Jump to content

Conor Hourihane


dont_do_it_doug.

Recommended Posts

On 9/27/2017 at 21:27, BigJim said:

He's doing what we bought him for and that's great but....

He is just so weak on his right side he will never make a top class midfielder.

He won't be a top class midfielder because he is one footed, but you're right that he will never be a 'top class' midfielder, that's why he is at this level at his age. However he will be a very good player for us for as long as we are at this level, I'm certain than that. I also think he'd be a useful additional to any bottom half premier league squad (not necessarily a first team regular though).

Edited by Dr_Pangloss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I generally do not think he's a particularly creative player, even when played further up the pitch he appears to lack a really good defence splitting pass. His crossing and set piece are very good and I'd wager they made up the majority of his assists at his previous club. We still lack a genuine number 10.

Edited by Dr_Pangloss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AntrimBlack said:

He really needs to be played further forward. Looks ineffective when he is playing deep.

I'm not certain that'll work, but it has to be better than the current approach. Conor doesn't affect games, for some reason.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, AVTuco said:

I'm not certain that'll work, but it has to be better than the current approach. Conor doesn't affect games, for some reason.

I thought he was effective further forward during our recent winning streak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AntrimBlack said:

I thought he was effective further forward during our recent winning streak.

He scored goals, but other than that, I'm not so sure. Obviously if he scores goals, I'm more than happy... but when he doesn't he could be more involved.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He needs to be played in a three man midfield behind the strikers where he did for Barnsley. 

Another classic example of us pissing a load of money up the wall and then not playing a player where they are meant to be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's been more effective further forward, but I have to agree with those who say he lacks a truly defence-splitting pass. He looked very pedestrian yesterday, on the rare occasions when he had the ball at his feet. I like him, but I don't think he has enough to be playing in a midfield two away at a top side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

He's been more effective further forward, but I have to agree with those who say he lacks a truly defence-splitting pass. He looked very pedestrian yesterday, on the rare occasions when he had the ball at his feet. I like him, but I don't think he has enough to be playing in a midfield two away at a top side. 

What you are edging towards is .....he is not good enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He isn't a No.10, I don't understand why everyone thinks he should be played further forward. He also never played in a 3 man midfield at Barnsley, they played a 442. I think Hourihane is a good player but like others have mentioned, he isn't one who's going to be playing through balls to strikers. Pretty sure most of his assists last season come from set pieces. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Fair question . . . honest answer, I don't know. He still has a lot to prove. 

I think he is decent.....not consistent, struggles to impose himself on his opposite number, is limited in as much he takes good deadballs, but pitch craft, not good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â