Perhaps it was to try and instill some responsibilities into the lad. Having a wide player play a game at left back in a friendly is by no means a pointless exercise. Absolutely no chance he'll play there in a competitive game unless we're really struggling. Chill out people.
Just a thought, and it's nothing more than that, but seen something similar in the past at both professional and amateur level. An attacking midfielder / winger doesn’t have much defensive sense. The player appears to have it all going forward but when the other team attacks the attacking midfielder / winger doesn’t track back to support the full back……… One way to improve the knowledge and understanding of the pressure on that full back – Stick that winger in that position! I had it done to me when I was about 20, and that was mid-season. Fair enough I was only playing at a high Saturday level but I quickly improved that side of my game. Things that look insane to us, maybe more than that!
This thread is f.cking nuts. Maybe he's playing him there because he's not good enough to play up front? Don't give a f.ck where his dad says he should play - he's not shown anything in the games I've seen that make me think he's going to make it professionally.
Perhaps there was a legitimate reason for his inclusion at left back. And perhaps he isn't as good a laiker as we'd all hoped he would be. But I'd rather see him get 90 minutes in his preferred position, like a certain Chris Dagnall keeps getting, despite him being about as useful as a chocolate fireguard.
Dagnall isn't good enough to play with his own **** never mind up front for Barnsley but he still keeps getting a game there. I've seen RNL play in the academy, reserves and first team and he's shown a hell of a lot more promise as a striker than Dagnall has. I'm not saying he's a world beater, simply that he's better than Hill's own signing so it's crazy to shove him to left back just to make room for Daggerless. Then again i've just given the reason havent I, Hill signed him.