General Mackie

A chip on my shoulder about mackie hmmmm okay, I'd say it was the other way around. What has he done in a yellows shirt ever positive football wise?
 
Marked Ox said:
Likewise has led the forward line in plenty of games when we were flying this season such as West Ham.

But when they don't want to see, they will ignore such things.
Click to expand...
On that basis, we should get Pat Hoban back. He led the line better than Mackie, also tried really hard, also ran around a lot, and also rarely scored
 
Marked Ox said:
Likewise has led the forward line in plenty of games when we were flying this season such as West Ham.

But when they don't want to see, they will ignore such things.
Click to expand...

i would also add a certain striker committed a fair number of fouls 2nd half

also when JR's effort went over the bar in the first half how was he able to find the space?
 
Ive been somewhat scathing of Mackie on the matchday thread - tbh something im not hugely proud of, but, for me, he looks like a player whos slightly past his best trying to play a role hes not the best suited for, which leads to him giving away a lot of unnecessary fouls and providing little goal threat. Yes hes had good days for us and everybody loves his wholeheartedness but would he get into Rotherham, Ipswich or Sunderlands team as centre-forward? I agree he brings so many good things, such as personality, experience, positivity and motivation for the younger players etc, but is that enough for a team who wants to challenge at the top of league 1? Hes great to have around the squad but was he really the best choice to start in a top of the table ‘6 pointer’ clash?
 
Mackie was awful yesterday but not the only one, I do think we need a lot better than him to gain promotion though, at the end of the day his job is to score goals and unfortunately doesn,t score enough and never really looks like doing so, imagine if we had vassel up front yesterday.
 
I'm probably more pro Mackie than most but his strengths only really lie in coming on as a sub for the last ~20mins when we're winning. I don't think anyone could deny that his presence + work rate lifts the team when he comes on. However, if Taylor needed resting or we needed more physicality up front, I'd prefer to see Agyei starting. Think he's looked really promising when given his brief opportunities but not been given a proper chance since his goal. Taller and obviously quicker than Mackie, perhaps lacking his aggression but you'd think more suited to playing a lone striker role
 
gingerox said:
I'm probably more pro Mackie than most but his strengths only really lie in coming on as a sub for the last ~20mins when we're winning. I don't think anyone could deny that his presence + work rate lifts the team when he comes on. However, if Taylor needed resting or we needed more physicality up front, I'd prefer to see Agyei starting. Think he's looked really promising when given his brief opportunities but not been given a proper chance since his goal. Taller and obviously quicker than Mackie, perhaps lacking his aggression but you'd think more suited to playing a lone striker role
Click to expand...
If only head transplants were possible. What a player Mackie’s head on Agyei’s body would be.. ?
 
Start the game with Mackie and your central striker is effectively not a consistent goal threat. Yes, sure he will get a few (I suspect any of our team would if playing that position) but that has never been one of his strengths. He has scored 7 for us in over 50 matches - he certainly has other strengths, but if you start with him then you give up the initiative IMO, and that is exactly what we saw yesterday. Yesterday was a collective failure of course, not just down to Mackie, which included the manager. Of those who started the game only Sykes and perhaps Baptiste came out of the first half with much credit.

Imagine if we had started the game playing as we did from the 60th minute...
 
Unfortunately some are still living in the past (still tugging away at Mackie’s goal against Bradford) yes there is moments where he does have an affect on games but not enough when we’ve needed it imo, as i mention on the January thread we need another striker in KR can’t trust Dan Agyei to do & I think that’s embarrassing not having him on the bench ahead of Hall who’s can’t cut it at this level any more, that just leaves us with Taylor who’s not even 1st choice ?

Rotherham proved what decent forward’s you need at this level, Smith (target man & line up play) Vassell (pacy & goal threat) Ladapo (target pacy goalscorer) & they can also call back Yates whenever they want so that’s 4 decent choices in strikers compared to our only decent striker in Taylor (don’t mention about all the attacking forwards we’ve got I’m on about out & out decent number 9’s)
 
Rotherham have bounced between the Championship and League 1 for the last few years so have had the opportunity to build and invest in their squad for a few years. After the Pep experience, we have had to rebuild as a mid-lower table league 1 side. It's therefore a little unfair to compare our strikers the theirs.

