Can't see Waggy being dropped after five goals in ten starts just because Martin - who has started every game but two, anyway - had a good 45 mins in a draw at Plymouth.
Without Waggy's goals, we'd be in a relgation place right now.
After ridiculously not finding room for Shelvey in the starting XI for so much of last season, I'd be shocked if Parky now doeas the same thing to Wagsstaff. Lessons learnt, and all that...
[cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]Although I can see a situation where only one of either will start regularly now.
And at the moment IMO that should be Martin .....but if he has srong competition from Waggy, that's absolutely how it should be.
And if Waggy does win back the shirt, then it's Martin's turn to prove that he should start.
Surely this is ridiculously harsh on Waggy and taking the "only as good as your last game" concept to the absolute extremes. Wagstaff has 5 goals (4 league, 1 cup) and 1 assist (1 league). Martin has 1 goal (1 cup) and 2 assists (1 league, 1 cup) and we're taking a second half showing against Plymouth that Martin is now more deserving of a place than Wagstaff?
I think it's a case of horses for courses -though it's difficult to know what horse suits what course. Waggy has done well in front of goal but can be quiet for spells. Martin looks very talented but often tries too much and makes the wrong choices. Against Brighton, I'd probably go with Martin with Waggy on the bench to make an impact if required.
[cite]Posted By: dabos[/cite]Surely this is ridiculously harsh on Waggy and taking the "only as good as your last game" concept to the absolute extremes.
Well, it may be ridiculously harsh in your opinion Dabos, but I'm basing my opinion on what I saw with my own eyes during our last game.
The difference in our approach play in the second half at Plymouth, compared to the 1st half when we created very little and couldn't retain possession, had to be seen to be believed.
Martin came on at half time, and really played his part in maintaining the persistant pressure that should have seen us comfortably winning the match - with Reid playing a direct winger's role, and on the other wing Martin providing the flair and whipping a succession of dangerous crosses over, Argyle were fortunate to still be in the game.
Nowhere in my previous posts do I knock Waggy, and 5 goals this season has shown his opportunism in ghosting into the box on the blind side. I'm not disregarding that.
But the difference with Martin playing compared to Waggy on Saturday, was that the whole team functioned as a creative unit and retained possession. And it was Martin who provided the flair that was previously lacking.
Simply said, the team as a whole played so much better with Martin.
In response to dabos - of course not! But are you seriously comparing wagstaff to ronaldo and do you seriously think wagstaff will score 30 or even 15 goals this season? The point is with ronaldo or lloyd sam or any decent winger is that you have to feel gthat.they are a constant menace to defenders and threatening for most of the game, whether that is to score or assist. But wagstaff just doesnt do that. At brentford and mk dons he did sod all all game and then popped up with a goal. If you are a striker then maybe there is a case for that because you could realisrically score 20 plus like that with decent constantly creating wingers. But wagstaff will not score more than 10 this season and in my opinion wont create anywhere near as many as martin. Ambrose is a far more realistic comparison and he scored plenty for us, because, like wagstaff, he had a decent strike and probably got left free a lot during games as defenders didnt take him seriously as a proper threat becayse he didnt threaten consistently. Ambrose scored goals like wagstaff but how many fans were gutted to see him leave?
Whilst there are pros to wagstaff, and he is certainly a reasonable squad player in our cyrrent plight and division, in my mind martin is simply a better player so should have the place for the moment until wagstaff improves or more likely martin doesnt perform
Simply said, the team as a whole played so much better with Martin.
For 45 mins - in the first match you've seen in ages, Oggy, because you were away in Marseilles.
Dabos is right. Over the season so far, you have made a cruelly harsh call on Waggy - and that from someone who is usually generous to a fault by nature...
Flair? Martin has been showing that all season. It got us nowhere, because there was no end result. Waggy has saved our bacon several times by popping up from nowhere with the goals.
Extraordinary that having spent every season since Darren Bent left bemoaning our lack of goals , once we find a goalscorer , people want to drop him.
Frankly, I wouldn't drop either Martin or Waggy. They've started something like nine games together in the same team this season.
Martin then gets dropped by Parky, presumbaly due to a growing frustration at the absence of any ''end result''.
He has a decent 45 mins as a sub for Waggy - and suddenly everyone is saying only one of them can play in the same team. I don't follow the logic. In fact, I'd go further. There is no logic to dropping our leading goalscorer when there are only four teams with fewer home goals than us in the entire division!
The problem for me is Martin IMO looks better out wide. He gets that bit more space, rather than playing centrally and having to battle against centre backs and central midfielders.
Reid has to play on the left though when fit (with Martin for back up, left doesn't suit Wagstaff at all). So that only leaves right midfield, which is Wagstaff's best position as well (not convinced we should be playing him up front, at least not when we have a few options including Anyinsah).
I wouldn't play Martin in CM in a 4 man midfield, especially not with Wagstaff and Reid, just can't see how that would be balanced. Parky wouldn't play Jonjo that way so I can't see him playing Martin there. I wouldn't say 3-5-2 suits our players either, Reid tires in games enough as it is.
