Hughesy

[Alph]

5 minutes ago, BondJovi said:

Much like some people who don't rate Ince. I really do wonder what supposed football some fans watch.

@Mr Tibbs made a valid point on the negative side of the Hughes debate. He raised some good points. 

But I can't buy into Hughes not fitting Rowett's style but Bryson and Johnson do. 

You'd think Bryson was winning the ball every two minutes and pinging passes all over the place the way some tell it.

It's been 4 games. Hughes is out of form. What's the fuss? 

[BondJovi]

1 hour ago, Alpha said:

@Mr Tibbs made a valid point on the negative side of the Hughes debate. He raised some good points. 

But I can't buy into Hughes not fitting Rowett's style but Bryson and Johnson do. 

You'd think Bryson was winning the ball every two minutes and pinging passes all over the place the way some tell it.

It's been 4 games. Hughes is out of form. What's the fuss? 

But that is modern way. Instant results needed. The concept of form seems to have been forgotten and some players are more affected by form than others. I suspect Hughes will get his chance this weekend, entirely up to him to grab it. Great player but has had a difficult season, most of our players are good and most have had very mixed seasons.

[Warren Hobhead]

2 hours ago, BondJovi said:

But that is modern way. Instant results needed. The concept of form seems to have been forgotten and some players are more affected by form than others. I suspect Hughes will get his chance this weekend, entirely up to him to grab it. Great player but has had a difficult season, most of our players are good and most have had very mixed seasons.

Nailed it. 

 

Goodnight.

[StantonRam]

I don't agree that Hughesy seems 'lazy' on the pitch, on the contrary he is sometimes the only bright spark when everyone else is having an off day.  If anything maybe he needs to stop trying to win every ball and run for everything and use his vision a bit more and be selective about when to battle and when to wait.

Our Will is the real deal, already an established England U21/U23, we sometimes forget how young he is, let's keep backing him out there and let him know that he is wanted here.  In a season which can run to almost 60 games if we get a couple of decent Cup runs and in which the games come thick & fast we need his ability to unlock defences with his pace & passing accuracy.  We're lucky to have so many midfield options but IMO Will should always be towards the top of the match day squad list even if he doesn't always start.

If we don't mount a serious promotion challenge this time (2017-8) he will be off, he mixes with PL players in the England setup and he will know how much those guys earn and hear them talk about playing European games, playing for/against the top sides etc, for all we know the club might have already turned down some offers from PL clubs.

For supporters of a Championship club that's probably going to finish top 10 this time but (much as I'd love it) probably not top 6 we can be an ungrateful bunch at times.  Not many clubs in this division have a player of his class!

COYR!

LR2

[Van der MoodHoover]

Just now, LondonRam2 said:

I don't agree that Hughesy seems 'lazy' on the pitch, on the contrary he is sometimes the only bright spark when everyone else is having an off day.  If anything maybe he needs to stop trying to win every ball and run for everything and use his vision a bit more and be selective about when to battle and when to wait.

Our Will is the real deal, already an established England U21/U23, we sometimes forget how young he is, let's keep backing him out there and let him know that he is wanted here.  In a season which can run to almost 60 games if we get a couple of decent Cup runs and in which the games come thick & fast we need his ability to unlock defences with his pace & passing accuracy.  We're lucky to have so many midfield options but IMO Will should always be towards the top of the match day squad list even if he doesn't always start.

If we don't mount a serious promotion challenge this time (2017-8) he will be off, he mixes with PL players in the England setup and he will know how much those guys earn and hear them talk about playing European games, playing for/against the top sides etc, for all we know the club might have already turned down some offers from PL clubs.

For supporters of a Championship club that's probably going to finish top 10 this time but (much as I'd love it) probably not top 6 we can be an ungrateful bunch at times.  Not many clubs in this division have a player of his class!

COYR!

LR2

Well said. He's given us some treasured moments already and hopefully we will see some more. 

[Phoenix]

Haven't read all through this thread, but to me, Will has peripheral vision. He 's probably decided on 2 or 3 different passes to make before he even receives the ball. His speed of thinking is tremendous.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

[Steve How Hard?]

1 minute ago, Phoenix said:

Haven't read all through this thread, but to me, Will has peripheral vision. He 's probably decided on 2 or 3 different passes to make before he even receives the ball. His speed of thinking is tremendous.

Form is temporary, class is permanent.

Exactly. Finding it very hard to think of another championship player that could have picked that pass to Bent against Wolves, never mind executing it. Yeah Bents finish put the gloss on it but the vision and execution was sublime. Moments like that are few and far between at championship level.

[jagerbob]

23 hours ago, BondJovi said:

Much like some people who don't rate Ince. I really do wonder what supposed football some fans watch.

Hughes has been ***** this season end of.

if we are playing the posession game playing in the opponents half for near enough 90 mins, and he can dictate play in the playmaker role then we all know what he can do.

i dont like him in a more balanced style of play, when we play the ball longer, and are more direct.

