Sky Sports News Football Show. (Jephcott)

[edengreen]

We don't play to Hardies strengths do we though? We hoof the ball back to front when no options or play so slow that their is no space. Hardie wants a quick ball into the channels where he can use his pace. Admittedly his finishing has been poor this year but he proved when played into the right positions last year he can finish.

If you look at his goals reel last year nearly every ball was a ball on the floor through the channels he scored from

Lowe being a striker should surely realise that?

 

[ChepstowGreen]

I certainly wouldn't want Luke sold without serious money but actually I'd be quite optimistic that Hardie could step up and score plenty in his absence. Last season he showed tremendous finishing ability and i think there are signs over the last few games that his confidence is returning so if he gets the chances he'll start a run of his own I reckon.

 

[Dan Ellard]

To say we would be in the bottom four without him is hearsay that isn't supported by the facts.

Well the fact that Jephcott is the division's top scorer is quite an important one.

Are you saying if we sell/drop Jephcott, all the other players will chip in and score his goals instead?

Jephcott has 12 goals and the closest others have 3, so I'd say that is quite ambitious.

As Emu says, I wouldn't want to rely on that happening. I couldn't imagine Hardie, for instance, suddenly banging them in.

It is a fact though that we've scored more goals per game without Luke than we've scored with him. I find that as hard to believe as everyone else, but the reality is that other players have stepped up when Luke has been unavailable.

Whether that pattern would continue long-term is open to conjecture and I hope we don't have to find out any time soon.

Thats a fair point and it may well be that the stat is merely a coincidence. It does however link back to 2 years ago, when we had Ladapo who was banging goals in, but as a team our goals scored column wasn't as impressive as the year before, when our top scoring striker was Taylor with 6. Rotherham also do far better when Ladapo doesn't play compared to when he does, despite him continuing to score goals.

However, I dont see a resemblance to Freddie in Luke's game. His movement in deeper areas and his hold up play are far superior as others have said. Even if we had a different manager and were playing an Adams-style 1 up front, I dont think Luke would be too bad either - albeit naturally he is better with a striker partner creating space for him in this system.

I hope he remains our player for many years to come - but if not, then we need big big money for him.

 

[Knibbsworth]

We went up a division so you can't really make a comparison like that. Ladapo would likely have got more goals if he was with us in League Two.
Carey, Taylor, Bradley, Kennedy etc. will not have scored as much in League One as they did in League Two.

 

[Biggs]

Who knows?? So there's no point saying with any certainty where we'd be. At the moment we look to LJ for goals, but clearly if he wasn't in the team there'd be another way we'd have to score them.

It does always annoy me a bit when people say 'if it weren't for.... we'd be ....'. Usually the player being spoken about is in the team for that reason, whether it's a goalkeeper meant to stop shots or a striker meant to score goals.

Just enjoy him while he IS here, I say.

 

[Keith Whitfield]

On a different note, does anyone else remember the incredible performance by Dean Ashton for Crewe at Home Park when they demolished us 3-1 on a Tuesday night? I remember it because a number of us said at the time that here was the next Paul Mariner. He was here, there and everywhere and was even strong enough to hold off Cocko in his prime. Think he might have scored a couple into the bargain. Watched out for him after that and wasn't surprised when Norwich and then West Ham paid big money for him and England called him up. Sadly, he broke his ankle in training for England (Shaun Wright-Phillips being the culprit) and never achieved his immense potential.

 

[Ave IT]

To say we would be in the bottom four without him is hearsay that isn't supported by the facts.

Well the fact that Jephcott is the division's top scorer is quite an important one.

Are you saying if we sell/drop Jephcott, all the other players will chip in and score his goals instead?

Jephcott has 12 goals and the closest others have 3, so I'd say that is quite ambitious.

As Emu says, I wouldn't want to rely on that happening. I couldn't imagine Hardie, for instance, suddenly banging them in.

It is a fact though that we've scored more goals per game without Luke than we've scored with him. I find that as hard to believe as everyone else, but the reality is that other players have stepped up when Luke has been unavailable.

Whether that pattern would continue long-term is open to conjecture and I hope we don't have to find out any time soon.

Luke's goals per minute on the pitch must be one of (if not THE) best in the EFL - he's often been subbed or not started. So genuine question - I wonder how does the stat about goals per game with and without LJ stand up if it's turned into goals per minute on the pitch?

(I still can't get my head around why RL pulls off our biggest goal threat to replace him with Nouble, Hardie or Telford).

 

[Frank Butcher]

(I still can't get my head around why RL pulls off our biggest goal threat to replace him with Nouble, Hardie or Telford).

I suspect in the last two games I've watched live Nouble has been brought on for the specific reason of holding the ball up up front and relieving pressure at the back. Lovely combination that they are, Jephcott and Hardie (in particular) like the ball in front of them. The fact that big Frank has not delivered what was presumably asked makes it look like a straight swap which in turn seems non-sensical.

 

[Dan Ellard]

To say we would be in the bottom four without him is hearsay that isn't supported by the facts.

Well the fact that Jephcott is the division's top scorer is quite an important one.

