Chedwyn

[Kenilworth]

He doesn't make intelligent runs to receive the ball into feet. When he gets it he cannot control it.
He looks average at best and below average the majority of the time.
He might work well with someone lke Grant Holt - but if they have already got Vokes I would advise them to stick with him rather than wet nurse the Chedders

 

[SwissBlade]

He could be a good player next season in the 1st.

He'll be gone unfortunately

---------- Post added at 12:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 PM ----------

He doesn't make intelligent runs to receive the ball into feet. When he gets it he cannot control it.
He looks average at best and below average the majority of the time.
He might work well with someone lke Grant Holt - but if they have already got Vokes I would advise them to stick with him rather than wet nurse the Chedders

From what I've seen he does make the right runs and controls the ball.

 

[BaldeRunner]

What was aggressive about it? Yes he's been disappointing at times, but i'm more disappointed that Ched has always been the fall guy (much like Billy was). He's a far better footballer than so many think. When Micky first came we saw some excellent displays from Ched alongside Vokes and Bent because he complimented their style.

We're back to the old comparison of how he plays to what we paid for him, which i disagree with, Jamie Ward was always excused because he was cheap.

It was an aggressive response in that you you used the comment "...as you blindly state he is" in your previous post. The use of the word 'blindly' implies the original poster has not seen Ched play and is making a judgement without any basis in fact. My point is that your supposition that he was, in fact, a great footballer but we had just never seen it was a tad more blind than the thousands of us who actually watched him underperform week after week.

As for disagreeing with the comparison about how much a player (or presumably a manager) costs should relate to how well he performs I think is the kind of mentality that should eventually win you a place on the current United board.

 

[Pollingtonblade]

I don't pay his wages, I have no input to contract dealings why would I care what we paid for him or what we pay him weekly?

We fans do 'pay his wages' though?

 

[SwissBlade]

It was an aggressive response in that you you used the comment "...as you blindly state he is" in your previous post. The use of the word 'blindly' implies the original poster has not seen Ched play and is making a judgement without any basis in fact. My point is that your supposition that he was, in fact, a great footballer but we had just never seen it was a tad more blind than the thousands of us who actually watched him underperform week after week.

As for disagreeing with the comparison about how much a player (or presumably a manager) costs should relate to how well he performs I think is the kind of mentality that should eventually win you a place on the current United board.

I apologise for sounding aggressive, but I just responded in the dismissive tone in which the earlier post was made.

I never said that he was/ is a great footballer, but he's certainly decent at this level and given better supply would score a lot more in this team.

I am one of the thousands that watch him week after week, hence my defence of him.

As for your last comment, seems like you're the blind one here, just because I don't base my opinion of a player on his alleged wages/ transfer fee and instead I base it on what I see I am somehow of a certain type of mentality that you don't subscribe to.

---------- Post added at 02:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:57 PM ----------

We fans do 'pay his wages' though?

No I pay Lowton's, besides I thought we Blades fans lined the pockets of Batho and McCabe?!?

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

I've a feeling he'll sign for Norwich and do Ok there. Go figure

 

[lenners]

Ched Evans, 10 goals in about 70 games represents 'decent at this level'?
No wonder we've gone down.

 

[BaldeRunner]

I apologise for sounding aggressive, but I just responded in the dismissive tone in which the earlier post was made.

I never said that he was/ is a great footballer, but he's certainly decent at this level and given better supply would score a lot more in this team.

I am one of the thousands that watch him week after week, hence my defence of him.

As for your last comment, seems like you're the blind one here, just because I don't base my opinion of a player on his alleged wages/ transfer fee and instead I base it on what I see I am somehow of a certain type of mentality that you don't subscribe to.

---------- Post added at 02:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:57 PM ----------



No I pay Lowton's, besides I thought we Blades fans lined the pockets of Batho and McCabe?!?

 

[SwissBlade]

Thanks for the economics lesson Balderunner!

Personally I think he's good enough for us, fit for purpose and all that

 

[BaldeRunner]

Thanks for the economics lesson Balderunner!

Whoops messed that bit of message board up!
It's simple economics. You have finite resources and whatever you spend on one item means a commensurate reduction in what is left to spend on any other items. Therefore, that item has to be deemed to be value for money, particularly when it is taking a relatively larger proprtion of the aforementioned finite resources. Value for money can be defined as whether said item is fit for purpose and/or performing at a level that enhances the overall quality of the purpose for which it was originally purchased.

If the United board took your attitude we would be spinning into a crisis by now. Oh hang on....

 

[judge]

I apologise for sounding aggressive, but I just responded in the dismissive tone in which the earlier post was made.

I never said that he was/ is a great footballer, but he's certainly decent at this level and given better supply would score a lot more in this team.

I am one of the thousands that watch him week after week, hence my defence of him.

youre really clever

 

[Zlatan]

Ched Evans, 10 goals in about 70 games represents 'decent at this level'?
No wonder we've gone down.

Yet funnily enough he managed 10 in 28 for Norwich at this level a few years ago. Ever thought we could be the problem?

 

[Jonny G]

I imagine that's the thinking behind signing Philliskirk, who for maybe 25% of the money should get twice the goals.

 

[gavtheblade]

I imagine that's the thinking behind signing Philliskirk, who for maybe 25% of the money should get twice the goals.

agreed totally my
friend.off u go donkey evans

 

[sothall blade]

I like him personally, but think the price tag has just fucked him, too much expectation because of it and I think the pressure because of it has been too much for him.

For the record, no he certainly was not worth what we paid for him, we were robbed blind for a relatively untried and untested young'un.

what did we pay for him though ?, alledgedly it was 3 mill,then we paid 1.5 mill depending on this or that,in my mind he aint playing because it obviously goes on appearances so we know why he aint playin,but for what its worth i think he will go to norwich and start banging them in,lets just hope we can get a few million to in vest in the team

 

[lenners]

Yet funnily enough he managed 10 in 28 for Norwich at this level a few years ago. Ever thought we could be the problem?

No. An inability to put a shift in, to anticipate, to move, to pose a threat, to score goals are more likely to be the problem.

 

[norfolkblade]

what did we pay for him though ?, alledgedly it was 3 mill,then we paid 1.5 mill depending on this or that,in my mind he aint playing because it obviously goes on appearances so we know why he aint playin,but for what its worth i think he will go to norwich and start banging them in,lets just hope we can get a few million to in vest in the team

I don't know mate, hence I just said "price tag", you hear so many different figures that you just don't know what to believe!

As I said earlier, the talk is he has signed a pre-contract agreement with Norwich, and their fans are very excited at the prospect of him returning.

---------- Post added at 04:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:09 PM ----------

No. An inability to put a shift in, to anticipate, to move, to pose a threat, to score goals are more likely to be the problem.

Like the rest of our strikers this season then? Him being top scorer for us speaks volumes for the rest of em don't you think?

 

[lenners]

Yes Norfolk, the rest of our strikers have been shit as well.
I'm not sure how that makes £5m Chedwyn any better as a player.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Regardless of his ability, he must go - if at all possible - as we need the funds to rebuild the squad in the summer.

 

[norfolkblade]

Yes Norfolk, the rest of our strikers have been shit as well.
I'm not sure how that makes £5m Chedwyn any better as a player.

Because he scored and they haven't? £5m?! I'm assuming you included his wages in this? At least I hope you have!

 

[Kenilworth]

Anyone remember Chedders scoring with his noggin?
Shows how brave he is(n't) and his lack of ability to improve / eradicate weaknesses in his game.
Not worth the money or the place in the squad.
As fir putting a shift in U don't see it. To me he hides a lot. He does not make the runs to be available nor does he ever get to the near post in front of his marker. He hangs back and waits so the defender clears with ease.
If that's your idea of good fur this level Swiss I think you are one of a minority.

 

[Vancouver]

Because he scored and they haven't? £5m?! I'm assuming you included his wages in this? At least I hope you have!

Using the system known as 'Len Maths' he'll soon have cost us around £10m. Apparently 'Len Maths' isn't used in rocket science though.