Why did we buy Sharp?

[dune]

Give him a chance. he can't be any worse than Guly.

[The9]

I'm amazed at all the excuses for him not playing, like not being 'saints fit'. I think you will find he was dropped after starting the first couple of games when he signed and has not been able to break into a side which has been performing well since.

 

As for the major relocation etc, that doesn't really work when you have Lee starting games & playing well.

 

Lets be honest, only Adkins knows why he isn't being used.

 

Doesn't make a lot of sense when you consider he was dropped for Lee and then not brought back in when Lee was unavailable, which has necessitated shifting Guly back up top. Results do speak for themselves, but he played away against West Ham and that result was pretty good.

 

I would note that in the Championship Tadanari Lee's closing down and ability to press defenders into giving away possession high up the pitch is probably more beneficial to the overall team than Sharp's excellent movement and awareness when we already have the ball, but that could change in the Prem (if...). Then again, Lee's approach didn't harm Brett Ormerod in the Prem much.

 

My take is that we're getting him "Saints fit" by giving him extra training (I have no proof of this) and that's making him less than peak for match days, which we're aware of due to the amount of monitoring we do of player fitness, so he's only being used sparingly. That has the added effect of making him eager to play when he does. If he's ready to go for the last few games AND he's far fitter than before, excellent.

 

If not, he's still going to be a useful addition next season, as he's probably one of the few we don't already have operating near optimum performance. Thinking about it, we might be doing something similar with Puncheon.

[The9]

I was about to highlight Swansea to counter your argument, then I realised that they have dyer. I then thought of the players we have sold, Walcott, bale, Oxlade… who is the next pacey winger in the youth team? Anyone know? Or are we going for Adam and Jason down the flanks next year? Personally, I want to see us playing like Bilbao I suppose we do have de rids, and I reckon he will be a better player in the prem, you only have to look at what he did to the West Brom defenders in the pre season, fall over much ;,…,;

 

More amusing when you think that the defender mostly falling over was former Skate loanee (and current Brighton loanee) Joe Mattock.

 

If someone could ask De Ridder to stop trying to chase down and nick the ball off opponents from behind, thereby getting himself booked within 5 minutes of getting on the pitch that would probably help him too. He's done it basically every other game for us this season.

[mulletsaint]

Hence why I said "top quality".

 

Ask a full back if they'd rather defend against Beckham or Bale. Look at Arsenal when they play with both Walcott and AOC, defences are terrified of them. Same goes for Spurs with Lennon and Bale.

 

Pace is a key attribute to any side and something we will desperately need if we do get promoted as it's not going to be that easy to pass our way through Premiership defences. Even the mighty Arsenal have struggled in recent years for their refusal to adapt to a different style. It's only recently that Wenger has started to play Walcott more and AOC and adapt their style of play. It's no coincedence their form has started to improve because of it.

 

Apologies for missing that, was trying to get my points across while being nagged to get out of the house by my missus. However I do think that players who display both attributes are rather thin on the ground, hence why they tend to sell for stupid money. Many people at the end of last season thought that Mackail-Smith was the answer but he's hardly set the world alight this season. I'm happy with Sharp and believe he'll come good. If we can find another Oxlade-Chamberlain in the youth set-up or a Bale who ain't gonna set us back £40million then fine in the meantime I think questioning the chap is a little premature.

[sussexsaint]

If. God forbid, anything happened to Rickie I think we would be very happy that he is here. The fact that hasn't happened is fantastic but I am still glad he is here and we wouldn't have to fall back on Barnard

[the saint in winchester]

I think the OP raises a fair question, and one that has been on my mind too. Only NA knows the answer. Whether he was signed as a deputy for Lambert, or to play alongside him, or simply to add strength to the squad ... we don't know the rationale NA gave to Mr Cortese.

I'm impressed that we haven't seen any moaning quotes in the press from Sharp - and I mean that. He was a big fish at Doncaster, he can't even get into our pond, and yet I haven't read of him belly-aching about being brought here.

I would like to see more of him, but 'the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few' (to quote Mr Spock). Assuming he's not barred from the game on Saturday (as a condition of the transfer), it would be good to have him play a role.

[Saint Troy]

assumin we get promoted - good enough then sharps a good buy, not good enough at 1.8m its money well spent to provide at worst good championship cover to get us promoted.

dont get promoted - deffo good enough to score many goals alone (if lambert is sold) or alonside lambert or when lambert is injured.

 

OP simply does not raise a good question. At 1.8m SHarp was a very sensible buy

[david in sweden]

I reckon he'll still have a part to play in our promotion procession.

 

....... +1

[Minty]

Still can't believe that people, who've heard Adkins talk again and again about having a squad of players, not just a starting XI, and how the whole squad stick together and support each other, think that a player might have been brought in as 'back up'. He was signed to improve the squad. His time will no doubt come, and hopefully he'll show his qualities. Until then, he's just one more member of the squad ready to be called upon.

[saintrich]

Signed to add competition for places. Everyone will play their part in the closing stages of the season, to hopefully get us over the line.

[david in sweden]

Seems to have been an odd decision. I'm not sure he's good enough for the Premiership, so if we thought he wasn't 'Saints fit' then why buy him?

 

Seems to be a lot of money for a player that's going to sit on the bench most of the time.

 

You might argue that his impact has been to make Lambert and Lee up their games, but that doesn't seem to ring true.

 

 

 

not sure you grasped the background to your question?.

 

we may be top of the league, but we can still only use 11 players at a time, and most people admit the "regulars" are those we should play. Adkins (rightly I think) uses different players according to the opposition, and other times rests someone to prevent injury, or keep others " interested". Of course we would always play Lambert, Davis, Fonte and Jos, Lallana etc, but the midfield can be changed as and when he wants.

 

Why did we buy Sharp when he wasn't fit ? He (was) a good goalscorer despite his team being at the bottom of the league, and the reason he wasn't Saints fit - was probably just that. IF he (and his Donnie teammates) had been fitter.. they might have won more games and Billy might have scored more than he did. It takes more than a few training passes to get up to speed when you haven't had a good pre-season and are still learning the names of your new team-mates. NA knows him (from Scunnie days ) and obviously thinks he can get him up to speed soon, and we may still see him in the goals before the end of the season.

WHY we bought him is in the results. After his Brighton hat-trick, Ricky injured and then suspended after second Brighton game..when back he scored only twice in 7 games. We needed cover before the window closed.- it was Billy. I'm happy to go along with NA decision.

 

Finally, with Lee injured and Lallana back on form, it won't do harm for Billy to sit it out a bit longer. When everyone is fit again, there will be lots of competition for places.

Edited 21 March, 2012 by david in sweden

[Mowgli]

Sharp is seen by NA as a player to give us options up front. He will be a big part of our plans next season and a good back up for Rickie in the run up. Not sure anyone really expected Lee to hit the ground running as he did. It is very difficult for a new player to gel in a team on a hot run and Lee has proved the exception rather than the rule. Look at Maynard - has unsettled a side that was looking dead certs for promotion. Has done very little up front and spends more time on the wing. His confidence is suffering as a result. Another genius tactical move by BFS.

[Upton72]

I imagine that very few players come here with a level of fitness described as "Saints fit". Billy Sharp falls into that category. All credit to the medical & coaching staff for giving us a side that can still put maximum effort in on 90 minutes.

Just look at how Rickie's fitness has improved compared to the aftermath of that disastrous pre-season under AP.

Billy shows good movement and anticipation. Nigel and the team will build on that for this season and next when he'll be much fitter and more acquainted with the system.

Billy will play 90 minutes when Nigel decides he can do it at our tempo.

[wightman35]

Anybody who is unsure of the reasons for buying Billy Sharp ought to read the thread about 1948- 49! Charlie Wayman injured and Saints surrendered an 8 point lead. I was there as a thirteen year old under the old West Stand at the Dell, when we lost against ( I think ) West Ham and Newcastle around Easter. My dad blamed the Directors and Bill Dodgin. Left me a trifle pessimistic! Fortunately, our present Directors and Manager seem to have a different agenda.

