Big_John_10 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Kozak was a necessary purchase as we have no backup for Benteke. A back up to Benteke was a necessary purchase. Kozak was not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Kozak was a necessary purchase as we have no backup for Benteke. A back up to Benteke was a necessary purchase. Kozak was not. If only the funds were made available, this debate would not be happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGregor1888 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Kozak was a necessary purchase as we have no backup for Benteke. A back up to Benteke was a necessary purchase. Kozak was not. Profound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Nice to see Kozak's been written off already after less than half a dozen games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) Not sure that's true - when you have a winning system, you can use that system as a foundation to build others off of. When building a house, you don't destroy the foundation first: you make sure it is strong as possible. Making sure we have a replacement for Benteke in is sure our most successful formula remains an option for us to use, something the players and manager are already comfortable with and know how to work. It doesn't mean that that is the only way we can play. For all his time has been limited so far, surely the acquisition of Helenius, who offers us something none of our other strikers do, suggests Lambert is keen to have a number of options open to him? I'd generally agree with that if it wasn't for the fact thst we are on a limited budget. I'd expect a little more pragmatism from the manager with this being the case. Deciding to chose a player that will most likely be needed only for back-up to be your most expensive summer signing is strange unless you consider that it was so important to get Kozak (he chased him all summer remember) because he really just wouldn't have been able to cope with Benteke being out and no No. 9 to fill in. As for Helenius, since Lambert isn't bothering to play him, it is difficult to see why he was bought in the first place. Edited October 29, 2013 by Isa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) A back up to Bent was a necessary purchase. Benteke was not. fixed for what im sure people said something like this last season. give kozak a chance Edited October 29, 2013 by Zatman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Not sure that's true - when you have a winning system, you can use that system as a foundation to build others off of. When building a house, you don't destroy the foundation first: you make sure it is strong as possible. Making sure we have a replacement for Benteke in is sure our most successful formula remains an option for us to use, something the players and manager are already comfortable with and know how to work. It doesn't mean that that is the only way we can play. For all his time has been limited so far, surely the acquisition of Helenius, who offers us something none of our other strikers do, suggests Lambert is keen to have a number of options open to him? I'd generally agree with that if it wasn't for the fact thst we are on a limited budget. I'd expect a little more pragmatism from the manager with this being the case. Deciding to chose a player that will most likely be needed only for back-up to be your most expensive summer signing is strange unless you consider that it was so important to get Kozak (he chased him all summer remember) because he really just wouldn't have been able to cope with Benteke being out and no No. 9 to fill in. As for Helenius, since Lambert isn't bothering to play him, it is difficult to see why he was bought in the first place. Didn't Helenius come on in the last game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 This might be a novel concept, and bear with me here, but wasn't Helenius bought as a prospect? He even said HIMSELF that he's got more time this season than he ever thought he would. Just because you buy a player doesn't mean you're buying them to play straight away. It's not as black and white as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) I disagree that it's subjective that the 2 managers differ in style, like at all. It's not about the possession we don't have, but rather what we do when we have it. With AM, the concept of attack was foreign to us. Under Lambert, sure we don't keep much of the ball, but we are much more forward thinking and progressive, and don't play for 0-0 draws. Or have you forgotten the days of us playing 6 defenders + Heskey as a winger and protecting 1-0 deficits? We never got battered by any team under him, but the 6-1 result last year would never have been possible, not in a million years. So I think it's unfair and borderline insulting to liken PL's tenure to that of his predecessor. Fair enough on the Lambert quote. I still don't think however that it implies a lack of tactical nous, seems a very cynical way of looking at it. Personally, I think it was a good movet. Last season we finally found a winning formula of sorts with the 4-3-3 (of course it's not exactly going swimmingly at the moment), and in the event that we lost the big fella to injury, we'd have someone to come in and slot straight into our style of play. None of our other strikers can fit into the role Benteke does in our system. Every team has a go-to formula, why change it and risk unsettling our run of good form? Yes I probably shouldn't have written playing style as I actually meant the general quality of football offered at home and in terms of entertainment value (which is certainly subjective). In terms of style and approach, obviously Lambert differs from McLeish. However, the are the same issues in struggling to string a few passes together, lumping the ball