Jamie Murphy

[GreersElbow]

Re Duffy, thought one slip aside, the whole of the defence were excellent vs City.

Absolutely, ignore the own goal - City hardly carved open opportunities, they did what any class team would. Pounce on mistakes, such as Stephens.

Defensively, I think we're sound, it's going fowards where we have issues. Mind, it's not all as bad as it seems as them up the road have a team that NONE of our players would get into, and players like Benetake who we'd dream of having.


Haven't scored yet...

 

[Napper]

Murphy been one of the better players in both games.

Looks ok, need him in the squad - fact

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Murphy been one of the better players in both games.

Looks ok, need him in the squad - fact

In a team which has lost both games without scoring a goal. We can play him, it's no problem. But he's not at the standard of this league, so we're going to lose if we keep playing him and he's not going to affect the game in a positive way for us. The sooner Murphy isn't in the squad, the better for our chances of survival.

But if we're happy to get relegated without trying, by all means keep playing Murphy, and Bong, and Hemed, and Baldock. If we're determined to have a good go at staying up, we can't play any of those regularly because they're just not good enough players. It's no criticism, this is the Premier League afterall.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Absolutely, ignore the own goal - City hardly carved open opportunities, they did what any class team would. Pounce on mistakes, such as Stephens.

Defensively, I think we're sound, it's going fowards where we have issues. Mind, it's not all as bad as it seems as them up the road have a team that NONE of our players would get into, and players like Benetake who we'd dream of having.


Haven't scored yet...

Nail and head.

Forgetting the comedy of errors for Leicesters first goal, they created next to nothing.

We just looked awful on Saturday offensively


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Napper]

In a team which has lost both games without scoring a goal. We can play him, it's no problem. But he's not at the standard of this league, so we're going to lose if we keep playing him and he's not going to affect the game in a positive way for us. The sooner Murphy isn't in the squad, the better for our chances of survival.

But if we're happy to get relegated without trying, by all means keep playing Murphy, and Bong, and Hemed, and Baldock. If we're determined to have a good go at staying up, we can't play any of those regularly because they're just not good enough players. It's no criticism, this is the Premier League afterall.

Not sure I agree . I reckon we would of done better the first 2 games playing the team we did last year than the perceived new players that are supposedly premier league quality.

I'm not saying Murphy should start and I'm certainly not his biggest fan but he can bring things to the table and influence games.

 

[cocamalia]

Of course Murphy can influence games offensively at Premier League level. But how well? To what extent? But how many times a match? How many times a season?

An example would be 20 seconds into the game on Saturday where he carried the ball nicely for 40 yards, only to go and lose it...now I'm not blaming the goal on him at all really, but it just illustrates how much more clinical and incisive you need to be. And I don't think Jamie Murphy offers enough.

 

[Brighton Mod]

Of course Murphy can influence games offensively at Premier League level. But how well? To what extent? But how many times a match? How many times a season?

An example would be 20 seconds into the game on Saturday where he carried the ball nicely for 40 yards, only to go and lose it...now I'm not blaming the goal on him at all really, but it just illustrates how much more clinical and incisive you need to be. And I don't think Jamie Murphy offers enough.

Was it not his shot that caused a hand ball appeal? Which was hand ball.

 

[cocamalia]

Was it not his shot that caused a hand ball appeal? Which was hand ball.

I don't think you followed my point.

Re-read.

 

[Brighton Mod]

I don't think you followed my point.

Re-read.

Your post suggests that he is not clinical enough, so I pointed out the contribution he made to our performance in a positive way. I'm not sure what I have misread. I watched many players last night in the Man City v Everton game who did exactly what you have said of Murphy.

Your point about not offering enough could be levelled at many players in our team, its early days still and the strategists in the management team have to work out out to get the ball to the likes of Murphy, Knockheart, March and Murray in a position where they are able to make inroads into the opposition. Your point should be aimed at the team and the setup if you see it like you say.

