Miller

**** me. Some people really have got their Perkins goggles on. Next thing you'll be saying he's better than De Silva.

 

Better as a midfield spoiler? Yes. Better at getting his foot/head in, and then setting up our next attacking move? Yes. Better for workrate, fitness? Yes. Better attitude? Yes. Better in terms of wages? Yes.

But I'm not silly enough to suggest that Perkins is better in an attacking sense, or at passing the ball.

Two midfielders they may be, but not of a similar type, thus making them hard to compare. Wheras you said Arismendi was a better player than Perkins and Dawson. Now I have often said it's too early to judge the latter, due to his limited appearances thus far in a tarn shirt, but I'd still pick him above Diego who was about as bad as it gets. And I don't need to explain why Perkins is better than him, it's as clear to see as the clouds in the sky.

Btw, I don't wear goggles, not even when swimming. I just happen to rate David Perkins. You don't. Therefore we are arguing/debating. I like that.

 

Matt Hill was about as useless as Jay Maccavelli at defending/passing. But he offered more going forward, IMO. But Scott Golbourne has already shown he's better than either of them at defending, and he has more than the pair of em going forward. IMO like.

But don't get me twisted. I'm not suggesting Golbourne is something special. In fact I prefer McNulty at left back. But it's each to their own I suppose.

And Conan is mental. As am I. And you also.
We're Barnsley fans arguing on a message board about a collection of average players.

 

The interesting thing about all these flops (Dickinson aside 'cause he hardly played) is that they regularly featured in a team that was far better than last season's. They featured in a team that won more games, drew more, lost less, scored more and conceded less. Yet they are worse players. Doesn't quite add up to me that. That team also lost its' best player in January too but soldiered on regardless.

 

Davey arranged that transfer

 

/\ /\ /\
This!!

 

Glad to see someone that can tell me why Perkins is good.
I dont agree with any of it other than the wages, but at least I can see your reasoning

 

Huge difference in budget, though. And that was Robins' second season in charge. He'd had time to build a squad, with a lot more tools at his disposal than Hillcroft. So much was the difference in budgets/ideas, that both Mark Robins and BFC went their seperate ways, whilst Keith and Flicker were more than willing to take the job on. And in just a few weeks of rebuilding after the mess that Robins had left behind, Hillcroft had us playing the best football in years, and until injuries/transfer robbed us of our midfield/creativity etc, we looked well set to smash the previous seasons points tally. You cannot deny that.

But yes, what went on afterwards was shocking. Abysmal. A joke at times.

But I truly believe that Perkins is better than Arismendi.

I believe Golbourne is better than both Hill and Maccavelli.

Simple as that really, pal.

 

We weren't debating the budget though. I also don't think that Robins left us in a mess. He had players on short term contracts but he had a plan for the following season. You can't really say that we would have smashed the previous season's points total. I think we would have struggled to match the performance in the first half of the season even without the injuries/transfers.

 

So Robins completed a signing 18 months after Davey arranged it?

 

I was just being facetious. It seems that is what you have to be on here lately!!

I actually thought he was a poor signing in the first instance and got worse with his actions while at the club, including getting locked up in Cleethorpes for fighting, this is after his fighting in Blackpool just before we signed him.

 

Not half as bad as what Kelvin & Alnwick have been up to.

Surprised Keef dunt sign him back up.

 

I didn't enjoy the football under Robins, and didn't like the myriad loanees, short term deals. It was anyones guess who was playing each week. But I didn't want him to leave.

And, much of my concerns, moans, whinges towards the end of last season, with regards to King Keith, were about similar things.

There really isn't much between the pair of em.

But Keith's budget was smaller and his gobs bigger. And his fashion sense is priceless.