4-2.

Will be interesting to see what he does on Friday, perhaps he will feel he got it wrong and will go back to 4-4-2 against Wolves. He'll probably feel it was worth trying last night.

442 with Wilson fit again. You don't get over a cold / tummy bug in 3 days.

When Towell becomes available - attacking 4-5-1.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

well up until a couple of games ago he was generally getting in the right position and making chances. I'd say that he was desperately unlucky for a large part of the season - hitting the woodwork or drawing the keeper into a good save most games..

I'd agree it's dried up for the lad right now, but I'd also say that the whole team look a bit unsure of where to pass to. Contrast that with most of the games up to the charlton game - every time we went forward the ball was being passed quickly, and the opposition was caught on the back foot.

We've 7 key players out, and the main attacking threat - the wingers and full backs doubling up - has gone - especially on the left hand side.

Last night is a bit unfair to judge him on as generally he was a fair few metres away from the nearest midfielder.

I'm a ST holder, I go to every home game. I said I totally get that we have injuries and the formation didn't help him last night, which is why he needed to hold the ball up (as Bobby did) or, alternatively, offer better movement as an outlet (which Wilson or Baldock would've done). He did neither and he was constantly beaten in the air too. Also, all of the positives you've discussed about quicker ball movement is a result of having March, Baldock, Lua Lua, Rosenior/Bong in the side - that isn't something Hemed offers. And as for the team being unsure where to pass to... All you're doing is damning Hemed even more as you're proving in that statement alone that it's clear the other players don't trust him as an outlet.

Basically, you've not actually answered my question - what does he do? What does he bring to the team when he's not scoring goals?

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Not a kneejerk thread but you wait until we lose a couple of games to post it. Looking at this thread and others on here, I think a lot of our so called fans don't deserve promotion. When we have a couple of poor results, after a fantastic season, they turn on the players and the manager. It is a sad reflection on our supporters.

Saying that we'd be better with any one of our other 3 forwards up front isn't turning on the players. Neither is questioning what a player actually brings to the side or how they're performing. If you hadn't noticed, there also a thread that praises Goldson's performance last night.

 

[luge]

I'm a ST holder, I go to every home game. I said I totally get that we have injuries and the formation didn't help him last night, which is why he needed to hold the ball up (as Bobby did) or, alternatively, offer better movement as an outlet (which Wilson or Baldock would've done). He did neither and he was constantly beaten in the air too. Also, all of the positives you've discussed about quicker ball movement is a result of having March, Baldock, Lua Lua, Rosenior/Bong in the side - that isn't something Hemed offers. And as for the team being unsure where to pass to... All you're doing is damning Hemed even more as you're proving in that statement alone that it's clear the other players don't trust him as an outlet.

Basically, you've not actually answered my question - what does he do? What does he bring to the team when he's not scoring goals?

I'm saying that when he has the service he does alot better. I'm saying that because we weren't confident on the ball last night he was working off scraps rather than balls he could work with or do anything with.

Generally Baldock would be making space across the front line and hemed would be coming deep to get the ball to him, and then busting a gut to to get into a scoring position. He did this well enough for most of the season. Last night he was on his own, and balls were not coming to him. So he went to go and find them, in the process setting up a valid goal and hustling their back four.

He didn't have a great game, and is a bit out of sorts at the moment. As are most of the team.

Zamora is a different player who offers different skills.

Perhaps a spell on the bench will do him good, Hughton doesn't have that option at the moment.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

You can understand why Hughton did it though. Goldson coming in at the back, already weakened with Calderon doing his best, plus our wingers not quite firing and Kayal and Stephens looking a bit overrun in midfield in recent games. The logic being Crofts would give both Kayal and Stephens more support going forward.

I'm actually pleased Hughton is able to show tactical flexibility depending on the players available - not just sticking to a tactical formation regardless of who he has available, also taking into account the opposition. You can say he got it wrong because we lost and we have no way of knowing how we'd have done with our more typical 4-4-2.

Will be interesting to see what he does on Friday, perhaps he will feel he got it wrong and will go back to 4-4-2 against Wolves. He'll probably feel it was worth trying last night.

I totally agree. My issue isn't with the personel or that we had a switch in formation, it's how we played it. We played 4231 (which is just a more attacking 451) at the end of last season but having Tex in the hole made the formation much more of an attacking threat.

