| Andersen 07:11 - Apr 21 with 7847 views | NorthantsHoop |
I see there is some posts on here saying Andersen was a bit poor yesterday, didn't see that myself, he is one of the reasons that we are out of the mess we got ourselves in. Really rate him and his assists and delivery from set pieces a major factor in our improvement. Looks and is a very good signing. |  | | |  |
| Andersen on 11:01 - Apr 21 with 1677 views | mart_Goblin |
| Andersen on 10:52 - Apr 21 by EastR |
Paal for me, I thought he had a very poor game |
Yes I have to agree. I think Paal is shot to pieces. Opposition once again targeted him with high balls. He lost his dual with his opponent way way too much and lost the ball far too many times. Offers zero going forward at the moment too.
I think Marti has had enough of him too. If Fox doesn’t start then he replaces him in the second half.
I hope I’m wrong and Paal is just running on empty but I have a feeling he’ll be the next one on the Cifuentes bonfire. |  | | |
| Andersen on 11:53 - Apr 21 with 1583 views | saxbend |
He is rather like Willock in that he has a lot to offer but he is not very consistent. Even when he makes mistakes though, they come from trying things that are necessary to unlock defences. He wouldn't be the first player we've signed who took months to become someone we all looked forward to seeing, anyway. Marti will sort him out I am sure. |  | | |
| Andersen on 12:17 - Apr 21 with 1524 views | baz_qpr |
| Andersen on 10:08 - Apr 21 by Northernr |
Surprised so many people think he played well yesterday. You couldn't fault his effort and he kept showing for the ball and wanting it and trying to make things happen, but second half in particular almost nothing he tried came off as intended and I was pleased we put Smyth on and brought Willock inside when we did. Got him on a 5 atm. |
I would say that's very harsh, yes lots did not come off, but actually lots did and he was involved in most of our good attacking play. He's corners yesterday were as good as anything we've seen all season. A 6 at worst |  | | |
| Andersen on 12:22 - Apr 21 with 1506 views | Watford_Ranger |
| Andersen on 10:56 - Apr 21 by stevec |
Maybe not entirely related but after Andersen went off we seemed to be under siege from what I would say was up till then, a fairly disinterested Preston.
As for Smyth, does my head in. As Preston pushed forward Smyth had umpteen opportunities to push up, get in line with the solitary full back where acres of space were available to run onto a through pass. Again and again he positioned himself 10 yards too far back waiting for the ball to feet and blew any attacking opportunities.
Andersen is a cut above, we just need to put some competence in front of him. |
Maybe instructed to tuck in a bit. He did enough for them to take Brady off. |  | | |
| Andersen on 13:11 - Apr 21 with 1418 views | gazza1 |
There were at least 6 better performers than Anderson yesterday.......he was average but was part of the winning team. | | | |
| Andersen on 13:27 - Apr 21 with 1380 views | NorthantsHoop |
| Andersen on 10:52 - Apr 21 by EastR |
Paal for me, I thought he had a very poor game |
Agree Paal is a weak link, need to find a replacement for him next season. On Andersen which I started the post about again I see far too much negativity towards him, he has something about him that can make the game look easy and there is no doubt without his assists since joining we would be in a worse position. I just like these type of footballers always have just have something about them that makes the game enjoyable to watch, especially when something special happens. | | | |
| Andersen on 13:32 - Apr 21 with 1351 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Andersen on 13:27 - Apr 21 by NorthantsHoop |
Agree Paal is a weak link, need to find a replacement for him next season. On Andersen which I started the post about again I see far too much negativity towards him, he has something about him that can make the game look easy and there is no doubt without his assists since joining we would be in a worse position. I just like these type of footballers always have just have something about them that makes the game enjoyable to watch, especially when something special happens. |
Not really seeing this at all. Funny how everyone sees players differently. Most of the threat came down their right, I didn't think Paal did much wrong, solid 6. Fox came on more to give us that extra height and heading ability.
