| Strikers, why strikers? 10:56 - Jan 13 with 1757 views | pablosturn |
I post very infrequently, however just the pure number of links with only strikers concerns me a lot, doesn't it worry anyone else.
If there was ever a shred of doubt as to why MM should leave and be replaced with some fresh ideas its the fact that he thinks a big striker is going to help us climb the league and play better football.
Our side lacks creativity and pace in central midfield, the likes of Bru, Skuse, Douglas, Hyam do not provide this an the injury prone Bishop doesn't seem to be able to stay fit. One good buy in CM would change the dynamic of our team for the better but I guess they may get bored watching Chambers launch ball after ball up to Pitman et al.
I don't get the whole wait until we are safe thing to change our manager, something needs to be done now as this guy is all out of ideas in my opinion. Last roll of the dice for him seems to be try and buy a Murphy clone and let the good times roll.
MM out.....now! [Post edited 13 Jan 2017 10:56]
|  | | |  |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 11:00 - Jan 13 with 1729 views | SWGF |
It's a close-run thing between needing a proper, multi-faceted central midfielder or a striker.
Truth is we need both (and more). |  |
| |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 11:01 - Jan 13 with 1708 views | pablosturn |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 11:00 - Jan 13 by SWGF |
It's a close-run thing between needing a proper, multi-faceted central midfielder or a striker.
Truth is we need both (and more). |
True, probably very true, I just think if it is one player or the other id lean towards a talented CM to feed some confidence back into our starved front 1,2 or 3! | | | |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:02 - Jan 13 with 1705 views | Bloots |
....such a twist over rumours and transfer gossip.
We obviously miss a striker with a physical presence, so we are going to be linked with all of them in our price range.
We aren't going to buy them all (if any) you do realise that don't you?
I'd suggest that we need a physical striker and a midfielder to add some box to box energy.
Take a deep breath and wait to see what, if anything, happens. [Post edited 13 Jan 2017 11:02]
|  |
| Elite Level Poster: Elite Level Supporter: Elite Level Human |
| |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:04 - Jan 13 with 1676 views | pablosturn |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:02 - Jan 13 by Bloots |
....such a twist over rumours and transfer gossip.
We obviously miss a striker with a physical presence, so we are going to be linked with all of them in our price range.
We aren't going to buy them all (if any) you do realise that don't you?
I'd suggest that we need a physical striker and a midfielder to add some box to box energy.
Take a deep breath and wait to see what, if anything, happens. [Post edited 13 Jan 2017 11:02]
|
That was a balanced view on what rumours and news is coming out, apologies, we should sit back and be apathetic.
It was a view that we aren't even being linked with a CM, MM will not fix the correct areas, why should we just wait for him to sign a big target man,. look at other sides and they do without a massive brute to bully defences.
We need the right man at the top to start making some correct decisions.
Some of his recent decisions have been baffling | | | |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:07 - Jan 13 with 1653 views | Kieran_Knows |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:04 - Jan 13 by pablosturn |
That was a balanced view on what rumours and news is coming out, apologies, we should sit back and be apathetic.
It was a view that we aren't even being linked with a CM, MM will not fix the correct areas, why should we just wait for him to sign a big target man,. look at other sides and they do without a massive brute to bully defences.
We need the right man at the top to start making some correct decisions.
Some of his recent decisions have been baffling |
We've not been linked with a CM? So Tunnicliffe, Potts and Power are not CM's? No? |  |
| |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:09 - Jan 13 with 1633 views | pablosturn |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:07 - Jan 13 by Kieran_Knows |
We've not been linked with a CM? So Tunnicliffe, Potts and Power are not CM's? No? |
Strong links are they? lol
We wont be buying a CM, too busy buying big lumps for chambers to launch the ball to.
He will revert to type don't you worry | | | |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 11:34 - Jan 13 with 1578 views | rickw |
For Mick's tactics to work we need a giant striker, most of those we've been linked to aren't any bigger than those we've already got.....
I agree Mick needs to be changed, however ME won't do this unless we lose probably 5 matches in a row |  |
| |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 11:39 - Jan 13 with 1559 views | itfcjoe |
Because we don't have a proper number 9 style strike - and that doesn't necessarily mean a big lump |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:52 - Jan 13 with 1516 views | Butterbing |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:09 - Jan 13 by pablosturn |
Strong links are they? lol
We wont be buying a CM, too busy buying big lumps for chambers to launch the ball to.
He will revert to type don't you worry |
Links are just paper talk. Sometimes there is something in them, sometimes it is an agent, sometimes it is creative thinking. They don't necessarily mean anything. Mick does tend to keep his cards close to his chest in that respect so I wouldn't read too much into it. |  | | |
| Yeah, you certainly sound.... on 12:08 - Jan 13 with 1454 views | Bloots |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:04 - Jan 13 by pablosturn |
That was a balanced view on what rumours and news is coming out, apologies, we should sit back and be apathetic.