However, this is about Mackie and I stand by the opinion that he offers something. Yesterday, Rotherham put 3 players forward for our goal kicks, forcing Eastwood to kick long. Mackie often does this himself. He chases across the backline and slows the delivery out of defence. This allows 9 of our players to set up ready to win the ball and immediately regain control of the game. He also rushes defenders into playing the ball quickly which allows the midfield to press and brings others into the game. And on top of this he also offers experience and leadership in a generally very young and very quiet team.

But he also has many faults. His goal scoring record is poor and he often snatches at chances, equally he doesn't directly assist goals. These are two massive expectations and we do need better options to support Taylor. The other issue is his discipline as he can often give away fouls when we're in decent positions.

The thing with Mackie playing is having others who can play in the space he creates and get our goals. Yesterday, without Henry and with Brannagan, Baptiste and Fosu offering little first half, we had no real goal threat.

Mackie is limited and I suspect he will play fewer games in the second half of the season. But you only have to go back a few weeks to Man City when we looked a different team when he came on.
 
Scotchegg said:
But you only have to go back a few weeks to Man City when we looked a different team when he came on.
Click to expand...
Yes, he is a better option to use later in the game, depending on the circumstances. You wouldn't bring him on if we needed a couple of goals!
 
Marked Ox said:
Likewise has led the forward line in plenty of games when we were flying this season such as West Ham.

But when they don't want to see, they will ignore such things.
Click to expand...
Yeah I remember him against West Ham. I remember him going off at 1-0 and Taylor scoring the second in an eventual 4-0 win. I remember Taylor scoring the equaliser against Man City too. In fact, I remember Taylor scoring lots of goals.

Jamie Mackie is an inferior striker to others who is less effective, and who shouldn’t be given equal billing with one of the best number nines at this level when they’re both fit and available. Sorry about that.
 
RyanioBirdio said:
Yeah I remember him against West Ham. I remember him going off at 1-0 and Taylor scoring the second in an eventual 4-0 win. I remember Taylor scoring the equaliser against Man City too. In fact, I remember Taylor scoring lots of goals.

Jamie Mackie is an inferior striker to others who is less effective, and who shouldn’t be given equal billing with one of the best number nines at this level when they’re both fit and available. Sorry about that.
Click to expand...

I didn't say he should get equal billing with Taylor but he has led the forward line in plenty of games we've won comfortably this season (and we were winning when he went off against Premier League West Ham). I just challenged a ridiculous post which discounted the good he has done.
 
Bacon said:
Have to agree with most of the posts on this thread. I like Mackie as much as then next man, but he just simply is not a goal threat. Playing him ahead of a fit Taylor is ludicrous and should never happen again
Click to expand...


I said it elsewhere but to deploy Mackie ahead of Taylor when Henry is also unavailable seems a really poor decision. Of the front three who exactly was getting the goals yesterday ? Mackie quite simply doesn’t score. Sykes has, what, two career goals for us and Fosu has something like 1 goal in the last 10 matches.

Gorrin never scores and while Brannagan is relatively prolific for a midfielder he has dried up recently. Baptiste has a goal in him but he’s not a reliable source of goals.

Agyei will provide a greater goal threat than Mackie and I’d much rather have unleashed Browne down the middle than Mackie. With the other options we had it seemed one of Robinson’s more bizarre selection decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Manorlounger
Ex Player You gotta love Jamie Mackie!
Replies
1
Views
1K
Sarge
Sarge
OxfordNondie
General Mackie
7 8 9
Replies
168
Views
23K
Left Wing Cross
Left Wing Cross
F
Mackie- big game player?
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
makv
makv
W
Jamie Mackie
2 3
Replies
47
Views
9K
witney50
W
Sarge
General Whyte, Browne & Mackie ...
Replies
1
Views
2K
Witneyoldfella
W
Back
Top Bottom