B.A Baracus Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 (edited) Ill just mention that I like Mcgugan and I don't think I've ever slagged him off before Saturday.. He's a very good player to have coming off the bench at this level. Doesn't make him immune from criticism. Do I think he can score 20 in a season, or he scores goals at the virtually a drop of a hat or he's anywhere near as good as some people think he is? No. There's a reason he was moved on by Watford, ironically in their bid for promotion, he lacks consistency and can be lazy at times. Like Saturday. Edited October 5, 2015 by B.A Baracus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wilyfox Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 More B A Ballacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.A Baracus Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 More B A Ballacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronio Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Expecting McGugan to go back and defend is kind of like expecting players like Semedo and Hutchinson to push forward and attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.A Baracus Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Expecting McGugan to go back and defend is kind of like expecting players like Semedo and Hutchinson to push forward and attack. At 2-1 with our backs against the wall....you wouldn't expect that? . If we were 2-1 down I guarantee you those 2 would be pushing up the pitch. It works both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronio Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 At 2-1 with our backs against the wall....you wouldn't expect that? . If we were 2-1 down I guarantee you those 2 would be pushing up the pitch. It works both ways. Some players need to be further up the pitch. We can't have every single player behind the ball, that would just invite more pressure. Players like Hutch and Semedo. Their remit is to sit back and protect the back four. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevdi9 Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 i'l change it from drop of a hat to when you least expect it then , twas only a figure of speech anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.A Baracus Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Some players need to be further up the pitch. We can't have every single player behind the ball, that would just invite more pressure. Players like Hutch and Semedo. Their remit is to sit back and protect the back four. Not with forestieri and Joao on the pitch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRADDAZ Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 (edited) McGugans remit wasn't to be moved from central midfield within 10mins of coming on. The reason he was moved, was because he wasn't doing his job, as a central midfielder, correctly. That's why Carvahal made the change. That really is simple to understand, surely? Edited October 5, 2015 by BRADDAZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last_Great_Hope Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 bloomin laughable this thread is we just go around in circles some footballers are blessed with skill others are not some run around a lot others don't that's football whichever way you look at it ,the lad came on and maybe did nothing but did the most important thing and at the end of the day that's all that counts putting the ball in the net and sealing the points ,yes it looks nice if the players work hard and people will appreciate it , but at the end oft he day it's goals that count and for all his faults mcgugan can give you that virtually at the drop of a hat , Sorry Trev, but thats testicles. We are at the point where we can have players who can score, create goals AND work their socks off. Why should we settle for either / or? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronio Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 McGugans remit wasn't to be moved from central midfield within 10mins of coming on. The reason he was moved, was because he wasn't doing his job, as a central midfielder, correctly. That's why Carvahal made the change. That really is simple to understand, surely? It all depends on how you look at it. What I don't get is the unnecessary criticism of a player who scored the winner to secure our 4th straight win on the bounce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corneliusreeve Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 It all depends on how you look at it. What I don't get is the unnecessary criticism of a player who scored the winner to secure our 4th straight win on the bounce. Winner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IstillhateSteveBould Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 It all depends on how you look at it. What I don't get is the unnecessary criticism of a player who scored the winner to secure our 4th straight win on the bounce. And if it had been a certain "striker", the same posters would be defending him with their lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.A Baracus Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 And if it had been a certain "striker", the same posters would be defending him with their lives That certain striker DID score the winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stocksyuto Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 People saying the goal took a deflection why not show the evidence then that it did nowhere was it mentioned that it did not on sk/ or on channel 5. Good bait tho been fresh for the past 3 days for you lot do you come on here during your lunch breaks at work to carry on posting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 People saying the goal took a deflection why not show the evidence then that it did nowhere was it mentioned that it did not on sk/ or on channel 5. Good bait tho been fresh for the past 3 days for you lot do you come on here during your lunch breaks at work to carry on posting What evidence can we post beyond the video of the goal? I don't know what to tell you, other than when I watch the video I can see a clear deflection which takes the ball's trajectory on a steeper upwards curve than it was heading when it initially left McGugan's boot. There are enough people on here saying that they can't see this deflection, that I accept that it's not obvious and must be some kind of optical illusion one way or another. It looks clear enough to me, but there we have it. Others have said the same as I'm saying, so I know I'm not the only one seeing a deflection. There's no agenda behind this: I rate McGugan as a player and was touting his name on here long before we signed him; it's just that I see a deflection when I watch the video of that goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitechapel Owl Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 For those that can't see the deflection please watch it here: http://www.skysports.com/football/sheff-wed-vs-preston/339649#ooid=c1dDl5dzreGQJRB4fy0L6K8iONj3vrpo If you still can't see it then get yourself down to the opticians asap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitechapel Owl Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 People saying the goal took a deflection why not show the evidence then that it did nowhere was it mentioned that it did not on sk/ or on channel 5. Good bait tho been fresh for the past 3 days for you lot do you come on here during your lunch breaks at work to carry on posting Watch the link, there's your evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stocksyuto Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 What evidence can we post beyond the video of the goal? I don't know what to tell you, other than when I watch the video I can see a clear deflection which takes the ball's trajectory on a steeper upwards curve than it was heading when it initially left McGugan's boot. There are enough people on here saying that they can't see this deflection, that I accept that it's not obvious and must be some kind of optical illusion one way or another. It looks clear enough to me, but there we have it. Others have said the same as I'm saying, so I know I'm not the only one seeing a deflection. There's no agenda behind this: I rate McGugan as a player and was touting his name on here long before we signed him; it's just that I see a deflection when I watch the video of that goal. I like mcgugen but i dont think he deserves a start but i also dont think he should give up part of his attack play to go more defensive he will get more goals just how he is and at the moment hes on 3 in 5 isnt he? Its just your opinion about it being a deflection nothing more but the experts at sky have the ability to pause and zoom in with amazing hd to see this and there was no mention of it at all dont you think they would have checked that out. Watch the link, there's your evidence. Dont need to watch the link pal i was there i saw it clearly not through a tv set after the game had finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitechapel Owl Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Why ask for evidence then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now