I really don't see how Reid, Martin and Wagstaff can all start at once in a balanced side. It also limits our options on the bench starting them all at once.
[cite]Posted By: incorruptible addick[/cite]Martin then gets dropped by Parky, presumbaly due to a growing frustration at the absence of any ''end result''.
Simply said, the team as a whole played so much better with Martin.
For 45 mins - in the first match you've seen in ages, Oggy, because you were away in Marseilles.
Agreed .......the previous match I saw was against Exeter, when Martin started and Waggy came on as sub midway through the second half; after which both Martin and Waggy played together in the same side.
Sure I was away for the intervening few weeks, but kept in touch with family and friends - so got plenty of Charlton feedback.
I stand by what I posted. And as you've quoted me, Nigel.
Let me say it again:
"Simply said, the team as a whole played so much better with Martin".
Do we know if waggy will be fit next Saturday? It could be academic over the next few matches, Waggy out for one injured, martin gets his next booking and out for the next.
It is a difficult decision for parkie when Reid, Martin and Waggy are all fit. Reid gets the left berth, but until martin can consitently have an end product to his game then Waggy will continue to be a viable option to start. Of course there is always the out of the box (or in the box)m option of playing Waggy behind and to the right of the main striker - Anyinsah ?
[cite]Posted By: paulsturgess[/cite]But are you seriously comparing wagstaff to ronaldo and do you seriously think wagstaff will score 30 or even 15 goals this season?
I did say it was an extreme comparison! I was just merely pointed that if you score a lot of goals and don't get many assists it doesn't really matter, as long as you're making a positive contribution. (Ronaldo's assist tally was not that high the year he scored 30 odd.)
No Palace fans were complaining about Ambrose's lack of all round game last season. They would've been relegated without him, no question. I take the point raised by others that it's hard to carry too many players who don't contribute to all phases of play though. But to say it's 'not enough' for a midfielder like Ambrose to score close to 20 goals is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. I know he didn't do that for us, but that's a bit irrelevant.
Simple maths suggests that Waggy can definitely reach 15 goals this season. I know football doesn't work exactly like that, and I'm not sure whether he will, but to say it's unlikely isn't true given what's happened so far.
You know that he didn't do that for us but thats a bit irrelevant? Sorry I think it's the other way round - I was comparing Wagstaff to the Ambrose who played for us and who was universally accepted as ineffectual and not good enough but still had the ability to contribute 8/9/10 goals in a game. He was a different player last year playing in a different position in a team with a different setup and obviously it worked and he probably was contributing more to the whole game, but that is irrelevant to this. If somebody can change Wagstaff drastically so that that happens then fine but the point I am making is that Wagstaff is currently filling the role which Ambrose did back then, which wasn't good enough.
If we had had a more creative, footballing winger away at Brentford then we may well have created enough chances to convert and score 3 goals rather than him managing to pop up and nick one consolation himself lurking at the back post. Look at Kyle Reid - before saturday - 3 assists in a row for us (MK Dons Home, Brentford Away, MK Dons away) and countless other dangerous opportunities created. Has changed games whenever he came on, like Martin did by the sounds of it on Saturday. That isn't Wagstaff.
"Football doesnt work exactly like that" - it doesnt work at all like that. Bent scored 2 on his charlton debut, and something like 6 in his first 6, but he was never going to score 38 goals in 38 games was he? In 95-96 Bowyer was on about 9 or 10 by November and the top scorer in Division 1 but ended on about 13. I remember one year where Dion Dublin had about 10 goals in his first 7 games for Villa.
And for me in "simple maths" terms - Wagstaff may score the odd goal, but contributes to relatively few dangerous goalscoring situations, but I believe Reid and Martin will score a few as well and they create 8/9/10 good attacking situations each game, 2 or 3 of which are likely to result in a goal. So even if they score a few less, theyll pay this back and more in creating.
Erm no Ambrose never scored for consistently for us. Amborse scored 13 league goals in all his time at Charlton; hardly 8/9/10 goals in what I assume you mean a season. Waggys scored five in one season, the first he's been first choice. Martin is great to watch but lacks that little bit of composure to score or indeed to add the final touch to his clever runs. Waggy's clearly better athleticism is now beginning to tell in that he get's to ball quicker and hits the ball cleaner and more positively than Martin.
Waggy last season added 50/50 strong tackles to his game. Never seen Martin do that, by sounds or vision. Ambrose needs multiple players digging out possession for him before he even becomes a factor. Waggy is scoring when we are creating very few clear cut chances. Fact is in this team, on the right Ambrose would be doing nothing, and in the middle would be doing nothing. And fact is over this season Waggy is contributing more to actual goals than Martin.
I like Martin but see few actual real assists or goals from him. Waggy would be on the right for me in nearly every away game, barring injury or gross lack of form.