We're not going to be binning off the number of players some fans seem to think we will. |  |
| |
| Andersen on 14:00 - Apr 21 with 1291 views | gazza1 |
| Andersen on 13:27 - Apr 21 by NorthantsHoop |
Agree Paal is a weak link, need to find a replacement for him next season. On Andersen which I started the post about again I see far too much negativity towards him, he has something about him that can make the game look easy and there is no doubt without his assists since joining we would be in a worse position. I just like these type of footballers always have just have something about them that makes the game enjoyable to watch, especially when something special happens. |
Shocking comments about Paal......bit like the one about Dunne Experiment is over, drop him for Cannon!!!! | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Andersen on 14:34 - Apr 21 with 1256 views | WatfordR |
| Andersen on 14:00 - Apr 21 by gazza1 |
Shocking comments about Paal......bit like the one about Dunne Experiment is over, drop him for Cannon!!!! |
I don't think Paal is a poor footballer at all and I think he's been decent overall for us. I think his form has dipped a bit though, he isn't necessarily getting forward as much as he did. He may actually suffer a little in comparison to what Dunne has given us on the right.
But we have Larkeche and Fox , if we're looking at turning over the least number of players for the greatest return, Paal to me is one where we could get decent money and not necessarily weaken the squad. |  | | |
| Andersen on 14:42 - Apr 21 with 1239 views | timcocking |
Seems like a class act at this level from what I’ve seen.
I actually think this whole team is quality now, with the obvious exception of up front and goalkeeper. |  | | |
| Andersen on 14:44 - Apr 21 with 1221 views | gazza1 |
| Andersen on 14:34 - Apr 21 by WatfordR |
I don't think Paal is a poor footballer at all and I think he's been decent overall for us. I think his form has dipped a bit though, he isn't necessarily getting forward as much as he did. He may actually suffer a little in comparison to what Dunne has given us on the right.
But we have Larkeche and Fox , if we're looking at turning over the least number of players for the greatest return, Paal to me is one where we could get decent money and not necessarily weaken the squad. |
Paal form has dipped for sure......was OKish yesterday.
He could be better if we see more of the ball in the attacking 3rd......i would not sell him unless its for very good money. [Post edited 21 Apr 14:46]
| | | |
| Andersen on 14:58 - Apr 21 with 1197 views | NorthantsHoop |
| Andersen on 13:32 - Apr 21 by Antti_Heinola |
Not really seeing this at all. Funny how everyone sees players differently. Most of the threat came down their right, I didn't think Paal did much wrong, solid 6. Fox came on more to give us that extra height and heading ability.
We're not going to be binning off the number of players some fans seem to think we will. |
If you mean Andersen then I am going to champion him as he is creative and I just like these types of players who have something about them and let's face it Marti knows his ability much more than us watchers do. On Paal he has an annoying knack of losing a challenge then going down and feigning injury done it a few times in his time with us and yesterday in 1st half nearly cost us, but to his credit has scored some vital goals i.e. Huddersfield. Again football is a bit of a subjective sport and sometimes we see what we only want to see if we like a player etc. | | | |
| Andersen on 15:04 - Apr 21 with 1156 views | Watford_Ranger |
| Andersen on 14:34 - Apr 21 by WatfordR |
I don't think Paal is a poor footballer at all and I think he's been decent overall for us. I think his form has dipped a bit though, he isn't necessarily getting forward as much as he did. He may actually suffer a little in comparison to what Dunne has given us on the right.
But we have Larkeche and Fox , if we're looking at turning over the least number of players for the greatest return, Paal to me is one where we could get decent money and not necessarily weaken the squad. |
He’s physically weak. Decent in the air for his size and offers a bit going forwards but a bit meh overall. Doubt anyone is paying good money for him and it’s not really a priority but I wouldn’t be sad to see him go. | | | |
| Andersen on 15:17 - Apr 21 with 1130 views | WatfordR |
| Andersen on 14:44 - Apr 21 by gazza1 |
Paal form has dipped for sure......was OKish yesterday.
