What's new

Player Watch: Dane Scarlett

TEESSIDE1

Married, new job and Spurs on the up!
Jul 3, 2006
15,406
19,307
He’s scored just four goals in professional men’s football, which is fine, he’s still really young. But he couldn’t force his way into a regular spot for Ipswich, so it’s going to be difficult for him here, probably. I’m all for giving youngsters a chance but only a fraction of them are up to the level we need. Agree though Europa League could be a great opportunity for him.

Yet Ferguson who seems to be injured pretty much every week, only has a handful of goals is reportedly valued in excess of £100m based on his potential. Lots of young players have potential but until they either have an outstanding break through season or start delivering on a regular basis, they’ll never fulfil their potential.

Scarlett looked like a rabbit in headlights a couple of years ago but since then he seems to have matured physically and you can see his reading of the game has improved.

For Ange to stick with Son who simply cannot play as a centre forward and ignore Scarlett then it’s unacceptable, especially given how our performance improved against Burnley when Scarlett came on and Son moved out wide.

There’s only 2 games to go, we’re not expected to get anything against City and by losing, it’s not as if it’s going to have a catastrophic affect on where we finish. Barring Chelsea winning their last 3, Newcastle seeing off Utd and us failing to either draw or beat one of the worst sides ever to play in the EPL, then we’re not going to finish below 5th.

Ange has 2 games to blood Scarlett, it’s a fantastic opportunity for Scarlett to show he’s good enough and it will also give Ange food for thought for the summer. Yes we still need a quality striker but at the moment we arguably need 2 new strikers… if Scarlett steps up then we can either invest in one elite/potentially elite striker or invest the money saved in other areas of the squad. Until we actually starting giving the youth players a chance, we’ll never know if they’ll ever make it.
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
43,046
80,151
Ipswich had just been promoted from League 1 and had a manager with a Spurs connection. That one looked good on paper to me.

Veliz to Sevilla was bound to fail from the start.
True but it's not really that as such it's the fact we played him and then loaned him. If we intended to loan him we should have not played him. That way when his loan didn't work out we loan him to someone else. Now he's stuck here not playing (aside from now one brief cameo but too late now) when he could have had a 2nd half of the season at another lower league club.
 

Bluto Blutarsky

Well-Known Member
Mar 4, 2021
16,086
74,302
Ange has 2 games to blood Scarlett, it’s a fantastic opportunity for Scarlett to show he’s good enough and it will also give Ange food for thought for the summer

Ange has seen him train. He will know if Scarlett is an upgrade on Son (Johnson and Kulusevski) as a forward line.
 

DogsOfWar

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2005
2,314
3,675
My issue with not playing youngsters is that we have a particular style of play which doesn't change.
But we have certain positions where if there is an injury a player comes in who is not suited to the system.

So if the system isn't going to change for this then why not bring in a youngster who is more suited to the system?

In my view an inexperienced round peg in a round hole is better than an experienced square one.

In Richie's case we nearly always play better with a number nine, so rather than move Son up there let's just play Scarlett in that role and find out if the system is better with a player who plays that role.
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
43,046
80,151
It's very difficult for a young player to come in when the team isn't clicking. We've seen him struggle numerous times in Europe for that same reason. Why people think the youth players are going to make a difference to this team is beyond me. Son is clearly a far better option up top than Scarlett. The whole team is poor right now and an academy player won't change that.
 

Westmorlandspur

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2013
3,044
4,964
It's very difficult for a young player to come in when the team isn't clicking. We've seen him struggle numerous times in Europe for that same reason. Why people think the youth players are going to make a difference to this team is beyond me. Son is clearly a far better option up top than Scarlett. The whole team is poor right now and an academy player won't change that.
Rather have Son on the left then we can get the best out of him.At least Scarlett does play up front. We are getting nothing from Son if he plays centre forward. Could even put a Deki up there.
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
43,046
80,151
Rather have Son on the left then we can get the best out of him.At least Scarlett does play up front. We are getting nothing from Son if he plays centre forward. Could even put a Deki up there.
Well Deki is no more a center forward than Son and the issue goes further than just Son not being good up top. If we can't create chances for Son then we won't for Scarlett either.
 

mr ashley

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
3,231
8,805
It's very difficult for a young player to come in when the team isn't clicking. We've seen him struggle numerous times in Europe for that same reason. Why people think the youth players are going to make a difference to this team is beyond me. Son is clearly a far better option up top than Scarlett. The whole team is poor right now and an academy player won't change that.
Disagree
The team clicked much more when Scarlett was on the pitch
Son doesn’t play well with his back to goal.
instead he drops off to get the ball but then can’t find a pass unless it goes wide or backwards. If it goes wide then the box is empty
Kulusevski can’t play lw as his first touch brings him inside, and Johnson can’t play on the left because he can’t cross with his left foot.
Son can go both ways at LW, Johnson can use his pace to get behind the fullback at Rw. It’s kulusevski who probably misses out, unless we start him and bring Johnson in later.

It makes more sense to bring in a young player when everyone else is in their strongest positions
 

Finchyid

Well-Known Member
Jun 27, 2017
3,900
12,195
Needs to start…you just see a difference in play when we have someone making forward runs. I also thought his involvement in the goal was key, he blocked off the defender who then follows him which created the space for vdv
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
43,046
80,151
Disagree
The team clicked much more when Scarlett was on the pitch
Son doesn’t play well with his back to goal.
instead he drops off to get the ball but then can’t find a pass unless it goes wide or backwards. If it goes wide then the box is empty
Kulusevski can’t play lw as his first touch brings him inside, and Johnson can’t play on the left because he can’t cross with his left foot.
Son can go both ways at LW, Johnson can use his pace to get behind the fullback at Rw. It’s kulusevski who probably misses out, unless we start him and bring Johnson in later.

It makes more sense to bring in a young player when everyone else is in their strongest positions
I think you're paying too much attention to just Scarlett there. We need to see more of him to judge how much difference he makes. We looked better with VdV coming out from left back, Johnson on his favoured side and Son was more effective than Johnson was left because he was poor there. We were all round just better 2nd half even before Scarlett came on and then the changes mentioned with Bentancur on as well all made a difference.
 

Westmorlandspur

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2013
3,044
4,964
Well Deki is no more a center forward than Son and the issue goes further than just Son not being good up top. If we can't create chances for Son then we won't for Scarlett either.
Deki has some physical presence and can hold the ball up, neither of which applies to Son.
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
43,046
80,151
Deki has some physical presence and can hold the ball up, neither of which applies to Son.
I think it's a bit different the way Kulusevski works to hold the ball up. He seems to work well to the right to get his body goal side of the ball and hold the ball that way. Whether he can play more back to goal from central I'm not so sure. It's a totally different role than carrying the ball a bit from deeper and then holding onto it. He even struggled on the left to do the same as he does on the right and hasn't looked convincing behind the striker either. The most natural he looked actually was in a midified 3 with Bentancur and Lo Celso. I'm not saying it won't work but it's still no more likely to work better than having Son there.
 

UbeAstard

Well-Known Member
May 31, 2005
3,390
2,461
Nah, Kulu was great at the start.
He's been pretty poor for a while now though but you can't deny his initial impact.
Its my opinion that he was nothing special and people got over exited about the good things he did. You guys who think he was great have a right to that opionion too, we'll have to live side by side.
 
Top