|
I just hope Leroy isn't too Lita too late for City
ADAM AIKEN - A VIEW FROM THE STAND
04 October 2008
The signing of Leroy Lita on loan from Reading - exciting though it is - has the air of being the last throw of the dice.
I hesitate to suggest that he will prove to be the solution to all our problems. Such predictions usually prove to be the kiss of death. But he certainly looks to be a great addition, if only for a month, to what looks like a decent strikeforce - on paper, at least.
And that's where the problem lies. Lita, Jamie Cureton, Arturo Lupoli, Antoine Sibierski and Omar Koroma, on paper, look the business. In reality, so far this season, they have collectively looked nothing like it.
Only Barnsley and Doncaster have scored fewer Championship goals than we have this season. Today will be our 10th game of the campaign, and we are rapidly running out of time to play the “It's early days - wait for things to settle down” card.
Lita undoubtedly can bring something to the party, but the players around him are going to have to raise their own games if we are to realise our potential this season.
Our loan brigade now comprises Lita, Lupoli, Sibierski, Koroma, John Kennedy, Ryan Bertrand, Elliott Omozusi and Troy Archibald-Henville, and it also included Jonathan Grounds before his unfortunate recall by Middlesbrough this week.
I have no idea what our transfer/loan budget is, but it can't be infinite. Every time we bring someone else in - whether it be Lita or, before that, Sibierski - we move one step nearer to the point at which the money runs out.
There can't be an endless stream of new faces coming in throughout the season. There will be a limit. And that's why the signing of Lita has a feeling of being the last throw of the dice.
We may have more loan strikers on our books than we know what to do with but it won't take long for our best-laid plans to fall by the wayside.
Just look at our defensive situation. Only last week, I was extolling the virtues of Glenn Roeder's signings for the centre of defence.
A squad including Dejan Stefanovic, Kennedy, Omozusi and Grounds, with Archibald-Henville and Gary Doherty on our books as well, suggested that this was one area of the team where we should have few problems this year.
Not so. We go into today's match against Derby with two of those six (Kennedy and Doherty) injured, Grounds having been returned to sender and Stefanovic suspended. It looks as though we could be relying this afternoon on Omozusi being paired with either the untried Archibald-Henville or midfielder Sammy Clingan, if the latter returns from injury.
Things would be a lot easier if Stefanovic hadn't been sent off on Tuesday.
His dismissal for dissent - which is unacceptable for a player of his experience - capped a miserable few days in which, as is our wont, we failed to capitalise on the home victory against Sheffield United a fortnight ago.
I missed the trips to Barnsley and Southampton, but it seems as though the first was a turgid affair against the bottom club, who three days later got turned over by Ipswich, while the trip to St Mary's sounded like our opening day match at Coventry - we dominated but proved unable to score, and we ended up losing 2-0 against the run of play.
While I have some sympathy with Roeder's comments about the merits of grinding out a result at Barnsley despite playing badly (because in the past, our below-par performances have invariably led to defeats), the fact remains we have won only twice in the league this season.
It's not good enough, and it's not going to get any better if we don't shake off the habit of giving away penalties.
Conceding five in our first nine league games is ridiculous, and we'd be in an even greater muddle if David Marshall hadn't saved the fourth of those five at Barnsley last week.
Roeder claimed that Stefanovic's tackle at Southampton was neither a foul nor in the box, but giving away five spot-kicks in nine games suggests that a pattern is emerging.
Our strikers failing to score plus our willingness to give away penalties equals giving ourselves a mountain to climb.
If those habits continue today, we face going into the next international break in a depressing position.
HULL'S SUCCESS SPARKED HAPPY CANARY MEMORIES
Hull's victory at the Emirates Stadium last Saturday did two things.
First, it showed how ridiculously over-the-top the national media can be when one of their beloved big four teams gets beaten. Judging by their reaction, you'd think that Arsenal's 2-1 defeat had already put paid to their title ambitions.
An upset it might have been, but it was hardly the stuff of legends, was it? After all, even we managed to beat Man Utd during our recent fateful Premiership season.
These results happen - a couple of weeks ago, Stoke got a 0-0 draw at Anfield, too - but the pundits always seem to react as if it's the end of the world as we know it.
I mean no disrespect to Hull, who fully deserved the plaudits for their performance and the result.
But as far as the wider Premiership campaign is concerned, let's keep some perspective. The second thing that match did was bring back memories of our 4-2 win at Highbury in 1992-93. In some ways, our result was an even better one - as relegation favourites we came from 2-0 down, whereas Hull had conceded only one.
In all fairness, though, the gulf in class between top and bottom in 1992 was nothing compared with the gap today, so I guess the two results were pretty much equally impressive.
But while Hull will not end up challenging for the title and finishing third like we did 16 years ago (it's already 16 years ago - can you believe it?), the Tigers showed it's possible to approach life in the Premiership without the negative mindset that we and others have shown in recent years.
I doubt they'll maintain their lofty league position for long, but they look as though they could be Premiership survivors at the very least - and deservedly so.
|