Historically Reid has created virtually no assists. Yet this season when fit he looks like he can do it every game. These we mays are an absolute waste of time. Waggy has shown immeasurable improvement every season he's played. People who prove they can learn and adapt are my kind of players. My West Ham friends say Reid looked like a forrest who would never pick a measured cross out in the prem. Now in League One he's doing very well at 22. Waggy's doing it at 20. If form changes then so be it, Martin comes in. But before proof Martin stays in the flatters but fails to deliver bin.
[cite]Posted By: ColinTat[/cite]Erm no Ambrose never scored for consistently for us. Amborse scored 13 league goals in all his time at Charlton; hardly 8/9/10 goals in what I assume you mean a season. Waggys scored five in one season, the first he's been first choice. Martin is great to watch but lacks that little bit of composure to score or indeed to add the final touch to his clever runs. Waggy's clearly better athleticism is now beginning to tell in that he get's to ball quicker and hits the ball cleaner and more positively than Martin.
Waggy last season added 50/50 strong tackles to his game. Never seen Martin do that, by sounds or vision. Ambrose needs multiple players digging out possession for him before he even becomes a factor. Waggy is scoring when we are creating very few clear cut chances. Fact is in this team, on the right Ambrose would be doing nothing, and in the middle would be doing nothing. And fact is over this season Waggy is contributing more to actual goals than Martin.
I like Martin but see few actual real assists or goals from him. Waggy would be on the right for me in nearly every away game, barring injury or gross lack of form.
Historically Reid has created virtually no assists. Yet this season when fit he looks like he can do it every game. These we mays are an absolute waste of time. Waggy has shown immeasurable improvement every season he's played. People who prove they can learn and adapt are my kind of players. My West Ham friends say Reid looked like a forrest who would never pick a measured cross out in the prem. Now in League One he's doing very well at 22. Waggy's doing it at 20. If form changes then so be it, Martin comes in. But before proof Martin stays in the flatters but fails to deliver bin.
Waggy also scored 4 league goals last season despite usually coming on as a sub.
[cite]Posted By: paulsturgess[/cite]And for me in "simple maths" terms - Wagstaff may score the odd goal, but contributes to relatively few dangerous goalscoring situations, but I believe Reid and Martin will score a few as well and they create 8/9/10 good attacking situations each game, 2 or 3 of which are likely to result in a goal. So even if they score a few less, theyll pay this back and more in creating.
and wagstaff is the only player out ouf himself, reid and martin that has started all matches that we've scored 2 or 3 goals this season.
i honestly think people pay too much attention to 'assists' in respect to the actual end product, the goal.
simon francis got 9 (yes nine) assists for relegated southend last season. lets put him at right wing.
no-one is doing it for 90 mins for us at the moment. if people are comfortable with leaving someone out who has scored a quarter of our total goals from midfield, and has the knack of popping up with equalisers/winners, then they are far more confident than me of reaching the play-offs.
[quote][cite]Posted By: ColinTat[/cite]Erm no Ambrose never scored for consistently for us. Amborse scored 13 league goals in all his time at Charlton; hardly 8/9/10 goals in what I assume you mean a season.[/quote]
He got 8 in 2007/8 which was the season I was referring to and his only fullish season playing for us outside of the premier league.
[quote][cite]Posted By: paulbaconsarnie[/cite]i honestly think people pay too much attention to 'assists' in respect to the actual end product, the goal. simon francis got 9 (yes nine) assists for relegated southend last season. lets put him at right wing.[/quote]
Assists are so important. But I think people pay too much attention to "final assists" i.e. who actually touched the ball last before the scorer. Francis probably got 9 assists because he took there free-kicks and corners and can deliver a decent dead ball and so that couldve accounted for 6 or 7 of them.
[quote][cite]Posted By: ColinTat[/cite]If form changes then so be it, Martin comes in. But before proof Martin stays in the flatters but fails to deliver bin.[/quote]
But football isn't as simple as just stats and because Wagstaff has got a few goals this season he is therefore better than Martin. A good manager needs to look at the overall contribution of a player and the potential they have to improve - Martin has looked more dangerous and been involved than Wagstaff in most games he has played this season and as a manager I would judge that given a consistent run and a bit more time to settle in he will start producing more in terms of "actual delivery". He scored and set up goals in the loss at Shrewsbury, crashed a shot against the bar at home the other week, put in a dangerous cross with his wrong foot at Plymouth on Saturday which resulted in us hitting the post; if these things had been marginally different who would be a lot healthier in statistical terms. Many players take a bit of time before it starts to come perfect for them at a new club.
[cite]Posted By: paulsturgess[/cite]You know that he didn't do that for us but thats a bit irrelevant? Sorry I think it's the other way round - I was comparing Wagstaff to the Ambrose who played for us and who was universally accepted as ineffectual and not good enough but still had the ability to contribute 8/9/10 goals in a game. He was a different player last year playing in a different position in a team with a different setup and obviously it worked and he probably was contributing more to the whole game, but that is irrelevant to this. If somebody can change Wagstaff drastically so that that happens then fine but the point I am making is that Wagstaff is currently filling the role which Ambrose did back then, which wasn't good enough.
