Bristol Boy Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 The guy's neither one thing or the other. He's not a goal poacher similar to Thorpe or Cureton. He's not a pacy player ala Andy Cole. He's not someone who's strong and big/quick enough, without being lightning or a giant, like Bob Taylor or Sean Goater. And he lacks the physical presence of a Paul Cheesley. He's young and will get stronger and improve, I'm sure and he's a decent finisher. Had we paid £100,000, a similar fee to Marck Goodfellow, then I don't think you'd have many complaints, but Goodfellows signing just proves what £100k can buy in 2003, at this level, as do signings at other clubs like Sam Parkin and Leon Knight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swindon Hater Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 "and he's a decent finisher." I disagree there, I've seen him miss plenty of easy chances. But then he's scored some good volleys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leadman Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 are we baseing this on notts, if we are i think you should give credit to there defender(richardson) he had a great game and i dont think any striker in this div would of made him look poor yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltshoveller Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 The guy's neither one thing or the other. He's not a goal poacher similar to Thorpe or Cureton. He's not a pacy player ala Andy Cole. He's not someone who's strong and big/quick enough, without being lightning or a giant, like Bob Taylor or Sean Goater. And he lacks the physical presence of a Paul Cheesley. sounds like you are discribing teddy sheringham!! what miller does have is a great touch and an awareness of players around him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cidersam Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 May I had Miller wins a quite a lot of headers which can create a few openings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 sounds like you are discribing teddy sheringham!! what miller does have is a great touch and an awareness of players around him Miller is also an excellent header of the ball, whether it be to link a team mate or power it into the net. Best i've seen down the gate since the big Cheese in that respect. Would combine well with Roberts or Lita but he does need the crosses coming in, which just hasn't been happening this season. Give him a run in the side with Goodfellow providing quality crosses and he'll show his worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheshire_red Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 Come on, you are being very harsh, he is a young man with bags of potential. It is not his fault that he cost what he did. The reason he cost so much (in todays market) is that there was a lot of interest in him (remember Jewell's childish outburst when he chose us over Wigan!?). He will prove to be a very good target man, it is a position for which he will improve with experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cider head Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 The guy's neither one thing or the other. He's not a goal poacher similar to Thorpe or Cureton. He's not a pacy player ala Andy Cole. He's not someone who's strong and big/quick enough, without being lightning or a giant, like Bob Taylor or Sean Goater. And he lacks the physical presence of a Paul Cheesley. He's young and will get stronger and improve, I'm sure and he's a decent finisher. Had we paid £100,000, a similar fee to Marck Goodfellow, then I don't think you'd have many complaints, but Goodfellows signing just proves what £100k can buy in 2003, at this level, as do signings at other clubs like Sam Parkin and Leon Knight. he reminds me of a tom ritchie but without he goals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Red_Alligator Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 ...We don't play to his main strength - i.e. getting quality crosses in for his head. The combo with Peacock doesn't seem to work well either. But like others I'm pretty convinced that he will become a regular goalscorer for us. I think he needs lots of backing from the fans as all youngsters do - not sure thats always in the AG nature though. Red_Alligator Biting Gasheads and anyone from Swindon for 25 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BTR_FTG Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Utter Twaddle. Miller had a poorish game Saturday but has bags of talent, pace & unlike any forward we've had these past six years has fantastic first touch. Play to his strengths & he'll get a hatful. He also, unlike some I could mention, runs his socks off, shows great commitment & isn't afraid to get 'stuck-in'. BTR FTG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Boy Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 sounds like you are discribing teddy sheringham!! what miller does have is a great touch and an awareness of players around him Let's hope he develops into a Teddy Sheringham however I'd disagree with you on his awareness. I think his link up play is average and I don't think his first touch is all that good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edson Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I think his link up play is average and I don't think his first touch is all that good. If you don't think Miller's first touch is "all that good", how would you describe Peacock's?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Boy Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 Utter Twaddle. Miller had a poorish game Saturday but has bags of talent, pace & unlike any forward we've had these past six years has fantastic first touch. Play to his strengths & he'll get a hatful. He also, unlike some I could mention, runs his socks off, shows great commitment & isn't afraid to get 'stuck-in'. BTR FTG Strange that he's not scoring and Peacock is then, isn't it? Same poor crosses, which I've mentioned myself. In terms of his pace, you're the one who's talking twaddle and we've several players who are far quicker. He is lightweight and easily shaken off the ball, most of the time, so where this "he gets stuck in" comes from, I don't know. He's had several poorish games and has been continually substituted-Brentford was an example of one game where he was awful. A developing player for £300k? Not at this level in 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DolmanDudess Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 If you don't think Miller's first touch is "all that good", how would you describe Peacock's?? As Bristol Boy said..... Peacock's scoring and Miller isnt, simple as! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Boy Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 If you don't think Miller's first touch is "all that good", how would you describe Peacock's?? I'd describe Peacocks first touch as abysmall on most occasions, but for some strange reason he's scored 13 times! Peacock also gives away far to many unnecessary free kicks and doesn't hold the ball well enough. That argument is a bit like the "well if you don't like Wilson, you want Tony Puils in charge" I'm not LP's biggest fan but he's scoring goals and I'd select him in front of Miller on current form.The point really is that they shouldn't play together up front. Look at Mooneys performance against us and his first touch and that's what both of our lads need to aim at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol Boy Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 are we baseing this on notts, if we are i think you should give credit to there defender(richardson) he had a great game and i dont think any striker in this div would of made him look poor yesterday No. Season to date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edson Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I'd describe Peacocks first touch as abysmall on most occasions, but for some strange reason he's scored 13 times! Peacock also gives away far to many unnecessary free kicks and doesn't hold the ball well enough. Look at Mooneys performance against us and his first touch and that's what both of our lads need to aim at. We agree on that, then. Peacock has started finding the net again, and all power to his elbow for doing so. However, the number of attacking positions that are frittered away due to his consistent fouling of the opposition defender is frustrating and is costing us other potential scoring positions. Could it not be that Miller is not getting the chances because his strike partner never finds him, as he's too busy backing into his defender and conceding possession? That argument is a bit like the "well if you don't like Wilson, you want Tony Puils in charge" No, it's a bit like "why pick on one front player for an alleged weakness, when his partner is far worse in the area you've highlighted?" The point really is that they shouldn't play together up front. I agree, but I thought the point was that: The guy's neither one thing or the other. He's not a goal poacher similar to Thorpe or Cureton. He's not a pacy player ala Andy Cole. He's not someone who's strong and big/quick enough, without being lightning or a giant, like Bob Taylor or Sean Goater. Which, to my mind, describes Lee Peacock far more accurately than it describes Lee Miller. Look at Mooneys performance against us and his first touch and that's what both of our lads need to aim at. Indeed. And, at 27 years of age, having cost the club £600k and with four years at the club under his belt, Mr Peacock should be far nearer reaching those aims than Mr Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.