 

[cocamalia]

Your post suggests that he is not clinical enough, so I pointed out the contribution he made to our performance in a positive way. I'm not sure what I have misread. I watched many players last night in the Man City v Everton game who did exactly what you have said of Murphy.

Your point about not offering enough could be levelled at many players in our team, its early days still and the strategists in the management team have to work out out to get the ball to the likes of Murphy, Knockheart, March and Murray in a position where they are able to make inroads into the opposition. Your point should be aimed at the team and the setup if you see it like you say.

Fair point re. team strategy.

I guess my point was more around the frequency of making chances / scoring opportunities. It will happen for him in games but not as often as needed. I also don't think he's clinical enough.

Not sure about the City v Everton game. Looked like both teams had plenty of threat across the forward line to me. Perhaps the young forward Tom Davies did not have the desired impact.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Re Duffy, thought one slip aside, the whole of the defence were excellent vs City.

You mean all 11 players? Because that's how many men we had behind the ball. And we still conceded. Twice.

I'm not saying Duffy was awful against Man City, but he most certainly wasn't "brilliant".

 

[Silverhatch]

Not sure I agree . I reckon we would of done better the first 2 games playing the team we did last year than the perceived new players that are supposedly premier league quality.

I'm not saying Murphy should start and I'm certainly not his biggest fan but he can bring things to the table and influence games.

Totally agree with this. The 4-4-2 side of last year would have made a better fist of the first two games offensively. However, it's academic because injuries and departures have robbed us of that comparison.

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Not sure I agree . I reckon we would of done better the first 2 games playing the team we did last year than the perceived new players that are supposedly premier league quality.

I'm not saying Murphy should start and I'm certainly not his biggest fan but he can bring things to the table and influence games.

He only influenced one or two games last season, he's just not very good. His only asset is that he's been here a while.

 

[Stat Brother]

As this (and all the other threads) are still rumbling on I'm curious as the expectation levels of those feeling players like Tomer, Jamie, Jiri et al have no place in a 25 man Premier League squad.

The club so far has spent £50m in upgrades and plugging gaps, with potentially more to come.
It was very much a top end Championship side with a fair few Championship players.

Should the club have 'Norwooded' all the players that were deemed unlikely to be of starting 11 quality?

 

[whitelion]

As this (and all the other threads) are still rumbling on I'm curious as the expectation levels of those feeling players like Tomer, Jamie, Jiri et al have no place in a 25 man Premier League squad.

The club so far has spent £50m in upgrades and plugging gaps, with potentially more to come.
It was very much a top end Championship side with a fair few Championship players.

Should the club have 'Norwooded' all the players that were deemed unlikely to be of starting 11 quality?

We need a squad of 25 which has to be named on 1st September. I doubt all 25 would be starting 11 quality but close to.

 

[Conelli98]

Has a bid come in for Murphy...someone on the Argus website seems to think a bid has been submitted?...have I missed something?

 

[GT49er]

Scapegoat? Why have one when you can have a whole flock!

Herd, not flock................................

 

[British Bulldog]

Has a bid come in for Murphy...someone on the Argus website seems to think a bid has been submitted?...have I missed something?

I seem to recall the person that posted it has been right on a few things before.

 

[Weststander]

Absolutely, ignore the own goal - City hardly carved open opportunities, they did what any class team would. Pounce on mistakes, such as Stephens.

Defensively, I think we're sound, it's going fowards where we have issues. Mind, it's not all as bad as it seems as them up the road have a team that NONE of our players would get into, and players like Benetake who we'd dream of having.


Haven't scored yet...

But according to Gullit on Sunday evening's MOTD2, Palace played really well at Anfield, whilst he felt LFC were poor. Strange that, other than a couple of much hyped runs by Loftus-Cheek, they were negative and out played:



Gullit is a crap pundit. It was obvious that he was talking up his mate and fellow countryman De Boer.

 

[Triggaaar]

Herd, not flock................................

No, a herd, flock, or trip of goats are all correct.