Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

But based on that logic, it makes me wonder why they’ve let Marriot go. What  do they know ?

May just be down to the managers preferred system. Someone said he's not a target man (I think I remember the lad being as big as bannan) and not able to play the lone striker role which Derby employ. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Rev Owl said:

Just telling my dad about the new Jack Marriot. 

He remembered the original chap pictured here.

Dad said he was a good player, a winger if he remembers correctly.

I saw him a few times towards the end of his time at Wednesday. He was a right winger.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a look at the derby forum expecting the usual he’s poo anyway and I will drive him there myself but no! They actually seem quite annoyed at cocu not playing and now letting him move to a rival. 
makes a refreshing change. Patterson kachunga and now this lad all getting similar reactions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, pressy said:

Just don't understand this signing. Why Derby have let him go out on loan and why we've signed a player who can be recalled in Jan 


Because Cocu doesn’t rate him (but the Derby fans do).  Similar to when we let Winnall join Derby on loan, and he scored in every other game which took them to the top 6, before getting injured.


The next 3 months are massive for us and we have to get as many points as we can to catch up with the pack.  So we’ve been able to sign a decent striker to help during that time.  We can sign another striker in the next window if Derby recall him.  Hopefully by then he’s scored plenty and helped us get out of the hole we’re in 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, 0114 said:

Terrible deal.
 

Extended his deal at Derby.

 

No buy out clause.

 

January recall clause. 
 

So if he’s successful we completely lose out here. 
 

Good player. Bad deal. 

If they recall him it will be cos hes been successful for us and playing well.Good deal for both clubs for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, pioowl said:

If they recall him it will be cos hes been successful for us and playing well.Good deal for both clubs for me.

Yep if they’ve recalled him means he’s scored a few and we’ve climbed the table 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s probably more down to how Derby do rather than us.

 

Cocu doesn’t like him and won’t want him back. If Cocu does well enough to keep his job Marriott will stay here , if he gets sacked then a new manager would probably recall him, irrespective of how he has been performing here.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember the original Jackie Marriot very well. It was at the time I'd discovered football and Wednesday, and it takes over your life. I've told this story before, but, Jackie Sewell was our star player ( along with golden boy Quixall), Sewell being the record British signing when we'd just bought him. In our kick abouts at school, as there was only me going to matches yet, I'd got the pick so became Sewell. A new kid joined the school ( Fox Hill), and they had a lodger, the self same Jackie Sewell, a current England international btw. They lived on Wordsworth or Chaucer. In the first kick about this kid Peter told me in no uncertain terms that he was JS and I wasnt. That's when I became Jackie Marriot. 

He was a fast, tricky right winger, not at all unlike the present JM in appearance as a matter of fact.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, millo said:

I saw him a few times towards the end of his time at Wednesday. He was a right winger.

Thanks for that confirmation. Dad said he thought he played on the right. It's nice to know he can remember somethings well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pioowl said:

If they recall him it will be cos hes been successful for us and playing well.Good deal for both clubs for me.

I just don’t see how anyone can see potentially losing our main goal threat in January, mid season as any sort of positive. 
 

Remember how our season went losing Fletcher in January?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 0114 said:

I just don’t see how anyone can see potentially losing our main goal threat in January, mid season as any sort of positive. 
 

Remember how our season went losing Fletcher in January?

 

Because the alternative was playing Jordan Rhode, if we do lose Marriot in January then so be it, we'll at least be able to recruit someone else then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloody hell, some people on here must think we're Real Madrid. We're on -7, hardly going to get people pledging the rest of their careers to us, are we?

 

Despite this, we got a good player. A few, in the end. 

 

Well done recruitment, let's see us use it, now. 

 

UTO

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, fingyfop said:

 

Because the alternative was playing Jordan Rhode, if we do lose Marriot in January then so be it, we'll at least be able to recruit someone else then.

Forgive me for thinking about the bigger picture. Rather than just sorting ourselves for the next 12 weeks. 
 

He’s a good player. But we haven’t got a good deal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 0114 said:

Forgive me for thinking about the bigger picture. Rather than just sorting ourselves for the next 12 weeks. 
 

He’s a good player. But we haven’t got a good deal. 


The bigger picture is we have got to stay up this season. Nothing else matters. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sheffwed1 said:


The bigger picture is we have got to stay up this season. Nothing else matters. 

Exactly. So losing our main number 9 in January would be an issue THIS season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 0114 said:

Forgive me for thinking about the bigger picture. Rather than just sorting ourselves for the next 12 weeks. 
 

He’s a good player. But we haven’t got a good deal. 

 

I am thinking of the bigger picture, we signed Marriot on deadline day, it was probably him or no one.

 

Big, small, whatever sized picture you want, we're better off having him for just the next 3 months than we would have been by signing no one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, fingyfop said:

 

I am thinking of the bigger picture, we signed Marriot on deadline day, it was probably him or no one.

 

Big, small, whatever sized picture you want, we're better off having him for just the next 3 months than we would have been by signing no one.

Exactly. I’m thinking about the season, not just 3 months of it. 
 

We got a good player but agreed to a bad deal. 

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...