For all of my criticisms of Hemed, and he was dreadful last night, he may have been more effective had we not played our wide players so deeply (or had we played them higher up and narrower so they were closer to Hemed) and if we'd allowed Kayal more license to get forward and support Hemed in more of a no.10 role. Unfortunately, the wide players and the 3 midfielders were, for the first 65-70 minutes, far too deep.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

Saying that we'd be better with any one of our other 3 forwards up front isn't turning on the players. Neither is questioning what a player actually brings to the side or how they're performing. If you hadn't noticed, there also a thread that praises Goldson's performance last night.

How is starting a thread called "Hemed - Nowhere near Championship standard" not turning on our players?

 

[Stat Brother]

The problem is he's never in the right position to get on the end of it. Watch how Zamora peels off defenders, goes where they don't want him to go. Hemed never does this - defenders can easily predict what he's going to do.

This may well be the case.

But I'd like more than none, לא, nil, zilch, aucun, squadosh, nada, 沒有, nought, ninguna crosses on which to base that opinion.

Especially an opinion on a player 5 months into a new job, in a new country, and one who thunder b*****ded a header in, from a pin point cross to win the Albion 3 points v Charlton.

 

[marshy68]

We could play the best forward on the planet if the wide men can't get a ball past the first man what is the point?

Agreed only two decent balls into the box last night one for the disallowed goal other for bz chance.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I'm saying that when he has the service he does alot better. I'm saying that because we weren't confident on the ball last night he was working off scraps rather than balls he could work with or do anything with.

Generally Baldock would be making space across the front line and hemed would be coming deep to get the ball to him, and then busting a gut to to get into a scoring position. He did this well enough for most of the season. Last night he was on his own, and balls were not coming to him. So he went to go and find them, in the process setting up a valid goal and hustling their back four.

He didn't have a great game, and is a bit out of sorts at the moment. As are most of the team.

Zamora is a different player who offers different skills.

Perhaps a spell on the bench will do him good, Hughton doesn't have that option at the moment.

So you think he's a deep lying attacker who needs someone else alongside him who will move in behind defenders to open up space for him?

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

How is starting a thread called "Hemed - Nowhere near Championship standard" not turning on our players?

You're right - it's a politically incorrect subject line. What do you think of Hemed?

 

[DJ NOBO]

This may well be the case.

But I'd like more than none, לא, nil, zilch, aucun, squadosh, nada, 沒有, nought, ninguna crosses on which to base that opinion.

Especially an opinion on a player 5 months into a new job, in a new country, and one who thunder b*****ded a header in, from a pin point cross to win the Albion 3 points v Charlton.

I know VLP never beat first man last night but even so Hemed (in other games) gets in such bad positions that he turns ok/good crosses into poor ones because he lets the defender get ahead of him.
I don't know why so many people are generous with him - he arrived for big money and he hasn't delivered

 

[Finchley Seagull]

You're right - it's a politically incorrect subject line. What do you think of Hemed?

Sorry, who said anything about political correctness? You said it wasn't turning on our players. I said the thread title clearly is. Obviously you agree but don't want to admit you were wrong.

In terms of Hemed, he's certainly better than nowhere near good enough for Championship standard. He had a great start to the season and looked full of confidence. Now he's had a bad patch, he's looking a bit low on confidence, as happens to strikers. Personally, assuming he's still trying, which he is, I prefer to get behind the player when he's picked in that situation rather than slate him online. That is what I believe supporters do. Obviously others think it's better to slag him off.

As for last night, he wasn't anywhere near as bad as some on here think. He's not a lone striker but, with Zamora and Wilson not fit enough to start according to Hughton, he was the only option and did all he could with poor service most of the night.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

All I'll add to this is that, since day 1, any time the ball is hit into the box, I don't fancy Hemed to be the player to get on the end of it. Be that in the air or on the floor.

For me, that's quite worrying for a striker. The frustrating thing is he was making some lovely runs and being found.....but then out-muscled or out-paced.

Zamora yesterday turned a half chance on his weaker foot into a shot against the bar.

 

[Stat Brother]

Zamora yesterday turned a half chance on his weaker foot into a shot against the bar.

