Chermiti hasn't lit the place up with goals and people are allowed to be frustrated. At the same time, the basic facts you pointed out matter: limited starts, plenty of short sub appearances and a manager who seems happy with a certain shape. That all changes how we should read the raw numbers.

Are the stats being judged fairly?

Look at the minutes, not just the goal tally. Starting 14 of 23 league matches and logging a number of short cameos skews percentages. Scoring three times from starts and twice as a sub tells you he has produced in both roles, even if the totals aren't hefty. You can make a fair point that expectations for a front man are different when he’s only getting a handful of minutes in some games.

Tactics, team efficiency and who finishes

There’s also the bigger team context. If we’re top for shots and shots on target but only convert a small percentage, that’s not solely on one striker. You mentioned Chermiti and Tav having similar shot conversion figures — that suggests pockets of finishing inefficiency around the side, not just a single failing player. It’s entirely reasonable to argue the rest of the team need to be sharper in front of goal.

What Rohl seems to prefer

Ultimately this becomes a tactical debate. Either the manager wants a centre-forward who links play, presses and creates space for others, or he wants someone cleansheet-hungry and purely goal-focused. If Rohl keeps picking Chermiti in those positions despite other options, you have to assume he values what Chermiti brings beyond the raw goals. If you want a different outcome, the solution is clear: change the role or change the formation. Until that happens, the manager’s selection choices tell you what he wants the team to look like on the pitch.

To be fair, it’s not a tidy argument either way. But you’re not daft to ask if the stats are fair — they rarely are without context.

Written by Angus1812: 16 May 2026

Tags: tactics rumours