Date: 26th August 2008 at 3:07pm
Written by:

Richard Timbrell gives us his thoughts on Martin Paterson from the Palace game…

After being asked by Barnsey to watch a player for the new Player Focus section, I was initially a bit worried about what it would entail. However, after the first few minutes, I actually started to enjoy it, and so was therefore pleased that I was watching someone who should have a key role in the team. Anyway, here are the stats that I picked up from watching Paterson on Saturday.

Total shots on goal = 4
On target = 1 (25%)
Off target = 3 (75%)

Long balls directed towards him = 20
Of which received (within 2 metres of Paterson) = 11
Went astray (more than 2 metres from Paterson) = 9

Received long balls = 11
Won = 4 (36%)
Lost = 7 (64%)

Headers contested = 13
Won = 2 (15%)
Lost = 11 (85%)

Passes Received = 18

Passes played = 11
Passes complete = 10 (91%)
Passes astray = 1 (9%)

Tackles contested = 4
Won = 1 (25%)
Lost = 3 (75%)

Fouls won = 1
Fouls conceded = 2

Beat his marker = 1

Caught offside = 0

Throw ins received = 2
Throw ins taken = 0

Booked = 1

Substituted in the 82nd minute.

As you can see, perhaps the most alarming statistic is that in the 82 minutes he was on the field, the defence launched 20 long balls in his general direction. Bearing in mind he only won 2 headers all afternoon, this statistic is slightly alarming. It doesn`t quite fit the bill of the free flowing passing game that we are supposed to be playing. Indeed, not once was Paterson caught offside all afternoon, indicating the lack of a through ball from the midfield, meaning his pace and timing of his run was never tested. This is a problem that needs to be looked into.

That said, a lot of these long balls came in the first half, and once Palace went down to 9 men, we started to play the ball into feet more. Paterson received 18 passes all game, of which well over half were in the second half. The most interesting statistic of all, and perhaps the area that I was most impressed with Paterson in all afternoon, was his passing. He had a 91% success rate, and he always looked for the easy ball, or for the man in space. He also then looked to get into space himself, but with Palace packing men behind the ball, it became increasingly difficult for him to do this.

Perhaps the best way to highlight the poor service into Paterson is through his shot statistics. He managed 4 attempts on goal all afternoon, with only 1 attempt being on target. 3 efforts were from outside the area, with the other being perhaps his best chance of the game. For me, if we are going to play the lone man up front, then we have to play to his strengths. If the through ball tactic isn`t working, you need to consider balls across the six yard box or the suchlike. Paterson was having to fashion attempts on goal for himself, and when you`re playing with what looks like a 5 man midfield, this is disappointing.

Finally, Paterson showed his temperamental side by getting a silly booking for opening his mouth too much.

All in all, I think Paterson had as good a game as can be expected, considering he rarely got the ball when in a dangerous area. His pace wasn`t really tested all afternoon, and neither were his goal instincts. However, he always looked willing to receive the ball, and his passing was good and consistent. If ever a player were to benefit from a strike partner, it would be Paterson.

I`d give him a 7/10.


2 Replies to “Player Focus 2”

  • Just shows how we need a target man. Someone that can win a few headers. Scunthorpe fans all said that he is useless for staying onside! That statistic would say otherwise or we have coached him pretty well already.

Comments are closed.