Cwyzka to Rochdale

Given how quickly we sold Vaz, Davies et al, I suppose it's then the 'fact' we just asked Keith if wanted to sell Done - answer 'no' - and we then turned our back on £700k ?

eeeh I dunno

 

She represents them all

 

Not true. He'd been in great form at the end of that season and was offered a deal when others were released.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rochdale/9487966.stm

 

She doesn't. If you're on about Lillis, the woman who used to represent Stones.

Although her brother plays for Rochdale.

 

As Dyson says, you're probably on about Georgina Lillis. She represents a lot of our younger lads, although some have since moved on. To Rochdale, Shrewsbury and Bury.

Gary Lloyd is the agent we're referring to.

 

He started just 16 games in his first spell. He was a sub at a league 1 side. How often do Championship clubs sign players that spend the majority of their time on the bench in the league below? Maybe if they're young and just breaking in to the side, but Done was 23 when he signed for us. How often do managers purchase players from their previous clubs who they didn't select all that often when they were at that club? Particularly when their previous club was further down the league pyramid than their new club. Managers often go back for players, but not for those on the bench. They try to buy the players they picked week in, week out at their former clubs. The best players.

When Hill signed him again for Rochdale he was on the bench for the first 5 months in league 2.

He's finally having some success under Keith, but that's after years of doing next to nowt.

 

Layering!!!

 

Apologies, it was Scott Wiseman who he initially released only to change his mind.

 

You're looking at that very simplistically based on stats. The truth was that Done came into the side later on during 10/11 after looking nothing more than a squad player... but when he did he was our key man as we went on a great run that took us to the verge of the playoffs. Up until that point we thought of him as a winger, but Hill played him behind COG and L1 defences couldn't cope with him. Many fans were thinking we'd found a real player, but Hill's departure put paid to that. Can't blame Hill for then coming back to get him after seeing the exact same thing we had. He was one of our best players.

The Done that returned to Dale was won shorn of confidence. He didn't feature much until Hill yet again pulled a masterstroke and converted him in to a LB and he was as good as anyone when we went on the run that not only as good as clinched promotion, but saw off Leeds in the Cup.

Then this season Hill shifts him again and we've currently got a striker who has ten goals by November.

 

Aye. Two years previously. And it was a decision fans questioned at the time and still point to Ramsden turning down a new deal as being fortunate meaning Hill went back to Wiseman.

 

I always rated Matty Done.

 

All you say may well be true, but that doesn't make Done's career a roaring success. It's only really been this last calendar year he's done anything of note. He may have had a good spell towards the end of the 10/11 but we're talking about 10 starts at most. That's not a successful season, it's a flash in the pan.

For the majority of the time Hill has had Done he hasn't played that well and done very little for him, yet he kept signing him.

The amount of players that joined Barnsley who were associated with Hill and Flicker from their Rochdale days who have then gone on to sign for Rochdale again or Bury is just weird.

You don't expect your managers to get every single signing right. They're doing OK if half of them are a success. But who, from all the signings that Hill and Flicker made for Barnsley, have gone on to better themselves? I can think of one, Vaz Te, who had never encountered the dynamic duo before. There's a few still in the Championship, either rooted to the bottom of the table with Blackpool or kicking their heels in Brighton's reserves. The rest fell back down the leagues. Barnsley had a pretty comfortable season the year before Hill came. Other than Vaz Te, there's no one else that Hill or Flicker brought to the club playing at that level. I find that odd. Considering how well they have developed players at Rochdale, it's even weirder. We might be a relatively small club, but they both had a lot more money to play with at Barnsley than at Rochdale and even at Bury, who are supposed to the money bags.

 

Fvcking incest is the only way I can describe this $hite.

Hill is corrupt, and should be punished.

 

Admittedly I know **** all about this stuff, and certainly less than others, but didn't Hill (to some acclaim) say he refused to deal with agents who wanted big fees? And didn't we pay the lowest amount to agents in the league under his first season? All of which (I imagine) would obviously limit the agents we would use and, as a consequence, the players we could sign.

 

LOL ... either..

1.Secret love trist?
2. Both members of Gamblers Anonymous & attend meetings together?
3. Sheer madness.
4. Power, Corruption & Lies (By New Order).
5. Another reason...

 

If I post with the intention of providing information, why ignore it and continue on the same theme? Done HAS played well for the majority of time at Dale. The times when he wasn't involved it was because he didn't get much of a chance in successful sides. When he's played he's been excellent as an attacking midfielder, very good at left back and the surprise success as a goalscoring striker.

Has he really done very little for Hill in the two and a half seasons he's had him at Dale? I'm willing to accept he might not have had much impact at Barnsley - Reds fans saw him more than I did (but presumably he did ok at times with that interest from Palace) - but please let's not re-write history of his career at Spotland. If you know of any other players we've had who have impressed in defence, midfield and attack, please be sure to point them out.

 

9 goals in 17 starts this season. Not bad for a non striker.

 

Managers sign players for all sorts of reasons. Good pro, reliable, know what they are getting, good squad player, versatile. Done is arguably all of these things. For Division 1 he's a fair pick and clearly can do a job in multiple positions. Not sure there's much mystery.

 

Wow, you're a piece of work you aren't you? Get out of your own arse much? Christ knows why I bothered entering in to a conversation with you having experienced this kind of fcukwitted response from you before. I deserved all I got I suppose.

I guess that's why Hill had him on the bench so often in his first season and for the first 5 months of his second. He's such a good manager he doesn't need to select the players who are performing so well, he can leave them on the bench.

Now **** the **** off before I reach through the internet and pull your tiny **** off you stupid Rochdale lovely person.

 

Harsh.

Mate of mine is 442.

I think you did reight though in ending the debate. He's never wrong, 442. Even when he is.