He could be better if we see more of the ball in the attacking 3rd......i would not sell him unless its for very good money. [Post edited 21 Apr 14:46]
|
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that we have to sell and generate income to be reused, and for me it's a question of how you do that whilst causing the least hurt to the squad overall.
JCS has been great under MC, but if there is good money to be generated by selling him, then I think we have options to bring adequate replacements more cheaply. Paal is a decent footballer, but we have two options at the club who could step in.
If we are looking to bring in two strikers, we don't need Dykes and Frey imo, so if we can get a few million for Dykes, then I think that's decent enough business.
Replacing the likes of Chair and Willock effectively, may not be so easy and not so cheap.
I'd be looking to generate about £10m in sales, and be keeping fingers crossed that some additional money might accrue from Eze. We have to start planning short (12 months) and medium (up to 4-5 years) term so that we don't ever find ourselves in the mess we had this season. We can't keep everyone at our level and with our revenue producing restrictions. | | | |
| Andersen on 15:27 - Apr 21 with 1100 views | dmm |
Eze scored again this afternoon. Just saying. |  | | |
| Andersen on 15:35 - Apr 21 with 1081 views | Match82 |
| Andersen on 15:17 - Apr 21 by WatfordR |
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that we have to sell and generate income to be reused, and for me it's a question of how you do that whilst causing the least hurt to the squad overall.
JCS has been great under MC, but if there is good money to be generated by selling him, then I think we have options to bring adequate replacements more cheaply. Paal is a decent footballer, but we have two options at the club who could step in.
If we are looking to bring in two strikers, we don't need Dykes and Frey imo, so if we can get a few million for Dykes, then I think that's decent enough business.
Replacing the likes of Chair and Willock effectively, may not be so easy and not so cheap.
I'd be looking to generate about £10m in sales, and be keeping fingers crossed that some additional money might accrue from Eze. We have to start planning short (12 months) and medium (up to 4-5 years) term so that we don't ever find ourselves in the mess we had this season. We can't keep everyone at our level and with our revenue producing restrictions. |
A few million for Dykes?
Looking to generate about £10M in sales? I'll be honest, I don't think we'd get £10M if we sold every player in our entire squad.
Not trying to be a dck, I just honestly don't know what other teams would be worth more than £1-2M for any player. Not Chair with the court case hanging over him. JCS probably and maybe Field? Possibly Dunne?
I think it's saying something that except for Cook, JCS, Field and Chair, I don't think there are any players that big chunks of our fan base (not necessarily the same people in every case) don't think are Championship quality. |  | | |
| Andersen on 16:13 - Apr 21 with 1008 views | VancouverHoop |
I mentioned what, to me, is the bizarre criticism of Andersen on another thread yesterday. To briefly recap. Our strikers don't score many goals. Our best two forwards, Chair and Willock, are reactive players, essentially runners with a ball at their feet. They don't create space for others because, all to frequently, no one can read where they're going. Andersen, OTOH, is a forward focussed creative hold up player who's always looking for a space to pass to. Consequently we're more of a threat from corners and dead ball situations because of him.
Sure he's probably past his prime, and can't do ninety minutes anymore but, to reiterate, no one else in the current squad does what he can. Booting him out the door unless we're certain we've found someone who can replace him is nutsy cuckoo. [Post edited 21 Apr 17:33]
| | | |
| Andersen on 17:18 - Apr 21 with 919 views | QPROslo |
| Andersen on 16:13 - Apr 21 by VancouverHoop |
I mentioned what, to me, is the bizarre criticism of Andersen on another thread yesterday. To briefly recap. Our strikers don't score many goals. Our best two forwards, Chair and Willock, are reactive players, essentially runners with a ball at their feet. They don't create space for others because, all to frequently, no one can read where they're going. Andersen, OTOH, is a forward focussed creative hold up player who's always looking for a space to pass to. Consequently we're more of a threat from corners and dead ball situations because of him.
