Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Matt Smith -- Tall but...

  1. #1

    Default Matt Smith -- Tall but...

    At the risk of incurring the wrath of the purists on this forum, and though he looks to be a nice chap, for me Matt Smith is as lunky with his ball touches as was Seb Polter. Like his height, but how often have we seen/heard him mis-hit, mis-head, or simply fail to deliver close to the goal. Is it better to have a giant in the middle who's relatively finesse-less, or a fast forward with the skill to score. Thoughts?

  2. #2

    Default

    Having a lump up front is percentages football, where the odds are against you.
    Let's face it, any centre back worth his salt should be able to deal with most of headers that come his way.
    The bottom line is you need intelligent players to anticipate where the odd lose ball or flick on will end up, otherwise the whole thing becomes an exercise in futility.
    At the moment we don't have that but maybe Washington and Smith will finally gel.
    Personally, like many on here I'd go Cilla to start. The ball seems to stick to him like Velcro so he can easily bring other players into play with his back to goal. Not only that, he obviouly knows where the net is.
    If Ollie won't play him because he thinks he's lazy, i genuinely think Ollie is losing the plot. He's our best striker by far and if Ollie keeps him out of the team over a point of principle he's shooting himself in the foot, well and truly.
    He'll regret it till his dying day, if ever he lives that long

  3. Default

    I got nothing against Smith as plan B/C but he should not be the opening act

    Problem is the manager likes a type of play where you get ball forward early try to pick the scraps up then play from there. It's for me a gameplan from 15years ago. We saw it when he brought Brett Angel in and played Santos up top it's his philosophy

    Fulham play quick counterattacking football with pace all over the park Smith never fitted the game plan so they palmed him off up the road to the manager who likes to play slow laborious hit it long football where he will fit in

  4. #4

    Default

    as a plan b hes perfect, big powerful lump who can push through tired players or attack/defend set pieces but as a key player?? no way. too one dimensional and limits a team. i liked nassers suggestion of a quartet of sylla in front with freeman, yeni and pavel behind him. sounds a lot better than smith and washington up front.

    sylla should always be ahead of smith and with those 3 behind him he doesnt need to work as hard as olly wants him to

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    5,925
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Originally Posted by West Acton
    I got nothing against Smith as plan B/C but he should not be the opening act

    Problem is the manager likes a type of play where you get ball forward early try to pick the scraps up then play from there. It's for me a gameplan from 15years ago. We saw it when he brought Brett Angel in and played Santos up top it's his philosophy

    Fulham play quick counterattacking football with pace all over the park Smith never fitted the game plan so they palmed him off up the road to the manager who likes to play slow laborious hit it long football where he will fit in
    Bang on mate.

    I hated Santos up front at the time. I hate that style of football even more now. I can handle it if we need a goal and we bring a lump on for the last half hour, but there is nothing more disheartening than looking at the teamsheet an hour before kick off and just knowing that we are in for an afternoon of hoof ball.
    Co-Founder of the Dubai R's
    Follow me on Twitter @Tarbie82

  6. Default

    Tarbs I actually don't care as long as we win, I know I'm in the minority with that view, but it's especially hard to take when you play like that but lose most weeks

    I would add however he seems decent bloke and is no trouble at all I like him and he is better then I initially anticipated but he's not a player to start games unless that game dictates it's going be scrappy and nasty

  7. Default

    Apart from being a nice lad, Smith has conditioned the way we play. It is so obvious that the likes of Lynch are being instructed to hoof the ball up to Smith. This is not the way football should be played in 2017. We have enough creative players in midfield to built our offensive more meaningful. The likes of Freeman, Borysiuk, Manning, Pawel, Scowen, Cousins and Luongo can definatley create an opening by playing football!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    bollo bridge road w3
    Posts
    16,428

    Default

    Can we make him the new Gladwin, or is there an even better candidate?

  9. Default

    Originally Posted by Kevin Mcleod
    Can we make him the new Gladwin, or is there an even better candidate?
    The first silly post in this thread after reading through what was a good discussion.

  10. #10

    Default

    very limited player. Foolham used him as an impact sub and we should do likewise
    I must away now, I can no longer tarry
    This morning's tempest I have to cross
    I must be guided without a stumble
    Into the arms I love the most

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    bollo bridge road w3
    Posts
    16,428

    Default

    Originally Posted by Norths
    The first silly post in this thread after reading through what was a good discussion.
    Why is it silly. Someone always gets the boo boy treatment lately.

  12. #12

    Default

    Originally Posted by West Acton
    I got nothing against Smith as plan B/C but he should not be the opening act

    Problem is the manager likes a type of play where you get ball forward early try to pick the scraps up then play from there. It's for me a gameplan from 15years ago. We saw it when he brought Brett Angel in and played Santos up top it's his philosophy

    Fulham play quick counterattacking football with pace all over the park Smith never fitted the game plan so they palmed him off up the road to the manager who likes to play slow laborious hit it long football where he will fit in
    You are correct and this one my main bone of contention when signing him in January.
    Smith doesn't possess the skills or mobility needed for good play nor does he score enough.

    Sylla should be the main striker - he can control the ball, bring others into play and most importantly, score goals.

    But as you say, a big lump up top for hoofball is Holloway's preferred game plan. Always has and always will be.

  13. #13

    Default

    Originally Posted by Kevin Mcleod
    Can we make him the new Gladwin, or is there an even better candidate?
    Originally Posted by Norths
    The first silly post in this thread after reading through what was a good discussion.
    Totally agree.

    I would like to hear what Smith brings to the table other than being a target man for hoofball and good at defending corners and free kicks.

  14. #14

    Default

    Originally Posted by Kevin Mcleod
    Why is it silly. Someone always gets the boo boy treatment lately.
    Its not a question of making him a boo boy, but about his and Holloway's style of play .

    Most of us on here are saying we are ok to have him as an impact sub when chasing the game late on, but not as the starting choice.

    If QPR get anywhere near being a top half team playing hoofball with Smith, I will be amazed.

  15. #15

    Default

    Agree with a lot of points on here but I actually think him and Washington could be a decent pairing.

    If we used him as the big bully, physical centre forward allowing the younger, quicker Washington to feed off I can see it working. He's also very useful at corners and free kicks. Problem is I don't think IH will adapt his style of play which has been pointed out on this thread.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •