FAO: Pinchy

[Pollingtonblade]

Astonishing offer? Maybe not. But there was certainly interest.

Pinchy maybe ought to take his own advice and speak to people in the game and ask their opinion of Monty's professional attributes.

No one is claiming he was the most technically gifted but players as shit as some you like to make him out to be, don't play at the level he did for years.

I can't remember the interest from anyone else. Was it Warnock at one of his clubs? Can't think of anyone else who'd want a midfielder who couldn't pass, couldn't head a ball, ran round in circles and the only attacks they broke up were their own teams.

 

[Sean Thornton]

I can't remember the interest from anyone else. Was it Warnock at one of his clubs? Can't think of anyone else who'd want a midfielder who couldn't pass, couldn't head a ball, ran round in circles and the only attacks they broke up were their own teams.

Leeds and the following season apparently Colin at QPR. Probably the tractor needed a service though so some tabloid bought the "story".

Think Monty was first choice for Chelsea at one time but he got injured so they had to settle for Makalele.

 

[Pollingtonblade]

Leeds and the following season apparently Colin at QPR. Probably the tractor needed a service though so some tabloid bought the "story".

Think Monty was first choice for Chelsea at one time but he got injured so they had to settle for Makalele.

Was that when Leeds were buying anybody as they were screwed?

I understand Chelsea as didn't Frank Lampard once say Monty was the most feared midfielder in the league?

 

[Sean Thornton]

Was that when Leeds were buying anybody as they were screwed?

I understand Chelsea as didn't Frank Lampard once say Monty was the most feared midfielder in the league?

Think both Leeds and ourselves offered a contract but his chose to reward us once more with his silky skills.

Tinker.

I think a few remember his dismal performances at the end of his time with us, when he was truly shocking and tend to forget the qualities he did have. Or quality.

 

[Pinchy]

My sincere apologies for being privy to information that hasn't first been run past your good self.

You aren't. It's bollocks. It was all paper talk. We would have gladly sold him. I've already told you what Warnock said.

Are you privy to the Frank Lampard comment that never was, too?

 

[Pinchy]

Was that when Leeds were buying anybody as they were screwed?

I understand Chelsea as didn't Frank Lampard once say Monty was the most feared midfielder in the league?

Erm... no he didn't. It's a complete myth. Patrick Vieira never mentioned him either.

In addition, Sean is taking the piss about the Chelsea stuff...

But, then I think you knew all that already and were being naughty yourself...

 

[mosbolad]

You aren't. It's bollocks. It was all paper talk. We would have gladly sold him. I've already told you what Warnock said.

Are you privy to the Frank Lampard comment that never was, too?

I understand this must be a really difficult concept for you to grasp, but maybe, just maybe, on occasion, someone knows a little more about something than yourself.

No idea about Lampard I don't know him.

Feel free to browbeat away as our resident blatherskite.

 

[Working Class Hero]

It always makes me laugh when people use a particular player/manager's opinion to prove something. It's one person!

There were probably a thousand players/managers who thought Monty was bobbar, but they're hardly going to air that opinion are they?

Adkins rated Hammond.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

What the lad lacked in skill he more than made up in effort and desire, would run through brick walls for the club, how many players these days have that attitude, yes he frustrated the hell outta me at times, however would he have been playing for the Blades if was as skillful as as he was a grafter. He loves the club and most Blades fan love him

Will always remember that strike against Tranmere away !

UTB

I’ll always have a certain amount of affection for the guy for his sheer determination to win every game. Very poor technically but with that being the case, to achieve what he has in the game is nothing short of a remarkable testament to the man. I’m not sure I can recall any player achieving so far above their natural talent level (maybe Booker? I was only very young when he played for us so struggle to judge).

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Doyle. And he was fucking shit too.

Doyle was a grafter but don’t think he was as bloody minded and determined as Monty. That lad would never give up on a ball and never stop running. Doyle was slightly better technically though in that he could at least play short passes to a teammate.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

With such a (small) dedicated fan base it comes as a huge surprise that whenever a best Blades team is suggested that dear old Monty doesn't even make the bench?

That’s because he had massive shortcomings as a footballer. It is possible to have a high opinion of the man, his contribution for SUFC and what he was able to achieve in the game whilst still acknowledging his shortcomings.


He wasn’t anywhere near one of our best ever midfielders. But he was a guy who made a positive contribution during a decent spell in our history and deserves to be remembered for that. Oooh Ah Bob Bookah is fondly remembered and also doesn’t get named in best XIs for the same reason.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

I'm all for playing football rather than hoof ball but I would rather have had Monty in the side than the over rated Kevin McDonald any day of the week.

And I'm sure Chris Wilder is of the same opinion.

Depends on a multitude of factors but largely I’ have to disagree. Danny Wilson didn’t agree with the assessment and a Doyle/Monty partnership would be awful to watch on a weekly basis. McDonald was a classy player and a joy to watch. For me the argument was whether it should be Monty or Doyle alongside him.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Really? List his qualities without saying "tried hard" or "got stuck in" more than once... Try to keep a straight face.

Stamina

Tenacity

Bravery

Positional sense (to a degree)

Concentration (man-marking role)


He had his qualities. Unfortunately, they were all “off the ball” qualities.

 

[itsinyerblood]

That’s because he had massive shortcomings as a footballer. It is possible to have a high opinion of the man, his contribution for SUFC and what he was able to achieve in the game whilst still acknowledging his shortcomings.


He wasn’t anywhere near one of our best ever midfielders. But he was a guy who made a positive contribution during a decent spell in our history and deserves to be remembered for that. Oooh Ah Bob Bookah is fondly remembered and also doesn’t get named in best XIs for the same reason.

He is remembered, just not that fondly. Of course Montgomery had games where he punched above his weight, happens to nearly all players. Trouble was he rarely made a contribution that I can recall as inspiring, and that's the thing we look for in a player. Even Basham has moments when he excels and suggests he's worth persevering with (I jest all you Bash lovers, last season he was consistently good).

 

[Benny and the Blades]

I think that this is an insulting thread about a player who served this club and it's fan's loyally in this division and above for so long.
I know this is a game of opinions but this is a cheap and degrading attack led by an ignorant arrogant fool who would not be fit to tie his boots on a football field, let alone play along side of him........

 

[itsinyerblood]

I think that this is an insulting thread about a player who served this club and it's fan's loyally in this division and above for so long.
I know this is a game of opinions but this is a cheap and degrading attack led by an ignorant arrogant fool who would not be fit to tie his boots on a football field, let alone play along side of him........

Sandy, it sounds as if you've swallowed one too many viagra.

Try and differentiate between an attack and a critical assessment. Not sure why there's this bloated adoration of a player who, at best, was just about competent, and at worst, someone who couldn't hit the proverbial cow's arse with a banjo from 6 foot away.

 

[Pinchy]

It always makes me laugh when people use a particular player/manager's opinion to prove something. It's one person!

There were probably a thousand players/managers who thought Monty was bobbar, but they're hardly going to air that opinion are they?

Adkins rated Hammond.

A lot of players never noticed him because, contrary to his reputation of being a destroyer, they went past him with ease and accelerated as he plodded after them tirelessly but in vain. On the occasions he 'won' the ball it was nothing more than temporary deprivation pending an opposition throw-in, free-kick or (quite often) penalty. Failing all those, he would simply cut out the middle man and deliver the ball back in person.

I'm not in the least surprised that he's a Bladey hero. Exactly the sort of non-footballer that one would expect to achieve that status, but...

...only in S2.

 

[Pinchy]

I think that this is an insulting thread about a player who served this club and it's fan's loyally in this division and above for so long.
I know this is a game of opinions but this is a cheap and degrading attack led by an ignorant arrogant fool who would not be fit to tie his boots on a football field, let alone play along side of him........

Bladey claptrap. I paid him a compliment and would happily have left it there.

Then the bollocks started and so it continues...

 

[1danewhitehouse]

He is remembered, just not that fondly. Of course Montgomery had games where he punched above his weight, happens to nearly all players. Trouble was he rarely made a contribution that I can recall as inspiring, and that's the thing we look for in a player. Even Basham has moments when he excels and suggests he's worth persevering with (I jest all you Bash lovers, last season he was consistently good).

Fair enough. With players like Monty, Done etc. I remember them fondly for giving their all in spite of their limitations. I have far more respect for these players than the Baxters, Treacys etc. of this world who had the ability but not the inclination to make the most of it.

 

[Pinchy]

Stamina

Tenacity

Bravery

Positional sense (to a degree)

Concentration (man-marking role)


He had his qualities. Unfortunately, they were all “off the ball” qualities.

Yes quite right. He would have made an excellent fireman, soldier or mountaineer. Unfortunately (for us) he chose an occupation that demands other qualities.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Sandy, it sounds as if you've swallowed one too many viagra.

Try and differentiate between an attack and a critical assessment. Not sure why there's this bloated adoration of a player who, at best, was just about competent, and at worst, someone who couldn't hit the proverbial cow's arse with a banjo from 6 foot away.

I'd say it's because of what made him "just about competent". He shouldn't have been but he played like a lifelong fan of the club would (if our bodies allowed us to do so). He left everything on the pitch for SUFC and did, at times, make positive contributions. Let's not forget he was a regular in a team that won promotion to the PL. Like I say, for me, it's similar to the Bob Booker thing. Limited but gave absolutely everything for a team that resulted in more than he really should have been capable of.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Yes quite right. He would have made an excellent fireman, soldier or mountaineer. Unfortunately (for us) he chose an occupation that demands other qualities.

Where we'll have to differ is in the opinion that, despite his shortcomings, he was so good at the items I list that the overall package was "acceptable". Not brilliant but acceptable and I admire someone who can achieve that despite such limitations. He'll never go down as a great for me (I often didn't want him in the starting line up) but he will always be fondly remembered for his dedication to the cause.

 

[itsinyerblood]

I'd say it's because of what made him "just about competent". He shouldn't have been but he played like a lifelong fan of the club would (if our bodies allowed us to do so). He left everything on the pitch for SUFC and did, at times, make positive contributions. Let's not forget he was a regular in a team that won promotion to the PL. Like I say, for me, it's similar to the Bob Booker thing. Limited but gave absolutely everything for a team that resulted in more than he really should have been capable of.

Then what's puzzling is why so many supporters don't extend the same charitable attitude towards Matt Done. He gave everything to the club whenever he played, he left everything on the pitch, but this smacks of selective and preferential treatment. I'm one of those who wished that we could have seen more of the Matt Done in his first season for us, but it wasn't to be. So instead what we got was a trier who simply wasn't good enough. Same applies to Monty, yet he's extended so much more than the likes of Done has received. Strange innit.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Then what's puzzling is why so many supporters don't extend the same charitable attitude towards Matt Done. He gave everything to the club whenever he played, he left everything on the pitch, but this smacks of selective and preferential treatment. I'm one of those who wished that we could have seen more of the Matt Done in his first season for us, but it wasn't to be. So instead what we got was a trier who simply wasn't good enough. Same applies to Monty, yet he's extended so much more than the likes of Done has received. Strange innit.

I can't speak for other fans, only myself. I also think both were good enough at times but couldn't manage it consistently. I fondly remember both and have nothing but well wishes for both. That said, I wouldn't want either in the current team because I don't think they are good enough footballers. But it doesn't stop me holding both in high regard.

 

[robbiez666]

There have been few times in my life when I've been struck dumb, but after repeatedly worrying the corner flag, that worldly he scored counts a one.

 

[BushBlade]

Then what's puzzling is why so many supporters don't extend the same charitable attitude towards Matt Done. He gave everything to the club whenever he played, he left everything on the pitch, but this smacks of selective and preferential treatment. I'm one of those who wished that we could have seen more of the Matt Done in his first season for us, but it wasn't to be. So instead what we got was a trier who simply wasn't good enough. Same applies to Monty, yet he's extended so much more than the likes of Done has received. Strange innit.

Plenty have had a 'charitable' view of Done, probably, in the main, the same posters who have a 'charitable' view of Monty and any other player who leaves it all on the pitch when playing for us.

And every fucking one of us knows full well they're not technically good players and no one has ever suggested otherwise.

 

[itsinyerblood]

Fair enough. With players like Monty, Done etc. I remember them fondly for giving their all in spite of their limitations. I have far more respect for these players than the Baxters, Treacys etc. of this world who had the ability but not the inclination to make the most of it.

That's a reasonable and fair debating point. There are some players who are spoilt by the excesses that exist within the game, some legitimate, others peripheral to any perceived success that comes their way. Let's take a bog standard income of between £2-3 grand a week, not bad going for someone whose talent is at best limited. Most supporters invest far more in their team than these players who adopt an almost mercenary approach to their careers. No wonder certain players end up with bugger all once their playing days are over. Someone like Baxter has probably burnt any bridges in the game, due, I'd imagine, mainly to the close network amongst managers. Selfish and self-centred prick would just about summarise a player like Baxter.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Then what's puzzling is why so many supporters don't extend the same charitable attitude towards Matt Done. He gave everything to the club whenever he played, he left everything on the pitch, but this smacks of selective and preferential treatment. I'm one of those who wished that we could have seen more of the Matt Done in his first season for us, but it wasn't to be. So instead what we got was a trier who simply wasn't good enough. Same applies to Monty, yet he's extended so much more than the likes of Done has received. Strange innit.

I think the difference is about 10 seasons.

 

[itsinyerblood]

Plenty have had a 'charitable' view of Done, probably, in the main, the same posters who have a 'charitable' view of Monty and any other player who leaves it all on the pitch when playing for us.

And every fucking one of us knows full well they're not technically good players and no one has ever suggested otherwise.

The thing is, in Done's first season he showed enough potential to suggest we'd bought well. Something went wrong after that, no idea what exactly, but that potential was never realised, so we ended up with a player whose lungs and legs were never in doubt, but his ability to score, well, that was always in doubt.

Maybe it's the composition of any football team that will include lesser talents, sometimes even barely talented players. At the top end Man Utd have had a few less than spectacular players that have been part of their footballing romance. Same applies to other teams, and maybe it's because these type of players are required to do the less than extravagant jobs that are essential to a club's ability to succeed. Last season Done played regularly in the first half of the season, playing alongside Sharp and enabling Billy to score effectively, enabling us to build a momentum as we climbed the table. Many supporters questioned Wilder's wisdom in selecting Done, but thankfully when it comes to management we don't employ a democratic system whereby supporters are asked for their opinions.

When Done played alongside Sharp I don't recall too many charitable comments supporting Wilder's selection. Eventually this changed, we bought in new players and this contributed to our promotion. I don't get too arsed about players, good or indifferent. Trouble is, we've had our fair share of the lesser types, something I hope we'll see less of under Wilder.

 

[BushBlade]

The thing is, in Done's first season he showed enough potential to suggest we'd bought well. Something went wrong after that, no idea what exactly, but that potential was never realised, so we ended up with a player whose lungs and legs were never in doubt, but his ability to score, well, that was always in doubt.

Maybe it's the composition of any football team that will include lesser talents, sometimes even barely talented players. At the top end Man Utd have had a few less than spectacular players that have been part of their footballing romance. Same applies to other teams, and maybe it's because these type of players are required to do the less than extravagant jobs that are essential to a club's ability to succeed. Last season Done played regularly in the first half of the season, playing alongside Sharp and enabling Billy to score effectively, enabling us to build a momentum as we climbed the table. Many supporters questioned Wilder's wisdom in selecting Done, but thankfully when it comes to management we don't employ a democratic system whereby supporters are asked for their opinions.

When Done played alongside Sharp I don't recall too many charitable comments supporting Wilder's selection. Eventually this changed, we bought in new players and this contributed to our promotion. I don't get too arsed about players, good or indifferent. Trouble is, we've had our fair share of the lesser types, something I hope we'll see less of under Wilder.

I recall quite a lot of posts explaining to Done's critics why he was contributing despite not scoring. People either accept it, or read the comments and actually see if they can see the truth of them in future games, or just stick to their guns and criticise a player for his lack of ability. It's their right to do so as much as it is mine to challenge their view (and to privately think they're stupid boorish arseholes, in some cases).

Ultimately, we all have opinions on how the game should be played and there's a lot of different ways for a team to be successful; there isn't really a 'right' or 'wrong' and equally some players are only suited to a particularly way of playing. But when a successful manager picks a player regularly, in a successful team, anyone who argues with that better have a very good case and the ability to communicate it properly. Otherwise one can look like a contrarian or just a stupid twat.