[the saint in winchester]

Still can't believe that people, who've heard Adkins talk again and again about having a squad of players, not just a starting XI, and how the whole squad stick together and support each other, think that a player might have been brought in as 'back up'. He was signed to improve the squad. His time will no doubt come, and hopefully he'll show his qualities. Until then, he's just one more member of the squad ready to be called upon.

 

"Improve the squad" is just a buzzword. He's barely making the bench and rarely gets more than 30 mins game time. It was a fair musing question from the OP.

[Thedelldays]

"Improve the squad" is just a buzzword. He's barely making the bench and rarely gets more than 30 mins game time. It was a fair musing question from the OP.

apart from he is....

[david in sweden]

"Improve the squad" is just a buzzword. He's barely making the bench and rarely gets more than 30 mins game time. It was a fair musing question from the OP.

 

 

well it's abit more than that . Billy has started a game 3 times, and been on the bench in every game nce (seven times ) and got on 4 times.

Perhaps the fact that we've been unbeaten in the last 12 games is one of the resaons we haven't been "forced" to pick him from the start - plus the prev. mentioned not totally " Saints -fit "

[Minty]

"Improve the squad" is just a buzzword.

Erm, no. I'll accept it's a matter of opinion, but if you did a poll and ask if fans felt his signing improved the squad or not, I'd wager most people would say yes. Plus, as mentioned above, he *has* been on the bench, at least, for most games since he joined, and bearing in mind players like Chaplow have been left out of the 16, clearly for tactical reasons by Adkins, it is clear that he will use players as he sees fit, and that it is no reflection on his worth.

 

So, back to the OP's question - which seems to be being asked based on the OP's own perception that the player *should* be playing, which I believe is wrong. Players are signed to improve a squad. ALL players are signed for this reason. Many will be such an improvement on existing players (in the managers eyes) that the new players may well be put straight into the starting XI. Some need time to adjust, others have to earn their place, others are used tactically... but a signing doesn't automatically mean a starting place, and vice versa, if they do NOT play, it does not mean they were a waste of money or are NOT going to have a role to play in future.

[fanimal]

Simple - to score the winning goal on saturday and get back the 3 points we gave them at the Keep Moat!!

[Sour Mash]

All this "Saints Fit" stuff is a load of b****ks. He is much more suited to being back-up to Lambert, than partnering him, particularly from the start. I guess we saw how much of an impact having Lambert out was and wanted to ensure sufficient back-up was in place in case he was out injured/suspended again.

[Chez]

Sharp is a goal poacher. His all round play is pretty average and he is so slow its not true. That doesn't mean he's not a good signing, although I personally never thought he was the right guy, but what it does mean is that he needs to play the whole game to give him the maximum chance of doing what he does best - taking a chance when it comes. That is what he does and expecting much more of him is wrong. He doesn't have a secondary attribute - pace or strength or dribbling skills for example, that means he's not ideal as an impact sub.

[lydlinch saints]

Is hammonnd and harding saints fit?

[Singeon Sears]

Billy Sharp has (thankfully) joined the current Championship leaders - it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone he has a battle to get into the team.

 

Lee (who i suspect was expected to take a little longer to settle in), Lamber, Guly, would walk into most Championship sides.

 

I actually don't believe he is 100% match fit, at least to the level Adkins wants, this may be due to niggles I have no idea.

 

Either way it shouldn't be surprising anyone that it tough to get into our starting line up - and we should see it as a positive thing

[bender]

When were promoted with 5 games to go, give him a run out for 5 games.

[sfc4prem]

Sharp is a goal poacher. His all round play is pretty average and he is so slow its not true. That doesn't mean he's not a good signing, although I personally never thought he was the right guy, but what it does mean is that he needs to play the whole game to give him the maximum chance of doing what he does best - taking a chance when it comes. That is what he does and expecting much more of him is wrong. He doesn't have a secondary attribute - pace or strength or dribbling skills for example, that means he's not ideal as an impact sub.

 

He had an impact against Millwall. Set up Lambert for the 1st pen after a good run. His all-round game will improve under our coaches, of that I am sure.

[Viking Warrior]

Sharp is an integral part of the team . He will get to feature and will score goals for us . It's just others have the edge at present .

