Saturday’s clinical dissection of a sorry Sunderland side was a classic example of a myth buster which I’m fully signed up to.
The myth in question? That in order for a club to survive and prosper in the cruel world of the Premier League it needs a striker who can get 15-20 goals a season.
It’s a myth which has been doing the rounds over the summer and which reached an online crescendo when Lewis Grabban missed that early doors sitter against Palace.
“A nailed-on consistent 15-20 goal-man of Premier-league experience,” is what the bloggers and tweeters demanded. Funnily enough, no names which really fitted the bill were offered.
Glenn Murray and Dwight Gayle seem to keep popping up on the yellow and green radar. Capable enough, but hardly 15-20 men. Who knows, by the time this gets to print a deal may have been done with one of them.
A cluster of exotic-sounding overseas players from afar are continually suggested by twitchy fans.
Big gamble and not fitting the exacting criteria of above in any way.
Remember how terribly excited we all got when a Ricky van Wolfswinkel came to our fine city? Whoever you choose to blame for his failure, he’s never a 15-20 man at this level.
What happened at the Stadium of Light was a comfortable win that could have been by a larger margin and no strikers were on target. The ‘long suffering’ folk of the north-east found the exit gates faster than a dose of salts.
Cameron Jerome by all accounts was outstanding in stretching the Black Cats’ centre-halves this way and that almost at will, while linking play with the midfield and creating space for even our much-maligned defenders to get forward and contribute two goals; the first from the back four under the mercurial reign of Alex Neil.
Great performance from big Cam but no goals and not even an effort on goal as far as I remember. But it didn’t matter.
The best form of defence was certainly offence and long may it continue. It worked under Paul Lambert with some great away-day results, while Chris Hughton paid for his adherence to the over-cautious alternative. He’s doing a good job in the Championship though.
With a fluid, dynamic team allowing midfield and defence to get in the box and contribute goals throughout the season, we could comfortably finish mid-table without Jerome, Grabban or Gary Hooper breaking that rather arbitrary 15 goal target.
With a top scorer of 10-12 goals and four or five others chipping in half a dozen or so plus a few from the back and you have 40+ goals – generally plenty enough for a good finishing position.
West Brom comfortably finished 13th last season and only found the net 38 times.
Palace scored 47 goals and finished 10th with the aforementioned Glenn Murray their top scorer on just 7 goals. Stoke were 9th with a top scorer on 11.
Boom goes that myth surely?
In 2013/14, Palace finished 11th and only troubled the scoreboard 33 times. Their top scorer, one Dwight Gayle, scored just 7 times.
Clearly, the goals-shared hypothesis depends greatly on a tight-ish defence in order for the goal difference to not sink to unmanageable proportions.
Much criticism has been directed at centre-half and right-back over the months, despite the fact that we conceded fewer goals than anyone last season (including the notoriously frugal Middlesbrough) once Alex Neil got his hands on the squad.
Mistakes were made in the curtain raiser against Palace, but I’m confident that the current back four can cut the proverbial mustard against most opposition we’ll come up against.
Aguero or Sanchez will no doubt be a different can of worms, but then even the much heralded back-fours of Chelsea and Palace back struggled against such £30million plus of quality. Thankfully, Senor Suarez who seemed to take particular offence to our defence is plying his trade elsewhere.
A fully fit Jerome is capable of double figures. Grabban or Hooper more than capable of half a dozen. Nathan Redmond, Jonny Howson, Graham Dorrans, Youssouf Mulumbu, Wes and Bradley are all capable of chipping in with four or five. And the defence will surely add to their Wearside tally with the positive frame of mind instilled by the boss.
There may be one or two new faces in the squad come 1st September, but the current crop have the ability, know-how and goal threat to get us to the middle of the table and stay there.
And that’ll do me nicely.
Those numbers do a good job on the myth; and I agree – a reliable striker would be more than nice to have but it’s not the be all and end all. Cam did have an effort on goal on Saturday, which he couldn’t keep low enough to hit the target.
There still seems to be more talk of strikers potentially coming in than of defenders, though. The thought of Mattia Destro arriving was encouraging but it looks like he’ll go to Bologna. I heard James Collins mentioned and I’d be quite pleased with him as a signing.
I was one of the people that was and still crying out for another striker and CB but this article has made me slightly more calm that we may be ok this season. Redmon has looked electric in both games and so has Jerome but I’m still not convinced Grabban will score many at all and neither will Hoops. I think we do need a striker and another CB as Russ won’t be adequate against the top 10 teams but as you said they’re not the teams we are expecting to beat. I’m still buzzing from Sunderland so I hope that I’m feeling the same way post Palace
Good article mate
A good case, Russ – thorough and well-evidenced. And clearly true….
…up to a point. I’m persuaded it isn’t necessary for survival to have a 15-goal striker. But on top of the qualities City already have, it would be sure be a bonus. Assuming he fitted in personality-wise, someone like Charlie Austin – who can manufacture and convert chances that others can’t – would give our hopes a big shot in the arm.
With the other outstanding relegated striker Danny Ings settling in to his new role on the Liverpool bench, surely there’s a chance for a more modest Premier League team to persuade Austin that he can play – really PLAY – in the top division.
I’ve no idea whether we are, or should be, interested in Austin specifically. But for me, a more clinical striker could make more difference to our fortunes than any other kind of player. Taking nothing away from City’s performance at the Stadium of Light, not all defences will be as generous as Sunderland’s. Against others – starting with Stoke on Saturday – chances will be at a higher premium.
Cheers for the feedback.
Ben – never heard of James Collins so I looked him up. We’ve done alright with strikers from Shrewsbury before.
Jack – glad to hear my words had a calming effect..for now.
Stewart – Charlie Austin’s fee is out of our ball park I suspect.
Stoke is a tough nut to crack but I’d take a big deflection off Bassong’s backside for a 1-0 win.
Good myth-busting Mr Saunders. Of course we’d like a 20-goal striker with a proven track-record and blah blah blah, but every club wants a player like that, and they aren’t easy to find. It’s all about the team performing as a unit if you can’t go out and sign Benteke.
Can’t see Austin wanting to come here, after his experience with a newly promoted side last season, and I don’t think we’d want to pay the kind of wage he’s used to.
We have one very good and two very decent strikers already. I don’t think the new number 9 has to be exceptional for us to stay up.
Stewart (3),
I was asked about Austin the other day and my guess is even after relegation QPR are probably paying him more than we or any other team would be willing to give him. When Leroy Fer left to stay in the Prem I wasn’t surprised but was shocked he went to QPR. Again my guess is that it was for the money.
Russell, I meant James Collins the West Ham centre-half. He’s been pushed down the pecking order by the arrival of Ogbonna. Probably just speculation, though.
Geoff (6) – I suspect you’re right. Someone told me recently that Austin’s wages weren’t that extraordinary, but I’m not convinced (this is QPR, after all).
For sure, a big addition to our wage bill would be problematic as long as Hooper and RvW are still on it.
Russ (3) – Stoke ‘a tough nut to crack’? See today’s article. Spooky.