Taxi for Barnard.............?

[dubai_phil]

OK so I've watched two matches. I've put a QUESTION MARK in the title so bear me out, andI keep the ideas simple in the OP for debate.

 

LB strengths - predatory goal scorer, battler, 120% effort, makes a nuisance of himself and creates chances for others.

LB weakness (like I said bear with me on this) compared to RL he needs 1 and a quarter touches to get the ball under control, lack of killer pace over the first 5 yards

 

So, what I noticed.

 

In the past 2 games we have played what seems a clearly defined passing pattern RL getting the ball wide etc. Everyone has told me that's how we've been playing for ages and it is frustrating the hell out the regulars, but it clearly is what we work on in training.

 

For me we play like all the teams in the World Cup (bar England) working the ball around, looking for angles and keeping possession (as much as possible) until a final ball into the edge of the box.

 

The moves kept breaking down in ShefW & Charlton (AOC having a mare with his touch did not help), because the ball was coming in to LB with his back to goal between his feet & his chest. the lack of pace meant the CB's were able to keep VERY tight to him and the ball kept bouncing off him. In fact LB spent a large part of both games with his arms out appealing for (rightly) fouls.

 

Opta stats may be interesting, but his pass completion up tight to the defenders was IMHO not high. Now, compare that to when Forte came on, he seemed to play sideways to the defender, he can't play with his back to goal he looks to make the CB turn which as others commented forced their defence to drop deeper.

 

So. LB is not working in the current style of play, a style that most leading teams try and play and I think will serve us well as we move up the pyramid.

 

So LB & NA needs to tweak his role or I finally understand why NA preffered Guly in the striker role.

 

So lose our most committed player and goal scoring threat or continue to have the play break-down.

 

Taxi for Barnard.

 

IMHO not quite but I see where we are going wrong and why everyone is hacked off AOC & Chaplow also fall into the passes breaking down area.

 

(oh and gang? RL is a FAR better footballer than many on here give him credit for, his touch and control is superb, ok so he ain't a Ron Davies in the air but his touch in the last two games is up there with Crouchy's)

[saintscottofthenortham]

I am not going to bother wasting my time reading it, thus I can't give you an answer.

 

All I will say is I really rate him. Far more so than Guly. My apologies if you were not slagging him off.

[dubai_phil]

I am not going to bother wasting my time reading it, thus I can't give you an answer.

 

All I will say is I really rate him. Far more so than Guly. My apologies if you were not slagging him off.

 

Shouldda read it mate

 

I precis for you. I think in our style of play that LB is a liability because he plays with his back to goal and he allows the CB's to get tight to him and so he keeps getting bundled off the ball and our passing moves break down. There was a load of explanation in there and some questions

[SNSUN]

I can't remember which opposition messageboard said it, but Barnard is one of those players you'd much rather have playing for your side than against it. That, to me, is high praise indeed. If the opposition are frustrated with him, he's doing his job very well.

 

Lambert is class, but Barnard is a natural finisher. Ok, maybe his positioning isn't World Class, but he works so hard he tends to find position eventually. He'd be automatic choice if I were manager, if we lose him at the tail end of the season it'll be a big loss.

[Saint Fan CaM]

Wow - pretty broad brush analysis I would say there. I don't honestly think it's that simple though. For example, have you noticed how LB takes players with him and away from other attacking players? I don't think it's so much LB, but the pace at which a ball is delivered into an area where he can take advantage (same for Lambert for that matter). We sometimes mess about too much and end up losing the ball without even getting a strike on goal. Anyway, who knows you may get your wish soon if LB gets a custodial.

[Dalek2003]

The boy Barnard, he's got to get in there !

[dubai_phil]

Wow - pretty broad brush analysis I would say there. I don't honestly think it's that simple though. For example, have you noticed how LB takes players with him and away from other attacking players? I don't think it's so much LB, but the pace at which a ball is delivered into an area where he can take advantage (same for Lambert for that matter). We sometimes mess about too much and end up losing the ball without even getting a strike on goal. Anyway, who knows you may get your wish soon if LB gets a custodial.

