Why have se signed McParland and Nix?

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board ARCHIVE' started by Denby Dale Tyke, Mar 3, 2006.

  1. Den

    Denby Dale Tyke New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,470
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Leeds
    Home Page:
    Two lightweight wingers who will never force their way into the team ahead of Deaveney and Shuker? Wouldnt we have been better paying the wages of a tough tackling midfielder. What do i know?(dunno)
     
    Denby Dale Tyke, Mar 3, 2006
    #1
  2. Map

    Mapplewell Tyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,034
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Lightweight? Has tha even see them play yit?!
     
    Mapplewell Tyke, Mar 3, 2006
    #2
  3. Gue

    Guest Guest

    so we have atleast 2 playes for every position

    then we have automatic cover incase Shuker/Devany get injured/banned/whatever, it will also ensure Shuker and Devaney perform on a consistent basis and it keeps standards high because if they dont perform well Mcparand and Nix will be rearing to go. B4 Shuker and Devaney know that they have to play well to keep their place.
    Dont forget we signed them b4 burns went so why would we have signed a central midfielder?
     
    Guest, Mar 3, 2006
    #3
  4. pon

    pontyender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2005
    Messages:
    10,790
    Likes Received:
    3,912
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Barnsley
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Apart from defensive midfield
     
    pontyender, Mar 4, 2006
    #4
  5. Gue

    Guest Guest

    RE: Apart from defensive midfield

    We signed Mcparland and Nix before Burns went.
     
    Guest, Mar 4, 2006
    #5

Share This Page