Lavery

[Treeton Blade]

Sorry, but it's easy to see that Hanson is not good on the ground in the same way that ELL is not good on the ground.

He has his uses as does EEL but there is a reason why hanson came into pro football late - IMHO

UTB

Agree with you on EEL, I`ll give you that

 

[JohnDenver]

there is a reason why hanson came into pro football late - IMHO

Promising career in retail?

 

[sitwell]

Sorry, but it's easy to see that Hanson is not good on the ground in the same way that ELL is not good on the ground.

He has his uses as does EEL but there is a reason why hanson came into pro football late - IMHO

UTB

Tripe ,depends what you expect them to do ,neither are Steve Wigley but both are good with their feet ,but both have different jobs. Do you not see how Hanson brings other players into play ,with control and lay offs and Landell tackles and gives it to better players ,or do you just see what you want to see ?

 

[BushBlade]

You are of course correct about the need to sign players in January - it certainly gave the fans optimism. The question with all our players is that a team never stands still and improvemnets can always be made.

I suppose what we should be starting to discuss is how the team could get better. Hanson, for me, will never be a first choice player. Samir has the ability to become first choice and unsure about Jayo. Perhaps Jayo won't be signed permanently when we go up.

UTB

I don't think there's any need to discuss how to improve the team until the end of the season when we'll have nowt else to talk about. Doing it now just invites criticism of players who are contributing to our probable promotion.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Agree with you on EEL, I`ll give you that

EEL is uncomfortable with the ball at his feet or when a player runs at him - not ideal at CH when you are often last man.
I have nothing against Hanson - but he is just effective against certain opposition. I prefer my footballers to be efffective in most games against whatever opposition is thrown up and work hard when they happen to struggle to make up that difference.
Just think Hanson is limited and as posted before, there is better. If he helps to get us out of this division, and all of the JTW players have helped, then fine.
He just seems a Bassett type of player and not a CW type.

UTB

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Tripe ,depends what you expect them to do ,neither are Steve Wigley but both are good with their feet ,but both have different jobs. Do you not see how Hanson brings other players into play ,with control and lay offs and Landell tackles and gives it to better players ,or do you just see what you want to see ?

Tripe? - quite often with you sitters when ANYONE disagrees with you.

IT's only an opinion - if you don't agree then fine - it's quite often you DON'T like opinions that you disagree with.

UTB

 

[Pinchy]

Anti-hoof Pinchy rates Hanson though.

So go figure that one out.

I maintain that a good 'big man' centre-forward is entirely compatible with proper football. Its only when the manager's philosophy is wrong or lesser players take the 'easy way out' that the dark, menacing shadow of hoof descends.

I would say this; Anyone who doubts my assessment of Done ought to watch Lavery - the player they would like to think Done to be.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

I maintain that a good 'big man' centre-forward is entirely compatible with proper football. Its only when the manager's philosophy is wrong or lesser players take the 'easy way out' that the dark, menacing shadow of hoof descends.

I would say this; Anyone who doubts my assessment of Done ought to watch Lavery - the player they would like to think Done to be.

Do you think many disagree about Done?
Don't really see many thinking he should play now considering how the team has progressed?

UTB

 

[wizadry]

Because no one can really complain with his selection policy - do well and the shirt's yours to lose. It makes it easier when the team's winning too.

There will be times when it might cause you to drop the odd point but in the long run the benefits of keeping everyone pulling in the same direction outweighs that. That'll be Wilder's thinking.

You are right Ricky, no one can complain but he does have players who were playing first team football before they came here so he has to manage that well no matter what he says or who he picks.

Some players can be twats if they don't feel wanted but even the players not in the squad are warming up with the squad on some match days, that's some achievement from the management and great enthusiasm and character from the player.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

you don't rate hanson then? You could suffer the rath on here - some think the sun shines.....................etc

UTB

I think there are parallels to be drawn between Hanson and Nuhiu. Both big, hardworking team players who lack pace and technical ability. They’ve both been around the block a bit and are wily old pros.


Lavery is a very different kind of player. Still quite raw with some pace and trickery but also some naivety to his play in terms of positioning etc.


He reminds me of Danny Webber in the way he plays, especially the way he likes to pick the ball up on the left and cut in running at players.


Personally, more often than not, I would prefer Lavery to start over Hanson but that’s not to say the big man can’t play a role for the team. I just see him more as the Chief style impact sub than the Shipps type leader of the line.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Sitters - the issue for some is why play Hansen at all?

UTB

He’s certainly not what one would label a “proper footballer” a la Coutts/Fleck etc. is he?


I think he has his uses though but for me, he should be plan B.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Lavery reminds me of Fernando Torres in his Liverpool days. Albeit a League One version.

I kind of agree in terms of physique and his running style but I think they’re actually very different types of players with Torres being much more of an out and out goalscorer and Lavery being one of those forwards who drifts and is provider as much as scorer.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Sorry, but it's easy to see that Hanson is not good on the ground in the same way that ELL is not good on the ground.

He has his uses as does EEL but there is a reason why hanson came into pro football late - IMHO

UTB

I’d say a key difference between the two is that Hanson is very aware of his limitations and tends to make good (safe) decisions laying the ball off to more talented teammates and recycling possession where as EEL has a rick in him and sometimes gives the ball away in dangerous areas.

 

[boo radley]

Sorry, but it's easy to see that Hanson is not good on the ground in the same way that ELL is not good on the ground.

He has his uses as does EEL but there is a reason why hanson came into pro football late - IMHO

UTB

They are not Headballers they are Footballers. If they were no good at playing football they would not have made the professional game. They would not be as good as Fleck in midfield as much as Fleck would not be as good in defence or upfront.
Kieran Freeman on the other hand...

 

[Fulwood Blade]

He’s certainly not what one would label a “proper footballer” a la Coutts/Fleck etc. is he?


I think he has his uses though but for me, he should be plan B.

yes agreed - plan B is fine.
Not plan A ideally - don't see it as a crime in wanting the team to be better - some can't or won't see the logic.

UTB

 

[Fulwood Blade]

They are not Headballers they are Footballers. If they were no good at playing football they would not have made the professional game. They would not be as good as Fleck in midfield as much as Fleck would not be as good in defence or upfront.
Kieran Freeman on the other hand...

Of course they are footballers - but it isn't a crime to want better than some of what we have got. Both are effectual when playing certain opposition. I'd prefer having players who are effective against most teams than some of ours that are limited in what they do. We have turned the corner and I suppose some like me are being greedy about where we can now go.

UTB