| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) 04:32 - Apr 7 with 1940 views | Aviator |
|  | | |  |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 06:46 - Apr 7 with 1872 views | slade1 |
At last, someone agrees with me!! I have said this from day one.
Yes I know he has scored some goals but with him in the team we play different, and not as good. Our passing game suffers as we punt the ball up to Moore.
Personally I have nothing against him as I am sure he's a very nice man but on the footballing side of things I wish he want in the starting line up, but maybe used later in the game of the bench if things needed to be changed. | | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 07:54 - Apr 7 with 1754 views | ITFCBlues |
Well yeah. If you have any understanding of how football works, you'd know that usually with 15 mins to go when down 1-0 against a side that's starting to sit deeper and deeper, you do tend to start applying more pressure.
Did we look better away to Cardiff and Blackburn when Moore went off? |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:07 - Apr 7 with 1676 views | Dubtractor |
FWIW I think we played better football with Hirst than with Moore, but you only need to look at how we played in the month before Moore signed to know that we looked pretty toothless without him in the team, and the results since he signed tell a pretty clear tale.
Since Moore signed we've got 28 points from 39 available, and scored 33 goals (2.5 per game) in the process, so the idea we'd be a better side without him is for the birds. |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:10 - Apr 7 with 1642 views | WestStanderLaLaLa |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:07 - Apr 7 by Dubtractor |
FWIW I think we played better football with Hirst than with Moore, but you only need to look at how we played in the month before Moore signed to know that we looked pretty toothless without him in the team, and the results since he signed tell a pretty clear tale.
Since Moore signed we've got 28 points from 39 available, and scored 33 goals (2.5 per game) in the process, so the idea we'd be a better side without him is for the birds. |
Agreed, we beat QPR and Stoke with Moore edit: (or Hirst) [Post edited 7 Apr 8:14]
|  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:17 - Apr 7 with 1604 views | cressi |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:07 - Apr 7 by Dubtractor |
FWIW I think we played better football with Hirst than with Moore, but you only need to look at how we played in the month before Moore signed to know that we looked pretty toothless without him in the team, and the results since he signed tell a pretty clear tale.
Since Moore signed we've got 28 points from 39 available, and scored 33 goals (2.5 per game) in the process, so the idea we'd be a better side without him is for the birds. |
When we brought the two players in Ali and Moore we was desperate for a striker only had Jackson who is no centre forward in my view.
Moore will score a few goals and is useful at defending dead balls. Ali has a injury that needs managing.
Would I keep Moore next season when hopefully Hirst has a full pre season and we have 3 months to get a striker in No I definitely wouldn't but for the moment we are where we are. | | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:28 - Apr 7 with 1550 views | GlasgowBlue |
One poor result and performance and look how quickly people are turning on the players who recently won six games in a row, had a perfect Easter and sit in the automatic promotion places with just 5 games to go.
Fickle as fcuk. |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:28 - Apr 7 with 1554 views | Churchman |
Without Moore we’d be struggling to make the play offs. He’s been tremendous for us and worth every penny of the reputed £500,000 he’s cost.
Is he a better player than Hirst? In some ways yes. In other ways no, not least in mobility. Moore struggles a bit against big clomping centre halves because while being able to batter them he won’t run away from them with his pace shortage.
Trouble is that Hirst is injured. Strikers cost significant money and Moore was as good as we could have got in the circumstances. He’s done well in my view. Provided that focal point we desperately needed.
It’s easy to forget he went into the game not 100% fit. It’s easy to forget that we’ve lost two key players in Burns and Hirst. Easy to forget our most potent player, Hutchinson, is very young and performances will vary. It’s easy to forget that despite all playing the same number of games, few will have gone through what we did on Monday after a long gruelling trip to Blackburn.
Easy to forget Norwich are a year two parachute team too. They should be better than us yet where will they finish? They have a good youth system and have been operating at a higher level than us for nudging two decades.
We have made brilliant progress but there’s a long way to go. In the desperate disappointment of yesterday, perspective is important. |  | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:40 - Apr 7 with 1502 views | jonnysuave |
I wouldn't want us signing him permanently but he's played a role generally quite well. Not always.
Big minus with letting the ball out for a corner though, when in a promising position with other players in the box. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 09:01 - Apr 7 with 1437 views | textbackup |
FWIW, IMO Yesterdays issue was Moore starting instead of AAH or KJ up there. Against two big lumps that couldn’t turn for sht or handle pace, we played right into their hands. Those two won’t have an easier game this season |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 09:11 - Apr 7 with 1395 views | ITFC_Esquire |
Yep we haven’t won 9 in 11 since he came in, off the back of a run of draws and point dropping…. Get a grip. | |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 10:55 - Apr 7 with 1207 views | Bent_double |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:40 - Apr 7 by jonnysuave |
I wouldn't want us signing him permanently but he's played a role generally quite well. Not always.
Big minus with letting the ball out for a corner though, when in a promising position with other players in the box. |
Yes, why-oh-why did he do that, when a cut-back to Sarmiento (I think?) seemed the better option? |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 13:10 - Apr 7 with 1111 views | Meadowlark |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 07:54 - Apr 7 by ITFCBlues |
Well yeah. If you have any understanding of how football works, you'd know that usually with 15 mins to go when down 1-0 against a side that's starting to sit deeper and deeper, you do tend to start applying more pressure.
