Long - Time to go.

[Hoop Blah]

I guess an easy question to ask, is who on here (and in the real world) actually has any confidence that when presented with a decent chance Long will score?

Well that could finally be the end of the thread if we're waiting for positive responses....

[brendywendy]

I guess an easy question to ask, is who on here (and in the real world) actually has any confidence that when presented with a decent chance Long will score?

any? yes, i have some.

[Wycombe Royal]

I guess an easy question to ask, is who on here (and in the real world) actually has any confidence that when presented with a decent chance Long will score?

A little, but not much. But it will only take a couple of chances being taken for my optimism level to rise........

[BR2]

I guess an easy question to ask, is who on here (and in the real world) actually has any confidence that when presented with a decent chance Long will score?

A little, but not much. But it will only take a couple of chances being taken for my optimism level to rise........

I think the point Snowball and some others miss is that we have nothing against Long as an individual (although I would prefer it if he wasn't Irish but that is a personal prejudice and Kevin Doyle made me forget it for a while)and we would love it if he suddenly became the player that Snowball thinks he is bound to be in 3 years time.
If he somehow developed the knack of finishing (something I doubt will happen)we would have a player with tremendous energy and enthusiasm that could even lift us back to the Premier League.

While he continues to miss the chances that would bring those extra points needed we remain a mid-table club.
Obviously it is not all down to him as we have other areas that aren't quite right but this topic has been about him and the pluses and minuses of his game.
There does come a time when the manager has to decide if this is the central striker to take us forward and it will be interesting to see what will be done in the transfer window.
If nothing happens I assume that the club is just happy to stay at this level for another season.

[Ian Royal]

Runs happen, but maybe it's to do with the lack of chances MADE FOR Long.

I think it is more to do with Shane not taking up the right positions. THis is where instinct comes into it again. Jamie Cureton, Trevor Senior, Andy Cole, Alan Shearer, etc - -all these players had a strikers instinct and always seem to be in the right place at the right time. Shane doesn't have this and it isn't something that can be taught.

Completely. Look at Church when he isn't poked out on the wing (and even then he still had a good chance and forced a save), he gets in positions to get a lot of chances. Now he needs to improve his finishing. But he is scoring some goals and is getting in a lot of good positions.

Long creates openings, (and this was my criticism of Kebe before he found his form) he also fails in too many of the chances he creates.

Hunt is a different prospect. I don't think he finds as many chances as Church, but he does have a much better scoring record.

[Snowball]

When they have been put in they have been missed by the strikers. The ball alway seems to fall in the box away from Shane Long. I see it with my own eyes most matches. Also the wingers probably shy away from putting those types of balls in because when they do no-one is usually there. Shane can often be found outwide or still working his way in to the box, not in the box waiting for the loose ball.

There are simply not that many coming in.

And yes Shane is often wide. I can only presume the manager encourages that or at least is OK with it. Some strikers stay central and EXPECT to get service (Rasiak a most recent example)... Long in one sense "does too much work"... Maybe we should play 4-3-3 with Long-Hunt-Kebe which would suit all three players I'd've thought.

PS I'm not trying to defend Longy here. It's more we don't play a very conventional, feed the strikers with crosses, knowck-downs, through-balls. For my liking, toop many of our chances seem "random", someone chasing a long ball, a defensive error. How many WORKED goals/shots do we get, like Hunt's goal at Watford or Shane's volley v (was it Norwich or Donny?)

IF the manager feels Long is simply not centratl enough, WHY DOESN'T HE BOLLOCK HIM AND TELL HIM TO STAY MORE CENTRAL?

I think he expects Shane to be wide a lot, and it's THAT that causes the problem.

Take Ian Harte's goal against Norwich or Simon Church's lucky deflection earlier in the season against Ipswich - when does Shane Long have those type of chances fall to him? The answer is he doesn't because he doesn't get in the right positions. It isn't just about him having those type of chances being made for him, he has to be in the position in order to HAVE them made for him. Other players get those chances but he doesn't. Maybe it is the way he is being asked to play but as a lone striker he SHOULD be getting those types of chances.

I know Shane is a God, but even he can't score when he's not on the pitch...

Let's not forget that up until 3-4 games ago he was doing the 451 workhorse job.

