Jump to content

Garry Monk and Adam Reach both agree he's a striker now


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, @owlstalk said:

Large.jpg

 

Sheffield Wednesday boss Garry Monk has spoken about a chat he's had with Adam Reach where they discussed where his best position was, and both came to the conclusion that centre forward was the answer

 

Garry Monk explains: "I spoke to Adam and I think it's a case of, this season with the system we're using, where can we make him play where he can be most effective?

 

"He can move out wide, where he can do that job. But I spoke with him and we both agree that centrally is where he's going to be most effective.

 

"He can play deeper than that.

 

"But there's an opportunity to use him in certain games or certain situations where his quality in terms of that striker position can be effective.

 

"I thought he did some really good work (against Walsall).

 

"It's all about improving and getting used to it. Like all the others, the attitude is there."

 

Does anybody else here agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bluesteel said:

Hope we’re proven wrong but that sounds ridiculous

 

A second striker role (we have 2/3others!) for a player who’s game has been about getting crosses in and shooting from range rather than playing back to goal/on the half turn doesn’t sound right to me.

 

A victim of his own versatility 

 

Absolutely this, I'm sure he's not said to Monk: 'I'd like a go at playing up front please gaffa'. More so, it's a case that we are short of forwards and Monk is squeezing him in there as he's more talented/versatile than most. I feel for Reach, he always tries, never moans and is used wherever we have gaps rather than where he plays best. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try to look at the silver lining of every cloud when it comes to wednesday at the moment 

 

But this is codswallop 

 

The ONLY way he can come out with this is if he is trying to send a message to chansiri but it reads as if he believes it.

 

Reach is not and well never be a striker in a month of wednesdays

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Chris Apolon said:

I try to look at the silver lining of every cloud when it comes to wednesday at the moment 

 

But this is codswallop 

 

The ONLY way he can come out with this is if he is trying to send a message to chansiri but it reads as if he believes it.

 

Reach is not and well never be a striker in a month of wednesdays

Posesses the skills and height to be a good number 10, but not as a cf can't agree more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Anyone else starting to get worried about our ability to sign new players right now?

Monk alluded to this pre Walsall more or less said our transfer business was done until nearer the deadline 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shezzas left peg said:

Posesses the skills and height to be a good number 10, but not as a cf can't agree more. 

 

I'd be interested to hear the measure of success for reach in this position mind too

 

10 goals? 5 goals? Surely he has not just said "right adam your a forward now" he would have given him some expectations of what he wants. 

 

I could decide tomorrow I'm a motorbike but unless I make a brum brum noise and am capable of hitting 80+ mph its not gonna work! I do like a good buffing though

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First time I’ve massively disagreed with Monk’s opinion.

 

Best left winger at the club and his energy should mean he’s a very good left wing back too. If I’m manager and he can’t hack it at left wing back then I’m getting shut of him, as much as I do like him.

 

Anywhere else on the pitch he’s acceptable short term cover at best. He’s not even a plaster in those situations though, more like a damp flannel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StudentOwl said:

Don't get me wrong, there have been many "wtf" moment with Monk over the last few months... but I think this might finally be the moment where he's officially jumped the shark...


 

The only thing I thought when I heard what he thinks on Reach is WHAT THE HELL IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING REGARDING STRIKER SIGNINGS

 

Monk cannot possibly be choosing to give Reach a strikers shirt unless something mad is going off behind the scenes with new striker signings 

  • Like 3

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:


 

The only thing I thought when I heard what he thinks on Reach is WHAT THE HELL IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING REGARDING STRIKER SIGNINGS

 

Monk cannot possibly be choosing to give Reach a strikers shirt unless something mad is going off behind the scenes with new striker signings 

 

To me it reads that no one will sign for us so we are up the creek. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:


 

The only thing I thought when I heard what he thinks on Reach is WHAT THE HELL IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING REGARDING STRIKER SIGNINGS

 

Monk cannot possibly be choosing to give Reach a strikers shirt unless something mad is going off behind the scenes with new striker signings 

I reckon all the reasons you listed a couple of pages back contribute to us being completely unable to sign the personnel we want. It really is the only conclusion you can come to as to why Adam Reach is suddenly considered a forward (although admittedly it sounds more like as a false 9 forward than out-and-out... Wednesday's very own Dybala :duntmatter: )

 

 

Rasputin reminds me of one of those consultants that comes into a company, fires 20% of the workforce and shoehornes people into doing the vacant jobs when they're really barely qualified to do so...

 

really think a lot of Wednesday fans are being very naive and are in denial about just how much trouble we're in... and I really stand by what I said about the 12 point deduction... in time, we will wish it had been applied last season and we could have rebuilt as a big fish in a small pond in League One, rather than an average sized fish with its tail fin missing...

Edited by StudentOwl
  • Like 4
Link to comment
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...