Did we look better away to Cardiff and Blackburn when Moore went off? |
Oh dear,
The PhD of "how football works" mansplains to those who have a different opinion. |  | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 13:16 - Apr 7 with 1100 views | Ryorry |
Say you don't know much about us without saying you don't know much about us ... |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 13:23 - Apr 7 with 1072 views | MK1 |
I assume you only posted this for a reaction? |  | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 13:38 - Apr 7 with 1032 views | backwaywhen |
Jury is out for me , I certainly wouldn’t keep him at end of season , dare I say it ……would rather have Sargent, more of an all rounder . | | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 13:58 - Apr 7 with 969 views | FrimleyBlue |
He's our version of a haaland. When he's not, scoring he's out there, being a nuisance just by being on the pitch, but not really doing much. But he's popped up with goals.
I can't say he helps our play, but he has defenders eyes on him. |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 14:03 - Apr 7 with 953 views | Nutkins_Return |
We could have after every game some people saying "Hutch/Sarmiento/Taylor/AlHamadi etc have to start. Much better than x,y,z....completely misunderstand the difference in challenge from starting and coming on fresh to make an impact". Same people then "hutch not on it last few games" now he's starting. | | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 14:46 - Apr 7 with 895 views | Aviator |
I think we look far more dangerous with Ali than Moore and I wish KM would give him a go from the start. | | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 14:48 - Apr 7 with 885 views | backwaywhen |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 08:28 - Apr 7 by GlasgowBlue |
One poor result and performance and look how quickly people are turning on the players who recently won six games in a row, had a perfect Easter and sit in the automatic promotion places with just 5 games to go.
Fickle as fcuk. |
I for one had my opinion before and during the mention run , the thread is about Moore not the team / squad ……do keep up dear boy ! | | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 14:53 - Apr 7 with 865 views | ibbleobble |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 06:46 - Apr 7 by slade1 |
At last, someone agrees with me!! I have said this from day one.
Yes I know he has scored some goals but with him in the team we play different, and not as good. Our passing game suffers as we punt the ball up to Moore.
Personally I have nothing against him as I am sure he's a very nice man but on the footballing side of things I wish he want in the starting line up, but maybe used later in the game of the bench if things needed to be changed. |
“Punt the ball up to Moore”….of all the delusional statements on here in the wake of yesterday’s defeat, this is up there. We could have lost three or four nil playing out from the back and you’re insinuating he encourages us to play a long ball game 😂 | | | |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 14:59 - Apr 7 with 821 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 13:58 - Apr 7 by FrimleyBlue |
He's our version of a haaland. When he's not, scoring he's out there, being a nuisance just by being on the pitch, but not really doing much. But he's popped up with goals.
I can't say he helps our play, but he has defenders eyes on him. |
Is there a manager in the world (unless you call Roy Keane a manager) who wouldn't play Haaland in their team?
Moore had a poor game on Saturday. However, he got very little service. The fact he made a bizarre choice on the one time he got the ball in behind is odd too.
On a different day, the foul on Hutchinson sees Moore score the penalty, Hladky doesn't fumble one into his net, they don't shut up shop at 1-0 down instead of 1-0 up and we win comfortably as we exploit the space on the pitch.
That said, nodge did what they did very well and we had an off day. Disappointing it was against them but better to lose that one than against Southampton and we remain in pole position for second spot. That will do me, much as it hurts (especially living here) losing to them. |  |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 15:51 - Apr 7 with 745 views | FrimleyBlue |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 14:59 - Apr 7 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Is there a manager in the world (unless you call Roy Keane a manager) who wouldn't play Haaland in their team?
Moore had a poor game on Saturday. However, he got very little service. The fact he made a bizarre choice on the one time he got the ball in behind is odd too.
On a different day, the foul on Hutchinson sees Moore score the penalty, Hladky doesn't fumble one into his net, they don't shut up shop at 1-0 down instead of 1-0 up and we win comfortably as we exploit the space on the pitch.
That said, nodge did what they did very well and we had an off day. Disappointing it was against them but better to lose that one than against Southampton and we remain in pole position for second spot. That will do me, much as it hurts (especially living here) losing to them. |
No. And no one is saying not to play haaland in a team.
I thought that was a good comparison for how a player can been as not being part of the overall play but Is an important cog in the system due to the defenders waryness of him.
I don't however understand the apparent need to ignore Moore's weaknesses whilst he's involved It's ok to acknowledge he has weaknesses, all players do. It's also ok to know he's not Hirst and therefor the way we play is different with Moore in the side, Davis crosses for example.. many in the air yesturday, not saying that's wrong, but it's not one of strong points and many ended up missing moore and going over chaplins head behind him.
I think what the OP is getting at is indeed the directness of our play differs when Moore isn't on the pitch, of course, most of the time it's because we're past the 60 minute mark and pushing, however, Al Hamadi isn't dropping for the ball ala Moore, so we're direct with it and trying to get him in on goal, we revert back to what we could do with hirst when dropping wasn't the best option, but we could play him in.... You don't really have options with moore, it's him dropping and you're hoping he flicks it, or you're crossing and hoping he's on the end of it.
Moore has been a handy cover, Gallagher possibly would have been a more hirst like option, but we got moore and we've got the goals from him needed during this run, but I don't think the OP is wrong to say we look better without Moore.. we do, but only because we're using the striker in a different way. [Post edited 7 Apr 16:31]
| |
| |
| We look a much better side without Moore. (n/t) on 16:15 - Apr 7 with 659 views | billlm |
We didn't, but can see what your getting at were much more direct at times now rather than playing the ball through or pulling it back from the widemen,
Losing hirst killed our session we lost what was it 4-6 weeks of a front man, |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