If we had had a more creative, footballing winger away at Brentford then we may well have created enough chances to convert and score 3 goals rather than him managing to pop up and nick one consolation himself lurking at the back post. Look at Kyle Reid - before saturday - 3 assists in a row for us (MK Dons Home, Brentford Away, MK Dons away) and countless other dangerous opportunities created. Has changed games whenever he came on, like Martin did by the sounds of it on Saturday. That isn't Wagstaff.
"Football doesnt work exactly like that" - it doesnt work at all like that. Bent scored 2 on his charlton debut, and something like 6 in his first 6, but he was never going to score 38 goals in 38 games was he? In 95-96 Bowyer was on about 9 or 10 by November and the top scorer in Division 1 but ended on about 13. I remember one year where Dion Dublin had about 10 goals in his first 7 games for Villa.
And for me in "simple maths" terms - Wagstaff may score the odd goal, but contributes to relatively few dangerous goalscoring situations, but I believe Reid and Martin will score a few as well and they create 8/9/10 good attacking situations each game, 2 or 3 of which are likely to result in a goal. So even if they score a few less, theyll pay this back and more in creating.
Spot on, Reid and Martin get a lot more crosses in then Wagstaff, Just because on their stats it says they only have one assist, it doesnt matter because how many times will they cross the ball and it bobbles back and fourth in the box resulting in someone else getting the assist. the main thing is that they are getting the crosses in. I went to plymouth and in the second half we got more crosses in than we have done all season. Dont get me wrong Waggy has done well with his scoring but if he got more crosses in i'm sure us a team would have more goals compared to his 5.
[cite]Posted By: paulbaconsarnie if people are comfortable with leaving someone out who has scored a quarter of our total goals from midfield, and has the knack of popping up with equalisers/winners, then they are far more confident than me of reaching the play-offs.
Exactly. Even if you play Martin at RM, you have to find another role for Waggy, along the lines outlined above by Kap.
Absolutley extraordinary to me that anyone would want to drop our leading goalscorer. Without the points his goals have netted us, we would be in the bottom five right now.
For me, Waggy has to play on Sat (if fit). There are only four teams in the entire division who have scored fewer goals at home than CAFC this season and I'm backing him to score again v Brighton ...
Martin has one assist in the league. I couldn't care less against Shrewsbury in the cup.
I remember a youngish Sam against Tottenham putting cross after cross in against them. He was our major outlet in our last match with Spurs. But it was utterly pointless because we were not incisive he was getting a cross in after 4-5 feints, and their defence had all the time in the world to be compact with their midfield dominating in front of the D.
You use emotion in your arguement Sturgess, to prove that he may improve as a 'statistic' player. So basically at some time Martin might do it. Great pub logic. I agree some players, set a pattern in a match but don't always appear to have the stats to match it. The basic question is do you want a Tony Daely forest gump, or do you want a Ryan Giggs who does both threat and end product? I have no problem having Martin or Reid on the bench, depending on the game, and substituting wingers early second half. I am more inclined to start Martin on the right wing at home, as he is a set the tone type player. I would never have him in the hole, as he links play poorly is not direct enough in his running when he's one on one through the center; and often breaks down our attacks with his head down and pray approach, something more suited to direct wing play. But Waggy would always be first on my team sheet away from home, and probably at home against the better teams like Peterborough and Huddersfield.
Waggy is not providing full game end product offensively, but he's better defensively than Martin and positionally improving all the time. Martin has had the best of coaches, and often still does not look up at who he's crossing to or where his shot is going. Whereas Waggy meets the ball positively offensively, and get's the ball off cleanly, Martin's shot at the weekend was an example of poor execution and very difficult to pull off with the outside of your right boot.
Football's not all about stats, more's the pity we might actually get more cerebral managers as many are in baseball. Having said that to take your leading scorer out for someone who ain't hardly giving an end product, is up there with the blind imbecile Pardew's selling of Andy Reid and replacing the sole creator with a laconic forward. And yes I agree Nicholas Waggy needs to be putting in more early crosses, but that goes for all our players including Redi who often get's his best crosses by cutting bcak inside; on the outside he'll beat a man and not get an early cross in and run to the box quite often getting shut out by cd's, great at times but you need to variate.
I understand that the assist stat isn't the be all and end all, but given Martin's end product so far this season, I don't think you can even argue he's assisting-the-assist.
The Ambrose thing isn't a fair comparison - you're saying 8 goals in a season but contributing little else isn't enough and I agree. But 15 goals is another matter, and Wagstaff could be on course for that. As Colin said above Wagstaff is also contributing far more defensively than Sharon ever did.
I'm not even saying Wagstaff is definitely a better footballer than Martin, but picking Martin over Wagstaff at the moment in my opinion would be the wrong decision, taking all games this season into account. I'm not sure if this "only as good as your last game" should be taken literally or not.
We are going round in circles... Wagstaff is not Ryan Giggs... I guess it's just a difference of opinion... Its not emotion its just how I see the game. The way I see the game I feel we are more dangerous with Martin on the right than Wagstaff, simple as that. I am the sort of person who wants to see a bit of flair and unpredictability but maybe less consistency on the wing, especially in our division and the way we are playing at the moment. Others go for a more limited but as you say defensively etc more solid player. Different managers in the same way have different approaches.. but I don't want to be picking a right winger because he is more solid defensively. And I would happily bet 30quid that Wagstaff won't score 15 goals this season (certainly in the league!). I completely agree that in the hole or up front don't look like the right place for Martin.
[cite]Posted By: ColinTat[/cite]the blind imbecile Pardew's selling of Andy Reid
On a separate note to be fair to Pardew, it was Richard Murray that sold Reid not him...
I think the main thing that should come out of this is that although we may not all agree on the Martin v Waggy issue, it's great that Parky has a selection dilemma on his hands and we are able to change the system/personnel mid-game. This is something he said he wanted to achieve during the summer and it now looks like we have a squad capable of doing that.
Not that it matters but I think Martin actually has 2 assists, Orient away for Wagstaff's goal and another for Anyinsah's goal. The FL site gave the Orient one to Abbott.
Assists are important but Elliot and Mambo also have 1 each, so at this stage only Reid's 5 this season show much at all. As said it's not just the final assist either, that was part of the argument on Sam's side last season, but without watching every goal there's no way of showing a player is often involved in goals without getting the final assist.
On Francis I'm not sure his assists at Southend all came from set pieces, to be fair to him he has a good cross in open play as well. McCormack's goal a good example with his weaker left foot, and a few recently that players haven't scored from.
I agree with Colin in that I have no problem with one of the 3 wingers being on the bench but coming on early if needed, and that Martin is better off playing out wide. As I said, I don't see how all 3 can fit in the starting team while keeping it balanced.
To be fair to you paulsturgess how do you know that? Bloggers on here that actually know the club or work at the club all seem to say it was Pardew's decision. Murray said he'd back his decision, and Pardew wanted to replace Todorov. Pardew neglected the fact that all creativity came from Reid, as proved that ZZ and Ambrose assisted 10 goals when Reid played and only 1 after he left.
Pardew's MO was in the public domain with Darren Bent. He said in a press conference when Darren Bent was injured, that he had to consider selling him and getting assets in that could do the job from in the here and now. This MO exactly fits the Reid situation, and what people on here whom know Murray say that it was Pardew's final call. So I'd be interested to know where your notes on Reid come from?
I'm pretty flexible on my calls. I agree matches such as Tranmere, Leyton Orient, Dagenham, Yeovil, Wallsall and Rovers I'd be inclined to start Martin at home. As he'll get at teams early. Away from home in nearly every match I'd start with Waggy. Just look at the devestation he did at Orient when they got tired. His direct running is much more effective than Martin in open phases. And when we seem to have a player like Reid who can definitely hit a cross both on the outside and inside, we should have more than enough for most teams.
Okay maybe I'm assuming to much there it was just that my memory / presumption was that the board had had significant influence in the decision to sell him. I mean as much as Pardew made a terrible job of us he does have some basic intelligence and anyone could see that Reid was our key player and Pardew had made him captain, so I do not believe that Pardew would have simply volunteered to sell him without the board at least saying to him "look we've got a big offer for him and we could really do with the money, can we cope without him / do you think we can get up without him?" which is how I had interpreted it happening at the time.
The only other information I have is when I actually bumped into Pardew himself about 9 months after he had left and went and spoke to him and asked him what went wrong, and he blamed having to sell his captain and best player Andy Reid close to deadline day. So that actually came directly from him but obviously I wouldnt put it past him to be lying just to try and present himself better....
Cheers Pauley. Indeed I wouldn't putting it past Pardew to lie, seen as he is so incapable of critically analysing his mistakes and repeated them at every failing club he's created and been at; buying too many forwards, neglecting stoic reliable midfielders for weak willed good touched/one paced ones. Have to say Pardew doesn't have any basic logical intelligence, he seems to have got by solely with his crap tan smarm emotional intelligence.
Parky's displayed hugely more intelligence in trying to assemble a squad that provided options, and one where players suit/complement each other. To have eight forwards and not one combination working, proves Pardew is logically thick. To drop Mascherano who was fit, reliable and playing well at the Whammies whilst then bringing in an un-fit Tevez who'd partied all close season and was way off form, proves how thick Pardew is. Curbs would have packed the midfield with reliability and got through at Charlton, Pardew has one way and under pressure it falls apart unless a magic Reid or Sherringham saves him.
As for how it went I believe the guys on Charlton Life with more knowledge of the insides of the club than us, and the fact he'd already stated it was an MO he'd do with Darren Bent; sell your most saleable asset when he's injured to re-order the squad.
Comments
And at the moment IMO that should be Martin .....but if he has srong competition from Waggy, that's absolutely how it should be.
And if Waggy does win back the shirt, then it's Martin's turn to prove that he should start.
Without Waggy's goals, we'd be in a relgation place right now.
After ridiculously not finding room for Shelvey in the starting XI for so much of last season, I'd be shocked if Parky now doeas the same thing to Wagsstaff. Lessons learnt, and all that...
Surely this is ridiculously harsh on Waggy and taking the "only as good as your last game" concept to the absolute extremes. Wagstaff has 5 goals (4 league, 1 cup) and 1 assist (1 league). Martin has 1 goal (1 cup) and 2 assists (1 league, 1 cup) and we're taking a second half showing against Plymouth that Martin is now more deserving of a place than Wagstaff?
EDIT: Incorruptible beat me to it!
Well, it may be ridiculously harsh in your opinion Dabos, but I'm basing my opinion on what I saw with my own eyes during our last game.
The difference in our approach play in the second half at Plymouth, compared to the 1st half when we created very little and couldn't retain possession, had to be seen to be believed.
Martin came on at half time, and really played his part in maintaining the persistant pressure that should have seen us comfortably winning the match - with Reid playing a direct winger's role, and on the other wing Martin providing the flair and whipping a succession of dangerous crosses over, Argyle were fortunate to still be in the game.
Nowhere in my previous posts do I knock Waggy, and 5 goals this season has shown his opportunism in ghosting into the box on the blind side. I'm not disregarding that.
But the difference with Martin playing compared to Waggy on Saturday, was that the whole team functioned as a creative unit and retained possession. And it was Martin who provided the flair that was previously lacking.
Simply said, the team as a whole played so much better with Martin.
Whilst there are pros to wagstaff, and he is certainly a reasonable squad player in our cyrrent plight and division, in my mind martin is simply a better player so should have the place for the moment until wagstaff improves or more likely martin doesnt perform
Typos - new touchphone
For 45 mins - in the first match you've seen in ages, Oggy, because you were away in Marseilles.
Dabos is right. Over the season so far, you have made a cruelly harsh call on Waggy - and that from someone who is usually generous to a fault by nature...
Flair? Martin has been showing that all season. It got us nowhere, because there was no end result. Waggy has saved our bacon several times by popping up from nowhere with the goals.
Extraordinary that having spent every season since Darren Bent left bemoaning our lack of goals , once we find a goalscorer , people want to drop him.
Frankly, I wouldn't drop either Martin or Waggy. They've started something like nine games together in the same team this season.
Martin then gets dropped by Parky, presumbaly due to a growing frustration at the absence of any ''end result''.
He has a decent 45 mins as a sub for Waggy - and suddenly everyone is saying only one of them can play in the same team. I don't follow the logic. In fact, I'd go further. There is no logic to dropping our leading goalscorer when there are only four teams with fewer home goals than us in the entire division!
Reid has to play on the left though when fit (with Martin for back up, left doesn't suit Wagstaff at all). So that only leaves right midfield, which is Wagstaff's best position as well (not convinced we should be playing him up front, at least not when we have a few options including Anyinsah).
I wouldn't play Martin in CM in a 4 man midfield, especially not with Wagstaff and Reid, just can't see how that would be balanced. Parky wouldn't play Jonjo that way so I can't see him playing Martin there. I wouldn't say 3-5-2 suits our players either, Reid tires in games enough as it is.
I really don't see how Reid, Martin and Wagstaff can all start at once in a balanced side. It also limits our options on the bench starting them all at once.
He picked up a knock in the previous game.
Agreed .......the previous match I saw was against Exeter, when Martin started and Waggy came on as sub midway through the second half; after which both Martin and Waggy played together in the same side.
Sure I was away for the intervening few weeks, but kept in touch with family and friends - so got plenty of Charlton feedback.
I stand by what I posted. And as you've quoted me, Nigel.
Let me say it again:
"Simply said, the team as a whole played so much better with Martin".
After all, it's just my opinion.
Agree with you, Scoham. It's all about getting the balance right.
It is a difficult decision for parkie when Reid, Martin and Waggy are all fit. Reid gets the left berth, but until martin can consitently have an end product to his game then Waggy will continue to be a viable option to start. Of course there is always the out of the box (or in the box)m option of playing Waggy behind and to the right of the main striker - Anyinsah ?
I did say it was an extreme comparison! I was just merely pointed that if you score a lot of goals and don't get many assists it doesn't really matter, as long as you're making a positive contribution. (Ronaldo's assist tally was not that high the year he scored 30 odd.)
No Palace fans were complaining about Ambrose's lack of all round game last season. They would've been relegated without him, no question. I take the point raised by others that it's hard to carry too many players who don't contribute to all phases of play though. But to say it's 'not enough' for a midfielder like Ambrose to score close to 20 goals is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. I know he didn't do that for us, but that's a bit irrelevant.
Simple maths suggests that Waggy can definitely reach 15 goals this season. I know football doesn't work exactly like that, and I'm not sure whether he will, but to say it's unlikely isn't true given what's happened so far.
