Jump to content

Chris Martin - joined Reading on loan until the end of the season


DcFc Dyycheee

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

To be fair I was not at Leeds, cant comment.. However I am pretty sure @Mistaram would have been, so his opinion is as valid as anyones.

As far as stats go, dont read too much into those either. Touches.. What kind of touches? Same for passes, forward, backwards, sidewards? Winnalls might have been more direct and affected the game more.. Winalls less passes might mean he was driving forward and trying to create and that could explain the loss of possession. He might have been more of a risk taker, Martin might have been more conservative. It's all bollx.

Who knows, but the headline stats you have there are only part of the equation.

 

Was merely pointing out that Winnall didn't do all the work and Martin wasn't  invisible. And other than the goals they contributed similar, yes I get that the stats don't give the full story but to say a player was invisible yet had more of the ball doesn't make sense to me. Also the main thing is the result, we won and the whole team contributed to it. I guess I just dislike unfair criticism.

The pictures show the 2s touches, passes and shots. Not brilliantly clear on the pics but if you want to have a look and a play they are here.

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/1192449/Live/England-Championship-2017-2018-Leeds-Derby

Screenshot_20171207-180606.png

Screenshot_20171207-180619.png

Screenshot_20171207-180350.png

Screenshot_20171207-180549.png

Screenshot_20171207-180434.png

Screenshot_20171207-180527.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, rynny said:

Was merely pointing out that Winnall didn't do all the work and Martin wasn't  invisible. And other than the goals they contributed similar, yes I get that the stats don't give the full story but to say a player was invisible yet had more of the ball doesn't make sense to me. Also the main thing is the result, we won and the whole team contributed to it. I guess I just dislike unfair criticism.

The pictures show the 2s touches, passes and shots. Not brilliantly clear on the pics but if you want to have a look and a play they are here.

https://www.whoscored.com/Matches/1192449/Live/England-Championship-2017-2018-Leeds-Derby

Screenshot_20171207-180606.png

Screenshot_20171207-180619.png

Screenshot_20171207-180350.png

Screenshot_20171207-180549.png

Screenshot_20171207-180434.png

Screenshot_20171207-180527.png

If that's our new formation we will never get away with it far too many players for it to go unnoticed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, therealhantsram said:

All the folk agitating here to sell Martin will be the same ones bemoaning the lack of a Plan B after the sale. 

#youhearditherefirst

All the folk on here saying we should keep Chris (plan a) are the ones complaining we have no plan b

Sorry couldn't resist 

teams worked out how to play us when we were set up as how to get the best out of cm.  Is that not true?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spanish said:

All the folk on here saying we should keep Chris (plan a) are the ones complaining we have no plan b

Sorry couldn't resist 

teams worked out how to play us when we were set up as how to get the best out of cm.  Is that not true?

Teams ''worked us out'' this season with Nugent starting, does that mean we should never start that way again? No. Nonsense. The variety we have allows us to be less predictable, meaning it's harder to figure us out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PistoldPete2 said:

Selling Chris Martin would only make sense if we could get someone better.. Danny Ings maybe.

Ings looked a long way off being anywhere near what he was when the under 23s played Liverpool a few weeks ago. It would take the rest if the season to get him back up to fitness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, therealhantsram said:

All the folk agitating here to sell Martin will be the same ones bemoaning the lack of a Plan B after the sale. 

#youhearditherefirst

But if Martin isn't utilised in this plan B whats the point in keeping him? We play the exact same way whichever combo we use, some are better than others for this style. 

To me there's no plan A or B, just a style of play with interchangeable strikers with different qualities. If you don't adjust to them then the end result will be what we've seen so far, ineffective when played. That's not saying Martin isn't good enough, he's more than good enough for this division but just needs a bit of support, not to be expected to run around like a headless chicken. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Andicis said:

Teams ''worked us out'' this season with Nugent starting, does that mean we should never start that way again? No. Nonsense. The variety we have allows us to be less predictable, meaning it's harder to figure us out.

Sorry but don't try to pin your nonsense statement on me.  I think CM is plan b.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mr Tibbs said:

But if Martin isn't utilised in this plan B whats the point in keeping him?

Exactly this, also applies to every single player at the club.

We all have our favourites and argue till we’re blue in the face that Rowett should share our visions, but ultimately he is the manager and paid to make these decisions.

If Martin is not in Rowett’s plans and a reasonable offer comes in we should sell, use the money to bring in players that will be in his plans.

I like Martin I do, but if he does leave it wouldn’t be the end of the world. I’ve seen far better players cast out from other clubs that have gone to to have success.

1 player does not make a football club.

Devaluaing, demotivating an asset you have no intention of using to keep Barry from Burton happy is not a sensible move.

I can see him staying though to be honest, could be wrong but the Wolves link looks a little lazy and a chance to push a story out following on from last window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, PistoldPete2 said:

Selling Chris Martin would only make sense if we could get someone better.. Danny Ings maybe.

I agree to sell if we get someone better, Ings would be intresting but a lot like another team buying George Thorne - good for the average of about 8 games a season when on the filed of play.

in terms of replacing players with better well we let Jamie ward go and replaced him with wieman and camara - are we any better off? Well we spent £3-4 million on those two who scored 5 goals between them with paltry assists since ward left and even with his dodgy hamstrings I am sure he would have contributed much more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

I agree to sell if we get someone better, Ings would be intresting but a lot like another team buying George Thorne - good for the average of about 8 games a season when on the filed of play.

in terms of replacing players with better well we let Jamie ward go and replaced him with wieman and camara - are we any better off? Well we spent £3-4 million on those two who scored 5 goals between them with paltry assists since ward left and even with his dodgy hamstrings I am sure he would have contributed much more!

To be fair we let Jamie Ward leave, but replaced him with Tom Ince.

The Treetards believed they we got the shity end of the stick and fat Kenny Burns stated at the time that Florest had the better player. 

When we let them have JW and replaced him with a poorer version in Tom Ince! The Genius of FKB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Spanish said:

All the folk on here saying we should keep Chris (plan a) are the ones complaining we have no plan b

Sorry couldn't resist 

teams worked out how to play us when we were set up as how to get the best out of cm.  Is that not true?

No, we were top and then he got injured 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Why do u say that?

Genuine question as I've missed the damage articles...that should be ramage 

I think the wording leaves it too open ended and non commital. Saying things like ‘he’s in our plans’ could mean anything. When all is said and done, Martin has been a very good servant to this club and I’d much rather they came out saying ‘hes not for sale’ and let him know where his future lies. It suggests that he will revert to Vydra/Nugent at a drop of a hat again when I think Martin deserves an opportunity to have a run of games like others have had. I fear it makes us one dimensional, back to relying on one player for goals, which I keep saying was the problem with last years team. I don’t know, I don’t mean to be OTT, but I can’t see the point of not keeping a striker as good as Martin, if you then need to replace him (my stance is also similar on Thorne). I’m uncomfortable because I think it can show that he’s not open to trying something different. Could be wrong, but I’d rather him show some commitment. 

I won’t link because I don’t want him to get the click bait, but Ramage said he’d consider selling Martin in January. I don’t think that’s really his job to say who he’d sell. Then today he’s written about replacing him with Nugent for Barnsley with the words ‘no disrespect’. It’s no surprise, and I understand it but again I feel it’s this ‘one dimensional’ feeling that we have to get the best out of Vydra that I’m not sure is helpful to the rest of the team. It’s like we can discuss a Martin rumour, but Vydra’s effectiveness to the team overall is off the table. His Vydra/Nugent love in is increasingly apparent and not overly helpful to the discussion in my overall view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...