Greg Halford

[Jam The Man]

The rotation to see which of our 'strikers' are any good has surely now proved that the answer is: none of them.

So why not play Halford as the striker on Tuesday against Huddersfield?

Things can't get any more dire up front, so what have we got to lose!?

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Interesting, though that could mean Dunk retaining his place and IMO at the moment he is a complete liability.

 

[Jam The Man]

Hughes could come in for Dunk if required..

 

[Arkwright]

Halford is not a striker, if you are going to play someone up front player a striker, why not try an Under 21.

We really need to give two up front a go as at present the system just isn't working.

 

[Napier's Knee]

Bruno, Halford, Hughes, Bennett would be as dependable a back four as we can have until Greer is available again. Dunk needs to be kept on the training ground for some intensive coaching. I have no idea whether he's exhausted, arrogant or distracted in the way of Bridcutt and Buckley but he's definitely gone backwards of late.

I think we're also discovering that Baldock is actually pretty good

 

[fleet]

As none of our strikers can score you have to think it is the system we play rather than all of them being that bad. Don't you?

 

[fleet]

Halford has been our best central defender in recent games - need him at the back. Would like to see him here next year

 

[jamie the seagull]

"Released Nottingham Forest player Greg Halford says he was axed for non-football reasons"....?

http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2015/07/01/released-nottingham-forest-player-greg-halford-says-he-was-axed/

 

[8ace]

Please no.

 

[glasfryn]

Please no.

I think he might
good bench man can play just about anywhere other than goal

 

[hans kraay fan club]

"Released Nottingham Forest player Greg Halford says he was axed for non-football reasons"....?

http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2015/07/01/released-nottingham-forest-player-greg-halford-says-he-was-axed/

Pretty sure 'non-football reasons' in this case means 'financial reasons' - ie. "sorry Greg, we do still think you're great and that, shame to have to let you go, but budgets, you, know?"

i.e. football reasons.

 

[Hyperion]

I presume we would still be interested in signing him then?

 

[Papa Lazarou]

I presume we would still be interested in signing him then?

I would think so - very versatile - looked good on the ball at times, and has a very useful long throw.

looked a little exposed at times, but would be a decent squad player.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Good reserve and towards the end looked better than Dunk, who went completely off the boil.

Could we do better? Yes, but on the assumption Greer and Dunk will start, I'd take him as a sub.

 

[Telford Seagull]

I think he might
good bench man can play just about anywhere other than goal

Actually....Halford is a very good goalkeeper too! When he was at Sheffield United, he used to spend one day per week training with the keepers

 

[Hyperion]

I would think so - very versatile - looked good on the ball at times, and has a very useful long throw.

looked a little exposed at times, but would be a decent squad player.

Yep no more than that. Your summary was similar to mine, decent but a good back up player due to his versatility

 

[Uncle Buck]

Actually....Halford is a very good goalkeeper too! When he was at Sheffield United, he used to spend one day per week training with the keepers

Was that not Phil Jagielka, who was seemingly half decent as a keeper.

 

[drew]

I assume this is actually related to their transfer embargo and that they have to off load players before signing anyone within the constraints imposed.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Suggests that Halford was earning way more than £10k per week at Forest and with their FFP wage restrictions in place could be replaced by a younger player of the same ability for much less.

 

[TSB]

Attitude not ability is the problem with Greg.