Jump to content

Strikers coming through


Recommended Posts

Dykes isn't really a goalscorer, that has never been what his game is about. Even back when he earned his move to Livingston, he had only scored 2 goals in 36 games in the Championship for Queen of the South. However, in that same season, Stephen Dobbie scored 21 times playing alongside him, and Dobbie's goals dried up when Dykes went to Livi.  He only scored 9 times for Livingston last season too.

His main strength is his ability to occupy defenders, hold the ball up and win things in the air, and any goals scored on top of that are a bonus. Having him in the team means we're going to get loads more goals out of the attacking midfield players, and hopefully eventually the wing-backs too. That suits us given that we have the likes of McGinn, Christie, and Fraser.

In that sense, I couldn't give a shiny shit how he's getting on at QPR or what their fans think of him as long as he's playing regularly. I also completely disagree with the poster who said he would have scored 20 goals for Rangers by now given that Morelos and Roofe, both of whom are much better goalscorers than Dykes is, only have 11 and 12 respectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

Dykes isn't really a goalscorer, that has never been what his game is about. Even back when he earned his move to Livingston, he had only scored 2 goals in 36 games in the Championship for Queen of the South. However, in that same season, Stephen Dobbie scored 21 times playing alongside him, and Dobbie's goals dried up when Dykes went to Livi.  He only scored 9 times for Livingston last season too.

His main strength is his ability to occupy defenders, hold the ball up and win things in the air, and any goals scored on top of that are a bonus. Having him in the team means we're going to get loads more goals out of the attacking midfield players, and hopefully eventually the wing-backs too. That suits us given that we have the likes of McGinn, Christie, and Fraser.

In that sense, I couldn't give a shiny shit how he's getting on at QPR or what their fans think of him as long as he's playing regularly. I also completely disagree with the poster who said he would have scored 20 goals for Rangers by now given that Morelos and Roofe, both of whom are much better goalscorers than Dykes is, only have 11 and 12 respectively.

Morelos has been terrible this season in front of goal. Roofe hasn’t played all that many games and even less as the main striker. If Dykes had played every game this season for Rangers I don’t think he’d be far off 20.

I do agree though that scoring is not really what he brings for us, but his presence has helped enormously. My only concern is we get lazy and become reliant on the long ball, especially against the top teams (where there will be a temptation to do so). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dykes isn't really a goalscorer, that has never been what his game is about. Even back when he earned his move to Livingston, he had only scored 2 goals in 36 games in the Championship for Queen of the South. However, in that same season, Stephen Dobbie scored 21 times playing alongside him, and Dobbie's goals dried up when Dykes went to Livi.  He only scored 9 times for Livingston last season too.
His main strength is his ability to occupy defenders, hold the ball up and win things in the air, and any goals scored on top of that are a bonus. Having him in the team means we're going to get loads more goals out of the attacking midfield players, and hopefully eventually the wing-backs too. That suits us given that we have the likes of McGinn, Christie, and Fraser.
In that sense, I couldn't give a shiny shit how he's getting on at QPR or what their fans think of him as long as he's playing regularly. I also completely disagree with the poster who said he would have scored 20 goals for Rangers by now given that Morelos and Roofe, both of whom are much better goalscorers than Dykes is, only have 11 and 12 respectively.
Totally. Dykes' strength isn't goalscoring. It'd be great if he could add that to his game, but so long as he's capable of excelling in the other aspects (e.g. vs Serbia) then that's great for Scotland.

What worries me slightly is the Israel game: Christie, McGinn and Fraser were all playing behind him and it just didn't click. That was just one game of course, which is why I'm trying to gauge how he's doing currently in his club appearances to see whether he's more often than not turning in Serbia performances or Israel ones (or, more likely, something in between).

Loads of variables in there of course (playing at a different level with totally different players etc), but it's give me a wee fuzzy feeling to know he's a commanding presence up front the majority of the time in the Championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Gordopolis said:

Totally. Dykes' strength isn't goalscoring. It'd be great if he could add that to his game, but so long as he's capable of excelling in the other aspects (e.g. vs Serbia) then that's great for Scotland.

What worries me slightly is the Israel game: Christie, McGinn and Fraser were all playing behind him and it just didn't click. That was just one game of course, which is why I'm trying to gauge how he's doing currently in his club appearances to see whether he's more often than not turning in Serbia performances or Israel ones (or, more likely, something in between).

Loads of variables in there of course (playing at a different level with totally different players etc), but it's give me a wee fuzzy feeling to know he's a commanding presence up front the majority of the time in the Championship.
 

The away game where we got beat 1-0? Fraser wasn't playing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/02/2021 at 10:39, BingMcCrosby said:

Most of us were expecting him to be a regular scorer 

Were we? Was there a survey done?

Dykes hasn't been a regular goal scorer at any club outside the surf n turf Aussie league, not sure many of us outside of those who simply equate a strikers role to scoring goals were expecting him to score regularly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Moonster said:

Were we? Was there a survey done?

Dykes hasn't been a regular goal scorer at any club outside the surf n turf Aussie league, not sure many of us outside of those who simply equate a strikers role to scoring goals were expecting him to score regularly. 

At the time yes, he was scoring more regularly for livingston. And Improving so quickly.

Anyway a couple of days ago you had it being a great idea that Billy Gilmour doesn't play football this season. As long as his manager says nice things.

Also that Billy Gilmour shouldn't worry as scotland always qualify for major tournaments.

Also its not important at all when playing a back 3 what the preferred foot of the players are.

Thats all just recently, so pipe down numpty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

At the time yes, he was scoring more regularly for livingston. And Improving so quickly.

Anyway a couple of days ago you had it being a great idea that Billy Gilmour doesn't play football this season. As long as his manager says nice things.

Also that Billy Gilmour shouldn't worry as scotland always qualify for major tournaments.

Also its not important at all when playing a back 3 what the preferred foot of the players are.

Thats all just recently, so pipe down numpty

Just pointing out you weren't speaking for "most people" m8, something you point out to others on a regular basis in this section.

That Gilmour stuff though:

Image result for dale carrick gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Moonster said:

Just pointing out you weren't speaking for "most people" m8, something you point out to others on a regular basis in this section.

That Gilmour stuff though:

Image result for dale carrick gif

 

If you went and looked back you would see that at that time I actually was. 

So were talking about a conversation that has previously happened. And the majority thought that. If now with hindsight you disagree ok.

Your mistaking me picking up numpties like you who say things like "we all think this" during a conversation. To try and win favour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

If you went and looked back you would see that at that time I actually was. 

So were talking about a conversation that has previously happened. And the majority thought that. If now with hindsight you disagree ok.

Your* mistaking me picking up numpties like you who say things like "we all think this" during a conversation. To try and win favour.

Evidence a majority supported that view please.

Also, you're*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BingMcCrosby said:

Evidence they didn't? Saying as your the one thats so interested 🤷‍♂️

At the end of the day "m8". Your picking me up for a post in which I admitted I had got something wrong. 

You should try it sometime.

If you're making the claim the onus is on you to prove it is correct. 

If you can point out anywhere I've got something wrong I'll happily apologise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...