Garath Mcleary

[saunders:]]

When is he going to get his chance in the starting line-up. Every time we see him he looks class, and yet Garner is preferred on the wing, a position you can see he does not like playing. Mcleary offers much more going forward, and his pace probably means he would be every bit as good at tracking back.

 

[zigga-zagga]

When is he going to get his chance in the starting line-up. Every time we see him he looks class, and yet Garner is preferred on the wing, a position you can see he does not like playing. Mcleary offers much more going forward, and his pace probably means he would be every bit as good at tracking back.

In view of my previously well-aired views on this matter and the absolute hammering I take for airing them I will restrict my contribution to this thread to

NEVER NEVER NEVER

 

[leekspin]

I think it's because he's more of an impact player at the moment. He played well towards the end of last year when Billy brought him and then when he started he didn't fit in the game very well.

 

[Johnny Bravo]

I think it's because he's more of an impact player at the moment. He played well towards the end of last year when Billy brought him and then when he started he didn't fit in the game very well.

I'm inclined to agree, since he has been here he has looked fantastic coming off the bench to run at tired players but whenever he has started he has looked a different player. A loan move away for him would be good but at the moment we don't have enough natural wingers to let somebody borrow one.

 

[removed user]

No end product. I like him but he won't make it.

 

[birkin youth]

Definitely rate him as an impact sub.

I think the chances we created in the final period of the Bristol City match were mainly down to him.

I wish Billy would bring him on earlier though... 65-70 minutes is perfect timing.

He also needs to learn when he has gone far enough. Quite often he beats a couple of defenders, and then tries to beat one too many; but ends up losing possession.

 

[The Maniacal Megatron]

Can't cross for toffee. Best out on loan.

 

[birkin youth]

Had a few assists last season no? Scored 1 or 2 goals as well.

A long way to go, but a very useful player to have. Just needs to mature a bit; if he had a bit of awareness around him when he got in the box, he'd be much more effective.

 

[Rich]

In view of my previously well-aired views on this matter and the absolute hammering I take for airing them I will restrict my contribution to this thread to

NEVER NEVER NEVER

You haven't taken a hammering for a view on a Forest player until you've walked a mile in my shoes!

Here they are:

 

[earthworm]

You haven't taken a hammering for a view on a Forest player until you've walked a mile in my shoes!

Smith is so shit ...

 

[FBS]

There was an interview with him on Forest World a while ago. He was saying he has been disappointed with the way he started the season, but hoped to improved.

I rate him, I think he could easily play from the beginning, but he does need to learn to pass a lot sooner.

 

[Dadford]

There was an interview with him on Forest World a while ago. He was saying he has been disappointed with the way he started the season, but hoped to improved.

I rate him, I think he could easily play from the beginning, but he does need to learn to pass a lot sooner.

There could be a danger of turning him into a give and go player and not the take people on type he is now.

 

[Timothy Pope]

Certain players have to accept that they are used best as impact players. Players such as Dele, Garath & to an extent this season Lewis all have a part to play in this role.

As Billy has said before - It's not necessarily the team you start with, but the team you finish with that wins you games. (Paraphrasing as I can't be arsed to find the exact words)

 

[Carvel]

Can't cross for toffee. Best out on loan.

Absolute rubbish. Just look back at some games from last year. Im sure at least 4 goals towards the end of the year came from his crosses. He hits them low and they usually find a Forest player.

Also, lets compare; can Garner, Anderson or Tyson cross any better than McLeary?

No.

 

[adam09]

No end product. I like him but he won't make it.

Because beating a man to the ball, going into the box and squaring a ball for Anderson to tap in from half a yard out is not end product?

Had a few assists last season no? Scored 1 or 2 goals as well.

Aye, correct. I wish people would actually know some facts before they say players don't do anything (eg the Dele thread).


He is certainly effective against a tiring defence and turned both the Cardiff and Bristol City games in our favour (two of the top CCC teams), but he's barely been given any starts, so until he does, nobody really knows whether he will be any good from the start of games or not.

Personally, I don't see why he couldn't. And he'd probably do more than Garner and McGoldrick do out wide. He did more in the middle on the pitch against Cardiff in about 10/15 minutes than I've seen McGoldrick do in any game.

 

[adam09]

And also, Anderson is hardly full of goals and assists either, yet he always starts.