It was a view that we aren't even being linked with a CM, MM will not fix the correct areas, why should we just wait for him to sign a big target man,. look at other sides and they do without a massive brute to bully defences.
We need the right man at the top to start making some correct decisions.
Some of his recent decisions have been baffling |
....balanced. | |
| Elite Level Poster: Elite Level Supporter: Elite Level Human |
| |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 12:14 - Jan 13 with 1420 views | oldbluestu |
| You shouldn't get your knickers in..... on 11:09 - Jan 13 by pablosturn |
Strong links are they? lol
We wont be buying a CM, too busy buying big lumps for chambers to launch the ball to.
He will revert to type don't you worry |
So all the links about CM's aren't strong but the all links about strikers you mention are strong?
I've only seen one link about a striker which I would class as strong and that's Hugill |  | | |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:20 - Jan 13 with 1389 views | Guthrum |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 11:34 - Jan 13 by rickw |
For Mick's tactics to work we need a giant striker, most of those we've been linked to aren't any bigger than those we've already got.....
I agree Mick needs to be changed, however ME won't do this unless we lose probably 5 matches in a row |
Not 100% true. The last game I saw live, at home v Bristol, there was a definite policy of putting the long ball beyond the opposition defenders, for our front men to run on to. Relatively little of the attempted ball-to-head.
I don't think a tall, but relatively immobile, lump would suit the team at all. One of Murphy's greatest assets was his relative agility and turn of speed for such a big man.
If going for height, we need someone more in the Peter Crouch mould than the Andy Carroll stereotype. |  |
| |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:24 - Jan 13 with 1369 views | hype313 |
Well, given the fact that we lost our leading front line striker in August, you can see why the club might feel it necessary to purchase another. |  |
| |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:34 - Jan 13 with 1340 views | rickw |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:20 - Jan 13 by Guthrum |
Not 100% true. The last game I saw live, at home v Bristol, there was a definite policy of putting the long ball beyond the opposition defenders, for our front men to run on to. Relatively little of the attempted ball-to-head.
I don't think a tall, but relatively immobile, lump would suit the team at all. One of Murphy's greatest assets was his relative agility and turn of speed for such a big man.
If going for height, we need someone more in the Peter Crouch mould than the Andy Carroll stereotype. |
Against Lincoln they played defensively so there was no space behind, we were just lumping it for Pitman or Sears to outjump their 6ft5 defender all game....
But you are right about Murphy - he was stereotyped as just a big targetman but didn't always get the credit (outside of Town fans) for his mobility and workrate too | |
| |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:39 - Jan 13 with 1318 views | Guthrum |
While I agree with the gist of your point (or get another wide-man so Lawrence or maybe Ward can move to the centre, both being able to play in that position), I also think that the prevalence of links is largely down to the general perception in the outside world (including the media) that we lost an important "big-man" striker in August so we must be looking to get another similar. This rather than any knowlege of at whom we have actually been looking (which McCarthy is not in the habit of publicising). [Post edited 13 Jan 2017 12:47]
| |
| |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:44 - Jan 13 with 1288 views | TractorWood |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 11:00 - Jan 13 by SWGF |
It's a close-run thing between needing a proper, multi-faceted central midfielder or a striker.
Truth is we need both (and more). |
Only 3 or 4 of our squad are consistently good enough to put forward a case as credible championship players. When this is aggregating against expectations of perpetually being in the playoffs, fans are obviously going to get frustrated, regardless of the brand of football.
Club feels like a lifeless regurgitation of itself at the moment. Fresh blood and ideas are the answer to stave off perpetual decline. [Post edited 13 Jan 2017 12:50]
|  |
| |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:47 - Jan 13 with 1278 views | Guthrum |
| Strikers, why strikers? on 12:34 - Jan 13 by rickw |
Against Lincoln they played defensively so there was no space behind, we were just lumping it for Pitman or Sears to outjump their 6ft5 defender all game....
But you are right about Murphy - he was stereotyped as just a big targetman but didn't always get the credit (outside of Town fans) for his mobility and workrate too |
Under those circumstances we need people who can run the ball and pass accurately to get through the defence. But we haven't got that many in the squad who can (or will).
Kenlock can a bit, but he's young and inexperienced. Dozzell certainly, but only sometimes at the moment. Bru likewise, but even more variable. McGoldrick can pass, but not really run. Sears can run but not effectively use the ball at the end of it. Then there's Lawrence, who is the full package and therefore the man making and scoring the goals.
We need another Tom Lawrence as much as we need a big Centre Forward, IMO. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