 

No I want him in the team - doh! But watching the build up play his main role seems to be the most forward player hodling the ball and laying it off to whoever is running in to support. So, we have our best scorer playing outside the box with his back to goal, sort of think that isn't the right place for him - my example was - like playing Ted McDougall as an AM....

 

BUT I can see why Guly (and to an extent) Forte give something different.

 

So in his current role our moves break down around him, so either give him a different role (ie scoring GOALS) or Guly will be back

 

And yes agree about the pace of the ball - it just seems to bounce off him at times, allowing the CB to hoof it

[saintscottofthenortham]

Shouldda read it mate

 

I precis for you. I think in our style of play that LB is a liability because he plays with his back to goal and he allows the CB's to get tight to him and so he keeps getting bundled off the ball and our passing moves break down. There was a load of explanation in there and some questions

 

Ok mate I read it. I saw the "Taxi For Barnard." and thought "Na." so didn't bother reading it. Now I see that you were putting it forward as a question.

 

Some good points, but to me nobody else bothers opposition defences quite like LB does and I love him for that. Granted, his first touch can be questioned every now and again but for me, he is just what we need. After watching Guly play week in week out and moving about 50m during those 10 games, I was mighty relieved to see LB gifted the chance to show his worth, and for me, he has grapped that opportunity with both hands.

 

Taxi for Barnard? No.

[dubai_phil]

Ok mate I read it. I saw the "Taxi For Barnard." and thought "Na." so didn't bother reading it. Now I see that you were putting it forward as a question.

 

Some good points, but to me nobody else bothers opposition defences quite like LB does and I love him for that. Granted, his first touch can be questioned every now and again but for me, he is just what we need. After watching Guly play week in week out and moving about 50m during those 10 games, I was mighty relieved to see LB gifted the chance to show his worth, and for me, he has grapped that opportunity with both hands.

 

Taxi for Barnard? No.

 

My feelings too - which lead me to think that the regulars will continue to get frustrated by our ineffective style at the moment.

 

There was a moment towards the end of the Charlton game where they (Charlton) were pressing forward roared on by their fan and were playing on instinct, emotion and passion, it was the best 5 minutes of football I saw in 180. No doubt whatsoever that in those situations LB is who we need in the box. Just I think the STYLE overcomes the passion.

 

Modern football has become like that it's why England were (apart from Capello's crap inputs) rubbish at the WC, our passion was stifled by organisation. I think we need to have a style and it is why I commented to my mates that I had NEVER seen such an organised (hell even OVER coached) Saints team, and that is was sterile football.

[Viking Warrior]

You should have used cartoon characters Phil mr northam would understood your précis

[Berkers]

Take on board all the criticisms (particularly lack of pace) and do get frustrated that we like to encourage AOC and Lallana to play inside allowing the full-backs space but that's another debate.

The fact is that with Lee Barnard in the side, Rickie Lambert appears to be far more effective - a genuine partnership.

[benjii]

Shouldda read it mate

 

I precis for you. I think in our style of play that LB is a liability because he plays with his back to goal and he allows the CB's to get tight to him and so he keeps getting bundled off the ball and our passing moves break down. There was a load of explanation in there and some questions

 

Nah.

[saintscottofthenortham]

My feelings too - which lead me to think that the regulars will continue to get frustrated by our ineffective style at the moment.

 

There was a moment towards the end of the Charlton game where they (Charlton) were pressing forward roared on by their fan and were playing on instinct, emotion and passion, it was the best 5 minutes of football I saw in 180. No doubt whatsoever that in those situations LB is who we need in the box. Just I think the STYLE overcomes the passion.

 

Modern football has become like that it's why England were (apart from Capello's crap inputs) rubbish at the WC, our passion was stifled by organisation. I think we need to have a style and it is why I commented to my mates that I had NEVER seen such an organised (hell even OVER coached) Saints team, and that is was sterile football.