 

[The Maniacal Megatron]

Absolute rubbish. Just look back at some games from last year. Im sure at least 4 goals towards the end of the year came from his crosses. He hits them low and they usually find a Forest player.

Also, lets compare; can Garner, Anderson or Tyson cross any better than McLeary?

No.

I didn't say any of them can cross either. I've found that everytime I've seen him play he can run at the player, beat the man but hardly any end product.

Just my opinion though.

 

[Johnny Bravo]

And also, Anderson is hardly full of goals and assists either, yet he always starts.

Would you start McCleary ahead of Anderson if it were a straight fight between the two?

I wouldn't but just that comment made me wonder.

 

[Carvel]

I didn't say any of them can cross either. I've found that everytime I've seen him play he can run at the player, beat the man but hardly any end product.

Just my opinion though.

Yes, that's fair enough to have your opinion on it. But as I said, when someone can come on and change a game by providing pace and assists I think I would conclusively call that an end product.

I'm not sure there are many players at this level who can consistantly put in good crosses. The only ones I remember in recent times for Forest were Reid (now an established Prem player) and Nicky Southall (an ageing winger who had played in the Prem).

I would imagine the reason he doesn't start is that he is always liable to give the ball away. Garner won't, neither will McGoldrick or Anderson.
Billy likes his teams to have good ball retention.

 

[Snake]

McCleary's use of the ball is far better than Anderson's, who tends to run around loads, get in good positions, but somehow manage to never ever provide a telling cross, nor even score open goals when they are delivered on a plate by the like of Garath McCleary. For where McCleary's come from he has developed very, very well. If he could produce a ninety minute performance he would be an absolute terror, and one of the scariest wingers in the league. He's not there yet, just as McGugan isn't. But, in lieu of somebody like Nathan Tyson, McCleary is going to have to start home matches to give us pace and natural width on both sides. Away from home, attrition is fine, but as we saw against Bristol City, we were carrying a passenger in Garner (two if you count McGoldrick), so might as well have started McCleary.

 

[birkin youth]

As for crossing, I think Anderson is totally wasted playing as a left winger.

He can cross in from the right, mainly low crosses, but they are still decent (sometimes). On the left, however, he always seems to cut inside.... so any advantage gained from his width is wasted.

Tyson on the left / Anderson on the right is clearly the best set-up for our wingers.

But McCleary is worthy of a spot on the bench. Even if runs the ball into the box and provides no decisive end product - it's better than floating around in no man's land giving away yellow cards (which is something Garner has been guilty of this season)

 

[Lee]

I didn't say any of them can cross either. I've found that everytime I've seen him play he can run at the player, beat the man but hardly any end product.

Just my opinion though.

Hardly any of our team has any end product if you are going to look at it that way.

McCleary is more of a threat on the winger than Garner will every be.

And comparing McCleary to anderson is just bollox. Anderson uses his paces to get past players, whereas McCleary uses alot more trickery and skill.

 

[The Maniacal Megatron]

Hardly any of our team has any end product if you are going to look at it that way.

McCleary is more of a threat on the winger than Garner will every be.

And comparing McCleary to anderson is just bollox. Anderson uses his paces to get past players, whereas McCleary uses alot more trickery and skill.

Very true.

I've always been of the way of thinking that he could make good use of going out on loan and getting regular 1st team football under his belt so he can come back to us and be more than just an 'impact player'.

 

[Forest Jonny]

Surely he's got to be earning his chance soon. Im sure he will want to shake the title of impact player to first team starter.

 

[RRRREDUN]

As Billy has said before - It's not necessarily the team you start with, but the team you finish with that wins you games. (Paraphrasing as I can't be arsed to find the exact words)

The only problem with this is if the side you finished with is the side you should have started with! Against Bristol, I felt that the side we put out hardly hurt them at all - we had barely a shot in the 1st 60 mins. This 5 in midfield thing is all well and good if you have your 1st choice striker playing (which we didn't). McGoldrick then looks good working off him (Blackstock). However, McGoldrick is ineffective on his own, isn't he? We should have played 2 up front. Then, in a straightforward 442, McCleary (IMHO) could have been given a start, but I wouldn't drop Ando for him - he's pure class (I'm surprised some of you even consider it).