At the moment it's Waggy all the way for me. He might not get on the ball as much as Martin, but 5 goals in 10 games cannot be scoffed at. From the brief highlights I've seen of the weekend's game, looks like Martin was putting some decent balls into the box. That end product has not been there in most of his previous games though.
If Benson and Abbott are going to start getting amoungst the goals regularly, then I'll take Martin's creativity and consistant involvement in games everytime, but if the strikers are misfiring then Waggy's goal threat is worth inclusion. At the moment though, I'd be starting Martin to try and create lots of chances for others, which is a winger's primary function.
Horses for courses. They both get up and down well and have plenty of pace. Martin's more likely to do something fancy to unlock a tight defence, Waggy's a bit more direct and is displaying a great eye for goal. Obviously, for us in the longer term it's got to be Waggy, but I think they're both excellent players that can play at a higher level.
Martin has performed better on the right and his general play has been a lot better than Wagstaff who has struggled to get into games and test his full backs regularly. Through the middle, I think Martin has flattered to deceive, especially against MK Dons at home and Brentford away.
However, Waggy has the knack of scoring goals, he showed this last season in his few starts and has done so again this season, it is no fluke he continiously gets into good positions and is a fine finisher. Hard to fit both in, but Waggy up top could be the answer.
[cite]Posted By: cafcdan18[/cite]However, Waggy has the knack of scoring goals, he showed this last season in his few starts and has done so again this season, it is no fluke he continiously gets into good positions and is a fine finisher. Hard to fit both in, but Waggy up top could be the answer.
He's scoring so many goals because he is ghosting in at the back post. I think he would be marked out of the game by a lot of League 1/Championship centre halves if we played him up front. He offers good protection to his full back and will run the up and down the line all day long so we should keep him on the wing, no question.
Very good topic, this, because I think it's a key issue for Parky.
I flagged up this dilemma on Saturday evening, because from the commentary v Plymouth in the second half, it sounded like every time Reid or Martin were going forward with the ball , we could have scored.
Frankly, Martin had previously disappointed me with his lack of ''end product'' (horrible phrase, but I can't think of a better one). But he's clearly a tricky, skillful player who ought to be a real handful for div three defenders. On Saturday it seemed he was finally playing in the position where he can inflict maximum damage on the opposition.
But the simple truth is that both Martin and Wagstaff have to play because we need Waggy's knack/instinct for scoring goals from nowhere - five in ten starts , I think.
So - can Parky find a new role for Wagstaff? I hope so. What cannot be allowed to happen is a repeat of the Shelvey fiasco last season, in which Waggy gets left out because Parky cannot work out how to use him.
I'm not a Parky hater - but leaving out our best player for much of last season because the manager couldn't find a role for him was pathetic . ''I've got a team of journeymen and one real star with diamonds on the soles of his boots - so I'll leave out my star'' . What the hell was that all about?
Oggy claimed yesterday that if we'd had Benson last season, he'd have got the goals that would have given us automatic promotion. I think the jury is still out on that. But I do think if we had found a proper role for Shelvey we might have found the handful of extra goals that would have seen us go up.
So, in short, finding the correct roles for both Martin and Waggy to play together in the same team is a major test of Parky's strategic abilities and will show us what he's learnt from the frankly ludicrous knots he tied himself into over Shelvey last year. I'm not sure what the answer is, but then I'm not the manager. Parky has no doubt got his best brains working on it right now!
Martin, Martin, Martin. Wagstaff is not good enough simple as, look what happened when he went off at half time on sat. Ambrose popped up scoring goals but was toss; thats not enough for a midfielder. I hope he can improve as he is still young, but I have never once seen an MoM from Wagstaff and barely more than half an hours consistently decent football. Great attitude and I would love him to improve as hes one of ours but in my opinion I don't ever see him being any more than a reasonable league one player.
[cite]Posted By: Clem_Snide[/cite]Wagstaff at right back. Parky always tells us what a good defensive job he does. Has the fitness to get up and down. Worth a go in the JPT?
An interesting thought that.
Keith Peacock has said that he wanted Shaun Newton to play right back because of his lack of a "trick" for a winger yet his athleticism would have enabled him to overlap and be an attacking threat too.
Waggy, although not as outstandingly quick as Newton, is certainly no slouch and probably has more stamina.
[quote][cite]Posted By: paulsturgess[/cite] I have never once seen an MoM from Wagstaff [quote]
Orient away 2nd game of season?
The interesting thing at the moment is they are keeping each other on their toes...whoever does well keeps the shirt on the right wing. So despite his 5 goals, Waggy should drop to the bench on Saturday and Martin starts. Waggy should then be chomping at the bit when he comes on.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Arry Addick[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: paulsturgess[/cite] I have never once seen an MoM from Wagstaff [quote]
Orient away 2nd game of season?
The interesting thing at the moment is they are keeping each other on their toes...whoever does well keeps the shirt on the right wing. So despite his 5 goals, Waggy should drop to the bench on Saturday and Martin starts. Waggy should then be chomping at the bit when he comes on.[/quote]
That's the closest obviously but even then I thought he was poor for the first hour but i acknowledge on that game he did pretty much win the game for us on that occasion. But that is one of the few occasions I think he has really impressed this season. Even when Lloyd Sam was off-form last season I felt like defences were scared of him and he always had it in him to beat somebody. Don't see that with Wagstaff.
People say Martin 'creates' more - but where's the evidence of this? Does he have any more assists than Wagstaff this season? I know they both got 1 against Orient. Martin has the trickery, but for some games in this level it's simply much better to have a battering ram like Abbott on the pitch instead - see Brentford away as the perfect example.
[cite]Posted By: paulsturgess[/cite]Martin, Martin, Martin. Wagstaff is not good enough simple as, look what happened when he went off at half time on sat. Ambrose popped up scoring goals but was toss; thats not enough for a midfielder.
Disagree completely. A winger's job can be any combination of assisting/scoring. I know this is an extreme comparison, but was Ronaldo not doing his job for Man United when he was smashing it in from 30 yards instead of crossing for other players? If Wagstaff can get a combined total of goals + assists of 15 or over this season, that would be an excellent effort, and it wouldn't matter whether it was 14 goals and 1 assist or 5 goals and 10 assists.
Bottom line ...... whichever player in possession of the shirt needs to be an effective and productive member of the team. And, as the old saying goes, a player is only as good as his last game.
At Plymouth on Saturday, Waggy worked hard, supported his fullback, kept the all important team shape but didn't see much of the ball. He didn't really have any impact on the game - but he still did a disciplined job.
Martin came on at half-time - and with Dailly now playing more advanced causing our defence to play a higher line and invariably making himself available, Martin was frequently fed short passes on the floor which he thrived on.
As a result, Martin was constantly in the game, and whipped over several good crosses which we should have scored from - including one that a defender struck against the inside of his own post. He should also have scored himself after being brilliantly set up by Racon in the box.
With Reid skinning his fullback at will on the other flank, Martin combining well with team mates and playing a tricky wingers game on the right, Argyle's defence were fully stretched with both wingers having the beating of their man.
On balance from Saturday's performance, Martin offered us something different and unpredictable on the right - unlike Waggy, who is more direct and IMO plays a similar game to Reid.
It's a difficult call, but for me Martin just shades it on Saturday's form.
personally i would start martin and bring waggy on if we need a goal. i think wagstaff has done brilliant especially with goals but i think martin would benefit the team more and is generally a standard better then waggy at mo in my opinion he should be playing championship, waggy is this league at momment but potential to be better
[quote][cite]Posted By: incorruptible addick[/cite]Very good topic, this, because I think it's a key issue for Parky.
I flagged up this dilemma on Saturday evening, because from the commentary v Plymouth in the second half, it sounded like every time Reid or Martin were going forward with the ball , we could have scored.
Frankly, Martin had previously disappointed me with his lack of ''end product'' (horrible phrase, but I can't think of a better one). But he's clearly a tricky, skillful player who ought to be a real handful for div three defenders. On Saturday it seemed he was finally playing in the position where he can inflict maximum damage on the opposition.
But the simple truth is that both Martin and Wagstaff have to play because we need Waggy's knack/instinct for scoring goals from nowhere - five in ten starts , I think.
