Very disappointing. Didn't offer himself, didn't offer a presence. For a big guy, he was totally dominated for 90 minutes.
In fairness to Harewood, we made very few chances against Peterborough when Davies was playing, and Peterborough are nowhere near the quality of Palace.
Extremely poor, we'll be lucky to see him score five times this season. If we don't bring somebody in we're going to be completely reliant on midfield for our goals.
I think they would be better got going down to B&Q and getting a gate post or summat and sticking a BFC shirt on it. would get more movement
Think he should drop the 'Hare' bit from his name and just call himself 'Wood', given he has the movement and control of a plank.
I do not know why I am doing this, but I am about to defend Harewood for no obvious reason. There is no doubt that Harewood plays the game differently to Davies. There is also no doubt that we have struggled to score this season, whoever has played up front. Aside from Birmingham, we have not scored more than one goal in a game. I personally do not like the diamond, but it is hard to argue against it away from home. At home, I do not believe it gives us enough width. The games becomes first goal wins, and if we concede first, we struggle to get back in the game. The problem is that it is hard for Keith to change the system because of injuries and lack of quality. I look forward to a time when we have pace out wide, and we can provide the crosses that any striker would want, but at the moment, any striker would struggle and this is why I believe we should not be so hard on Harewood.
It not just scoring though is it. He does nothing, he may not have the pace but he doesn't even challenge and put himself about. Twice tonight a couple of crosses went a little too close to the goalie but Harewood just stood and watched, he should at least be challenging. He doesn't win headers and he needs ten yards to turn a round in. When the ball comes to him for some reason he seems to take about 10 little touches to get it under control and then loses it Hes Just Bad
To be fair, I hate to be harsh on our own players. But I haven't seen much movement or effort from Harewood tonight. I can forgive players being beaten by a better opponent, but just not bothering to jump, and not offering yourself for a pass/throw in is just not acceptable. I was pleased when we signed him, but to be honest, id rather see us give the kids a chance.
There were plenty of balls into the box tonight. He didn't get anywhere near any of them. He fails to compete in the air. Too sluggish and no touch, the ball bounces off him.
I understand your frustration, but the problem for Harewood, as it is for Davies, is lack of space. He was heavily marked tonight because we were trying to force the ball through the middle where the bodies are thickest. Davies reacts to this by dropping deep looking for space, whereas Harewood reacts by staying in the danger area. They play the game differently, that is all. I maintain that we failed to create chances, and have done so all season at home.
Until the last 15 minutes we played the wingers on the wrong sides. This means they tend to cut in and hit in balls which curl towards the keeper and away from the strikers. When the cross is delivered from the full back position, it is delivered from in front of the opposing defense, so once again, it favours the defenders. Had Harewood been on the end of the chance that Palace scored from, he would have scored. In fact I would have scored and I am 61 years old. The difference is that the cross was delivered from a better position and is was a better quality cross.
Notwithhstanding Harewood offered little threat. His touch was poor and was unlikey to unhinge all but a recumbant defence. If there had been good crosses in great abound (there were a few) he would have threatened none (QED). A bit unlucky early on mindsthi .
