George Boyd

[bazapeps]

Does he have a future at the club?

 

Can't help but think Jos' selections have continued to be baffling this season, continuing from last season. Thorniley did ok when he came on on Saturday but had he made a rick or had we lost then fans would no doubt we wondering why on earth he replaced Fox on the left.

 

Boyd has no doubt been disappointing last season but towards the end seemed to do well at LWB, gave us some energy and attacking threat down that side. Fox and Thorniley barely get past the half way line and offer no attacking threat at all, which is bewildering in a 3-5-2.

 

Boyd somehow seems to have slipped behind Reach, Fox and Thorniley for that position. Yet another decision that seems to make no sense whatsoever.

 

 

[WalthamOwl]

Was a good player before he came to us.......seems to happen to a few that sign for us. 

[OxonOwl]

Perhaps he's on his way...

[torres]

It seemed like a strange signing at the time to me.

Not seen anything to change my mind.

 

Another to add to the ''What were they thinking'' list 

[Lord Snooty]

 

I thought Boyd was an odd signing at the time.

A wide player wih a reputation for tremendous staying power and stamina up and down the flank.

 

I thought he was a good player from what I'd seen of him at Peterbrough and Hull. And you always hope they'll pan out.

 

 I had huge doubts before he was announced as to  how effective hed be in Carlos' wingless (tuck inside all game and help the centre mids)  4-4-2. 

And so it proved really. Compounded with the untimely injury that requires double shoulder surgery.

 

Not sure he's cut out for the WB role  (Though that could also be said of others) I think he was just another odd acquisition for where we were at the time. 

 

 

[Guest wilyfox]

He wasn't what we needed. We did it anyway. Outcome is no surprise. 

[bazapeps]

Looking back yes he's another odd signing. And at the time another one of those players that were a big name, not what we needed and as with many there was no consideration of where he would fit into our side our system.

 

but the fact remains, he's surely not 4th best option at LWB?

[Kanye West]

Has he ever been played in his "actual" position? As far as I remember for Burnley he was a left midfielder. I don't recall seeing him play there that many times, if at all.

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

Id play him as a RWB

 

With Reach as LWB

 

 

[cookeh]

17 minutes ago, torres said:

It seemed like a strange signing at the time to me.

Not seen anything to change my mind.

 

Another to add to the ''What were they thinking'' list 

 

They were thinking:
We don't have a player who can really play wide right (same as we were).
Boyd's played there most of his career. He's a premier league regular with a great engine and impeccable injury record.

 

But feel free to rewrite history and wonder why anyone would sign him if you like.

[Guest Bulgaria]

always been a steady player who has an engine on him, appreciated everywhere he has played.

 

Signs for us..... his engine just seizes up and it looks like he is wearing lead filled boots.

 

The Wednesday way. 

[cookeh]

I'd put Boyd in at left wing back from now on.

Reach sin't up to the defensive responsibility of the role, as he showed against Wigan and when he has played there previously.

Fox isn't a wing back. He's fine as a back up left back or a back up left side of a back 3.. but then Thorniley's probably better for both of those.

Thorniley also isn't a wing back. Is attacking game basically doesn't exist. He's a centerback really.

 

Boyd wins by being the only option that will work hard enough at both sides of the game.. and even then he's far from ideal as his defending isn't great. At least he tries tho, rather than Reach who tends to just pull out of a tackle and then watch people run away from him.

[torres]

4 minutes ago, cookeh said:

 

They were thinking:
We don't have a player who can really play wide right (same as we were).
Boyd's played there most of his career. He's a premier league regular with a great engine and impeccable injury record.

 

But feel free to rewrite history and wonder why anyone would sign him if you like.

 

So when he came they played him on the left

[torres]

1 minute ago, cookeh said:

I'd put Boyd in at left wing back from now on.

Reach sin't up to the defensive responsibility of the role, as he showed against Wigan and when he has played there previously.

Fox isn't a wing back. He's fine as a back up left back or a back up left side of a back 3.. but then Thorniley's probably better for both of those.

Thorniley also isn't a wing back. Is attacking game basically doesn't exist. He's a centerback really.

 

Boyd wins by being the only option that will work hard enough at both sides of the game.. and even then he's far from ideal as his defending isn't great. At least he tries tho, rather than Reach who tends to just pull out of a tackle and then watch people run away from him.

 

Did you gain all this from watching highlights?

 

Boyd was shocking at Wing Back. Hence why he is not playing there now.

[cookeh]

Just now, torres said:

 

So when he came they played him on the left

 

Yeah, we've used him bizarrely. No question there.

The season before we bought him in he played 30 odd games at right mid. the season before that nearly 50 games there.

We buy him and play him there for 6 games out of 25. Why? who knows..

But at the time he joined we were all saying we needed right winger.. and that's exactly what he was.

That we never used him there is just nuts. The signing made sense.. what came after didnt.

[cookeh]

3 minutes ago, torres said:

 

Did you gain all this from watching highlights?

 

Boyd was shocking at Wing Back. Hence why he is not playing there now.

 

hah say you only saw the highlights of one game and suddenly everyone thinks you never see matches.  crikey.

[Guest Hillsborough Mole]

8 minutes ago, cookeh said:

 

Yeah, we've used him bizarrely. No question there.

The season before we bought him in he played 30 odd games at right mid. the season before that nearly 50 games there.

We buy him and play him there for 6 games out of 25. Why? who knows..

But at the time he joined we were all saying we needed right winger.. and that's exactly what he was.

That we never used him there is just nuts. The signing made sense.. what came after didnt.

 

He was Burnleys player of the season in 2015

[bdmfournil]

Boyd played in a number 10 role for the whole time he was at Peterborough according to

season ticket holders I know and he played right midfield for Burnley. Anyone less suited to LWB is hard to imagine

[cookeh]

1 minute ago, Hillsborough Mole said:

 

He was Burnleys player of the season in 2015

 

Was he? fair play.

i never really rated him, he's eligible for Scotland, but despite being a permier league regular (at a time when scotland had few), he never seemed dynamic enough to warrant a call up to me. he was a steady player.. a hard working player, but lacking a spark. When we signed him it seemed like a good move. it meant we could play him on the right side, with nando wide left and at this level he is an absolute quality player.

 

That never happened tho.. and why it didn't is a mystery.

As a signing tho, he seemed like a really good one that should have helped us last season. unfortunately the entire squad collapsed, him included, and the rest is history.

[cookeh]

2 minutes ago, bdmfournil said:

Boyd played in a number 10 role for the whole time he was at Peterborough according to

season ticket holders I know and he played right midfield for Burnley. Anyone less suited to LWB is hard to imagine

 

So do we just play Thorniley there because he had an ok half against Hull (tho was poor there a couple of games last season).. and accept that we have no attacking threat on the left at all?

 

I'm not being facetious, LWB is the big problem in our squad and i'm not sure how best to fill it. To me Boyd seems like the best of a bad bunch. It's easy to say "no, not him" but harder to come up with a better option.