 

I know what your saying. I put it down to how this squad was pretty much assembled under AP, and his teams play a totally different ball game than how Adkins sets out. I think, in time, once NA has been able to have a proper effect on what players are here (i.e, a summer transfer window or two) we will get the full benefit of how he likes to play, because there are a few players in our team who totally don't suit it, Rickie for one.

[dubai_phil]

Take on board all the criticisms (particularly lack of pace) and do get frustrated that we like to encourage AOC and Lallana to play inside allowing the full-backs space but that's another debate.

The fact is that with Lee Barnard in the side, Rickie Lambert appears to be far more effective - a genuine partnership.

 

Not having seen him play with Guly, would be interested to know the answer to this question.

 

With LB, Lee plays tight on the CB's with RL roaming and tending to drop deep (sort of like a 4-4-1-1) shape

With Guly, does RL play on the CB shoulder or is it Guly?

[saintscottofthenortham]

Take on board all the criticisms (particularly lack of pace) and do get frustrated that we like to encourage AOC and Lallana to play inside allowing the full-backs space but that's another debate.

The fact is that with Lee Barnard in the side, Rickie Lambert appears to be far more effective - a genuine partnership.

 

Agreed. Because they compliment eachother. Watching Lambo & Guly together though... well, thats like having Chips & Mash on the same plate. They look different, but are the same thing.

[saintscottofthenortham]

Not having seen him play with Guly, would be interested to know the answer to this question.

 

With LB, Lee plays tight on the CB's with RL roaming and tending to drop deep (sort of like a 4-4-1-1) shape

With Guly, does RL play on the CB shoulder or is it Guly?

 

Lambo runs around while Guly stands still.

[PokingFun]

Trouble is, passion alone does not win football matches. We have arguably won more points recently by being well organised and tough to beat, partiularly as a significant number of the games have been away from home.

 

LB gives us a good option up front as he will work hard and allow us to defend from the front so that hopefully our more gifted players can get on the ball. If we want someone that has the ability to unlock teams then you start with Guly as he has that ability (along with OXO and Lallana who have somewhat different attributes) but unfortunately is not as consistent and can be frustrating at times but equally has had games where he has been excellent.

 

I think its a bit horses for courses. Away from home I think Barney suits more as we have to be well organised and able to withstand any initial home team enthusiasm so a really strong work ethic is the order of the day. At home, I believe we can afford to be a bit more creative which means LB is probably not the best option albeit he is still a decent one.

 

I don't know exact stats on this but I believe RL / LB do have a decent record starting games together so its a decent option in its own right.

 

Guess it all boils down to the weaknesses of the opposition and how best we can exploit them. I think NA is good at spotting those things but also changing when it doesn't work. I'm just pleased we now seem to have a side that has flexibility of options when everyone is fit.

 

Anyway, I'm off out for a beer as Bristol Rovers have just scored, fingers crossed they can do us a favour!! COYR!!

[croydonsaint]

Barnards a nasty competive player. Any team will be stronger with that type of player. Be madness to lose him.

[jam]

I think Barnard could be one of our best (relatively speaking) signings in recent times.

 

But I believe we play more interesting, more dynamic and smarter football with Guly. In addition, Guly is bloody rapid, which adds a whole other dimension to our game.

 

I think that the style of football that Adkins is getting us to play will make Barnard more effective as a sub as I think the strategy is to get us controlling games, saving energy and wearing other teams out. Then we can stick Barnard and Forte (or similar) on and tear teams apart if we need to.

 

Sadly it seems like there are a significant amount at St Mary's who aren't satisfied unless we're going hell for leather at the opposition goal all of the time.

Edited 25 March, 2011 by jam
why not

[Supersubpuckett]

Barnard is an asset to the team, aside from the fact he can finish he gets stuck in and shows some passion which precious few of the others do - when he came on against swindon in place of that lazy, casual brazilian enigma he was a breath of fresh air. If he played against us he run rings round our defence. Rickie has failings too, so why are LBs being picked on here?

