Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Hughton and Injuries tracker 2018/19









chaileyjem

#BarberIn
NSC Patron
Jun 27, 2012
14,612
At the risk of CJ attacking me, I suspect the injuries to Murray and Dunk are the sort of injuries that frequently affect important players in the build up to cup games, then clear up just in time for the next league game.

Dunk wasn’t going to play anyway.
 




Sussex Nomad

Well-known member
Aug 26, 2010
18,185
EP
Murray [calf] - 6 weeks, Dunk [calf] - 5 weeks - "[Glenn] just felt his calf very slightly, but certainly enough, the same with Dunky, for him not to be available.
"And then we will push as hard as we can to get them fit for the Leicester game

Propper [ill] - 4 weeks - "Davy was ill, trained (Friday) and then didn't feel great. We assessed him and he was definitely not well enough to play."

Balogun [shoulder] - 8 weeks - "Generally we've been good with injuries but it was a difficult week with Leon Balogun injured as well in training, his shoulder."

Locadia [ankle] - season - "awaiting the results of a scan"
 




chaileyjem

#BarberIn
NSC Patron
Jun 27, 2012
14,612
Murray [calf] - 6 weeks, Dunk [calf] - 5 weeks - "[Glenn] just felt his calf very slightly, but certainly enough, the same with Dunky, for him not to be available.
"And then we will push as hard as we can to get them fit for the Leicester game

Propper [ill] - 4 weeks - "Davy was ill, trained (Friday) and then didn't feel great. We assessed him and he was definitely not well enough to play."

Balogun [shoulder] - 8 weeks - "Generally we've been good with injuries but it was a difficult week with Leon Balogun injured as well in training, his shoulder."

Locadia [ankle] - season - "awaiting the results of a scan"

thanks SN. PS: these are SN's personal evaluations (kind of you to get your stethoscope out) in case of any confusion.
 


Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
Dunk wasn’t going to play anyway.

Which is kinda my point. These are the sorts of injuries that happen to important players managers don't want to risk in the cup games, but can't come out and say 'look, they're really important to our league efforts, a cup run would be nice, but not at the expense of the league, I'd rather not risk them'. So lots of players across the league (nb, lots of managers do this, it's not a criticism of Hughton, and for me is a completely separate issue to the sentiment among some fans that led to you starting this endeavour), have a slight niggle, feel their calf, had a slight muscle thing, suffered a minor knock, etc, which is totally why they're not playing today. Yesiree.
 


chaileyjem

#BarberIn
NSC Patron
Jun 27, 2012
14,612
Which is kinda my point. These are the sorts of injuries that happen to important players managers don't want to risk in the cup games, but can't come out and say 'look, they're really important to our league efforts, a cup run would be nice, but not at the expense of the league, I'd rather not risk them'. So lots of players across the league (nb, lots of managers do this, it's not a criticism of Hughton, and for me is a completely separate issue to the sentiment among some fans that led to you starting this endeavour), have a slight niggle, feel their calf, had a slight muscle thing, suffered a minor knock, etc, which is totally why they're not playing today. Yesiree.

Still not sure what you're getting at.
Here's what happened on Saturday.
Hughton wanted to play Propper on Saturday but he was ill. I guess you're suggesting he wasn't ill.
And the plan all along was for Jayson Molumby to end up on the bench as a result, even though he'd played 45 minutes the night before.
Likewise Dunk had a late minor calf injury, so late in fact, that Leo Ostigard of all people also ended up on the bench. Was that the plan anyway ?
Why not just leave players out if you don't want to play them ?
 




E

Eric Youngs Contact Lense

Guest
Which is kinda my point. These are the sorts of injuries that happen to important players managers don't want to risk in the cup games, but can't come out and say 'look, they're really important to our league efforts, a cup run would be nice, but not at the expense of the league, I'd rather not risk them'. So lots of players across the league (nb, lots of managers do this, it's not a criticism of Hughton, and for me is a completely separate issue to the sentiment among some fans that led to you starting this endeavour), have a slight niggle, feel their calf, had a slight muscle thing, suffered a minor knock, etc, which is totally why they're not playing today. Yesiree.

I think he was going to be on the bench - for Centre-half cover as Balogun is more seriously injured.. but with a niggle and Balogun not available for the forseeable, it was felt risking the niggle getting worse was not worth it - hence the U23 lad was drafted in.. don't think it was the plan for him to be completely absent from the match-day squad.
 


Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
Still not sure what you're getting at.
Here's what happened on Saturday.
Hughton wanted to play Propper on Saturday but he was ill. I guess you're suggesting he wasn't ill.
And the plan all along was for Jayson Molumby to end up on the bench as a result, even though he'd played 45 minutes the night before.
Likewise Dunk had a late minor calf injury, so late in fact, that Leo Ostigard of all people also ended up on the bench. Was that the plan anyway ?
Why not just leave players out if you don't want to play them ?