[Chez]

He had an impact against Millwall. Set up Lambert for the 1st pen after a good run. His all-round game will improve under our coaches, of that I am sure.

he crossed a ball that led to a penalty. I thought at the time that a sharper striker might have got on to the ball quicker and taken the chance on himself. I still thought he should have shot, but he made the right decision to pass. Other than that square pass he did pretty much **** all. That's not an impact.

[VectisSaint]

"Improve the squad" is just a buzzword.

Some of the things you read on here you just couldn't make up.

[Torrent Of Abuse]

He was brought in because we all prefer a "why did we sign him" tread to a "we're only one injury away from a striker crisis" thread

[James]

he crossed a ball that led to a penalty. I thought at the time that a sharper striker might have got on to the ball quicker and taken the chance on himself. I still thought he should have shot, but he made the right decision to pass. Other than that square pass he did pretty much **** all. That's not an impact.

 

 

Jeez there really is no pleasing some. If he'd shot and missed you'd be saying he should have passed. He made a good run and had the awareness to cross resulting in a vital pen sparking potentially the most important comeback of the season. But no...not an impact at all. For goodness sake!

[sammysaint]

Sharp is quality proven at this level, never really had a chance to have a premiership career yet.

 

Watch him score this weekend, i reckon he will score 3/4 goals if given a chance, like steveeee i don't know how Guly keeps them out at times.

[ericb]

like steveeee i don't know how Guly keeps them out at times.

 

Not commenting on sharp but for de ridder it's because they play in different positions and Guly is our second highest scorer, not really that difficult to work out if you engage your brain a bit.

[krissyboy31]

All this "Saints Fit" stuff is a load of b****ks. He is much more suited to being back-up to Lambert, than partnering him, particularly from the start. I guess we saw how much of an impact having Lambert out was and wanted to ensure sufficient back-up was in place in case he was out injured/suspended again.

To a degree I think your correct with respect to 'back up' to Rickie but I do think there is something in the Saints fit argument. I don't think he is currently up to playing the way we played on Tuesday night, hustling, pressing and chasing right into the 95th minute.

[doddisalegend]

Nigel explains it all

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17487113

[david in sweden]

To a degree I think your correct with respect to 'back up' to Rickie but I do think there is something in the Saints fit argument.

I don't think he is currently up to playing the way we played on Tuesday night, hustling, pressing and chasing right into the 95th minute.

 

 

Agree totally. We can't talk about 90 minutes of football any longer. With stop time in the first half ...and then 95 mins + in the second, we see that the successful sides are those who are properly fit, and can go the full time and not wilt in the last quarter.

 

Look at all the games in the all Leagues that are won by those teams who are still running at the final whistle. The Millwall game might have been won by two penalites, but both came form attacking moves right near the end of a tough game, and thank goodness we had a player (Lambert) who was capable of scoring two penalties in the last 5 mins.

 

Only hope we have RL on the England bench in the summer - if we have to go to extra time and penalties at the end.

England have gone out too often in the past, because we lacked an MLT /Lambert good enough after 120 mins. of football.

[Sour Mash]

To a degree I think your correct with respect to 'back up' to Rickie but I do think there is something in the Saints fit argument. I don't think he is currently up to playing the way we played on Tuesday night, hustling, pressing and chasing right into the 95th minute.

If that's what we're expecting of him, we may as well give up now. Really not that kind of player. He's a goal poacher. Yeah, he can get fitter, but if you want a forward doing as described above, you'll play Lee or even De Ridder.

[Minty]

If that's what we're expecting of him, we may as well give up now. Really not that kind of player. He's a goal poacher. Yeah, he can get fitter, but if you want a forward doing as described above, you'll play Lee or even De Ridder.

I would've said similar about Lambert when he joined but he has improved his fitness markedly since joining us, and even more so under Adkins. He's not a Lee or De Ridder, but in relative terms, if we can get the same improvement out of Sharp that we got from Rickie, I think Sharp can become far more agile.

[Sour Mash]

I would've said similar about Lambert when he joined but he has improved his fitness markedly since joining us, and even more so under Adkins. He's not a Lee or De Ridder, but in relative terms, if we can get the same improvement out of Sharp that we got from Rickie, I think Sharp can become far more agile.

