Arizona Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Appart from his goal against Norwich, has he actually contributed anything to a Saints game? Yet again yesterday he looked lost and could have played till Christmas without scoring. Yes I know he is young, and I'd be all for giving him a chance IF he was our player. However the fact that he is a loan just defies the point of playing him. By the time he learns the first thing about possitioning, shooting and all that other good s**t, he'll be off back to Sheffield. Jan if you are reading... START WITH PATERSON! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Billy Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Jan if you are reading... I suggest you get a new pair of glasses, Can't you see what's happening on the pitch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mprobert Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Hard to make a case for Robertson isnt it, although you have to assume Jan sees more day to day to make these judgements. I think I'd prefer to see Paterson in the side on a "can't do any worse basis" - but no matter how desperate we get I wouldnt particularly want to see Dyer (by name...) back in the side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Porter Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 He does try hard but just isn't good enough. I'd start with Patterson as well, get Sterny John back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Appart from his goal against Norwich, has he actually contributed anything to a Saints game? Yet again yesterday he looked lost and could have played till Christmas without scoring. Yes I know he is young, and I'd be all for giving him a chance IF he was our player. However the fact that he is a loan just defies the point of playing him. By the time he learns the first thing about possitioning, shooting and all that other good s**t, he'll be off back to Sheffield. Jan if you are reading... START WITH PATTERSON! Since you seem to like him so much i suggest you learn how to spell his name. It's Paterson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Since you seem to like him so much i suggest you learn how to spell his name. It's Paterson. A lot of the Patttterson clan do not know how to spell their name.. What is T amongst friends? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladysaint Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 I cant understand why we are starting with Robertson as he is a loan player who will most probably be returning in January so to me it makes sense to bed Paterson in now as he is our player and is unlikely to be going anywhere unless he starts scoring bucket loads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Surely the point of a loan player is to play them. Why have we had so many loanees over the last couple of seasons who very rarely made the bench? At least Robertson is fit enough to play - we should all rejoice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Loweys boy Pulis could be our saviour....Almost sounded like Marys boy etc from Boney M. Praise The Lord... Am I EVER PRAYING FOR OUR SURVIVAL... Always thought Robertson was a strange loan as he could not always get into SheffUtd Reserves......JP or Lowey saw something, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Saint Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Here is my take on the matter. If you start someone young too soon in a 90 minute first team game you could do more damage that good. A young player, where possible, needs a more gentle intoduction so he can get a feel for the pace of the game at that level, build his experience and his stamina. By starting with a loanee who will likely go back it gives JP time to introduce Paterson for the last 20 -30 minutes of a game until he shows he is ready for a full debut. BUT it is essential that Paterson gets those regular short outings now. That did not happen last night and that would be my complaint. He needs to get some time on the pitch before the forward loanees go back, and back they should go! Hopefully he will then be ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 9 December, 2008 Author Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Since you seem to like him so much i suggest you learn how to spell his name. It's Paterson. It's not so much that I like Paterson as I don't rate Robertson. The way I see it, we can't lose anything by playing Pato instead as Robertson contributes very little, if anything to the team. Surely the point of a loan player is to play them. Why have we had so many loanees over the last couple of seasons who very rarely made the bench? At least Robertson is fit enough to play - we should all rejoice. No, the point of a loan player is to give ourselves another option in the squad. Ideally someone who is better than any of our current options, or provides cover in an area where we lack it. Robertson does neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 It's not so much that I like Paterson as I don't rate Robertson. The way I see it, we can't lose anything by playing Pato instead as Robertson contributes very little, if anything to the team. I know. I let it pass without comment on the last thread though so felt it needed mentioning. I saw someone refer to Jason Dodd as "Dodds" yesterday so feel the need to nip this one in the bud early! Oh and i feel Robertson is the sort of player that could probably make a strike partner look pretty useful...sadly he doesn't have one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
labibs Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 I thought Robertson was poor last night. I agree that he doesn't really seem to be particularly good at anything and for a big lad, he doesn't show much strength up front. I'd like to see DMG up front with Euell, at least Jason offers some presence up front. I still think it's a bit early to be playing Paterson from the start in every game, but I would have liked him to be given more of an opportunity. Was very frustrated that Jan didn't change his formation last night. Would have loved to seen Paterson brought on instead of Mills and 2 up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L1Minus10 Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Pekhart look better than Robertson. Robertson is just a poor fotballer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Appart from his goal against Norwich, has he actually contributed anything to a Saints game? Yet again yesterday he looked lost and could have played till Christmas without scoring. Yes I know he is young, and I'd be all for giving him a chance IF he was our player. However the fact that he is a loan just defies the point of playing him. By the time he learns the first thing about possitioning, shooting and all that other good s**t, he'll be off back to Sheffield. Jan if you are reading... START WITH PATERSON! both crap imo and can go back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior Mullet Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 I expect we are playing him because we have a relatively cheap option to buy or at least know Sheff Utd would be willing to sell cheaply. That's why we are playing him in preference to our own - he's as good as our own if we want him. IMO Robertson is not the player we need. His balance seems all wrong and he's not got much trickery or ability to beat defenders. He also seems to e on a different wavelength to the rest, which is not surprising given the rest have been playing together for years. The man for me up front is White. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the saint in winchester Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 The game was crying out for us to bring Paterson on - a target man that we could play balls to and pick up the pieces. Instead, JP preferred tippy-tappy until we lost possession. I'm sorry, I'm starting to lose confidence in this approach. I'm fed up reading "it will all come right soon if we keep playing like this." No it won't. It will keep going on like this. The odd point here and there. Could someone else do better with what we have? This has to be a coaching/style of play issue. Time for a change of direction? Going forward (not sideways and backwards) might help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint1977 Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Can no-one see that our attacking has really, really suffered since we stopped playing wingers? We keep playing strikers out wide and it doesn't work. BWP can almost do it on the right wing, but not the left. Robertson just can't do it, McGoldrick is crap out wide. If you stick to one of Holmes, Skacel, Surman, Mills left wing you have a good wide player. If you stick to one of BWP, Thomson or Dyer right wing then you have some balance. We started the season with Holmes and Thomson and it looked good, we had options and stretched the opposition. It created plenty of space for Lallana in the centre too as defenders were dragged out of position. Now when we're attacking we just see congestion in the centre and end up passing back of losing the ball. Holmes getting injured definately didn't help, hope he can return soon. We do look very one-dimensional and narrow although I'm not convinced we'd have that many more points without strikers to finish off the chances we were creating at the time. I do agree with what you saying though, by stretching teams we were creating space and a lot more chances and pace does make such a difference outside the Premier League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Jan, have a word with Wenger. :-) http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/7772990.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15saints Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Jan, have a word with Wenger. :-) http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/7772990.stm I wonder if we could take all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blandford saint Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Alternatively, we could get rid of a whole host of players who are on loan and not good enough, or ours and not making the first team, (Ryan Smith, Pekhart, Robertson, Gasmi, etc., etc. and if we get rid of about 6 we might actually be able to pay Stern John's wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 It looks as though I am in the minority on this one! I actually think Robertson has done OK for us thus far. Whilst he hasn't been banging the goals in, he does hold the ball up well which brings others into play. Sometimes playing as a lone striker means you don't always get the praise you deserve. More often than not, your contribution goes un-noticed. I like to call it 'the Emile Heskey' role. I'd be more than happy if we swapped Dyer for Robertson on a permanent basis come January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 It looks as though I am in the minority on this one! I actually think Robertson has done OK for us thus far. Whilst he hasn't been banging the goals in, he does hold the ball up well which brings others into play. Sometimes playing as a lone striker means you don't always get the praise you deserve. More often than not, your contribution goes un-noticed. I like to call it 'the Emile Heskey' role. I'd be more than happy if we swapped Dyer for Robertson on a permanent basis come January. your 3rd sentence sums it up problem is the others he has apparently been holding the ball up for have not been banging in the goals either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Jan, have a word with Wenger. :-) http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/7772990.stm yes!!! especially Vela Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Porter Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 I think West Brom are after Vela, there's no way he'll go to a CCC outfit. He spent last season in La Liga and is easily good enough for the Premiership. Gibbs, Simpson or Hoyte would all be good though. Still Jack Cork should be the priority atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 It looks as though I am in the minority on this one! I actually think Robertson has done OK for us thus far. Whilst he hasn't been banging the goals in, he does hold the ball up well which brings others into play. Sometimes playing as a lone striker means you don't always get the praise you deserve. More often than not, your contribution goes un-noticed. I like to call it 'the Emile Heskey' role. I'd be more than happy if we swapped Dyer for Robertson on a permanent basis come January. The big problem is that we have four players holding the ball, whilst running in circles and except for BWP, nobody scoring, or even getting into a good position to score. We should let Robertson go back, we need a right sided wide player badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 You have to have be a special player to play up front without much if any support. If he had someone alongside him he might be better. If you are going to play someone in that role play someone who can play that role effectively. What did Linelker do outside the box? Strikers thrive on the right kind of service. WE are not currently playing the sort of football that will provide goals for a loan striker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1965onwards Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 Can't believe that i agree with one of your posts SOG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 You have to have be a special player to play up front without much if any support. If he had someone alongside him he might be better. If you are going to play someone in that role play someone who can play that role effectively. What did Linelker do outside the box? Strikers thrive on the right kind of service. WE are not currently playing the sort of football that will provide goals for a loan striker. This is the crux. Robertson, Pekhart, McGoldrick etc. are not necessarily bad players but none of them are comfortable (or even capable) of playing the system they are being asked. Maybe it's time to see if we can change the system to suit the personell? I'm not holding my breath though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 You have to have be a special player to play up front without much if any support. If he had someone alongside him he might be better. If you are going to play someone in that role play someone who can play that role effectively. What did Linelker do outside the box? Strikers thrive on the right kind of service. WE are not currently playing the sort of football that will provide goals for a loan striker. Stop being so negative:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modern matron Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 oh god. ITS NOT HIS FAULT. As striker who is playing up front with no support - What is he meant to do? He has to drop so far back to get the ball and when he does hold it up there is no one infront of him. Sorry he's awful! We need 2 new forwards or 1 plus BWP up front.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 9 December, 2008 Share Posted 9 December, 2008 I don't rate him and don't think there was any point in signing him particularly (although his goal against norwich may prove vital). However, whilst reserving the right to get frustrated and slag him off during games, my considered opinion post-event is that I will not judge him fully until I see him play upfront with a decent strike partner. Same goes for McGoldrick. Unfortunately, I doubt this will happen any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheff Saint Posted 10 December, 2008 Share Posted 10 December, 2008 I thought he played quite well at Reading, really well actually. Monday he was disappointing though. I happen to think we play ok when we've got three up front. But to often it's only 1. At Reading and Derby all three forwards pushed up but against Watford, Palace, even when we won at Donny, it was 4-5-1. Which makes it v hard for the forward. I'd never play Pekhart. I've seen him 3 or 4 times and he's been bloody dradful each and every time. Get rid of him and the other toss loan players and get John or Rasiak in the team. In my humble opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahill Posted 10 December, 2008 Share Posted 10 December, 2008 Agree aboiut Pekhart - get rid asap. Robertson tries but he has no physical presence, he can't hold the ball up nor has he any pace so as a lone striker he is next to useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 10 December, 2008 Share Posted 10 December, 2008 Is it true he has broken ribs? apparently had broken ribs when he joined and still has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 10 December, 2008 Share Posted 10 December, 2008 Is it true he has broken ribs? apparently had broken ribs when he joined and still has. Robertson or Pekart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 10 December, 2008 Share Posted 10 December, 2008 Robertson or Pekart? Robertson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 10 December, 2008 Share Posted 10 December, 2008 Agree aboiut Pekhart - get rid asap. Robertson tries but he has no physical presence, he can't hold the ball up nor has he any pace so as a lone striker he is next to useless. Sheffield Utd knew this as did Milwall about Smith and Spurs about Forecast and Pekhart(looked good on video in youth game..Lowey saw the same 2 minute clip as me...So we are both useless talent scouts....Back to the X F actor for me.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 10 December, 2008 Share Posted 10 December, 2008 Robertson. If that is the case, there is no way he could play at 100%. I somehow can't see either club allowing that, as a severe blow on already fractured ribs could kill him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now