The next ten games, if Hunt is there, should be interesting. Hunt is going to start pulling markers, especially if he keeps scoring

[Wycombe Royal]

I know Shane is a God, but even he can't score when he's not on the pitch...

But that's my point. Even if he was on the pitch he would not have taken up the position that Church did. He just doesn't take up those types of positions and regardless of how many balls are coming in it still doesn't change that.

He does not have a NATURAL STRIKERS INSTINCT. His chances coming from through balls, running from deep, pressuring defenders into mistakes (like Watford) and in the past headed goals from crosses. He does not score the scrappy tap ins that come about from being in the right place at the right time.

[brendywendy]

think thats just made up opinion.

church is just as profligate as long
plus doesnt do all of the hard work for the team that long does

[Wycombe Royal]

think thats just made up opinion.

church is just as profligate as long
plus doesnt do all of the hard work for the team that long does

Well of course its opinion, it is my opinion. So I'm not sure why you only "think" that.

As for Church being as wasteful as Long - did I say he wasn't? All I said was that if Long had been on the pitch he would not have been in position to have got that chance. I didn't say he would have scored or missed it did I? Again it is just my opinion.

And I never mentioned anything at all to do with workrate. So basically if you want to criticise my opinion at least stick to what I actually wrote.

[brendywendy]

think thats just made up opinion.

church is just as profligate as long
plus doesnt do all of the hard work for the team that long does

Well of course its opinion, it is my opinion. So I'm not sure why you only "think" that.

As for Church being as wasteful as Long - did I say he wasn't? All I said was that if Long had been on the pitch he would not have been in position to have got that chance. I didn't say he would have scored or missed it did I? Again it is just my opinion.

And I never mentioned anything at all to do with workrate. So basically if you want to criticise my opinion at least stick to what I actually wrote.

ok. in my opinion , it is wrong.church misses as many as long.

[brendywendy]

think thats just made up opinion.

church is just as profligate as long
plus doesnt do all of the hard work for the team that long does

Well of course its opinion, it is my opinion. So I'm not sure why you only "think" that.

As for Church being as wasteful as Long - did I say he wasn't? All I said was that if Long had been on the pitch he would not have been in position to have got that chance. I didn't say he would have scored or missed it did I? Again it is just my opinion.

And I never mentioned anything at all to do with workrate. So basically if you want to criticise my opinion at least stick to what I actually wrote.

couldnt be arsed

[Wycombe Royal]

church misses as many as long.

..and I would agree with that opinion.

[Snowball]

Hunt's 3 goals have all come at the far left post

The first was the Church cross, allegedly a deliberate ploy worked out in training where the defenders went with Long
and the ball went over them all to an unmarked Hunt and was knocked back and in.

The second was a very nice thru-ball by Karacan after a scrappy set up, can't remember who knocked it back to Karacan
and of course Hunt finished very well indeed.

The third was Church in MDF knocking it back to Harte, the long ball over/round the defender,
a very good cross on the floor from Long and a side-foot in

The point about all those three goals was THEY WERE WORKED GOALS.



Long's 2 1-on-1s were self-made and Church's 1-on-1 was a break (Hunt held the ball far too long) and Church
was given a very narrow shooting angle. Long's "miss" against Norwich was a fantastic ball from Harte but at chest
height with Long not facing goal, and Long had to bring it down, get control, turn and shoot. Torres would have buried it
but many decent strikers would not.

Think hard, get some note-paper out and actually look at the so-called chances our strikers get. Some are not that easy.

We cut out few genuine "gilt-edged" chances

[Ian Royal]

think thats just made up opinion.

church is just as profligate as long
plus doesnt do all of the hard work for the team that long does

Well of course its opinion, it is my opinion. So I'm not sure why you only "think" that.

As for Church being as wasteful as Long - did I say he wasn't? All I said was that if Long had been on the pitch he would not have been in position to have got that chance. I didn't say he would have scored or missed it did I? Again it is just my opinion.

And I never mentioned anything at all to do with workrate. So basically if you want to criticise my opinion at least stick to what I actually wrote.

ok. in my opinion , it is wrong.church misses as many as long.

That's not the point being talked about doofus.

