Jamie Murphy

[Kezman17]

not in team at all for today’s game, heard he’s all but done to return for blades in January. Are the rumours true or just rumours

 

[Northyorksblade]

not in team at all for today’s game, heard he’s all but done to return for blades in January. Are the rumours true or just rumours

So why not put it in the rumours section?

 

[LSF]

True

 

[Fanny magnet]

Weird thing about this rumour is I was never a fan of his I thought he was a bottle job but whenever I picture him its him running in behind and slotting the ball home

Got a funny feeling he could be the missing piece in our jigsaw

 

[Harry's Game]

It’s true that they are rumours.

 

[FTPE]

Where would he even play in this team?

 

[zablade]

Where would he even play in this team?

The Brooks role, just behind Clarke or Donaldson.

 

[Blade58]

not in team at all for today’s game, heard he’s all but done to return for blades in January. Are the rumours true or just rumours

don't think he's been involved in most Brighton games this season tbh, so that's nowt new

 

[ScottishBlade93]

I would definitely take him back. He would flourish under wilder. Give us some pace to hit teams on the break and unlock defences.

 

[LJBlade]

The Brooks role, just behind Clarke or Donaldson.

When has he ever played that position before? He didn’t do it for us when he was here

 

[zablade]

When has he ever played that position before? He didn’t do it for us when he was here

There are lots of players Wilder has brought in playing in positions they haven’t done before and doing pretty well in them.

 

[PokerBlade]

It’s true that they are rumours.

Or so I've heard.

 

[FTPE]

The Brooks role, just behind Clarke or Donaldson.

Ok, fair enough. You know who'd be better in that Brooks role though don't you?...

 

[bladesmanluke]

Murphy would give us something we haven’t had since we sold him. Pure pace

 

[SUFC Guy]

It's true that they are rumours

 

[Fanny magnet]

It’s true that they are rumours.

It's true that they are rumours

must be true then

 

[Kezman17]

Must be, and my bad that I didn’t put it in the rumours section...I hold my hands up

 

[Iceybabey]

I reckon he'll be back with us tbh

 

[Iceybabey]

As a striker

 

[FTPE]

Murphy would give us something we haven’t had since we sold him. Pure pace

I don't think he's as fast as you think. Everyone said that of Lavery and while he's certainly not slow, his quick feet and directness give the impression he's faster over 20yards than he actually is.

 

[Kezman17]

I’d take him back, if we got the money and that’s it. He’ll come back on wages higher than he was before more than likely

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

Where would he even play in this team?

The Brooks role, just behind Clarke or Donaldson.

When has he ever played that position before? He didn’t do it for us when he was here

There are lots of players Wilder has brought in playing in positions they haven’t done before and doing pretty well in them.

The man example being Duffy, who was signed as a left winger and played there in his initial appearances for us. One of the signs of Wilder's genius was switching him inside to the no.10 role. It gave Duff's career a whole new lease of life, and was instrumental in getting us up last season.

Who's to say Wilder couldn't reinvent Murphy with similar results ?

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

The chuff is going on here.

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

Sell Brooks for £18m (£1m upfront plus add-ons) and sign Murphy with the £500k Wilder will inevitably get from the million.

Seems feasible to me.

 

[LJBlade]

The man example being Duffy, who was signed as a left winger and played there in his initial appearances for us. One of the signs of Wilder's genius was switching him inside to the no.10 role. It gave Duff's career a whole new lease of life, and was instrumental in getting us up last season.

Who's to say Wilder couldn't reinvent Murphy with similar results ?

The difference being that Duffy is a very technical player who is very clever with the ball. Murphy didn’t seem to be like that. He seemed to be the sort of player who was good at knocking the ball past his opponent and then beat them for pace

 

[Booker4]

I'd take Murphy, whether we keep Brooks or not!

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

The difference being that Duffy is a very technical player who is very clever with the ball. Murphy didn’t seem to be like that. He seemed to be the sort of player who was good at knocking the ball past his opponent and then beat them for pace

Yep. No one on here comparing them. Least of all me.

 

[LJBlade]

Yep. No one on here comparing them. Least of all me.

But my point was that the attributes needed to play centrally, as shown by Duffy, aren’t the same sort of attributes that Murphy seemed to have when he last played for us. Hence my questioning of the person who said they would play him centrally.

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

But my point was that the attributes needed to play centrally, as shown by Duffy, aren’t the same sort of attributes that Murphy seemed to have when he last played for us. Hence my questioning of the person who said they would play him centrally.

Though Murph was occasionally deployed up top through the middle, and looked fine ? Different players with different attributes can thrive equally in the same position ?

 

[LJBlade]

Though Murph was occasionally deployed up top through the middle, and looked fine ? Different players with different attributes can thrive equally in the same position ?

Sorry, I should’ve been more specific. I was questioning playing Murphy in behind the striker(s) like where we play Duffy. When Murphy played centrally for us it was up top as the furthest man forward, where he could use his pace.