Originally Posted by
1927stepsbeyond
I don't think anyone is arguing Glatzel & Ward aren't technically better strikers than Pats. Glatzel looks a classy player but seems to lack the Championship know-how & hardness that would allow 46 x 90mins. He is an instinctive finisher but IMO does not offer enough in the early stages. He's almost definitely better than what he's shown this season but is not someone I'd bank on next year whether it be in the Championship or beyond. Doesn't seem to be aware of his own build & size.
I love Wardy, classic finisher with clever movement. Just let down by a lack of pace and power which is unmissable when up against two lout centre halves. Bagged some crucial goals over the years (Fulham (A) difference between 2nd & 3rd, of course) but cannot be considered a starter for me. He is limp and tires quickly, and is much more suited to playing vs a ragged defence (who isn't?!).
I think some are severely underestimating
a) the work Paterson does for 70 odd minutes
b) the impact that 70 minutes of hard-running & getting leathered can have on a back four / the space it creates
Paterson leading the line is not what I envisaged this time last year. I was hoping for the class-act 20 goals a season lad we've been lacking for a good decade now. It wasn't to be. When you consider our 3 options and what they offer, it is clear that Paterson from the off is our most effective. He is hard to watch at the best of times, seeing him entangled in melee's on the deck more suited to the egg-chasing also f***s my head up - but it's the best thing we've got. He is by now an experienced Championship battler who knows the score, has done it before and has a real love for the club. Selecting Glatzel or Ward now for our last five games seems backwards. We have watched the pair start & make little impact, also leaving us with less options of the bench to switch it up. I understand the disdain / perceived 'small-mindedness' for condoning /supporting this brutality of Pats up top, and would take a different stance if it were October, but when it's crunch-time I will take those points any which way please sir.
This is a point that has been cited abundantly that I will reiterate for the sake of this post. Like it or not, he does much of the dirty-work that enables the likes of Tomlin, NML (another with slow starter but super sub syndrome), Ward & Glatzel to benefit. Anyone doubting that has clearly never played 90 minutes of football and experienced the fatigue of body & mind that comes in the closing stages - regardless of the level you're playing at. Paterson gets at the back four, runs them ragged down the channels and hits sh*t out them to boot. It isn't pretty, but underestimating his work rate and contribution to the team, as doglike as it is, seems to me, shortsighted. It is all good and well saying "he had a great 20 mins, imagine he played all 90", but the fact is - coming off the bench as a striker is a completely different animal to starting the game. I sincerely believe he offers a physicality that Glatzel is yet to discover and Ward does not have.
Is it a coincidence we're up there in 'Goals from Subs' & 'Last 15 Goals' charts? Or that our strikers don't score from the start but are prolific off the bench?
We all suffer delusions of grandeur of the fancy football pipedream where actual footballers play in their actual positions. So I forgive you. Are we going to simply outplay Brentford and Fulham in the play-offs? You've got to work with what you have.
Any lone striker featuring in our more recent set-ups isn't going to have it easy, especially in the first half. I am not saying Pats is City's greatest No.9 of all time but we have somehow forged a winning formula, I'll stick please guvnor.
Reply With Quote