If we had had a more creative, footballing winger away at Brentford then we may well have created enough chances to convert and score 3 goals rather than him managing to pop up and nick one consolation himself lurking at the back post. Look at Kyle Reid - before saturday - 3 assists in a row for us (MK Dons Home, Brentford Away, MK Dons away) and countless other dangerous opportunities created. Has changed games whenever he came on, like Martin did by the sounds of it on Saturday. That isn't Wagstaff.
"Football doesnt work exactly like that" - it doesnt work at all like that. Bent scored 2 on his charlton debut, and something like 6 in his first 6, but he was never going to score 38 goals in 38 games was he? In 95-96 Bowyer was on about 9 or 10 by November and the top scorer in Division 1 but ended on about 13. I remember one year where Dion Dublin had about 10 goals in his first 7 games for Villa.
And for me in "simple maths" terms - Wagstaff may score the odd goal, but contributes to relatively few dangerous goalscoring situations, but I believe Reid and Martin will score a few as well and they create 8/9/10 good attacking situations each game, 2 or 3 of which are likely to result in a goal. So even if they score a few less, theyll pay this back and more in creating.
Waggy last season added 50/50 strong tackles to his game. Never seen Martin do that, by sounds or vision. Ambrose needs multiple players digging out possession for him before he even becomes a factor. Waggy is scoring when we are creating very few clear cut chances. Fact is in this team, on the right Ambrose would be doing nothing, and in the middle would be doing nothing. And fact is over this season Waggy is contributing more to actual goals than Martin.
I like Martin but see few actual real assists or goals from him. Waggy would be on the right for me in nearly every away game, barring injury or gross lack of form.
Historically Reid has created virtually no assists. Yet this season when fit he looks like he can do it every game. These we mays are an absolute waste of time. Waggy has shown immeasurable improvement every season he's played. People who prove they can learn and adapt are my kind of players. My West Ham friends say Reid looked like a forrest who would never pick a measured cross out in the prem. Now in League One he's doing very well at 22. Waggy's doing it at 20. If form changes then so be it, Martin comes in. But before proof Martin stays in the flatters but fails to deliver bin.
Waggy also scored 4 league goals last season despite usually coming on as a sub.
and wagstaff is the only player out ouf himself, reid and martin that has started all matches that we've scored 2 or 3 goals this season.
i honestly think people pay too much attention to 'assists' in respect to the actual end product, the goal.
simon francis got 9 (yes nine) assists for relegated southend last season. lets put him at right wing.
no-one is doing it for 90 mins for us at the moment. if people are comfortable with leaving someone out who has scored a quarter of our total goals from midfield, and has the knack of popping up with equalisers/winners, then they are far more confident than me of reaching the play-offs.
He got 8 in 2007/8 which was the season I was referring to and his only fullish season playing for us outside of the premier league.
[quote][cite]Posted By: paulbaconsarnie[/cite]i honestly think people pay too much attention to 'assists' in respect to the actual end product, the goal.
simon francis got 9 (yes nine) assists for relegated southend last season. lets put him at right wing.[/quote]
Assists are so important. But I think people pay too much attention to "final assists" i.e. who actually touched the ball last before the scorer. Francis probably got 9 assists because he took there free-kicks and corners and can deliver a decent dead ball and so that couldve accounted for 6 or 7 of them.
[quote][cite]Posted By: ColinTat[/cite]If form changes then so be it, Martin comes in. But before proof Martin stays in the flatters but fails to deliver bin.[/quote]
But football isn't as simple as just stats and because Wagstaff has got a few goals this season he is therefore better than Martin. A good manager needs to look at the overall contribution of a player and the potential they have to improve - Martin has looked more dangerous and been involved than Wagstaff in most games he has played this season and as a manager I would judge that given a consistent run and a bit more time to settle in he will start producing more in terms of "actual delivery". He scored and set up goals in the loss at Shrewsbury, crashed a shot against the bar at home the other week, put in a dangerous cross with his wrong foot at Plymouth on Saturday which resulted in us hitting the post; if these things had been marginally different who would be a lot healthier in statistical terms. Many players take a bit of time before it starts to come perfect for them at a new club.
Spot on, Reid and Martin get a lot more crosses in then Wagstaff, Just because on their stats it says they only have one assist, it doesnt matter because how many times will they cross the ball and it bobbles back and fourth in the box resulting in someone else getting the assist. the main thing is that they are getting the crosses in. I went to plymouth and in the second half we got more crosses in than we have done all season. Dont get me wrong Waggy has done well with his scoring but if he got more crosses in i'm sure us a team would have more goals compared to his 5.
Exactly. Even if you play Martin at RM, you have to find another role for Waggy, along the lines outlined above by Kap.
Absolutley extraordinary to me that anyone would want to drop our leading goalscorer. Without the points his goals have netted us, we would be in the bottom five right now.
For me, Waggy has to play on Sat (if fit). There are only four teams in the entire division who have scored fewer goals at home than CAFC this season and I'm backing him to score again v Brighton ...
