Alan McCafu

[paul_e]

minutes to goals ratio for last season is actually really interesting:

Bent - 1 every 270mins
Gabby - 1 every 626mins
Weimann - 1 every 471mins
Benteke - 1 every 207mins
Kozak - 1 every 207mins

Kozak is slight better than I expected there, I thought he's be closer to Bent's average.

Not sure what this has to do with Alan Hutton though.

[Dave]

Yup - in a game where Fabio Borini is £14m and Ideye Brown is £10m, £7m for Kozak is looking like pretty solid business.

[pauliewalnuts]

minutes to goals ratio for last season is actually really interesting:

Bent - 1 every 270mins
Gabby - 1 every 626mins
Weimann - 1 every 471mins
Benteke - 1 every 207mins
Kozak - 1 every 207mins

Kozak is slight better than I expected there, I thought he's be closer to Bent's average.

Not sure what this has to do with Alan Hutton though.

I genuinely don't know what people dislike about Kozak.

He came in, he scored a few goals, he got injured. Lots of people seem to forget the "scoring a few goals" thing.

[bobdylan]

He still comfortably outscored Gabby though even as a bit part player for a relegated side.

Gabby 4 league goals, Bent 3.

Yer cup goals don't count, Withey didn't really score in Rotterdam it was all a dream.

What have cup games got to do with a team being relegated?

Nonetheless including cup games - Bent 6, Gabby 4.

Nothing, who said they did?

[Matt Collins]

On current pre season form I'd start Hutton at stoke. Lowton just continues to look too much of a liability defensively. And I really like Lowton. But if he doesn't learn to defend we can't keep carrying him

[supertom]

On current pre season form I'd start Hutton at stoke. Lowton just continues to look too much of a liability defensively. And I really like Lowton. But if he doesn't learn to defend we can't keep carrying him

Never thought I'd see the day when I'd want Hutton back in the side, but he is the best right back at the club. Lowton isn't very good defensively and is very lightweight too. If Hutton can curb the rash challenges he'll be alright. I'd certainly be starting him at Stoke, especially if we're playing a back 4. Even as a wing back he probably gets the nod at the moment. Lowton and Bacuna have been poor in pre-season so far.

[Gregorys Boy]

minutes to goals ratio for last season is actually really interesting:

Bent - 1 every 270mins
Gabby - 1 every 626mins
Weimann - 1 every 471mins
Benteke - 1 every 207mins
Kozak - 1 every 207mins

Kozak is slight better than I expected there, I thought he's be closer to Bent's average.

Not sure what this has to do with Alan Hutton though.

I genuinely don't know what people dislike about Kozak.

He came in, he scored a few goals, he got injured. Lots of people seem to forget the "scoring a few goals" thing.

Spot on.  If he plays most of the next season then I can see him really having a good run.  The guy does look a bit of class to me.

[Gregorys Boy]

On current pre season form I'd start Hutton at stoke. Lowton just continues to look too much of a liability defensively. And I really like Lowton. But if he doesn't learn to defend we can't keep carrying him

If there is one match taylored made for someone like Hutton it is Stoke away.

I bet having a twenty page thread most be the highlight of his career, am sure he is looking on in pride. 

[pauliewalnuts]

I have always thought Hutton was a very poor player, but I am more than willing to believe he's the best right back at the club at the moment. If he carries on having a decent preseason, I would be happy enough to see him start at Stoke.

[dave.woodhall]

I genuinely don't know what people dislike about Kozak.

He came in, he scored a few goals, he got injured. Lots of people seem to forget the "scoring a few goals" thing.

He was signed by Paul Lambert, with money authorised by Randy Lerner. It was the same with Peter Crouch -a blind man could see there was a footballer there, but because Sir Graham II and Doug were so discredited in many eyes they couldn't possibly have done anything right.

[Ron Manager]

I genuinely don't know what people dislike about Kozak.

He came in, he scored a few goals, he got injured. Lots of people seem to forget the "scoring a few goals" thing.