Sure he's probably past his prime, and can't do ninety minutes anymore but, to reiterate, no one else in the current squad does what he can. Booting him out the door unless we're certain we've found someone who can replace him is nutsy cuckoo. [Post edited 21 Apr 17:33]
|
I'd written basically the same about Andersen but it disappeared somehow while editing. But anyway I agree entirely. Note: he can throw it longer than anyone else too except possibly Dykes, judging by 2 yesterday. | | | |
| Andersen on 17:22 - Apr 21 with 911 views | Ghost_on_the_Westway |
With respect, I don’t think it is bizarre to criticise his performance yesterday at all. He might have been half decent with a dead ball, but, he was a nervous wreck with a live one yesterday.
He might well come good and have a blinder against Leeds, but he had a stinker yesterday and for all Smyths’ faults, we were better overall when he came on and Willock moved inside. |  | | |
| Andersen on 18:27 - Apr 21 with 845 views | Spaceman_P |
I agree that Andersen is good but the last 3 games he's progressively got worse. I think it must be a health issue, I actually like the Danish Jesus and feel yesterday he looked tired.
Also He's had the same if not more opportunities to score than Smyth, should be tucking away most of his chances too.
I think not scoring might be affecting his confidence a bit. I hope before the end of the season, he gets the long-awaited goal.
Paul |  | | |
| Andersen on 18:40 - Apr 21 with 811 views | QPRSteve |
| Andersen on 16:13 - Apr 21 by VancouverHoop |
I mentioned what, to me, is the bizarre criticism of Andersen on another thread yesterday. To briefly recap. Our strikers don't score many goals. Our best two forwards, Chair and Willock, are reactive players, essentially runners with a ball at their feet. They don't create space for others because, all to frequently, no one can read where they're going. Andersen, OTOH, is a forward focussed creative hold up player who's always looking for a space to pass to. Consequently we're more of a threat from corners and dead ball situations because of him.
Sure he's probably past his prime, and can't do ninety minutes anymore but, to reiterate, no one else in the current squad does what he can. Booting him out the door unless we're certain we've found someone who can replace him is nutsy cuckoo. [Post edited 21 Apr 17:33]
|
He's only 29, should have a few more seasons in him. | | | |
| Andersen on 19:13 - Apr 21 with 760 views | DieByYourSide |
This is the same bloke who gave the ball away every time he had it, dragged a presentable shot wide, overplayed when he had a chance to shoot in acres from the edge of the box, right?
He's done some decent stuff for us since joining, his corners are above average and not writing him off at all but had a stinker from where I was standing yesterday. | |
| |
| Andersen on 19:16 - Apr 21 with 730 views | Benny_the_Ball |
Overall, Anderson has been a positive signing (particularly with respect to set pieces). However, he's performed poorly in the last 4 matches. To suggest that he played well yesterday is frankly laughable. |  | | |
| Andersen on 19:25 - Apr 21 with 700 views | PhilmyRs |
| Andersen on 19:16 - Apr 21 by Benny_the_Ball |
Overall, Anderson has been a positive signing (particularly with respect to set pieces). However, he's performed poorly in the last 4 matches. To suggest that he played well yesterday is frankly laughable. |
This. Not sure what game people were watching if they think he played well yesterday. Although agree about set pieces being better with him so maybe that’s what people are focusing on. | | | |
| Andersen on 19:25 - Apr 21 with 696 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Andersen on 10:08 - Apr 21 by Northernr |
Surprised so many people think he played well yesterday. You couldn't fault his effort and he kept showing for the ball and wanting it and trying to make things happen, but second half in particular almost nothing he tried came off as intended and I was pleased we put Smyth on and brought Willock inside when we did. Got him on a 5 atm. |
Sounds about right to me. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
