Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Reach is pit?

 

Is Ashley coal?

  • Haha 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Interesting comments about Rhodes, I've long suspected he will get a chance under Bruce and Bruce will be the man to get him firing again.

Edited by Blue and white
  • Agree 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Holmowl said:

Reach is pit?

 

Is Ashley coal?

 

Pretty Injured To be honest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:ph34r:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Injuries continue to bedevil us Not sure what can be done about it People were quick to blame Carlos for signing crocks, but we continue to do so Personally, I think it has more to do with what we are doing here A lot of the crocks had little or no history of injury, until they came here

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blue and white said:

Interesting comments about Rhodes, I've long suspected he will get a chance under Bruce and Bruce will be the mN to get him firing again.

 

If Norwich go up then I don't think there's any chance of him going there.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh it will be interesting to see how Rhodes performs under a proper footballing manager but again can we afford to keep him? Would rather cash in and see what we get but who would want him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said:

 

If Norwich go up then I don't think there's any chance of him going there.

 

Even in the highly unlikely event that Norwich stay down I doubt they'd want to keep him.

 

He's not started a game since October and has only played for more than 20 minutes twice and scored once since then. Been an unused sub in 5 of their last 10 and played for 5 minutes or less in another 3 of those games.  For the wages he's on they'd be better off spending them elsewhere even if we let them have him on a free.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re Rhodes, is Bruce any more of a football manager than Falke? 

I think this is as good as it gets, at this level for Jordan Rhodes

Trying to integrate him into our starting eleven, would be a backward step in my opinion 

That's not to say he can't be useful to us, in a similar way to the way Norwich use him, off the bench for the last ten minutes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, alanharper said:

 

Even in the highly unlikely event that Norwich stay down I doubt they'd want to keep him.

 

He's not started a game since October and has only played for more than 20 minutes twice and scored once since then. Been an unused sub in 5 of their last 10 and played for 5 minutes or less in another 3 of those games.  For the wages he's on they'd be better off spending them elsewhere even if we let them have him on a free.

 

Agree. I don't think he suits their system of one up and one off. just seems to be, like you said, they chuck him on as the extra man at the end to try and nick something.

Contract here runs till next summer so I doubt we're in a position to pay him up and release him even.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said:

 

If Norwich go up then I don't think there's any chance of him going there.

 

 Agree. And even if Norwich somehow implode (which they won't), I don't even think they'd sign him if the don't go up.

 

He's not been in their starting 11 for a while.

 

He'll be back with us IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gurujuan said:

Re Rhodes, is Bruce any more of a football manager than Falke? 

I think this is as good as it gets, at this level for Jordan Rhodes

Trying to integrate him into our starting eleven, would be a backward step in my opinion 

That's not to say he can't be useful to us, in a similar way to the way Norwich use him, off the bench for the last ten minutes

 

I think I would rather have Rhodes as an option for the last 10 minutes than some of the other options. However he’s a very expensive player to sit on the bench for the majority of time. I would love him to come back and get banging in the goals, I think if anyone can get him doing that it would be Bruce. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said:

s it just bad luck? I think it’s too constant for that. We pick up more injuries than anyone else.

Number one priority this. Beyond a joke.

Cannot strengthen the team if the replacements are sat in the stands.

All the "quality" loan players out injured!! You couldn't make this stuff up.

What with this and the match officials we have to deal with - bad luck seems to be the only kind we get!

Guaranteed that Rhodes will be dumped back at Hillsborough and it's time he started to earn his keep if we're gonna be stuck with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suspect  Bruce would like to do a deal and free up the wages for strengthening the squad elsewhere. He's been saying since day one we have too many strikers.

Of course, wanting to trim and being able to find takers are two different things..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said:

 

Agree. I don't think he suits their system of one up and one off. just seems to be, like you said, they chuck him on as the extra man at the end to try and nick something.

Contract here runs till next summer so I doubt we're in a position to pay him up and release him even.

 

Yep, and unfortunately his lack of contribution at Norwich (or anywhere really for the last 3-4 years since he left Blackburn) will mean that nobody else is going to be tempted to take a punt based on his former reputation and loan or buy him on his current wages.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He’s my favourite player but surely Hooper will have to go. All logic points that way. Therefore, a Rhodes-Fletcher front two is an obvious way forward. We know Rhodes can’t lead a line, but with Fletcher playing that role and Rhodes playing off him it could work well in our 442.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, alanharper said:

 

Yep, and unfortunately his lack of contribution at Norwich (or anywhere really for the last 3-4 years since he left Blackburn) will mean that nobody else is going to be tempted to take a punt based on his former reputation and loan or buy him on his current wages.

 

We could do with trying to set him up with a club that plays on the front foot with an old fashioned strike pairing.

If only there was one around here somewhere that didn't mind signing our old players...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Holmowl said:

He’s my favourite player but surely Hooper will have to go. All logic points that way. Therefore, a Rhodes-Fletcher front two is an obvious way forward. We know Rhodes can’t lead a line, but with Fletcher playing that role and Rhodes playing off him it could work well in our 442.

 

It could well do. Though I think sticking with 4-4-2 would mean some serious transfer surgery carried out in midfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said:

 

If Norwich go up then I don't think there's any chance of him going there.

 

Whereas if we go up, we could let Norwich keep him

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...