Independent Leyton Orient Forum

Red_Army wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:58 pm

Buckingham wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:43 pm

Red_Army wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:39 pm

Wilkinson and Koroma were in the same division last season.

Exactly. Which is a division below the one we are currently in.

But you are comparing it to Koroma's, who was also in the division below last season.

Buckingham wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:03 pm

Red_Army wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:58 pm

Buckingham wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:43 pm

Exactly. Which is a division below the one we are currently in.

But you are comparing it to Koroma's, who was also in the division below last season.

No, i'm saying that whilst his and Koroma's records last season may well be impressive, they were both in the division below. So, his records is good at conference level. We currently are not conference level any more.

I'd also say that Koroma gave us a lot more than just goals. I haven't seen Wilkinson play yet so I can't comment. I have no reason to believe that he won't be perfectly decent at League 2 level.

My overarching concern is that our backup is laughable.

Let's say that Angol and Wilkinson turn out to both be decent at L2 level. Excellent. But even in this best case scenario we have absolutely no depth up front. Will these two play every single game? Will they not get injured, tired, suspended? Will they perform well consistently all season?

We have found ourselves in a situation where we are totally reliant on two new strikers. Of course, the young lad bought into the first team may turn out to be a star. But it's a bit of a risky strategy. I really think we need an at least half decent striker at this level to bolster our attack.

As it stands:

Harrold is not a viable option for more than 15 mins per match.

Alabi belongs nowhere near a League 2 XI.

Ruel Sotiriou is a bit of mystery.

CreamofSumYungGai wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:41 pm So how many games did Harold start last season, and in how many of them did he play well? You're only going to need 1 hand.

But lets go even further back - how many times has Matt played more than say 60 minutes in the last 3 years? You might even need your second hand for that one.

He proved last season that he could serve a purpose, coming on against tiring defences and shaking things up. I know he's older and we've gone up a division but I still reckon he can do a job in that role. But there's literally no way he's going to be able to start 10-15 games for us and do a decent job.

Red_Army wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:15 pm

CreamofSumYungGai wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:41 pm So how many games did Harold start last season, and in how many of them did he play well? You're only going to need 1 hand.

But lets go even further back - how many times has Matt played more than say 60 minutes in the last 3 years? You might even need your second hand for that one.

He proved last season that he could serve a purpose, coming on against tiring defences and shaking things up. I know he's older and we've gone up a division but I still reckon he can do a job in that role. But there's literally no way he's going to be able to start 10-15 games for us and do a decent job.

I don't think anybody will be asking him to start that many games, to be honest. I agree he serves a purpose, but lets get it right- he was third choice last season because he was the third best player behind two players who rarely missed a game, not because he was incapable of running for more than a quarter of an hour.

Red_Army wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:22 pm Where has this nonsense about Harrold not being able to play for more than 15 minutes come from? He started games last season. The reason he didn't get so much game time because the first choice pairing were so successful, not because his legs disintegrated after 15 minutes.

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:19 pm On a semi-related note, the club tweeted a photo of boco at one of our games...must be on holiday from...hold on...


Assume we aren’t signing him?

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:14 pm Some stats to aide this discussion:

Last season Harrold played 583 minutes across 27 games, averaging 22 mins per game (21.59).

He played more than more than 45 minutes 3 times (11%) and more than 75 mins, twice (7.4%).

He played 30 mins or under 21 times (77.7%) and 15 mins or under 16 times (59.2%)

Buddy Manucci wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:05 pm I'd probably opt for Bonne and Angol.

CreamofSumYungGai wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:36 pm I think we're all in agreement (yet still somehow managing to argue!)

Angol and Wilkinson look like they're going to be a decent L2 forward line.

Harold will be a decent option off the bench.

Ruel will hopefully continue his development and play a part.

The problem is our 3rd choice striker - we haven't got anyone adequate to play 20 games this season in support of the main 2 and chip in with 10 goals.

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:14 pm Some stats to aide this discussion:

Last season Harrold played 583 minutes across 27 games, averaging 22 mins per game (21.59).

He played more than more than 45 minutes 3 times (11%) and more than 75 mins, twice (7.4%).

He played 30 mins or under 21 times (77.7%) and 15 mins or under 16 times (59.2%)

Red_Army wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 6:55 pm

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:14 pm Some stats to aide this discussion:

Last season Harrold played 583 minutes across 27 games, averaging 22 mins per game (21.59).

He played more than more than 45 minutes 3 times (11%) and more than 75 mins, twice (7.4%).

He played 30 mins or under 21 times (77.7%) and 15 mins or under 16 times (59.2%)

Yes those are the stats but they don't mean anything other than that he came on as a sub a lot.

It doesn't tell you why, which is nothing to do with being unfit or injury prone, but that he was first replacement for a successful and regularly appearing front two.

gshaw wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 8:12 pm

Red_Army wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 6:55 pm

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 5:14 pm Some stats to aide this discussion:

Last season Harrold played 583 minutes across 27 games, averaging 22 mins per game (21.59).

He played more than more than 45 minutes 3 times (11%) and more than 75 mins, twice (7.4%).

He played 30 mins or under 21 times (77.7%) and 15 mins or under 16 times (59.2%)

Yes those are the stats but they don't mean anything other than that he came on as a sub a lot.

It doesn't tell you why, which is nothing to do with being unfit or injury prone, but that he was first replacement for a successful and regularly appearing front two.

The fact we had to play said front two even when being rushed back from injury (Koroma) or knackered (Bonne) speaks volumes about how effective our 3rd and 4th choice options were. Signing Simpson was also part of that situation, otherwise why wasn't Harrold the solution rather than signing another player?

A quality attacking signing would transform our options and make us a lot stronger in the goal threat department. Someone who can play wing / upfront would be ideal (unless that's Angol and we then just need an out and out striker)

Apple Wumble wrote: ↑Fri Jul 19, 2019 8:44 pm I think you’re missing the point. He didn’t start games because Bonne and koroma were good but also because his quality and effectiveness is lessened when he starts.

He is good at coming on late, against tired defenders, when he can bully people. When he starts he’s nowhere near as effective.

So being 3rd choice when you’re just an impact sub is fine, not when you need someone to start a game as 3rd choice.