He can become fitter and more agile, but he's not going to become the sort of striker described above. Lambert is obviously in better shape than when he joined us and has developed his game a bit, but fundamentally, he is still the same style of plyer we originally bought.

[Thedelldays]

He can become fitter and more agile, but he's not going to become the sort of striker described above. Lambert is obviously in better shape than when he joined us and has developed his game a bit, but fundamentally, he is still the same style of plyer we originally bought.

LOL

 

no he is not

[Sour Mash]

LOL

 

no he is not

fantastic contribution as always you bore. How many games a season to you see? One or two? Go back to your boat.

[Thedelldays]

fantastic contribution as always you bore. How many games a season to you see? One or two? Go back to your boat.

what a great response.

[buctootim]

I dont know whether he can become faster / more agile / hold up better / score more goals. I'd be happy if he made the effort to smile occasionally in OS interviews.

[Verbal]

fantastic contribution as always you bore. How many games a season to you see? One or two? Go back to your boat.

 

Delldays is right though. RL's all-round game has come on in leaps and bounds since joining us. If he'd shown earlier what he is now, he'd be on a hefty sum in the prem. As for Sharp, it doesn't matter how many games any of us have seen, none of us have seen more than a few minutes of him. So who knows? Adkins has form, though, for getting the very best out of players, and integrating that within the team - all in a way which reminds me a tiny bit of way Clough/Taylor used to operate with supposedly lesser talents.

[shurlock]

He can become fitter and more agile, but he's not going to become the sort of striker described above. Lambert is obviously in better shape than when he joined us and has developed his game a bit, but fundamentally, he is still the same style of plyer we originally bought.

 

Agree- he was probably used as more of a targetman under Pards and is much fitter now. But he still operates as a second striker/AM who likes to drop deep -essentially the same role he occupied at Rovers, whether he was playing alongside/behind Jo Kuffour or whoever.

 

That said, his extra fitness means he can put in more of a defensive shift which he didn't before - and I guess that's whats being expected from Sharp.

Edited 23 March, 2012 by shurlock

[Sour Mash]

Delldays is right though. RL's all-round game has come on in leaps and bounds since joining us. If he'd shown earlier what he is now, he'd be on a hefty sum in the prem. As for Sharp, it doesn't matter how many games any of us have seen, none of us have seen more than a few minutes of him. So who knows? Adkins has form, though, for getting the very best out of players, and integrating that within the team - all in a way which reminds me a tiny bit of way Clough/Taylor used to operate with supposedly lesser talents.

I agree that Lambert has improved considerably since he joined us, but my point is that fundamentally, he is still the same type of forward - if you look at what is being suggested further up the page re. Sharp, it's very rare and unlikely to change an established player's style of play to that extent. I've seen a fair bit of Sharp and can't see his style of play changing too much (that's not to say I don't think he's a good player).

 

I do definitely agree that Adkins specialises in getting the most out of players. I'd suggest our results/performances this season have been greater than the sum of our individual parts so to speak.

[sfc4prem]

He looks a bit depressed in the interview. Like he has a lot weighing on his mind...

[Chez]

Jeez there really is no pleasing some. If he'd shot and missed you'd be saying he should have passed. He made a good run and had the awareness to cross resulting in a vital pen sparking potentially the most important comeback of the season. But no...not an impact at all. For goodness sake!

 

and some are easily pleased. If he wasn't so slow he'd of been in a position to shoot. Because he is slow he was forced to square it and luckily we got the pen. You can gloss it up as awareness, but it was much more down to his lack of pace and dare I say it lack of confidence to take the chance on for himself. jeez, next you'll be telling me the whole game turned because of him.

 

My argument is that he is not an impact sub. He doesn't have an attribute to change the pattern of the game.

[Chez]

Lambert is fitter. The rest is largely the same - brilliant link up play, only less goals from freekicks.

[Minsk]

In answer to the original question:

 

We signed Sharp for when Lee and Guly are injured (and now Rickie too).

[jamesfp1]

So that he could score against Doncaster. HTH.