A point about Duffy (and our AM role)

[LondonBlade89]

Among the many things Duffy brings to this team when he's on song, I think one of the most important is his willingness to show for the ball in attacking positions.

In my opinion, this is the reason why Brooks was quite a way off competing for Duffy's role, even though logic suggested he would. Brooks ended up being better as a second striker. He was happy on the ball, but I don't think he was willing (or ready) to be the playmaker always looking for ways to unlock defences. His contributions were more fleeting.

At the same time, it's why Didzy is good in this role. He shows for the ball in the attacking third and then looks forward.

Either way, this is what we need from Kieran Dowell. While he did seem to have Brooks-esque qualities when I saw him playing v Barnet, I'm hopeful he's more keen to get on the ball and dictate. Fingers crossed.

 

[nopigfansintown]

I agree, although I saw Brooks doing this for Bournemouth a lot in their game against Man Utd, so he is clearly capable of doing it.

 

[RedandWhite]

IMO Duffy doesn't demand the ball half as much as he should. He wanders about and could be minutes before he get's the ball. Obviously when he has it we know his qualities.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

I hope I'm wrong but I have a nasty feeling we won't be seeing much more of him this season , which would be both a pity and a big mistake .

 

[blademark]

I hope I'm wrong but I have a nasty feeling we won't be seeing much more of him this season , which would be both a pity and a big mistake .

What makes you think that Joe ?

 

[BigBed]

I think we will see him just as much, it's just now, Wilder has better options from the bench.
Duffy will eather start or finish, almost every game for us this season, aslong as injury and suspensions are avoided.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

What makes you think that Joe ?

I think CW will play Nadine alongside Billy with McG just behind . As I said , hope I'm wrong.

 

[Jonboy60]

I think CW will play Nadine alongside Billy with McG just behind . As I said , hope I'm wrong.

^this^

 

[coaxingstar71]

I don't understand why people feel it necessary to keep writing Duffy off. He's better at playing that role than McGoldrick or even Brooks was. We'll have to see if Dowell can really challenge him for that place, but I can't see Wilder rushing to change it when Duffy has done nothing wrong. In his last game he scored a superbly taken goal after running to support Billy, had the initial shot for the first goal and played in McGoldrick with a lovely ball in the lead up to the third. What else does anyone expect from him?
In the recent game against Derby, there were people saying he had a quiet game, he was being man-marked by Huddlestone for the whole game, who was so pre-occupied with Duffy that his only telling contribution in the whole game was one through ball.

For me, where Duffy is better than anyone else that we've tried in that role is firstly his work off the ball, if you watch him he turns up all over the pitch to help out defensively and he's integral to the pressing style we employ. Secondly, when things don't come off for him, he doesn't hide, he keeps going, trying things and showing for the ball.

If he's fir and managed properly, there's no reason why he can't keep playing for us for another couple of seasons, it's not as if the role he plays relies on pace.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

I reckon our front 3 - whether it be a 3421 or 3412 or even 343 formation will come from

Sharp/Madine/Duffy/McG and Dowell.

CW & AK have got a host of combination to chose from whether it be home or away.

If we are winning games we can bring Coutts on, but if we are losing or drawing, we've got some great attacking changes in those 5.

As for Clarke/Washington - doubt now we'll see much if any of these except for injuries/suspensions.

We have to go for top 2 - we've put ourselves in a great position and no FA Cup to be concerned about - just go for it Blades.

UTB

 

[LondonBlade89]

I reckon our front 3 - whether it be a 3421 or 3412 or even 343 formation will come from

Sharp/Madine/Duffy/McG and Dowell.

CW & AK have got a host of combination to chose from whether it be home or away.

If we are winning games we can bring Coutts on, but if we are losing or drawing, we've got some great attacking changes in those 5.

As for Clarke/Washington - doubt now we'll see much if any of these except for injuries/suspensions.

We have to go for top 2 - we've put ourselves in a great position and no FA Cup to be concerned about - just go for it Blades.

UTB

I mostly agree, although I reckon we're probably being a bit quick to write-off Leon here. He's not been fit recently and by all accounts it sounds as though if we had more options up top, he'd have been used even less. We'll need squad depth in this latter part of the season and so I imagine Leon will play a big role.

 

[WORKSOPBLADE]

Thought Dowell first half on Sunday showed up well in Duffy position. When he’s got the first 11 quality around him I think he will do a good job.

Still start Duffy for foreseeable though.

Great to have additional options both Dowell and dare I say Madine bring to keep opposition guessing, especially 60 mins plus.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

I mostly agree, although I reckon we're probably being a bit quick to write-off Leon here. He's not been fit recently and by all accounts it sounds as though if we had more options up top, he'd have been used even less. We'll need squad depth in this latter part of the season and so I imagine Leon will play a big role.

Yep, don't really disagree about Leon, and would love him to be capable of beating Madine (for obvious reasons), but CW has brought Madine in for a reason and Billy is just at the top of his game at present. Reckon Leo is probably 4th choice now.

UTB

 

[Chali 2na]

I agree, although I saw Brooks doing this for Bournemouth a lot in their game against Man Utd, so he is clearly capable of doing it.

He's come on loads in fairness, he's looked phenomenal for Bournemouth.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

I don't understand why people feel it necessary to keep writing Duffy off. He's better at playing that role than McGoldrick or even Brooks was. We'll have to see if Dowell can really challenge him for that place, but I can't see Wilder rushing to change it when Duffy has done nothing wrong. In his last game he scored a superbly taken goal after running to support Billy, had the initial shot for the first goal and played in McGoldrick with a lovely ball in the lead up to the third. What else does anyone expect from him?
In the recent game against Derby, there were people saying he had a quiet game, he was being man-marked by Huddlestone for the whole game, who was so pre-occupied with Duffy that his only telling contribution in the whole game was one through ball.

For me, where Duffy is better than anyone else that we've tried in that role is firstly his work off the ball, if you watch him he turns up all over the pitch to help out defensively and he's integral to the pressing style we employ. Secondly, when things don't come off for him, he doesn't hide, he keeps going, trying things and showing for the ball.

If he's fir and managed properly, there's no reason why he can't keep playing for us for another couple of seasons, it's not as if the role he plays relies on pace.

An excellent assessment .

I've lost count of the number of times that I've read on here that we need a replacement for the Duffy role . No we don't - the best player for that role who is remotely within our budget is , err .......... Mark Duffy . If for any reason he's not available , McG can easily slot into that role but , other than that being the case , he should be one of the first names on the team sheet .

My fear is that not everyone feels the same way about his vital contribution to our success , as witnessed by his omission from the team for the first two games of the season ( along , of course , with Billy Sharp ) .............

 

[coaxingstar71]

An excellent assessment .

I've lost count of the number of times that I've read on here that we need a replacement for the Duffy role . No we don't - the best player for that role who is remotely within our budget is , err .......... Mark Duffy . If for any reason he's not available , McG can easily slot into that role but , other than that being the case , he should be one of the first names on the team sheet .

My fear is that not everyone feels the same way about his vital contribution to our success , as witnessed by his omission from the team for the first two games of the season ( along , of course , with Billy Sharp ) .............

He missed the first two games because Wilder had given him time off as he had just become a father.

Fortunately I think Wilder knows how important Duffy is to us and that's also the reason he gets subbed, as he's protecting him in order to be fit for the next game. Of course I'm not saying that occasionally it's simply because he's not having enough effect on the game, he's not superman!

 

[Houston_Blade]

I don't understand why people feel it necessary to keep writing Duffy off. He's better at playing that role than McGoldrick or even Brooks was. We'll have to see if Dowell can really challenge him for that place, but I can't see Wilder rushing to change it when Duffy has done nothing wrong. In his last game he scored a superbly taken goal after running to support Billy, had the initial shot for the first goal and played in McGoldrick with a lovely ball in the lead up to the third. What else does anyone expect from him?
In the recent game against Derby, there were people saying he had a quiet game, he was being man-marked by Huddlestone for the whole game, who was so pre-occupied with Duffy that his only telling contribution in the whole game was one through ball.

For me, where Duffy is better than anyone else that we've tried in that role is firstly his work off the ball, if you watch him he turns up all over the pitch to help out defensively and he's integral to the pressing style we employ. Secondly, when things don't come off for him, he doesn't hide, he keeps going, trying things and showing for the ball.

If he's fir and managed properly, there's no reason why he can't keep playing for us for another couple of seasons, it's not as if the role he plays relies on pace.

The fact that it's 'the Duffy role' says it all for me. If someone was better at it then surely it would be theirs and not his.

 

[Champagneblade]

Makes you wonder what Conor Washington does for the next few months.

Can't see him getting in the XI.

It'll be Moore, Johnson, Stearman/Crainey, Coutts, Dowell, Madine, Clarke on Saturday I'd imagine.

 

[Chali 2na]

An excellent assessment .

I've lost count of the number of times that I've read on here that we need a replacement for the Duffy role . No we don't - the best player for that role who is remotely within our budget is , err .......... Mark Duffy . If for any reason he's not available , McG can easily slot into that role but , other than that being the case , he should be one of the first names on the team sheet .

My fear is that not everyone feels the same way about his vital contribution to our success , as witnessed by his omission from the team for the first two games of the season ( along , of course , with Billy Sharp ) .............

We still need a replacement for Duffy; he's 33.

 

[Woodys Thunderbolt]

Duffy has been shocking for most of this season, he pulls out of tackles and gives the ball away far too often.

 

[SwissBlade]

I think CW will play Nadine alongside Billy with McG just behind . As I said , hope I'm wrong.

I think Madine coming in takes a lot of pressure off Wilder to use Leon, McG or Billy as that target man. I don’t mean just for the long balls, but also for holding the ball up etc.

Leon is a much better player as an instinctive striker, when he’s got time to turn or time on the ball he seems to ponder his strike and then wastes it. When he’s more instinctive he gets goals

Billy likes to run on to balls or take chances in the box. He’s strong on the ball especially with his back to goal, but he’s not tall enough to be great in the air

McG has been excellent at holding the ball up, bringing other players into the action and recently grabbing a couple of goals

What we don’t really have in that lot is a striker which we can use well on set pieces. We rely on centre halves to get up or have some clever move like Leon’s v Derby.

Madine seems to bring a bit of everything we’re missing in those strikers. Apparently he has pace to but don’t recall him being pacey.

Duffy however and Dowell hopefully, will give us that link up with the midfield, you could argue that McG also does this, but Duffy moves himself and the ball much quicker. He’s tricky. He plays the free role brilliantly and he can open defences. As I say, I hope that Dowell can slot in for duffy after 60 Mins or when we have a run of games

Madine and Dowell should add to what we have and take pressure off a bit.

Considering that we had the most corners at one point, yet scored just one or two goals from corners, then we have to make better use of this advantage

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Duffy has been shocking for most of this season, he pulls out of tackles and gives the ball away far too often.

What a load of shite. He's had 2 below par games recently.

 

[SHOREHAMST.com]

Duffy is the best player I’ve ever seen play for United.

 

[Woodys Thunderbolt]

What a load of shite. He's had 2 below par games recently.

You need to get down to the Lane more often and concentrate on the games - he's been shite.

 

[Chali 2na]

Duffy has been shocking for most of this season, he pulls out of tackles and gives the ball away far too often.

You need to get down to the Lane more often and concentrate on the games - he's been shite.

 

[Working Class Hero]

Duffy is the main reason we play our football so high up the pitch, making us the attack minded team we are. When he's not there the ball is knocked around 30 yards further back. He makes us such a joy to watch because he's so happy to receive the ball and so comfortable on it (more so than any other player I've seen at play for us) in that part of the pitch.

There is no replacement for Duffy for under £20m, it's as simple as that. I have no idea what we'll do when he retires but it will take Premier League money so we had better get there soon.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

You need to get down to the Lane more often and concentrate on the games - he's been shite.

Strange how we seem much less productive when he's off the pitch isn't it.

I think i'll trust my own judgement over someone that clearly doesn't appreciate a decent player when he sees one.

Let me guess, you'd rather see Paul Rogers?

 

[Speedracer]

You need to get down to the Lane more often and concentrate on the games - he's been shite.

And you need to get to Specsavers pronto, he is by far our most creative player & the one opponents fear the most, as witnessed by clubs trying to man mark him out of the game.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

We still need a replacement for Duffy; he's 33.

We will need one eventually but like many others , I feel he has at least another couple of good years in him.

When that time comes , it's going to be very difficult and bloody expensive to get one as good .

 

[Chali 2na]

We will need one eventually but like many others , I feel he has at least another couple of good years in him.

When that time comes , it's going to be very difficult and bloody expensive to get one as good .

I disagree, I wouldn't say he has "at least another couple of good years" - I'd say he's got another couple of years in him if we're lucky.

Either way, we can't rely on his "replacement" to hit the ground running as soon as we sign him, we should look to sign him before Duffy is finished: not after.