Half chance, behave, that was the only quality cross from the entire game.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Half chance, behave, that was the only quality cross from the entire game.

So you're saying he SHOULD have scored?

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Sorry, who said anything about political correctness? You said it wasn't turning on our players. I said the thread title clearly is. Obviously you agree but don't want to admit you were wrong.

In terms of Hemed, he's certainly better than nowhere near good enough for Championship standard. He had a great start to the season and looked full of confidence. Now he's had a bad patch, he's looking a bit low on confidence, as happens to strikers. Personally, assuming he's still trying, which he is, I prefer to get behind the player when he's picked in that situation rather than slate him online. That is what I believe supporters do. Obviously others think it's better to slag him off.

As for last night, he wasn't anywhere near as bad as some on here think. He's not a lone striker but, with Zamora and Wilson not fit enough to start according to Hughton, he was the only option and did all he could with poor service most of the night.

I didn't start the thread and the OP has a right to ask the question about whether he thinks the guy is good enough for this level or our team, even if you disagree with it. That doesn't make him less of a fan than you because he has a critique.

I've put forward my views on Hemed and they are that I just don't get what he does as a footballer now that the goals have dried up. I also said he was awful last night, which he was, and anyone that thinks otherwise wasn't watching the game. I don't see what his strengths are and I don't see what he brings to the team at present other than hard work, which all of our players are currently showing - I would have any one of Wilson, Zamora and Baldock ahead of him in the team. However, I'm being open minded and I'm trying to figure out what he does and asked for your opinion, so there's no need to be an arse.

I appreciate your backing of Hemed and if it's any consolation, I have not and never would boo a player of ours at the game. But this is a medium to discuss his role and ability in the team - it isn't slagging him off. Personally I want BHA to progress and win games and, at the moment, Hemed is a barrier to us doing that. His poor form could be due to the team's tactics, it could be to do with poorer service due to injuries, but it could also be in large part down to him (all of which I've also said on this thread).

So I'll ask you the same question I posed earlier - what is it that he does/brings to the team? You've said he's not a lone strikers, another poster has portrayed him as a deep lying striker... What role do you think best suits him/his perceived strengths?

 

[Finchley Seagull]

I didn't start the thread and the OP has a right to ask the question about whether he thinks the guy is good enough for this level or our team, even if you disagree with it. That doesn't make him less of a fan than you because he has a critique.

I've put forward my views on Hemed and they are that I just don't get what he does as a footballer now that the goals have dried up. I also said he was awful last night, which he was, and anyone that thinks otherwise wasn't watching the game. I don't see what his strengths are and I don't see what he brings to the team at present other than hard work, which all of our players are currently showing - I would have any one of Wilson, Zamora and Baldock ahead of him in the team. However, I'm being open minded and I'm trying to figure out what he does and asked for your opinion, so there's no need to be an arse.

I appreciate your backing of Hemed and if it's any consolation, I have not and never would boo a player of ours at the game. But this is a medium to discuss his role and ability in the team - it isn't slagging him off. Personally I want BHA to progress and win games and, at the moment, Hemed is a barrier to us doing that. His poor form could be due to the team's tactics, it could be to do with poorer service due to injuries, but it could also be in large part down to him (all of which I've also said on this thread).

So I'll ask you the same question I posed earlier - what is it that he does/brings to the team? You've said he's not a lone strikers, another poster has portrayed him as a deep lying striker... What role do you think best suits him/his perceived strengths?

The thread is not a question. It's a statement. We'll have to agree to disagree but to me starting a thread like this isn't a critique, it's slating a player who's given their all for the team.

As for last night, you're basically saying anyone who disagrees with you didn't watch the game. Hardly encouraging debate is it? He looked a bit lost at times last night but was also involved in some good build up play while not being offered much service.

In terms of what he offers, at the start of the season (especially when LuaLua was playing) he got into really good positions to finish off moves and scored goals. He's not bad in the air and needs to play in a front two with a Baldock/Wilson type player. He can be quite strong too.

The annoying thing is because he settled in so quickly, people forget that he came in from overseas and had never played in England before this season. Manu has the same issue and has hardly featured (despite costing more than Hemed). It is a different style of play to Spain so maybe having hit the ground running when he was unknown but is now struggling when people have seen his strengths and weaknesses and needs time to adapt.