He was signed by Paul Lambert, with money authorised by Randy Lerner. It was the same with Peter Crouch -a blind man could see there was a footballer there, but because Sir Graham II and Doug were so discredited in many eyes they couldn't possibly have done anything right.

Crouchy looked as if he could play when he was at QPR. I think DOL got rid of him when he didn't do much against Man Utd. That was a bad mistake. One of many over the years.

[PeterWithesShin]

Nothing, who said they did?

Well when you say "relegated side" then it's all about league games isn't it.

[kippaxvilla2]

Nothing will convince me that the best way to move on players you don't want any more is to ostracise them and make them train with the under 12s.

I agree. The article in the Mail is typical mumbo jumbo. Why does Lambert have to speak in riddles? 'Nothing to do with football', then why not play him? There have been numerous occasions that he could have played, despite Hutton being scapegoat no.1, even to people who have probably never seen him play.

Don't get me wrong, I think he's a poor player, I really do.

However, given that our only other non-out-of-position option there until just lately, Lowton, was also pretty poor for much of the time, and given we've spent the last 18 months or however long we've been pretending Hutton doesn't exist, paying him 40k a week anyway, perhaps it might have made sense to include him in the squad?

agreed 100%. self defeating not including him. If he came in and played well in a few games, someone might take a punt on him. He couldnt have been any worse than the likes of Lowton, Bacuna and Luna this season anyway.

Hutton is a strange one though. Remember his weight ballooning at times at Spurs, where he mixed runs of good form with horrible form. Had a decent loan spell at Sunderland a few years back aswell. His first season he was shite for us but if he cut out his thuggish behaviour that he displayed with us, never really saw it in him elsewhere, he should be at least a competent option at right back.

Years ago this thuggish behaviour of which you speak would be just seen as a hard player and committed.  Apart from crocking Long (so what) have I missed something else?  I think he's an ok option given out serious lack of credible alternatives.

[Damo70]

I genuinely don't know what people dislike about Kozak.

He came in, he scored a few goals, he got injured. Lots of people seem to forget the "scoring a few goals" thing.

He was signed by Paul Lambert, with money authorised by Randy Lerner. It was the same with Peter Crouch -a blind man could see there was a footballer there, but because Sir Graham II and Doug were so discredited in many eyes they couldn't possibly have done anything right.

Interesting that you mention Crouch because I think there are a lot of similarities. Big, a bit ungainly and can come across as a bit clumsy and not much of a footballer. So basically an ideal scapegoat when things go wrong. But like Crouch he does have ability and he also seems to have a knack of sticking the ball in the net on a regular basis.

[KevinGage]

minutes to goals ratio for last season is actually really interesting:

Bent - 1 every 270mins
Gabby - 1 every 626mins
Weimann - 1 every 471mins
Benteke - 1 every 207mins
Kozak - 1 every 207mins

Kozak is slight better than I expected there, I thought he's be closer to Bent's average.

Not sure what this has to do with Alan Hutton though.

I genuinely don't know what people dislike about Kozak.

He came in, he scored a few goals, he got injured. Lots of people seem to forget the "scoring a few goals" thing.

Goals are obviously the key thing, and I think some of the criticism went way overboard last season.

I'd say it stemmed from two things, 1.  That he was signed in the first place, when we had no shortage of forwards (this is not long after we'd signed Helenius, remember) and 2. There is a touch of the Darren Bent's about him. That is, he can be quiet and seemingly no threat in the game.  He isn't particularly quick, and for his size, he doesn't throw his weight around or win enough flick ons.   If he isn't scoring, he isn't really doing much else.

Also, as well as signing a player for a position we seemed well stocked in, the fee seemed high, factoring in his goals to game ratio (n the league) for Lazio. 

The mention of Crouch is interesting though, the bit I seem of him last season indicates he is more comfortable receiving the ball to feet and getting on the end of things. So the big boof ball up top (as we often did with Crouch, but to no avail) was generally wasted on him too.