And no matter what people say, i dont think hes better than say bryson in a 4-2-3-1 holding role, and he doesnt look a goal threat like say Vydra is in the hole position.

At the very least we justify his place in the starting XI we need to play 4-3-3 and have Martin back. But id rather us not go back to that, i think the current system and starting XI under rowett is about right.

 

 

[RamNut]

On 13 April 2017 at 09:19, David said:

 

...except for vydra.

[TomInceOnFire]

5 minutes ago, RamNut said:

...except for vydra.

It does say generally to be fair

[Tombo]

3 minutes ago, RamNut said:

...except for vydra.

We've looked better without him. I'd say he's probably going to start on Monday though. Started against Fulham but went off to make way for 4-3-3, which we've been using since.

[RamNut]

1 minute ago, Tombo said:

We've looked better without him. I'd say he's probably going to start on Monday though. Started against Fulham but went off to make way for 4-3-3, which we've been using since.

Have we looked better? By all accounts we were a bit lucky v brum and poor today.

 

thats not the point anyway.....

the point is that if we're winning you keep the shirt - supposedly.

 

[Tombo]

11 minutes ago, RamNut said:

Have we looked better? By all accounts we were a bit lucky v brum and poor today.

 

thats not the point anyway.....

the point is that if we're winning you keep the shirt - supposedly.

 

We were not really lucky against Birmingham. I was there. I will judge what I have seen. We were better when he went off against Fulham (when we really were lucky to be winning at HT) and better against Birmingham. I'm not there today so I won't judge what I haven't seen.

The full quote from Rowett does say that he "generally" doesn't want to change a winning team, but it also includes a mention of resting players for certain fixtures. From Fulham to Hudds on Monday, we've been facing a Tues-Sat-Fri- Mon. 4 games in 13 days. Birmingham had the players who changed the game at Fulham starting and this is unchanged from the winning team at Birmingham.

In the last 3 games, there has been one change as far as starting lineups go. I think that fits the bill as 'generally' the same team.

I would still have Vydra in for Butterfield personally but it's not an inaccurate statement is it? If you want to misinterpret it and use that misinterpretation as a stick to beat him with, that's your problem.

[dcfctheteamforme]

14 minutes ago, Tombo said:

We've looked better without him. I'd say he's probably going to start on Monday though. Started against Fulham but went off to make way for 4-3-3, which we've been using since.

Looked better without him? Are you serious? I'm not a particular fan of him but to say we've looked better without him - since he's been playing he missed the Birmingham game, in which we struggled to beat (and shouldn't have won based on performance) a team that is second bottom of the form table (I think). Ludicrous claim

[Sparkle]

Personally I feel if Hughes starts then he needs two other proper midfielders in there with him for him to show his best which will stop the likes of Vydra from starting and currently we have a choice of Johnson who generally has to start due to his heading ability and Bryson who produces the energy and butterfield who is a more solid type of Hughes so Hughes is in a straight battle with butterfield currently 

[Rev]

7 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Personally I feel if Hughes starts then he needs two other proper midfielders in there with him for him to show his best which will stop the likes of Vydra from starting and currently we have a choice of Johnson who generally has to start due to his heading ability and Bryson who produces the energy and butterfield who is a more solid type of Hughes so Hughes is in a straight battle with butterfield currently 

I'd have to disagree that Butterfield is more solid than Hughes.

More solid than Butter, maybe.

[Tombo]

20 minutes ago, dcfctheteamforme said:

Looked better without him? Are you serious? I'm not a particular fan of him but to say we've looked better without him - since he's been playing he missed the Birmingham game, in which we struggled to beat (and shouldn't have won based on performance) a team that is second bottom of the form table (I think). Ludicrous claim

Were you there? Because I don't think I heard from anyone on the day that felt this way and nobody said anything like this in the various discussions I heard on the train back. I only seem to have heard this opinion online.

In any case, I was there and I really don't think we struggled to beat them, the draw would have been very harsh.

[Rev]

1 minute ago, Tombo said:

Were you there? Because I don't think I heard from anyone on the day that felt this way and nobody said anything like this in the various discussions I heard on the train back. I only seem to have heard this opinion online.

In any case, I was there and I really don't think we struggled to beat them, the draw would have been very harsh.

I was there, we should have been 2-0 at half time, but based on the second half we were massively lucky to come away with 3 pts.

A draw was the least Brum deserved.

[Sparkle]

14 minutes ago, reveldevil said:

I was there, we should have been 2-0 at half time, but based on the second half we were massively lucky to come away with 3 pts.

A draw was the least Brum deserved.

I was there and all of the above was correct and made a change

[Sparkle]

45 minutes ago, reveldevil said:

I'd have to disagree that Butterfield is more solid than Hughes.

More solid than Butter, maybe.

I didn't really mean it in a nice way