Oh, you're not that dumb. You know exactly what I'm saying. Clearly other people in the thread understand it with the references to Giggs. Some managers feel the need to justify their team selection when they play fringe players/youth/second team, to keep everyone happy about them taking the cup seriously. Slight niggles and knocks that happen in training all the time and are nothing to worry about suddenly become reasons to keep players out of the side for a cup game that the manager doesn't view as important as the league games.

If you go back to my first post on this topic, I specified Dunk and Murray. I belive Propper was ill. Managers don't tend to send their players away like that if they are just trying to protect them for the league. We're well stocked in midfield and should he have got injured or sent off, we'd still have stephens, bissouma, gross, kayal as capable, experienced cover. If Murray gets injured we have inexperienced cover in Victor, and would have been reliant on Locadia who is still struggling to hit top form consistently.

With Dunk we have Burn as cover, who while decent in the cup, has only faced Championship opponents, I suspect if Burn or Duffy got injured and Dunk was on the bench, it would have been a difficult decision whether to bring Dunk on or Montoya/Dung and shift them around (a late injury suffered innocently, sure, bring on Dunk; an earlier injury with Derby trying to bully our defenders, probably shift the full backs around). But I guess we'll never know if Dunk would have been used, or if he even was ever going to be on the bench or if that was just a line like the injury.

What about Murray? Anyone confirmed he was going to be on the bench and then pulled late? Or do we accept he was never going to be on the bench because we need him too much for the league?
 


E

Eric Youngs Contact Lense

Guest
Oh, you're not that dumb. You know exactly what I'm saying. Clearly other people in the thread understand it with the references to Giggs. Some managers feel the need to justify their team selection when they play fringe players/youth/second team, to keep everyone happy about them taking the cup seriously. Slight niggles and knocks that happen in training all the time and are nothing to worry about suddenly become reasons to keep players out of the side for a cup game that the manager doesn't view as important as the league games.

If you go back to my first post on this topic, I specified Dunk and Murray. I belive Propper was ill. Managers don't tend to send their players away like that if they are just trying to protect them for the league. We're well stocked in midfield and should he have got injured or sent off, we'd still have stephens, bissouma, gross, kayal as capable, experienced cover. If Murray gets injured we have inexperienced cover in Victor, and would have been reliant on Locadia who is still struggling to hit top form consistently.

With Dunk we have Burn as cover, who while decent in the cup, has only faced Championship opponents, I suspect if Burn or Duffy got injured and Dunk was on the bench, it would have been a difficult decision whether to bring Dunk on or Montoya/Dung and shift them around (a late injury suffered innocently, sure, bring on Dunk; an earlier injury with Derby trying to bully our defenders, probably shift the full backs around). But I guess we'll never know if Dunk would have been used, or if he even was ever going to be on the bench or if that was just a line like the injury.

What about Murray? Anyone confirmed he was going to be on the bench and then pulled late? Or do we accept he was never going to be on the bench because we need him too much for the league?

I think everyone accepts that the league is more important to the Club - The assertion that CH is somehow trying to pull the wool over our eyes is what I don't understand. As a man manager, he will never say that these players are 2nd choice - they all know where they fit in, he doesn't need to make that point publicly. Additionally they will nearly all be needed at some point in the first team. Protecting Murray over Locadia given the striking options, his age, or even a niggle again seem very normal things to do. He was on the bench against West Brom, why would he not have been on the bench if fit vs. Derby?
 




Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
I think everyone accepts that the league is more important to the Club - The assertion that CH is somehow trying to pull the wool over our eyes is what I don't understand. As a man manager, he will never say that these players are 2nd choice - they all know where they fit in, he doesn't need to make that point publicly. Additionally they will nearly all be needed at some point in the first team. Protecting Murray over Locadia given the striking options, his age, or even a niggle again seem very normal things to do. He was on the bench against West Brom, why would he not have been on the bench if fit vs. Derby?

I'm not criticising Hughton for it. My point when I started this way back, was let's not worry too much about Dunk and Murray's availability for leicester based on their absence v Derby. I will be very surprised if they are not fit for leicester (barring fresh injuries or illnesses, of course).

As to your question about Murray v Derby the answer is simple: Andone. In the West Brom game we had Andone, Murray, Locadia and Gyokores. In the Derby game Andone was suspended (and would be for Leicester), Gyokores hasn't shown he's ready to lead the line in the premier league yet, leaving us with Locadia and Murray as our realistic best options for Leicester (as of pre-derby). Is it worth the risk to Murray? I would imagine most managers who prioritise the league over the cup would say no.
 




Bob!

Coffee Buyer
Jul 5, 2003
11,630
So, will we have a no 9 on Tuesday?

Andone - banned
Murray - calf
Locadia - ankle
 
















zefarelly

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
22,786
Sussex, by the sea
Back what? Or did you mean backing? As in backing into defenders and having a sit down. It works well against the naive, most of our opponents this season are a bit smarter than that. It's just a shame we don't have anything better to offer.

Muzza will be back
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here