I remember a youngish Sam against Tottenham putting cross after cross in against them. He was our major outlet in our last match with Spurs. But it was utterly pointless because we were not incisive he was getting a cross in after 4-5 feints, and their defence had all the time in the world to be compact with their midfield dominating in front of the D.
You use emotion in your arguement Sturgess, to prove that he may improve as a 'statistic' player. So basically at some time Martin might do it. Great pub logic. I agree some players, set a pattern in a match but don't always appear to have the stats to match it. The basic question is do you want a Tony Daely forest gump, or do you want a Ryan Giggs who does both threat and end product? I have no problem having Martin or Reid on the bench, depending on the game, and substituting wingers early second half. I am more inclined to start Martin on the right wing at home, as he is a set the tone type player. I would never have him in the hole, as he links play poorly is not direct enough in his running when he's one on one through the center; and often breaks down our attacks with his head down and pray approach, something more suited to direct wing play. But Waggy would always be first on my team sheet away from home, and probably at home against the better teams like Peterborough and Huddersfield.
Waggy is not providing full game end product offensively, but he's better defensively than Martin and positionally improving all the time. Martin has had the best of coaches, and often still does not look up at who he's crossing to or where his shot is going. Whereas Waggy meets the ball positively offensively, and get's the ball off cleanly, Martin's shot at the weekend was an example of poor execution and very difficult to pull off with the outside of your right boot.
Football's not all about stats, more's the pity we might actually get more cerebral managers as many are in baseball. Having said that to take your leading scorer out for someone who ain't hardly giving an end product, is up there with the blind imbecile Pardew's selling of Andy Reid and replacing the sole creator with a laconic forward. And yes I agree Nicholas Waggy needs to be putting in more early crosses, but that goes for all our players including Redi who often get's his best crosses by cutting bcak inside; on the outside he'll beat a man and not get an early cross in and run to the box quite often getting shut out by cd's, great at times but you need to variate.
The Ambrose thing isn't a fair comparison - you're saying 8 goals in a season but contributing little else isn't enough and I agree. But 15 goals is another matter, and Wagstaff could be on course for that. As Colin said above Wagstaff is also contributing far more defensively than Sharon ever did.
I'm not even saying Wagstaff is definitely a better footballer than Martin, but picking Martin over Wagstaff at the moment in my opinion would be the wrong decision, taking all games this season into account. I'm not sure if this "only as good as your last game" should be taken literally or not.
On a separate note to be fair to Pardew, it was Richard Murray that sold Reid not him...
Assists are important but Elliot and Mambo also have 1 each, so at this stage only Reid's 5 this season show much at all. As said it's not just the final assist either, that was part of the argument on Sam's side last season, but without watching every goal there's no way of showing a player is often involved in goals without getting the final assist.
On Francis I'm not sure his assists at Southend all came from set pieces, to be fair to him he has a good cross in open play as well. McCormack's goal a good example with his weaker left foot, and a few recently that players haven't scored from.
I agree with Colin in that I have no problem with one of the 3 wingers being on the bench but coming on early if needed, and that Martin is better off playing out wide. As I said, I don't see how all 3 can fit in the starting team while keeping it balanced.
Pardew's MO was in the public domain with Darren Bent. He said in a press conference when Darren Bent was injured, that he had to consider selling him and getting assets in that could do the job from in the here and now. This MO exactly fits the Reid situation, and what people on here whom know Murray say that it was Pardew's final call. So I'd be interested to know where your notes on Reid come from?
I'm pretty flexible on my calls. I agree matches such as Tranmere, Leyton Orient, Dagenham, Yeovil, Wallsall and Rovers I'd be inclined to start Martin at home. As he'll get at teams early. Away from home in nearly every match I'd start with Waggy. Just look at the devestation he did at Orient when they got tired. His direct running is much more effective than Martin in open phases. And when we seem to have a player like Reid who can definitely hit a cross both on the outside and inside, we should have more than enough for most teams.
The only other information I have is when I actually bumped into Pardew himself about 9 months after he had left and went and spoke to him and asked him what went wrong, and he blamed having to sell his captain and best player Andy Reid close to deadline day. So that actually came directly from him but obviously I wouldnt put it past him to be lying just to try and present himself better....
Parky's displayed hugely more intelligence in trying to assemble a squad that provided options, and one where players suit/complement each other. To have eight forwards and not one combination working, proves Pardew is logically thick. To drop Mascherano who was fit, reliable and playing well at the Whammies whilst then bringing in an un-fit Tevez who'd partied all close season and was way off form, proves how thick Pardew is. Curbs would have packed the midfield with reliability and got through at Charlton, Pardew has one way and under pressure it falls apart unless a magic Reid or Sherringham saves him.
As for how it went I believe the guys on Charlton Life with more knowledge of the insides of the club than us, and the fact he'd already stated it was an MO he'd do with Darren Bent; sell your most saleable asset when he's injured to re-order the squad.