seagullsovergrimsby
#cpfctinpotclub
Barnsey has to worth at least £Z8M* 
£Z = Zaha Pound currency
£Z = Zaha Pound currency
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Wolves in for Ashley Barnes
- Thread starter Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ
- Start date
melias shoes
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2010
- 4,830
In the pre-season games that I have seen him in this year Barnes has looked much better than last season. If we now sell him, and to another Championship club, it would be bizarre beyond belief.
This.
Mutts Nuts
New member
- Oct 30, 2011
- 4,918
But we sell players for peanuts , if Ashley is offered a signifcant pay rise he will move on as would all of us
*Cough* Adam Virgo £1.5 million, nuff said?
somerset
New member
Players go for what they are worth in most cases,.... Barnes will attract a max of 750k in my view..... he is low profile compared to a lot of players, he has some goal stats yes, but scouts will see deficiencies in his game like we do and price will be adjusted accordingly,... he hasnt played any international footy ( one minor cap I believe),... and has come from unfashionable Plymouth.
Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ
Hove / Παρος
- Thread starter
- #167
His price is set at what we will accept. He is worth a lot more to us than 750k, because to buy a replacement of equal quality will cost a lot more than 750k. I'd say to replace him like for like, with a proven Championship striker with potential to improve you're talking 3mil plus
And there it is. I did have a feeling that was coming which is why I was afraid to ask. So essentially you would prefer Sam Allardyce to Gus Poyet, which, argue the toss as much as you like, is exactly what you are saying. And this is the Sam Allardyce who couldn't get a very expensively assembled West Ham squad in the top two of the 2nd Tier.
And one other question, what is hoof ball if it isn't going direct? Full backs hitting a target man early is going direct, goalkeepers kicking it long, looking for a target man to go for flick-ons is going direct - but that is also known as hoof-ball so I'm confused by the difference. You don't need to play hoof ball / go direct to get wingers in the game, in fact it's better that you don't, as playing around at the back brings the opposition on to you and creates space for the front players - but I suppose you are choosing to ignore that you ever saw that happen last season aren't you?
Basically, all the while Gus in charge, you are a waste of a season ticket, because you will NEVER appreciate what he is trying to do, and we are NEVER going to play the way you want.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I'll repeat what I just posted on the Gus thread.
Was I the only one who saw Greer passing long diagonals to Buckley a few times during the season which enabled him to beat the opposition, only to find that no one in the team was near the area to cross to?
Was I the only one who saw Greer passing long diagonals to Buckley a few times during the season which enabled him to beat the opposition, only to find that no one in the team was near the area to cross to?
Greer's always had that ability - we should use it more. Probably our best goal of last season was scored exactly like this (home to Ipswich). Greer, long diagonal ball to Buckley, clipped cross to CMS, bang. Ten seconds from Greer to goal.
To be fair, there is a difference between being more attacking and playing hoofball. As I understand it, Mr Burns is saying we should play more of our attacking players (presumably fielding two wingers rather than one) and provide more support to CMS in attack. If that means we concede more goals so be it, because we'll score more. None of that necessarily means hoofing it long to a target man, so not sure where you get the Sam Allardyce comparison from.
Not actually saying I agree with Mr Burns (I'm quite happy with the possession football Gus plays) but just don't think your criticism of his position is accurate.
glasfryn
cleaning up cat sick
Can I just remind some that football is a game where you have to score more than the other team to win !!!
can some one tell me how many games we have played under Gus where we had less posession than the opposing team and less shots on goal(sometimes as little as one) and still managed to win the blasted game, now I love free flowing attacking football like everyone else but there are games where you have to grind out a result to stay at the top and Barnes is one of those players you need to do this.
Christ on a bike why the hell would we sell one of our best players to get in a player who will take time to settle and who may not come up to scratch in the goals department
can some one tell me how many games we have played under Gus where we had less posession than the opposing team and less shots on goal(sometimes as little as one) and still managed to win the blasted game, now I love free flowing attacking football like everyone else but there are games where you have to grind out a result to stay at the top and Barnes is one of those players you need to do this.
Christ on a bike why the hell would we sell one of our best players to get in a player who will take time to settle and who may not come up to scratch in the goals department
My criticism is because he says the system 'is not working' - that's why I am disagreeing with his position. And he was saying we should play more direct, that's where the Sam Allardyce comparison comes from. It is very difficult to play possession football and go direct, not impossible, but very difficult.
And for as good as we think our players are, you watch us get picked off if we play with two wingers - Leeds at home, first half, to use but one good example.
Personally I agree with you. I like Gus' possession football, though I agree with the majority that thinks we need a better Plan B for when it's not working. My point is that being direct does not necessarily equate with hoofball-Allardyce tactics. Spreading it quickly to the wings and fast counter-attacking can be direct (rather than passing it round our back five) and doesn't require hoofing. Ferguson would be a better comparison than Allardyce.
That said, I thought one of our best performances last season was the Burnley game when because we were down to nine we had to hit it long for CMS and Buckley to chase, and it very nearly worked.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
That was beautiful and paid off. There were a few times when it didn't but at least we tried it. The team do know how to mix it up a bit. As Gus has said a few times in his interviews, he coaches the team and then once they're on the field, it's decisions, decisions, decisions. It's up the players as to how they implement any given move during a game. The players tried long ball at Watford away with Harper in goal for most of the match and it just didn't work.
We only did that for the last ten minutes though.
Meade's Ball
Well-known member
Hmmm, i wonder if teams who know we might want to play CMS behind them play a deep defensive line, therefore us having to keep applying pressure and keep the ball until they charge at us at all and we slice them open. I seem to remember Ipswich were the main idiots who played the Chelsea high-line technique and had no way of keeping us out. We just needed better players to keep possession higher up the field and drag oppositions about the place a little. Crofts should enable that a little, whilst a fully-attacking pair of wing-backs, effectively, should create more space for the closed-down forwards we had last year.
Playing it over the top into the keepers arms, or onto the head of a 6ft 4 centrehalf doesn't seem too intelligent. We just need to keep the ball and attack that bit more swiftly, and that includes not having Vicente hog it for 2 minutes to await someone to make the run. Quick-thinking isn't easily trained, but players like Bridge and Bruno already have it in spades, and Crofts had more of it since his time in this division and above. Various players we had, although some of them individually classy, didn't have the wherewithall, or possibly confidence after years of being lower down, to really control a pitch and flick balls here and there when they want to. Another pre-season should have aided that, and should, i think, put together that perfect combination of flair and purpose.
Playing it over the top into the keepers arms, or onto the head of a 6ft 4 centrehalf doesn't seem too intelligent. We just need to keep the ball and attack that bit more swiftly, and that includes not having Vicente hog it for 2 minutes to await someone to make the run. Quick-thinking isn't easily trained, but players like Bridge and Bruno already have it in spades, and Crofts had more of it since his time in this division and above. Various players we had, although some of them individually classy, didn't have the wherewithall, or possibly confidence after years of being lower down, to really control a pitch and flick balls here and there when they want to. Another pre-season should have aided that, and should, i think, put together that perfect combination of flair and purpose.