So - can Parky find a new role for Wagstaff? I hope so. What cannot be allowed to happen is a repeat of the Shelvey fiasco last season, in which Waggy gets left out because Parky cannot work out how to use him.
I'm not a Parky hater - but leaving out our best player for much of last season because the manager couldn't find a role for him was pathetic . ''I've got a team of journeymen and one real star with diamonds on the soles of his boots - so I'll leave out my star'' . What the hell was that all about?
Oggy claimed yesterday that if we'd had Benson last season, he'd have got the goals that would have given us automatic promotion. I think the jury is still out on that. But I do think if we had found a proper role for Shelvey we might have found the handful of extra goals that would have seen us go up.
So, in short, finding the correct roles for both Martin and Waggy to play together in the same team is a major test of Parky's strategic abilities and will show us what he's learnt from the frankly ludicrous knots he tied himself into over Shelvey last year. I'm not sure what the answer is, but then I'm not the manager. Parky has no doubt got his best brains working on it right now![/quote]
With respect, you are complicating something that is really quite simple.
We have 2 players playing for the same position, whoever has the shirt (and by the sounds of it on saturdays performance it is Martin) is in pole position but if he doesn't perform, he's dropped and Wagstaff comes back in.
The worst thing we could do is keep chopping and changing the formation to accomodate players.
We have 2 players playing for the same position, whoever has the shirt (and by the sounds of it on saturdays performance it is Martin) is in pole position but if he doesn't perform, he's dropped and Wagstaff comes back in.
The worst thing we could do is keep chopping and changing the formation to accomodate players.
I think you will find that Wagstaff and Martin have both started in the same XI in all but two or three of our league matches, so I'm not sure how they are all of a sudden ''playing for the same position'' and why to include both of them would be ''chopping and changing'' ?
Comments
However, Waggy has the knack of scoring goals, he showed this last season in his few starts and has done so again this season, it is no fluke he continiously gets into good positions and is a fine finisher. Hard to fit both in, but Waggy up top could be the answer.
He's scoring so many goals because he is ghosting in at the back post. I think he would be marked out of the game by a lot of League 1/Championship centre halves if we played him up front. He offers good protection to his full back and will run the up and down the line all day long so we should keep him on the wing, no question.
I flagged up this dilemma on Saturday evening, because from the commentary v Plymouth in the second half, it sounded like every time Reid or Martin were going forward with the ball , we could have scored.
Frankly, Martin had previously disappointed me with his lack of ''end product'' (horrible phrase, but I can't think of a better one). But he's clearly a tricky, skillful player who ought to be a real handful for div three defenders. On Saturday it seemed he was finally playing in the position where he can inflict maximum damage on the opposition.
But the simple truth is that both Martin and Wagstaff have to play because we need Waggy's knack/instinct for scoring goals from nowhere - five in ten starts , I think.
So - can Parky find a new role for Wagstaff? I hope so. What cannot be allowed to happen is a repeat of the Shelvey fiasco last season, in which Waggy gets left out because Parky cannot work out how to use him.
I'm not a Parky hater - but leaving out our best player for much of last season because the manager couldn't find a role for him was pathetic . ''I've got a team of journeymen and one real star with diamonds on the soles of his boots - so I'll leave out my star'' . What the hell was that all about?
Oggy claimed yesterday that if we'd had Benson last season, he'd have got the goals that would have given us automatic promotion. I think the jury is still out on that. But I do think if we had found a proper role for Shelvey we might have found the handful of extra goals that would have seen us go up.
So, in short, finding the correct roles for both Martin and Waggy to play together in the same team is a major test of Parky's strategic abilities and will show us what he's learnt from the frankly ludicrous knots he tied himself into over Shelvey last year. I'm not sure what the answer is, but then I'm not the manager. Parky has no doubt got his best brains working on it right now!
An interesting thought that.
Keith Peacock has said that he wanted Shaun Newton to play right back because of his lack of a "trick" for a winger yet his athleticism would have enabled him to overlap and be an attacking threat too.
Waggy, although not as outstandingly quick as Newton, is certainly no slouch and probably has more stamina.
It could work.
i hope there are other differences, too! Didn't Shaun end up with a suspended prison sentence for something or other???
Orient away 2nd game of season?
