Scott Golbourne, Matt Hill or Jay Maccavelli?

Again, who would you rather have playing for us out of those three?

Feel free to say why, or just vote.

 

Goldboune looked ok last season can get forward too. Im optimistic about him

 

Golbourne* stupid autocomplete?

 

Haven't seen enough of golbourne

 

I've seen enough of him to know he can't be any worse than Maccavelli, and at least on a par with Hill.

 

Agreed which is why I have chosen Golbourne.

 

I chose the popular option of Golbourne. He's never going to be Ashley Cole but he's a competent left back and should only get better.

 

There you go again, going for the p[opular option!!

 

I didn't rate McEvely or Hill, and on the few outings i have seen Goulbourne he looks to be on about a par to be honest - perhaps a little unfair as he was brought into a struggling team so on that basis i would choose Goulbourne - but its not a position I am entirely happy w have covered well.

Perhaps I have been spoilt with Eaden and Barnard and so am always hoping for a similar type of player.

I'm afraid I'm not a Wiseman fan on the right either, seems to be good 30yds either side of the half way line, so much as in the fact that he can carry the ball quicly over that distance but actually doing any defending or getting the cross in and he falls down with that on most occasions.

 

God my spelling was shocking in that last post!

 

Pretty unfair this one, not seen much of Goldbourne, and what I have seen of him, he's been out of position, I thought Matt Hill was a steady fullback, made a fair few errors though, but he's got my vote, purely because i've not seen enough of Goldbourne, and Hill was miles better than McEverly.