Tunnicliffe

As far as I'm concerned, it's no coincidence that we played much better without him in the team.

If I was Flitcroft I'd be looking to cut that deal short. It hasn't worked out for either party.

 

While he's been here we've played 5 games:

With Tunnicliffe....: P3 W0 D0 L3 GF5, GA13 PTS0
Without Tunnicliffe: P2 W1 D1 L0 GF3, GA2 PTS4

 

You can't judge a player on 5 games. You just can't do it. Thought you'd all have learned with my Daggers.

 

But this one isn't our player. We don't have the long term for him to improve.

 

I stuck by Daggers too. Just me and thee.

 

Point still stands though regardless. Understand that he's short term but you can't write him off.

 

Anyone is entitled to judge a player on whatever he/she wants........I seem to recall Peterborough fans saying not to expect very much with Tunnicliffe, so add this into your 5 games and the picture becomes a little larger?

Personally speaking I think we look a much better team with Etuhu down middle of park.......and now with mad dog Dawson on the bench, I can't see Tunnicliffe getting much of a chance?

 

Everyone's entitled to an opinion, course they are, my point is people have been stung before by players after making snap judgments (either way) early on so don't know why they continue to do it.

I bet you wouldn't have said that about Etuhu after he'd played 5 games...

 

Always. You let me down with Keith though Mario. I thought I could count on you.

 

Agreed that loan players need to make an impact. I think back to Nardiello's first match where he scored two and made one....

 

I think that's fair. I've not seen him play but seemed pretty obvious without Dawson we needed another body in there - it doesn't look to have worked out but there's still 10 games to go and he could end up being important. Got to remember with Dawson coming back he might need a few games to get back in to it too.

 

Didn't he only sign on a month's loan anyway?

 

You're not gunna believe this, but I said to my old fella at start of season that I thought Etuhu would be a good player for us........but I actually thought on right side midfield, where he has not had his best games!

Generally my gut reaction and initial summary of players is usually quite accurate in the long term (even if i say so myself).

I have to admit being wrong with Daggers though......but you can put me in a list with about 10K others on this one!!!!!

 

Why did we need him when Etuhu was playing so well in exactly the same central midfield position?

What we needed was replacement for Golbourne and stick with a 3-5-2 that was working so well for Flicker.

In fact when we signed Tunnicliffe I fully expected him to be a wing back or full back, so was amazed when he slotted in straight down the middle of the park.......think quite a few other REDS fans were as well.

 

Was Golbourne injured when he signed?

Because you're then limiting yourself to only 2 fit central midfielders in that type of role - Mellis is more creative and doesn't do the work Perkins/Dawson and now Etuhu does. And considering the amount of work they put in they're always prone to injury/fatigue etc. Seemed he became available, Flitcroft rated him and signed him for a month. No real harm done - it's not worked out but it's the only signing he's made so far that hasn't really.

 

28 day according to the BBC so due to end pretty soon. In fact Saturday would be his last game. If Dawson's fit now I can't really imagine him staying on.