[ottery st mary]

Barnard and Lambert combination is good enough for King Nigel then it is good enough for me..

 

More goals to come from this world class combo...

 

 

WIFM

[Turkish]

OK so I've watched two matches. I've put a QUESTION MARK in the title so bear me out, andI keep the ideas simple in the OP for debate.

 

LB strengths - predatory goal scorer, battler, 120% effort, makes a nuisance of himself and creates chances for others.

LB weakness (like I said bear with me on this) compared to RL he needs 1 and a quarter touches to get the ball under control, lack of killer pace over the first 5 yards

 

So, what I noticed.

 

In the past 2 games we have played what seems a clearly defined passing pattern RL getting the ball wide etc. Everyone has told me that's how we've been playing for ages and it is frustrating the hell out the regulars, but it clearly is what we work on in training.

 

For me we play like all the teams in the World Cup (bar England) working the ball around, looking for angles and keeping possession (as much as possible) until a final ball into the edge of the box.

 

The moves kept breaking down in ShefW & Charlton (AOC having a mare with his touch did not help), because the ball was coming in to LB with his back to goal between his feet & his chest. the lack of pace meant the CB's were able to keep VERY tight to him and the ball kept bouncing off him. In fact LB spent a large part of both games with his arms out appealing for (rightly) fouls.

 

Opta stats may be interesting, but his pass completion up tight to the defenders was IMHO not high. Now, compare that to when Forte came on, he seemed to play sideways to the defender, he can't play with his back to goal he looks to make the CB turn which as others commented forced their defence to drop deeper.

 

So. LB is not working in the current style of play, a style that most leading teams try and play and I think will serve us well as we move up the pyramid.

 

So LB & NA needs to tweak his role or I finally understand why NA preffered Guly in the striker role.

 

So lose our most committed player and goal scoring threat or continue to have the play break-down.

 

Taxi for Barnard.

 

IMHO not quite but I see where we are going wrong and why everyone is hacked off AOC & Chaplow also fall into the passes breaking down area.

 

(oh and gang? RL is a FAR better footballer than many on here give him credit for, his touch and control is superb, ok so he ain't a Ron Davies in the air but his touch in the last two games is up there with Crouchy's)

 

A classic post from someone that knows F*ck all about football and SFC, in this post you have summed up why this forum means f*ck all to anyone that is clued up and watches Saints home and away.

[Saint_lambden]

Taxi for Barnard? Jesus f*cking christ

[the saint in winchester]

The boy Barnard, he's got to get in there !

 

Thanks Dave. That goes along with your other classics like "what we don't want to do now, Adam, is concede a goal"!!!!

You don't say?!

[Smirking_Saint]

Having played upfront and done it, and centre half against it. There is nothing worse than playing against an annoying B*stard that chases down your every ball and gives you no time on it. He hussles and bussles, wins balls, creates space and causes confusion.

 

That is what he is there for, in order to disrupt the oppositions attacks, win free kicks, get the ball back and be a nuissance in the box. The fact that he isn't a bad player at all at this level and is scoring goals is a definate plus.

 

Also the fact that you have picked Lambert up on the fact that he is playing well but people are still slagging him off is surprising, he is a shadow of the player he was last year. Ok, he has a decent first touch and pass but he is not working hard at all and 9/10 his flicks go to noone.

[Saint Fan CaM]

And yes agree about the pace of the ball - it just seems to bounce off him at times, allowing the CB to hoof it

 

Err, no. I meant we don't play the ball into positions in the box quick enough...i.e. to the feet of our strikers to shoot BEFORE we run into a blind alley and CB's. We don't strike with pace often - we fanny around with umpteen passes - trying to be patient until eventually a move breaks down because we're OVER played the ball. This league is not about pretty - it's about brute force and passion and that's why we need the likes of Barnard in the team.

[St_Tel49]

Lambo runs around while Guly stands still.

 

You are joking aren't you?

[St_Tel49]

Taxi for Barnard? Jesus f*cking christ

 

Well read!

[SparkySaint]

The boy Barnard, he's got to get in there !

 

Love the Merrington nod

[Lighthouse]

Our record this season is far better when Barnard is in the side. We've only lost once, at Walsall, when he has started under Adkins. He's more likely to find the net than Lambert at the moment too. Aside from that purple patch, I really haven't been convinced by Guly.

[doggface]

Disagree phil, barnards 1st touch is better than the majority if our team IMO. That would have come from his spurs education.

He is one paced I will give you that and cannot play off the shoulder.

 

Guly & forte give something different, they both have strengths & weaknesses compared to Barnard.

[dubai_phil]

Err, no. I meant we don't play the ball into positions in the box quick enough...i.e. to the feet of our strikers to shoot BEFORE we run into a blind alley and CB's. We don't strike with pace often - we fanny around with umpteen passes - trying to be patient until eventually a move breaks down because we're OVER played the ball. This league is not about pretty - it's about brute force and passion and that's why we need the likes of Barnard in the team.

 

Disagree phil, barnards 1st touch is better than the majority if our team IMO. That would have come from his spurs education.

He is one paced I will give you that and cannot play off the shoulder.

 

Guly & forte give something different, they both have strengths & weaknesses compared to Barnard.

 

Cam - that maybe why we see LB playing with his back to goal so much, he has to turn around and wait for the pass. The "World Cup Stylee' of possession percentage stops the ball being pinged in quickly. Then with us the "final ball" into LB is coming from further away.

 

Dogg - think the last part is what I was getting at - that playing off the shoulder rather than with his back to goal. LB's first touch is 1 and a quarter touches, most of the rest (Lallana Lambert & Fonte excluded are probably 1 and a half) just that the CB's get that little glimmer and go straight through him, LB has been fouled and 99% of refs don't give it

 

So, back to my premise, the STYLE we are playing gets the ball to LB with his back to goal outside the box looking to lay it off. IMHO you should have your best goalscorer picking up that layoff FACING the goal. ie perhaps we should set up so someone else does that bit and LB comes ONTO the ball rather than say Chaplow....?

 

On the subject of the chasing down and defending from the front, no brainer of course he does. However that tends to happen when we DON'T have possession.

 

So again, the way he is being made to play that I saw in the last two games is NOT playing to his strengths, ergo our two best scorers are outside the box....

 

And lo, our goals from Open Play have (as many have commented) dried up of late as a percentage we score from set pieces or "all over the team"

 

Oh and Turkish. I know you are all knowing, which is why I made the point that I was commenting on what I had noticed in the last TWO matches SW & CAFC I attended. It was also why I asked others for opinions on formations and styles in games I had NOT seen. Thanks for adding to the debate

[dubai_phil]

I think Barnard could be one of our best (relatively speaking) signings in recent times.

 

But I believe we play more interesting, more dynamic and smarter football with Guly. In addition, Guly is bloody rapid, which adds a whole other dimension to our game.

 

I think that the style of football that Adkins is getting us to play will make Barnard more effective as a sub as I think the strategy is to get us controlling games, saving energy and wearing other teams out. Then we can stick Barnard and Forte (or similar) on and tear teams apart if we need to.

 

Sadly it seems like there are a significant amount at St Mary's who aren't satisfied unless we're going hell for leather at the opposition goal all of the time.

 

OK so I am not the only one who's noticed this. Thanks Jam

 

And the last sentence sums things up perfectly, leaving SMS Saturday all I heard was foocking rubbish, garbage blah blah blah after a 2-0 win.

 

Oh and to the non-readers - LB would be my first pick every game OK? Just I would try and play to his strengths more.

[saintscottofthenortham]

You are joking aren't you?

 

No.

 

Since he got his contract he has been SH*T! I have lost count of the amount of times he has stood and watched a ball roll pathetically towards the by line (going out for oppo's throw or goal kick) then as the Northam start to voice there grunts & groans he makes one half hearted "oh, shít... I better look like I'm trying. Oh well, too late."

 

He is massively over-rated. Granted, at moments he looks fantastic, but he too often looks like Ali Dia.

[hamster]

Like Barney's style of play.

 

Makes me wanna snake him sometimes though.

[Channon's Sideburns]

Barnard = Ormerod with goals.

 

He's ******* brilliant in my book. NEVER gives up. How many players anywhere can be described as such?

[um pahars]

In the past 2 games we have played what seems a clearly defined passing pattern RL getting the ball wide etc. Everyone has told me that's how we've been playing for ages and it is frustrating the hell out the regulars, but it clearly is what we work on in training.

 

What has been frustrating the regulars is that IMHO we have not been performing as well as our individual and collective abilities should be. Maybe we just have high expectations of a team that has much talent within it (relatively speaking of course). We've ground out results and stayed in the hunt, but for a couple of months now we haven't hit full power. Hopefully it will be a good thing and we find our best form in the run in.

 

But reading your post I haven't really seen that massive a change in the style of play. Yes, it seems as though we are keen to pass the ball and get it forward to our creative players, but we've also been happy to attack quickly, hit it long and mix it up etc. It's nowhere near the sea change that Brighton have adopted. When they played us it was as though their keeper was on a warning of death if he kicked the ball and anyone who lost possession would be transfer listed.

 

The style has not seen a huge change and IMHO it is not the style that is frustrating some punters, instead it is the application of it.

 

leaving SMS Saturday all I heard was foocking rubbish, garbage blah blah blah after a 2-0 win.

 

I think you maty be exaggerating somewhat there! It wasn't 90 mins of champagne football, but neither was it garbage. There were periods (particularly at the start) where our set up was wrong (particularly in the midfield) and we didn't keep possession well, but I certainly didn't get any feeling leaving the ground (certainly no boos!!) that people were that upset about our performance/result.

[positivepete]

Hi Phil, I managed to catch the Wednesday game before I disappeared off to sunny Angola for a few weeks. You are right about the style of play, but the problem is that we do not move the ball fast enough. RL has not had a good touch until that moment in the Sheffield Wednesday match where he took it down and turned the defender in one movement. I nearly fell off my seat at seeing him do that. Fair play if he is working on it, because he will need those sort of touches to move up a level.

 

That is the problem with a number of our players, Hammond is another, and he will also struggle at the next level if he continues to play so square on. You cannot play the ball to him when he has someone on his back in the way you can to Schneiderlin. Again you can see they have been working on Hammond, his shooting has improved a lot lately, and his body shape for the volley that was saved in the same Sheffield Wednesday game was superb, but his touch is still poor for someone playing in centre midfield in a team that wants to pass the ball.

 

It is tempting to say that the jury is out on Barnard, (sorry) but I think he has the potential to be a Championship player, but I think we will not really know until he gets there. I think that Adkins is trying to build a team with more pace, and LB does not have the pace of Guly, but his energy does have a place in the squad, and when he hits a goal streak you can see his confidence rise, and he becomes more dangerous. With LB and RL we struggle to get behind teams in the way we do with Guly, or indeed Forte.

Edited 26 March, 2011 by positivepete
Forgot about Barnard!

[Cascadia Saint]

Ormerod. Maybe.

[Smirking_Saint]

No.

 

Since he got his contract he has been SH*T! I have lost count of the amount of times he has stood and watched a ball roll pathetically towards the by line (going out for oppo's throw or goal kick) then as the Northam start to voice there grunts & groans he makes one half hearted "oh, shít... I better look like I'm trying. Oh well, too late."

 

He is massively over-rated. Granted, at moments he looks fantastic, but he too often looks like Ali Dia.

 

Yeah lets slag another player into the ground with the old northam patented, 'now he has a contract he is sh*t' routine.

 

Must be Chaplows go to be on that list soon eh ??

[Barry the Badger]

Barnard seems to be one of those players who splits opinion. The guys behind me are always moaning about him "falling over", whereas i think he's just very good at winning free kicks when under pressure receiving the ball on his own with his back to goal.

 

It is easy to be slightly blinded to a players weaknesses if he works his socks off, but I don't care, his workrate lifts the crowd and the rest of the team at times.

[dellgirl]

He's like that infuriating wasp at a picnic that just won't go away.

[Dangerous Albert]

He's like that infuriating wasp at a picnic that just won't go away.

 

Spot on

[braveheart1983]

Keep him in the side if you understand football and not raw opts stats.

[Saint Stimp]

He's one of our best players and this thread is redundant. It's like Arsenal slagging off Van Persie, and anyone who thinks he shouldn't be in the team is deluded. Disappointing, dubai_phil.

[dubai_phil]

He's one of our best players and this thread is redundant. It's like Arsenal slagging off Van Persie, and anyone who thinks he shouldn't be in the team is deluded. Disappointing, dubai_phil.

 

And where did I slag him off?

 

Arsenal play to RVP's strengths (eg they don't hoof the ball in the air to him). I questioned whether LB is effective when we are in possession if he plays with his back to goal rather than being the player arriving in the box. It was more a question of our tactics & style of play. IF I was getting close to slagging anyone off then I can be accused of having a small dig at NA as I felt in the games I watched that we didn't score (enough) from open play when we had the possession that meant we should have done.

 

I did quote my opinion of his strengths and weaknesses and many others agreed with that.

 

So my OP is still valid, I did SAY we shouldn't order a taxi for him, but IMHO we did not get the BEST out of him (ie goals) in the 2 games I saw.

[Saint Stimp]

And where did I slag him off?

 

Arsenal play to RVP's strengths (eg they don't hoof the ball in the air to him). I questioned whether LB is effective when we are in possession if he plays with his back to goal rather than being the player arriving in the box. It was more a question of our tactics & style of play. IF I was getting close to slagging anyone off then I can be accused of having a small dig at NA as I felt in the games I watched that we didn't score (enough) from open play when we had the possession that meant we should have done.

 

I did quote my opinion of his strengths and weaknesses and many others agreed with that.

 

So my OP is still valid, I did SAY we shouldn't order a taxi for him, but IMHO we did not get the BEST out of him (ie goals) in the 2 games I saw.

 

I did, unfortunately, write that after skimming through the internet after a night out and therefore not actually read the thread. Maybe I just saw the title and got all angry, who knows. Apologies .

[ottery st mary]

I take it that Barney is in the taxi and heading for St Marys and will get a game in at least ONE the forum teams?

 

Over to you old nick.....

[up and away]

OK so I've watched two matches. I've put a QUESTION MARK in the title so bear me out, andI keep the ideas simple in the OP for debate.

 

Read it all and worth the read. There is one issue here that is relevant to both Ricky and Lee, they just don't have the pace. The centre back has no real threat against him and can get as close to either as they want. That allows them to push or kick Lee or Ricky out of their stride. Ricky suffers in exactly the same way, but has the skill when he can find the space. It's just the distance he has to go to find the space which makes everything he does far less effective. A fit Guly is by far the better option for me, he brings the dimension that negates the problems both Ricky and Lee bring to the team. I would like to see Lee alongside Guly just to see how things would pan out, though not entirely sure what would be best.

 

One thing is for sure, we will need to bring in a decent striker if we ever get to the Championship, because neither Ricky or Lee are good enough on what I have seen this season.

[dubai_phil]

I take it that Barney is in the taxi and heading for St Marys and will get a game in at least ONE the forum teams?

 

Over to you old nick.....

 

You may think that sir, but I could not POSSIBLY comment

 

 

But wouldn't it be a hoot when Rupert turns up to play right wing for Nick

 

OK on second thoughts, it's meant to be a serious fun evening

 

Mind you, Gemmel? Where did you put Rupe's card when you met him on the train to Charlton