No one is arguing Church doesn't miss plenty of chances. In fact, I'd say he possibly misses more golden opportunities than Long does, maybe even more absolute chances.

The point is that he gets in the positions to be supplied chances more, and better, than Long. Though Church creates fewer for himself IMO, but then again he does do a lot of chasing like Long, he's just not as strong.

And lets not forget, he has one fewer goals, in significantly less pitch time and having been played in midfield and on the wing in a fair proportion of his starts. And all his goals are from open play.

[Snowball]

No one is arguing Church doesn't miss plenty of chances. In fact, I'd say he possibly misses more golden opportunities than Long does, maybe even more absolute chances.

The point is that he gets in the positions to be supplied chances more, and better, than Long. Though Church creates fewer for himself IMO, but then again he does do a lot of chasing like Long, he's just not as strong.

And lets not forget, he has one fewer goals, in significantly less pitch time and having been played in midfield and on the wing in a fair proportion of his starts. And all his goals are from open play.

1 Misses plenty of chances. (Ian Royal)
2 Misses more golden opportunities than Long. (Ian Royal)
3 Misses maybe even more absolute chances than Long. (Ian Royal)
4 Creates fewer chances for himself than Long. (Ian Royal)
5 Chases but is not as strong as Long. (Ian Royal)

6 Has just one assist this season compared to Long's 3. (Snowball)
7 Has scored no international goals this season (compared with Long's 2 in 209 minutes) (Snowball)
8 Has won zero penalties compared to Long's 5 penalties won this season. (Snowball)
9 Has scored one deliberate (very good) goal, one mis-hit, one deflection as a late sub but cannot score when starting 2010-11 (Snowball)


So apparently a bloke who is not really strong enough (yet) but gets
into positions to miss, should be preferred. No Brainer.

[Snowball]

Adding it here as it's relevant to the thread

The Average age of players currently in the Actim Top 100 Players for the CCC is:



27 Yrs 6 Months 20 days,

3 Years, 8 Months older than Shane Long


The average age of STRIKERS in The Actim Top 100 is 27 Years 6 Months, 10 Days

[cmonurz]

Out of interest, how many strikers are there in the top 100?

[Snowball]

Age TODAY

In the Actim Top 100


Average Age of Strikers 27 Years 6 Months, 10 Days

Average age of Midfielders 26 Years 3 Months

Average Age of Defenders 27 Years, 9 Months

Average age of Keepers 31 Years 4 Months

[Snowball]

Out of interest, how many strikers are there in the top 100?

18 out of approximately 96, say 20%

There is one true youngster, Sordell, the second youngest is effectively a season older than Shane (8 Months)

Clearly 25-28 Year olds dominate, especially 27-Year olds, exactly as predicted.



02/17/91 19 Years 09 Months Sordell Watford

05/20/86 24 Years 06 Months Blackstock Forest
02/05/86 24 Years 09 Months Sharp Doncaster
09/22/85 25 Years 02 Months Mackie QPR
08/12/85 25 Years 03 Months Graham Watford
03/26/85 25 Years 08 Months Somma Leeds

12/28/83 26 Years 11 Months Bechio Leeds
10/29/83 27 Years 01 Months Eastwood Coventry
08/30/83 27 Years 03 Months Commons Derby
08/29/83 27 Years 03 Months Morison Millwall
04/07/83 27 Years 07 Months Stead Bristol
12/05/82 27 Years 11 Months Dobbie Swansea

05/05/82 28 Years 06 Months Bothroyd Cardiff
12/30/81 28 Years 11 Months Parkin Preston

01/21/80 30 Years 11 Months Kitson Portsmouth
08/01/78 32 Years 03 Months Iwelumo Burnley
10/27/77 33 Years 01 Months Platt Coventry
08/22/77 33 years 03 Months Helgusson QPR

[Snowball]

Just looking at the top-five for strikers/midfield etc



Top 5 Average Age - - 24 Years 7 Months - - MIDFIELDERS

Top 5 Average Age - - 26 Years 2 Months - - STRIKERS

Top 5 Average Age - - 29 Years 2 Months - - KEEPERS

Top 5 Average Age - - 29 Years 7 Months - - DEFENDERS