Why is Griffiths still underrated by our support?

Well if we had a better striker then that striker might score 2, or score and get involved and create opportunities for others or fashion out more chances for themself.

Why can't people understand that. Scoring a goal and then doing nothing else for the rest of the game just doesn't cut it for me sometimes. If we had a better quality of striker they would contribute more.

 

But he is scoring goals for fun, including in Europe.

I fail to see what else he can do at the moment.

I just want my striker to score goals, and he is excelling in that respect.

 

Your slagging people for wanting him in the summer, are you not?

 

A have indeed, some of the people on here way overrate Hooper, which a haven't noticed from Celtic fans off the forum.

A mean the boy above Boyd Crowder doesn't think Griffiths is the answer yet he thinks Hooper is. That's * ridiculous if you ask me, none of them two are * answer

One is enjoying his best form and is currently the best we've got and the other has been rotten for ages and is lucky if he even makes Norwich bench

 

Can't speak for Murphy but that makes no sense.

In what way can he fail? I've already said plenty of times that he scores goals in Scotland and will continue to do so. It's not whether he will fail or not, it's whether he can continue to develop his game.

As far as I'm concerned, Griffiths right now is the best he'll ever be. I can't see him suddenly becoming a player who is scoring regularly and having a fantastic first touch and being able to beat two players and thread a pass through the defence.

I want him to do that, but I just don't think he has it in him.

 

Slagging? No that was you was it not?

 

Boyd, you seem to want the complete striker and we just cannot afford that.

All we can do is find someone who we can iron out their deficiencies over time and hopefully build ourselves a complete striker.

However I would rather try and turn a Griffiths into that striker while he scores goals trying to get there rather than sign a succession of Pukki's who have all the link up play in the world but no * goals!

 

See like you said a come across bitter with Hooper, that's how I've seen you and Murphy come across with Griffiths.

Always slating him.

Griffiths is better than Hooper.

Hail hail the Thumb

 

He can be a better all round player, it's not very hard to understand what I'm saying.

How often does it come up to Griffiths and he can't control the ball or he gives it away under little pressure or he puts in a terrible cross etc. And even his finishing isn't fantastic. He does miss a lot of sitters.

I can't argue with his scoring record but can't you see that he lacks in his all round game? It's blatantly obvious.

 

How many times do I need to * say it, I'm not slating Griffiths. I'm pointing out his weaknesses. I don't abuse the guy or say he's *.

Whereas you're always having wee digs at Hooper.

If you look through the threads about Hooper from his time here you'll see that I thought many fans here overrated him and I wasn't a massive fan of him. But in my opinion when he was here, he was better than Griffiths is now.

 

Scott Mcdonald
.
.
.
(A bit further down) - Griffiths.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Then Hooper cause he's * in the air, and lazy.

 

People who complain about him getting too many chances , at least he is in the correct position to get the chances how many times i watched stokes and sammy play as striker and they got 1/2 chances because they had no clue where to be always out wide . The wee man is a gem

 

It's not the perfect striker, I know we can only afford a certain type of player. But ( and I'm getting sick of his name now) Gary Hooper is the type of player we could be doing with. A fantastic goal scorer and someone who had a good first touch and could create goals for others. Plus he was a strong wee * who could back into defenders and bring others in to play.

He's not perfect but he has/had a bit more to his game than just scoring goals.

 

Say as many times as you like sweetheart, but like you accusing me of being bitter towards Hooper when I've stated many time a have nothing but love for the dude. Just because a think he's inferior to McDonald and Griffiths doesn't make me bitter at him.

 

More to his game? What like? Can't header a ball? Lazy bastardness? Slow as a snail but still faster than Weir? That more to his game you mean?

 

Nothing but love for him. Right look at the post I just quoted from 5 minutes ago.:smiley-laughing002:

So apparently Scott McDonald is miles better than Hooper as well. Deary me.

 

Yeah you love Hooper right enough. :smiley-laughing002:

 

Am pointing out his weaknesses why would that mean i don't?

 

Exactly

And as many have said, Griff doesn't just score goals. He has many more aspects to his game aswell. And why compare him to Hooper anyway. Hooper has been atrocious in recent memory and he is not a Celtic player.

I'm a fan of Griff. Yes he can improve parts of his game but he is fulfilling his number one priority, scoring goals at all levels. I would like to see him play next to somebody, maybe a target man.

I bet if his name was Leewang Griffong he wouldn't be getting the same negativity

 

A honestly thought that was the opinion from most Celtic fans? It's certainly my opinion.

McDonald didn't go missing in most games. He was a genuine big game player.

Thats no slight on Hooper, McDonald was just exceptional.