Are you saying if we sell/drop Jephcott, all the other players will chip in and score his goals instead?

Jephcott has 12 goals and the closest others have 3, so I'd say that is quite ambitious.

As Emu says, I wouldn't want to rely on that happening. I couldn't imagine Hardie, for instance, suddenly banging them in.

It is a fact though that we've scored more goals per game without Luke than we've scored with him. I find that as hard to believe as everyone else, but the reality is that other players have stepped up when Luke has been unavailable.

Whether that pattern would continue long-term is open to conjecture and I hope we don't have to find out any time soon.

Thats a fair point and it may well be that the stat is merely a coincidence. It does however link back to 2 years ago, when we had Ladapo who was banging goals in, but as a team our goals scored column wasn't as impressive as the year before, when our top scoring striker was Taylor with 6. Rotherham also do far better when Ladapo doesn't play compared to when he does, despite him continuing to score goals.

However, I dont see a resemblance to Freddie in Luke's game. His movement in deeper areas and his hold up play are far superior as others have said. Even if we had a different manager and were playing an Adams-style 1 up front, I dont think Luke would be too bad either - albeit naturally he is better with a striker partner creating space for him in this system.

I hope he remains our player for many years to come - but if not, then we need big big money for him.

We went up a division so you can't really make a comparison like that. Ladapo would likely have got more goals if he was with us in League Two.
Carey, Taylor, Bradley, Kennedy etc. will not have scored as much in League One as they did in League Two.

I was comparing 18/19 and 17/18, our two seasons in League 1.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

To say we would be in the bottom four without him is hearsay that isn't supported by the facts.

Well the fact that Jephcott is the division's top scorer is quite an important one.

Are you saying if we sell/drop Jephcott, all the other players will chip in and score his goals instead?

Jephcott has 12 goals and the closest others have 3, so I'd say that is quite ambitious.

As Emu says, I wouldn't want to rely on that happening. I couldn't imagine Hardie, for instance, suddenly banging them in.

It is a fact though that we've scored more goals per game without Luke than we've scored with him. I find that as hard to believe as everyone else, but the reality is that other players have stepped up when Luke has been unavailable.

Whether that pattern would continue long-term is open to conjecture and I hope we don't have to find out any time soon.

Luke's goals per minute on the pitch must be one of (if not THE) best in the EFL - he's often been subbed or not started. So genuine question - I wonder how does the stat about goals per game with and without LJ stand up if it's turned into goals per minute on the pitch?

(I still can't get my head around why RL pulls off our biggest goal threat to replace him with Nouble, Hardie or Telford).

There are currently only 7 players across all four divisions who have a minutes per goal record below 100.

78 Marcus Forss (Brentford)
79 Max Watter (Crawley)
92 Duncan Watmore (Middlesbrough)
94 Chuks Aneke (Charlton)
96 Anwar El Ghazi (Aston Villa)
96 Paul Mullin (Cambridge)
97 Luke Jephcott (Plymouth Argyle)

 

[Knibbsworth]

I was comparing 18/19 and 17/18, our two seasons in League 1.

Oops, my apologies. From memory we certainly played better with Taylor up front alone, so I do agree with you. Getting the best out of Ladapo and playing two up front weakened us as a team.

But then again we lost Bradley and Threlkeld and our defence went to ruin when Ladapo was in the team. From memory we got relegated having scored a ridiculous amount of goals.

 

[IJN]

On a different note, does anyone else remember the incredible performance by Dean Ashton for Crewe at Home Park when they demolished us 3-1 on a Tuesday night? I remember it because a number of us said at the time that here was the next Paul Mariner. He was here, there and everywhere and was even strong enough to hold off Cocko in his prime. Think he might have scored a couple into the bargain. Watched out for him after that and wasn't surprised when Norwich and then West Ham paid big money for him and England called him up. Sadly, he broke his ankle in training for England (Shaun Wright-Phillips being the culprit) and never achieved his immense potential.

Absolutely DO remember that game. We even gave him a standing ovation as he came off (slightly) injured that night.

What a performance that was and it did compare with Mariner v Rochdale and loads of remarked on it. I can also remember he had a very strange haircut that night (like a Guinea Pig) but I have no idea why that sticks in my mind.

THE best performance I've seen from an opposing player at Home Park. I'll never forget it.

 

[Keith Whitfield]

The other standout performance for me at HP was Charlie Adam for Blackpool just before he joined Liverpool - 2010? He was immense, as close to a one man match-winning performance as I've ever seen. I'd love to think that we could someday soon be treated to as good a performance by Jephers as those given to us by Ashton and Adam on those days. That would truly be something special.

 

[Tugboat]

The other standout performance for me at HP was Charlie Adam for Blackpool just before he joined Liverpool - 2010? He was immense, as close to a one man match-winning performance as I've ever seen. I'd love to think that we could someday soon be treated to as good a performance by Jephers as those given to us by Ashton and Adam on those days. That would truly be something special.

And we got Alan Gow

 

[IJN]

I blanked that one out Keith as he basically relegated what was a very good team in my opinion. Ring any bells? :facepalm: