Pig Walker on twitter, says..

Dave 'Front Page' Jones has said that he won't be recalling Chris O'Grady, as there is no longer a recall clause in the loan deal.

 

I wish all our loan players could be recalled, then we can go with what we've got like we should have done in the first place. Foster, Hassell and Harewood on the bench because we're jiggling the team about to try to accommodate loan players who simply aren't performing. Barmy.

I ******* hate loan players. They just take the place in the team of others that could do a much better job. A 36 year old to play wing back? A youth player struggling to come to terms with Championship? A centre forward taking the place of our best player over the unbeaten run? Just what we needed.

Contracted players are better than loan players every single day of the week and twice on Sundays.

 

I would agree with you but you've been nasty to me so I'm taking my like button home.

 

See my post in the "watching Keith Hill" thread - I don't pick any of the loanees.

I think COG is the best of the bunch, though. And I'm led to believe he's already signed for next season whatever happens.

 

He is the best of the bunch and he does work hard, but I'd still prefer it if we hadn't got him and just signed him in the summer.

I just don't like loan players.

Take Tunnicliffe for example. He may go on to be a great player, but at the moment he's not, not by a long way. If we hadn't got him in on loan then Etuhu would have been in midfield against Bolton. With Etuhu in midfield, Wiseman would have been at wing back. With Wiseman at wing back, Foster would have been in central defence. With those three players in their proper positions we'd have won the game.

 

I haven't even got a like button. Even when I did have one it didn't work.

 

Why are football managers scared to keep things simple ?

 

Which is what I've thought since the team was announced on Saturday.

But some people think we're moaning for moaning's sake. When as far as I'm concerned, the manager is tinkering for tinkering's sake.

 

No idea. By bringing Tunnicliffe in Flitcroft has tried to fix something that wasn't broken. In fact, it was purring along like a Ferrari. Now we've crashed.

If it isn't broken, fix it until it is.

 

I agree with that. Flicker dropped Foster, our most commanding centre half for a game against two physical forwards so that he could play two other players out of position and bring one in who turned out to be arguably our worst player on the day.

I don't mind O'Grady, he's not as good as Harewood but if he's committed to the club for next season no matter what and we do end up getting relegated then the Daggers/O'Grady partnership could turn out to be the best in the league.

 

I reckon Daggers will have some admirers should we get relegated. Might lose him, and a few others (Dawson, Perkins, Golbourne etc).

 

For once there is a thread with some proper sense in it.

It'll soon get hijacked but its nice to read. From my perspective I've never been into the Ranieri method of management, which seems to more and more the rage.

Like Jay, I'm not a fan of the loan market, although we have had some good ones in the past, on the whole they've been pretty dire over the last few years. We look far more balanced playing 3-5-2 and I think teams struggle to play against it. Its been our leveller in my opinion so I'm not sure why we have changed it so much over the last few weeks.

I'd go with Jays team, get back to basics and use the players that have got this team and club running through their veins at the moment.

 

Given our precarious position we were not able to make permanent signings to strengthen the squad for the run in, less we be lumbered with players we can't afford to pay and that no-one else wants on a reduced operational budget in League 1.

We have two 34 year old strikers who, while performing well, can not be expected to start every single game if we are to maximise their contribution to the fullest. Our top scorer decides to leave in January and decides to stop trying in November in case we try to for-go 300k and hold him to contract. The two current first choice strikers were actually 3rd & 4th choice before Xmas.
Dawson was injured at a crucial time, Etuhu replaces him and is injured, Perkins and O'Brien are both injury prone. We bring in an old head and a promising young one. We begin the new year well and within a month Stones has gone. A month later, Golbourne is out for the season. On the up side, we have faired well on suspensions.

You won't reply to this but there you go - without the loan market we would be threadbare and possibly already buggered.

 

Hassell can play where Delap and Tunnicliffe have.

And Danny Rose hasn't let us down when called upon.


But I think COG's arrival was needed, and he's made a better impact than the £8m superstar that Wednesday replaced him with.

I think the Tunnicliffe and Delap loans weren't needed, and are even less needed now.

Just my opinion, though.

 

I'm worried we might lose a couple but I reckon the one most likely to leave is Dawson. Hopefully people are put off by Daggers poor goal scoring record in 2012, Perkin's age and Golbourne's injury. People were sniffing around Dawson in January and if on his return, he continues where he left off there ought to be a few suitors, especially since he's about to hit his prime.

 

What's the point of replying to you?

The majority of the time you take the polar opposite view of much of what I write. That's fine, I have absolutely no problem with that at all. I put up my point of view and this BBS gives others the opportunity to put a counter view. Great. But if I were to counter your argument I'd just be repeating everything I've already said. There's no point in doing that, I've already said what I feel on the subject. There's no need to say I disagree with you, when it's already obvious that I do. I'm interested in putting forward my point of view and reading that of others. I'm not interested in having a row of any sort. So I read what you put, but see no reason why I should try to shout you down or disagree with you, when it's already obvious I see things from a different perspective and would be wasting my time in trying to change your mind.

 

I think Rose played himself out of contention v Millwall, to be honest. Everyone thought it was a laugh, but has he played since?

I'd play Bobby too and I wasn't keen on Delap coming but he's done okay. Tunnicliffe is an odd one, but could be a new Drinkwater and I think Flicker is having a good look with a view to making an offer. Look at that one from a manager's point of view, Dawson was tipped to be off to Birmingham before his injury, following Davies and Stones out the club? Then his replacement is injured.

Plus it is part of a young manager establishing a working relationship with the big noises in the game, he is doing Man U a favour too giving Tunners games. Even if he isn't the right player it's part of the network Flicker is becoming involved with that will benefit the club long term. Bigger pictures and all that.

 

I actually agree with a great deal of what you post, there is often nothing I could add. Just felt sending home the loan players as you suggested would invite problems for the reasons then stated. I also think that if Flitcroft is developing a relationship with Man U that is no bad thing.

 

I see where you're coming from, but I don't really understand the thinking behind throwing a kid straight into a winning side 3 days after arriving, ahead of the likes of Hassell, who has served this club for years and rarely let us down.

And I've nothing against him, and I do see chinks of promise in him. Same as I've nowt against Delap. I just find it bizarre (even unfair) that Hassell is apparently too old/slow and unable to play at RB/RWB, yet a man 5 years his senior, and slower, is brought in to do just that.

Flitcroft says Delap is superhuman-ly fit. I haven't seen evidence of that myself. But I have seen plenty of evidence of Hassell's ability/fitness.

Smells a bit funny does this.

 

I think you write well, put forward a lot of good views and contribute a lot to this forum. But if I don't reply when you disagree with what I say, it's not because I'm ignoring you, it's because I respect your right to an opinion, even when it is at odds with mine and I don't want to go trampling all over it.

I disagree with a lot with what you have said about loan players, but I think it's a valid argument none the less and I think people should get to read it as a counter to my mine. I don't want to then try to pick holes in it. I want people to read two conflicting opinions and make their own mind up.

When two people are so far apart on one particular subject, as we are, I don't think anything can be achieved by thrashing it out. It just tends to end up in a bit of a row with no one getting any further forward. Better, I believe, to leave your reply under mine as the alternative view uncontested.