Team v Port Vale

[Mouth of the South]

It would be a bit different with Chapman up there though. He can play as a second striker but also out wide, so he'd give us good variety. He could easily stay up top with Clarke with Carruthers/Duffy playing number 10, in our usual setup.

Yep, maybe so and I must admit I'd like to see Clarke and Chapman given a chance to play together.

I wonder though whether Chapman and M'boro are open to either a further loan and/or a perm deal esp with M'boro looking destined for the Champ themselves next season. He could be a great signing if so and if he is indeed in CW's longer term plans he'd justify game time at Port Vale ahead of the other strikers.

 

[Bladezz]

I'd be going:

Moore
Freeman Bash EEL JoC Lafferty
Coutts Fleck
Duffy
Clarke Sharp

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Permanent transfer, so them sort of agreements aren't the norm.

I remember Hessenthaler blowing a gasket over the possibility of Asaba playing against Gills on the back of a gentlemen's agreement. That was a permanent transfer.....

I don't think they're neforcab

This post genuinely confused me for quite some time. Then I thought “Steve Kabba”. Am I right?

 

[1danewhitehouse]

CW has been very loyal to 17 or 18 players all season. After gaining promotion his aim will now be fixed on the title.

With this in mind i really can't see who would drop out to give Brooks or Slater a run out. Reed has been the outstanding player with the 23s and would/ should be in line for an appearance before them.
He is not going to play any youngsters as it is all about the group of players who got us to where we are.

Reed, Chapman, Samir, all trump Slater or Brooks.

Yeah you maybe right and the issue of whether to give any of the youngsters a run out has been discussed recently on another thread. But, if he’s already decided that players such as Done, O’Shea (out of contract in the summer), Wilson, McNulty etc. won’t be here next season, it’s not unfeasible that one or two might get on the bench in their place. Big IF but not impossible.


As for Reed, I take your point. The reports I’ve read seem to indicate that Reed, Slater and Brooks have stood out. Mallon seems to get good reviews too (and doesn’t he play LWB- a position where we are a bit light). I’m not that emphatic in my view but think there could be an argument for one or two of these lads to get a chance at some point. With 2 games in 4 days, he might use more of the squad.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Surprised to see so many people suggested CW goes with just 1 up front v Vale. It didn't work in the first half on Sat and Utd have always looked stronger with 2 up this season.

I don't mind CW making changes but I'd expect the majority of the strongest 11 to start on Friday. CAM is the area we have most options with Duffy, O'Shea, Carruthers and Chapman (as welll as Scougall who thankfully is not getting anywhere near the squad at the moment). If he's fit, I'd expect Duffy to be back but if not I wouldn't be opposed to Carruthers starting and Chapman getting a run out. I think I'm in the minority but I've not been impressed by O'Shea whenever I've seen him, especially last Saturday.

Really pleased for Clarke, finally getting game time, goals and recognition - it can't have been easy for him while he was unfit and struggling to get into the side.

O’Shea’s a bit of a strange one. He’s contributed to a few goals, was incredibly unlucky not to get a last minute winner v Scunny and statistically, his contribution in the time he’s been on the pitch has been good. But for large parts of games, he seems a fairly peripheral figure, struggles to beat a man, gives the ball away etc. He’s done his bit but I’ve not seen enough to suggest he’s worth signing for the championship. Personally, I’d prefer to see more of Chapman. I think the “number 10” in our formation is given quite a bit of freedom and having the ability to beat a man is important as it’s not something we have a lot of in the side.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Why would there be a gentlemens agreement ? we signed him permanently so he should play

Not forced to be but some transfers have these agreements written in. Like I say, remember when we signed Asaba from Gillingham and Hessenthaler was going apeshit because Warnock threatened to play him against them in spite of a gentleman’s agreement.

 

[sheffielder]

Friday

Moore
Wilson EEL O'Connell
Freeman Carruthers Basham O'Shea Done
Chapman Clarke

Monday

Moore
Basham Wright O'Connell
Freeman Coutts Duffy Fleck Lafferty
Sharp Hanson

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

Playing Friday/Monday, is, barring a few hours, no different to playing Saturday/Tuesday.

Strongest teams both games.

 

[BushBlade]

Not forced to be but some transfers have these agreements written in. Like I say, remember when we signed Asaba from Gillingham and Hessenthaler was going apeshit because Warnock threatened to play him against them in spite of a gentleman’s agreement.

If I remember correctly you can't have such an agreement written into the contract. Nor can you have such a 'gentleman's agreement'.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

If I remember correctly you can't have such an agreement written into the contract. Nor can you have such a 'gentleman's agreement'.

Ah OK, perhaps times have changed on that front.

 

[BushBlade]

Ah OK, perhaps times have changed on that front.

Yes, that's what the Kabba thing was about. Samuels claimed we had a gentlemen's agreement with Watford that they wouldn't play him against us, which was a breach of regulations. But he had no evidence other than the circumstantial.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Yes, that's what the Kabba thing was about. Samuels claimed we had a gentlemen's agreement with Watford that they wouldn't play him against us, which was a breach of regulations. But he had no evidence other than the circumstantial.

And I think it was pointed out after that he was injured at the time anyway.

 

[larkymasher]

Yeah you maybe right and the issue of whether to give any of the youngsters a run out has been discussed recently on another thread. But, if he’s already decided that players such as Done, O’Shea (out of contract in the summer), Wilson, McNulty etc. won’t be here next season, it’s not unfeasible that one or two might get on the bench in their place. Big IF but not impossible.


As for Reed, I take your point. The reports I’ve read seem to indicate that Reed, Slater and Brooks have stood out. Mallon seems to get good reviews too (and doesn’t he play LWB- a position where we are a bit light). I’m not that emphatic in my view but think there could be an argument for one or two of these lads to get a chance at some point. With 2 games in 4 days, he might use more of the squad.

To be honest Reed and Brooks have been the stand out players this season. If they are missing from the middle of the park Slater is not yet in a position to take the lead role.
In fact to Graham and Semple at the heart of the defence have as much right to be pushing for a start as Slater ( that said Semple is out until November ) but my point is that as Centre Backs they dont tend to get as big a pat on the back as players further up the pitch.

There is no question that Slater has done well this season, i worry that he is used too quickly, as Reed was.

There is no point rushing these kids. At the moment Samir, Duffy, Fleck, Coutts, Reed, Brooks, are all up for starting before any youngster.