forward every five minutes and looking devoid of a clear gameplan far too often. I generally find it uninspiring watching home games under both, though less so under Lambert. My argument in reply to your second paragraph has already been stated above. Edited October 29, 2013 by Isa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted October 29, 2013 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2013 Nice to see Kozak's been written off already after less than half a dozen games. It happened with James Milner when O'Neill first signed him, and with Downing, and with Ashley Young who was branded a flop in his first half season, and Benteke and Bacuna. I'm sure there are more examples. People collectively never learn, although the odd individual does. Obviously that doesn't mean every signing given time will work out but there are plenty of examples of players written off far too early by the fans going on to prove people wrong. Personally, I think October is more than a little early to be writing off players especially those in their early 20's coming from overseas. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Also happened with Petrov as well didn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Also an opposite effect happens, people lauded the signings of N'Zogbia and Ireland, where they state he's just a bit off-form. He's brilliant at Bodymoor Heath you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I wouldn't normally write a player off but i just don't think someone as slow as kozak can be a good premiership striker. Happy to be wrong about him but i just don't see what attributes he has that are going to make him good at this level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 This might be a novel concept, and bear with me here, but wasn't Helenius bought as a prospect? He even said HIMSELF that he's got more time this season than he ever thought he would. Just because you buy a player doesn't mean you're buying them to play straight away. It's not as black and white as that. True but when on a limited budget, surely the manager should be working on signing players who are ready right now*? We don't have the luxury of being able to sign players who might come good one day given the quality of our squad. *I'm not saying he isn't but clearly Lambert feels this way considering how sparingly he has been used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 This might be a novel concept, and bear with me here, but wasn't Helenius bought as a prospect? He even said HIMSELF that he's got more time this season than he ever thought he would. Just because you buy a player doesn't mean you're buying them to play straight away. It's not as black and white as that. True but when on a limited budget, surely the manager should be working on signing players who are ready right now*? We don't have the luxury of being able to sign players who might come good one day given the quality of our squad. *I'm not saying he isn't but clearly Lambert feels this way considering how sparingly he has been used. But if his budget doesn't stretch to that but he can afford a prospect now then I don't see a problem with that. He is building for the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) I wouldn't normally write a player off but i just don't think someone as slow as kozak can be a good premiership striker. Teddy Sheringham Peter Crouch Berbatov Carew have all had decent careers in top flight for example and am sure their is plenty more Edited October 29, 2013 by Zatman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulver Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Because there would be holes elsewhere in the squad? Kozak was a necessary purchase as we have no backup for Benteke. Er, that'd make more sense if Kozak was anything like the kind of player Benteke is. We might as well have stuck Bowery (shudder) up front Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I wouldn't normally write a player off but i just don't think someone as slow as kozak can be a good premiership striker. Teddy Sheringham Peter Crouch Berbatov Carew have all had decent careers in top flight for example and am sure their is plenty more You should have quoted my whole post because all those you mention had other attributes to make up for any lack of pace. What does kozak have to make up for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulver Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I wouldn't normally write a player off but i just don't think someone as slow as kozak can be a good premiership striker. Teddy Sheringham Peter Crouch Berbatov Carew have all had decent careers in top flight for example and am sure their is plenty more TS : Great footballing brain PC: Deceptively good with feet and head DB : Great footballing brain JC : Great as main forward winning headers etc which of the above have anything in common with the Kozak we've seen so far ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avfc1982 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Nice to see Kozak's been written off already after less than half a dozen games. It happened with James Milner when O'Neill first signed him, and with Downing, and with Ashley Young who was branded a flop in his first half season, and Benteke and Bacuna. I'm sure there are more examples. People collectively never learn, although the odd individual does. Obviously that doesn't mean every signing given time will work out but there are plenty of examples of players written off far too early by the fans going on to prove people wrong. Personally, I think October is more than a little early to be writing off players especially those in their early 20's coming from overseas. I don't remember anyone writing those players off. Stop making things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts