Agreed. I read a comment yesterday (on the match day thread I think - can’t remember by whom) which said they don’t think Paddy will ever get back to his best again. Sadly, I agree.
batts, same as me, i was known as sick note too, had trials at a few clubs but had a dodgy hip so none took the chance, don't blame um
Excellent article Batty and one, along with the need for a another centre forward is worthy of a thread if its own.
Over the last month there has been a shift in the general noises coming out of the club on the left back and
LB CF positions from JM stating we were 'actively pursuing targets' to a dampening down lowering of expectations feeling now.
I think much of that change has been due to a feeling that Bamford was 'fit' again and that we had Joffy so where does the expensive new guy fit in? A couple of major flaws in that new mindset. As Batty has demonstrated Bamford''s injury record points to a consistent and sustained level of injury absences. Time out is more the norm than him being available to play.
The other issue is that there is an unfortunate pattern of small, less serious but quite frequent niggles or picking up dead legs for Joffy. This makes the situation with Bamford more risky as your back up also is not consistently available.
I have had a doubt in my head about whether it is a financial challenge with perhaps all those doubts about Barca being true and their 'active pursuit' is reliant on them making all the payments theoretically due. Also the JKA fee plus legal costs could hit at some point. They clearly can't admit this as it would compromise future negotiating but it could be a factor.
All logic and the evidence from the first two games shows we need the two positions addressing. If there is a financial problem we could try for loans.
Finally on Bamford assuming there is money there. Go all out for a striker who would at worst be competition and at best the main man and due to Bamford''s injury record have him as a bonus back up
Go with the player with the better injury record.
In most situations when say 95% are saying sign a forward and the board are in the 5% who is more likely to be correct.
I like and rate Paddy and this is not about his ability but all about the inconvenient truth of his injury record which the board must know by now cannot be relied upon.
Adductor is a niggly injury and really annoying one. We have to invest in another lead CF. We seem to find wingers and other decent attacking players, gotta find a good number 9 from somewhere. We didn't do it last season and it almost cost us, surely a professional organisation won't make the same mistake twice.....
We need to invest up front with this squad, but we will not, Rodrigo is top of the scoring charts, that's enough isn't it?
comment by RobLUFC Have you ever seen a better goal or on... (U5692)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Excellent article Batty and one, along with the need for a another centre forward is worthy of a thread if its own.
Over the last month there has been a shift in the general noises coming out of the club on the left back and
LB CF positions from JM stating we were 'actively pursuing targets' to a dampening down lowering of expectations feeling now.
I think much of that change has been due to a feeling that Bamford was 'fit' again and that we had Joffy so where does the expensive new guy fit in? A couple of major flaws in that new mindset. As Batty has demonstrated Bamford''s injury record points to a consistent and sustained level of injury absences. Time out is more the norm than him being available to play.
The other issue is that there is an unfortunate pattern of small, less serious but quite frequent niggles or picking up dead legs for Joffy. This makes the situation with Bamford more risky as your back up also is not consistently available.
I have had a doubt in my head about whether it is a financial challenge with perhaps all those doubts about Barca being true and their 'active pursuit' is reliant on them making all the payments theoretically due. Also the JKA fee plus legal costs could hit at some point. They clearly can't admit this as it would compromise future negotiating but it could be a factor.
All logic and the evidence from the first two games shows we need the two positions addressing. If there is a financial problem we could try for loans.
Finally on Bamford assuming there is money there. Go all out for a striker who would at worst be competition and at best the main man and due to Bamford''s injury record have him as a bonus back up
Go with the player with the better injury record.
In most situations when say 95% are saying sign a forward and the board are in the 5% who is more likely to be correct.
I like and rate Paddy and this is not about his ability but all about the inconvenient truth of his injury record which the board must know by now cannot be relied upon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this correct Rob, as we might not have the cash to buy an out and out striker, your solution is that we try to borrow some other teams premier league standard striker who will score a few and also do what Bamford does, holds on to the ball and brings others in to play.
You don't want much, do you.
We don't need a Bamford clone. We need a striker
who has ability and availability. They are out there.
And not for bank busting fees.
Forest unearthed a lively 9 in Owoniyi for 17 mill.
Rodrigo has been a pleasant surprise. He obviously
fits Marsch's system. Good there. Add one more
striker to the mix and we should be able to ride out
the inevitable Paddy absences.
And agree Rob. Left back is crucial. Looks like the
KaiWagner link is real. Get him and at the very least
we have two options at LB.
Was watching the Forest game and that Toffolo looks a bargain signing for them.
The loan option is more around if there is no money. If that is the case then yes you don't get the package you are getting with Bamford but at the moment we don't get Bamford because of the injuries.
With money the loan option is not needed and you do push for the full package goals and hold up play. Essentially the money issue question dictates how much we get. What doesn't change is the need to get someone.
Before last season started I said a big factor was whether Bamford could replicate the great season he just finished.
I said this for a number of reasons.
Firstly because obviously his goals were important, but secondly because in his first season he had quite a few injuries and I felt we'd gotten lucky to have him fully fit for 2 seasons and I felt we were due some bad injury luck for him as it were.
I feel Rodrigo 'should' be a capable replacement, and then you need 1 or 2 strikers as backup and ability to change style of play.
Gelhardt really had a good season last year breaking through and I expect to see him develop further.
But who else is there.....Perkins?
It's not enough when you know that there are question marks over Bamford's fitness.
If we're not pursuing a striker due to finances then I would suggest we've handled our finances incorrectly.
Money's available so we've been told
Mad to think Chelsea have Chilwell and Cucharella for left back and we are relying on Struijk
We’ve all been saying it, need a back up no9
Not rocket science
I saw the Forest game and although they were spirited and the crowd were excellent, the two boys signed from Huddersfield had half decent home debuts, but nothing that made me wish we'd signed them.
In all honesty I thought the result was a travesty and lady luck certainly shone upon Forest's first home game in the Premier league in over twenty years but fair play to them.
I would say that if Forest play like that against us, I would definitely fancy our chances of getting 3 points even if DJ is playing up front, hopefully not though and I sincerely hope Bamford is fit to lead the line for that one.
However if the owners do recognise the need to bring in another first team striker then assuming Rodrigo is maintaining his good form I can only see a new striker being brought in that is not put off by being mostly used as a sub so that would pretty much rule out any strikers available in the Premier league.
I personally think the owners are more likely to go for a cheap European/American unknown or one of the two Strikers, Pedro and Diaz, we have been linked with in the Championship.
I won't hold my breath though and just hope Joffy can stay fit and Bamford can at least make half the season and Rodrigo keeps banging them in.
comment by Outwood White (U9610)
posted 6 hours, 42 minutes ago
Was watching the Forest game and that Toffolo looks a bargain signing for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said in the pre-season that we should get Toffolo. He's a former England under-21, plays left back and/or left wing, stylish, comfortable at this level, and capable of finding the back of the net - four goals in his last 6 games for the doggies, or therabouts.
As for bringing in new players, the sounds from JM suggest that we have financial worries ahead, possibly to do with JKA and Barcelona. As we are a reactive club in the transfer market, my guess the board are holding out until the end of the 'mini-season' in November. They will assess our position and injuries, and the degree to which a 6 week break will help us, to see how things are looking, before deciding whether we need players.
When will we ever learn?
Marschian, any recruitment could be considered "reactive", couldn't it? Players are signed to address perceived weaknesses in the current squad. Do coaches other than Guardiola, Klopp, Tuchel have the luxury of "speculative" signings? Therefore aren't all but the superrich clubs "reactive"?
Signing youth players like Joseph and Gyabi is not reactive, but they often don't make it into the squad until they're ready, at some point in the future.
Barcelona raised the extra cash and registered Raphinha so there should be no hanky-panky on that score. We'll know 02/09, as per AR.
It may be we'll get hit for JKA but that should have been accounted for already in 21-22 and stuck to one side, surely?
comment by Jaz63 (U8369)
posted 32 seconds ago
Barcelona raised the extra cash and registered Raphinha so there should be no hanky-panky on that score. We'll know 02/09, as per AR.
It may be we'll get hit for JKA but that should have been accounted for already in 21-22 and stuck to one side, surely?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barcelona being able to register players and pay for players are two seperate issues. I don't think they have many problems paying for players, it's managing to achieve the strict criteria for registering players set by La Liga that's the problem.
La Liga have been very brave in the way they have decided to police profit and sustainability and it look a lot more effective than our much weaker policy.
I'd be amazed if they have any problem paying for players.
I heard he didn't have a good debut. Philips injured again too!
comment by Outwood White (U9610)
posted 2 hours, 47 minutes ago
I heard he didn't have a good debut. Philips injured again too!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i watched the game and while barca were crap i thought raph played quite well. he was was lively and took their corners but was taken off quite early.
I hate to say this but I think KP might have done an Andy Murray whereby AM in trying to be World number one played far too many tournaments for the required ranking points and as a consequence knackered himself so much to the point he needed hip surgery and was never the same player again and is just a shadow of the player he was,
KP played his heart out for us plus all the England games as well as MB's demanding training routines I do wonder has he worn himself out to the point we had the best days of him.
KP is still young and maybe the comparison with Andy Murray is not as extreme but plenty of players by their mid twenties have had career ending or damaging injuries so I actually think the club did well in getting the money we did from City.
Be very sad for KP if that is the case, Macca.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Bamford
Page 1 of 1
posted on 14/8/22
Agreed. I read a comment yesterday (on the match day thread I think - can’t remember by whom) which said they don’t think Paddy will ever get back to his best again. Sadly, I agree.
posted on 14/8/22
batts, same as me, i was known as sick note too, had trials at a few clubs but had a dodgy hip so none took the chance, don't blame um
posted on 14/8/22
Excellent article Batty and one, along with the need for a another centre forward is worthy of a thread if its own.
Over the last month there has been a shift in the general noises coming out of the club on the left back and
LB CF positions from JM stating we were 'actively pursuing targets' to a dampening down lowering of expectations feeling now.
I think much of that change has been due to a feeling that Bamford was 'fit' again and that we had Joffy so where does the expensive new guy fit in? A couple of major flaws in that new mindset. As Batty has demonstrated Bamford''s injury record points to a consistent and sustained level of injury absences. Time out is more the norm than him being available to play.
The other issue is that there is an unfortunate pattern of small, less serious but quite frequent niggles or picking up dead legs for Joffy. This makes the situation with Bamford more risky as your back up also is not consistently available.
I have had a doubt in my head about whether it is a financial challenge with perhaps all those doubts about Barca being true and their 'active pursuit' is reliant on them making all the payments theoretically due. Also the JKA fee plus legal costs could hit at some point. They clearly can't admit this as it would compromise future negotiating but it could be a factor.
All logic and the evidence from the first two games shows we need the two positions addressing. If there is a financial problem we could try for loans.
Finally on Bamford assuming there is money there. Go all out for a striker who would at worst be competition and at best the main man and due to Bamford''s injury record have him as a bonus back up
Go with the player with the better injury record.
In most situations when say 95% are saying sign a forward and the board are in the 5% who is more likely to be correct.
I like and rate Paddy and this is not about his ability but all about the inconvenient truth of his injury record which the board must know by now cannot be relied upon.
posted on 14/8/22
Adductor is a niggly injury and really annoying one. We have to invest in another lead CF. We seem to find wingers and other decent attacking players, gotta find a good number 9 from somewhere. We didn't do it last season and it almost cost us, surely a professional organisation won't make the same mistake twice.....
posted on 14/8/22
We need to invest up front with this squad, but we will not, Rodrigo is top of the scoring charts, that's enough isn't it?
posted on 14/8/22
comment by RobLUFC Have you ever seen a better goal or on... (U5692)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
Excellent article Batty and one, along with the need for a another centre forward is worthy of a thread if its own.
Over the last month there has been a shift in the general noises coming out of the club on the left back and
LB CF positions from JM stating we were 'actively pursuing targets' to a dampening down lowering of expectations feeling now.
I think much of that change has been due to a feeling that Bamford was 'fit' again and that we had Joffy so where does the expensive new guy fit in? A couple of major flaws in that new mindset. As Batty has demonstrated Bamford''s injury record points to a consistent and sustained level of injury absences. Time out is more the norm than him being available to play.
The other issue is that there is an unfortunate pattern of small, less serious but quite frequent niggles or picking up dead legs for Joffy. This makes the situation with Bamford more risky as your back up also is not consistently available.
I have had a doubt in my head about whether it is a financial challenge with perhaps all those doubts about Barca being true and their 'active pursuit' is reliant on them making all the payments theoretically due. Also the JKA fee plus legal costs could hit at some point. They clearly can't admit this as it would compromise future negotiating but it could be a factor.
All logic and the evidence from the first two games shows we need the two positions addressing. If there is a financial problem we could try for loans.
Finally on Bamford assuming there is money there. Go all out for a striker who would at worst be competition and at best the main man and due to Bamford''s injury record have him as a bonus back up
Go with the player with the better injury record.
In most situations when say 95% are saying sign a forward and the board are in the 5% who is more likely to be correct.
I like and rate Paddy and this is not about his ability but all about the inconvenient truth of his injury record which the board must know by now cannot be relied upon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this correct Rob, as we might not have the cash to buy an out and out striker, your solution is that we try to borrow some other teams premier league standard striker who will score a few and also do what Bamford does, holds on to the ball and brings others in to play.
You don't want much, do you.
posted on 14/8/22
We don't need a Bamford clone. We need a striker
who has ability and availability. They are out there.
And not for bank busting fees.
Forest unearthed a lively 9 in Owoniyi for 17 mill.
Rodrigo has been a pleasant surprise. He obviously
fits Marsch's system. Good there. Add one more
striker to the mix and we should be able to ride out
the inevitable Paddy absences.
And agree Rob. Left back is crucial. Looks like the
KaiWagner link is real. Get him and at the very least
we have two options at LB.
posted on 14/8/22
Was watching the Forest game and that Toffolo looks a bargain signing for them.
posted on 14/8/22
The loan option is more around if there is no money. If that is the case then yes you don't get the package you are getting with Bamford but at the moment we don't get Bamford because of the injuries.
With money the loan option is not needed and you do push for the full package goals and hold up play. Essentially the money issue question dictates how much we get. What doesn't change is the need to get someone.
posted on 14/8/22
Before last season started I said a big factor was whether Bamford could replicate the great season he just finished.
I said this for a number of reasons.
Firstly because obviously his goals were important, but secondly because in his first season he had quite a few injuries and I felt we'd gotten lucky to have him fully fit for 2 seasons and I felt we were due some bad injury luck for him as it were.
I feel Rodrigo 'should' be a capable replacement, and then you need 1 or 2 strikers as backup and ability to change style of play.
Gelhardt really had a good season last year breaking through and I expect to see him develop further.
But who else is there.....Perkins?
It's not enough when you know that there are question marks over Bamford's fitness.
If we're not pursuing a striker due to finances then I would suggest we've handled our finances incorrectly.
posted on 14/8/22
Money's available so we've been told
posted on 14/8/22
Mad to think Chelsea have Chilwell and Cucharella for left back and we are relying on Struijk
posted on 14/8/22
We’ve all been saying it, need a back up no9
Not rocket science
posted on 14/8/22
I saw the Forest game and although they were spirited and the crowd were excellent, the two boys signed from Huddersfield had half decent home debuts, but nothing that made me wish we'd signed them.
In all honesty I thought the result was a travesty and lady luck certainly shone upon Forest's first home game in the Premier league in over twenty years but fair play to them.
I would say that if Forest play like that against us, I would definitely fancy our chances of getting 3 points even if DJ is playing up front, hopefully not though and I sincerely hope Bamford is fit to lead the line for that one.
However if the owners do recognise the need to bring in another first team striker then assuming Rodrigo is maintaining his good form I can only see a new striker being brought in that is not put off by being mostly used as a sub so that would pretty much rule out any strikers available in the Premier league.
I personally think the owners are more likely to go for a cheap European/American unknown or one of the two Strikers, Pedro and Diaz, we have been linked with in the Championship.
I won't hold my breath though and just hope Joffy can stay fit and Bamford can at least make half the season and Rodrigo keeps banging them in.
posted on 15/8/22
comment by Outwood White (U9610)
posted 6 hours, 42 minutes ago
Was watching the Forest game and that Toffolo looks a bargain signing for them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said in the pre-season that we should get Toffolo. He's a former England under-21, plays left back and/or left wing, stylish, comfortable at this level, and capable of finding the back of the net - four goals in his last 6 games for the doggies, or therabouts.
As for bringing in new players, the sounds from JM suggest that we have financial worries ahead, possibly to do with JKA and Barcelona. As we are a reactive club in the transfer market, my guess the board are holding out until the end of the 'mini-season' in November. They will assess our position and injuries, and the degree to which a 6 week break will help us, to see how things are looking, before deciding whether we need players.
When will we ever learn?
posted on 15/8/22
Marschian, any recruitment could be considered "reactive", couldn't it? Players are signed to address perceived weaknesses in the current squad. Do coaches other than Guardiola, Klopp, Tuchel have the luxury of "speculative" signings? Therefore aren't all but the superrich clubs "reactive"?
Signing youth players like Joseph and Gyabi is not reactive, but they often don't make it into the squad until they're ready, at some point in the future.
posted on 15/8/22
Barcelona raised the extra cash and registered Raphinha so there should be no hanky-panky on that score. We'll know 02/09, as per AR.
It may be we'll get hit for JKA but that should have been accounted for already in 21-22 and stuck to one side, surely?
posted on 15/8/22
comment by Jaz63 (U8369)
posted 32 seconds ago
Barcelona raised the extra cash and registered Raphinha so there should be no hanky-panky on that score. We'll know 02/09, as per AR.
It may be we'll get hit for JKA but that should have been accounted for already in 21-22 and stuck to one side, surely?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barcelona being able to register players and pay for players are two seperate issues. I don't think they have many problems paying for players, it's managing to achieve the strict criteria for registering players set by La Liga that's the problem.
La Liga have been very brave in the way they have decided to police profit and sustainability and it look a lot more effective than our much weaker policy.
I'd be amazed if they have any problem paying for players.
posted on 15/8/22
I heard he didn't have a good debut. Philips injured again too!
posted on 15/8/22
comment by Outwood White (U9610)
posted 2 hours, 47 minutes ago
I heard he didn't have a good debut. Philips injured again too!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i watched the game and while barca were crap i thought raph played quite well. he was was lively and took their corners but was taken off quite early.
posted on 15/8/22
I hate to say this but I think KP might have done an Andy Murray whereby AM in trying to be World number one played far too many tournaments for the required ranking points and as a consequence knackered himself so much to the point he needed hip surgery and was never the same player again and is just a shadow of the player he was,
KP played his heart out for us plus all the England games as well as MB's demanding training routines I do wonder has he worn himself out to the point we had the best days of him.
KP is still young and maybe the comparison with Andy Murray is not as extreme but plenty of players by their mid twenties have had career ending or damaging injuries so I actually think the club did well in getting the money we did from City.
posted on 15/8/22
Be very sad for KP if that is the case, Macca.
Page 1 of 1