The interesting thing at the moment is they are keeping each other on their toes...whoever does well keeps the shirt on the right wing. So despite his 5 goals, Waggy should drop to the bench on Saturday and Martin starts. Waggy should then be chomping at the bit when he comes on.
Orient away 2nd game of season?
The interesting thing at the moment is they are keeping each other on their toes...whoever does well keeps the shirt on the right wing. So despite his 5 goals, Waggy should drop to the bench on Saturday and Martin starts. Waggy should then be chomping at the bit when he comes on.[/quote]
That's the closest obviously but even then I thought he was poor for the first hour but i acknowledge on that game he did pretty much win the game for us on that occasion. But that is one of the few occasions I think he has really impressed this season. Even when Lloyd Sam was off-form last season I felt like defences were scared of him and he always had it in him to beat somebody. Don't see that with Wagstaff.
Disagree completely. A winger's job can be any combination of assisting/scoring. I know this is an extreme comparison, but was Ronaldo not doing his job for Man United when he was smashing it in from 30 yards instead of crossing for other players? If Wagstaff can get a combined total of goals + assists of 15 or over this season, that would be an excellent effort, and it wouldn't matter whether it was 14 goals and 1 assist or 5 goals and 10 assists.
At Plymouth on Saturday, Waggy worked hard, supported his fullback, kept the all important team shape but didn't see much of the ball. He didn't really have any impact on the game - but he still did a disciplined job.
Martin came on at half-time - and with Dailly now playing more advanced causing our defence to play a higher line and invariably making himself available, Martin was frequently fed short passes on the floor which he thrived on.
As a result, Martin was constantly in the game, and whipped over several good crosses which we should have scored from - including one that a defender struck against the inside of his own post. He should also have scored himself after being brilliantly set up by Racon in the box.
With Reid skinning his fullback at will on the other flank, Martin combining well with team mates and playing a tricky wingers game on the right, Argyle's defence were fully stretched with both wingers having the beating of their man.
On balance from Saturday's performance, Martin offered us something different and unpredictable on the right - unlike Waggy, who is more direct and IMO plays a similar game to Reid.
It's a difficult call, but for me Martin just shades it on Saturday's form.
I flagged up this dilemma on Saturday evening, because from the commentary v Plymouth in the second half, it sounded like every time Reid or Martin were going forward with the ball , we could have scored.
Frankly, Martin had previously disappointed me with his lack of ''end product'' (horrible phrase, but I can't think of a better one). But he's clearly a tricky, skillful player who ought to be a real handful for div three defenders. On Saturday it seemed he was finally playing in the position where he can inflict maximum damage on the opposition.
But the simple truth is that both Martin and Wagstaff have to play because we need Waggy's knack/instinct for scoring goals from nowhere - five in ten starts , I think.
So - can Parky find a new role for Wagstaff? I hope so. What cannot be allowed to happen is a repeat of the Shelvey fiasco last season, in which Waggy gets left out because Parky cannot work out how to use him.
I'm not a Parky hater - but leaving out our best player for much of last season because the manager couldn't find a role for him was pathetic . ''I've got a team of journeymen and one real star with diamonds on the soles of his boots - so I'll leave out my star'' . What the hell was that all about?
Oggy claimed yesterday that if we'd had Benson last season, he'd have got the goals that would have given us automatic promotion. I think the jury is still out on that. But I do think if we had found a proper role for Shelvey we might have found the handful of extra goals that would have seen us go up.
So, in short, finding the correct roles for both Martin and Waggy to play together in the same team is a major test of Parky's strategic abilities and will show us what he's learnt from the frankly ludicrous knots he tied himself into over Shelvey last year. I'm not sure what the answer is, but then I'm not the manager. Parky has no doubt got his best brains working on it right now![/quote]
With respect, you are complicating something that is really quite simple.
We have 2 players playing for the same position, whoever has the shirt (and by the sounds of it on saturdays performance it is Martin) is in pole position but if he doesn't perform, he's dropped and Wagstaff comes back in.
The worst thing we could do is keep chopping and changing the formation to accomodate players.
I think you will find that Wagstaff and Martin have both started in the same XI in all but two or three of our league matches, so I'm not sure how they are all of a sudden ''playing for the same position'' and why to include both of them would be ''chopping and changing'' ?