Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Wouldnt you have waited to make sure you get a player in before loaning him out?. I dont agree with Duracell that we are that far ahead of Barnsley we can loan them our players just to get fit. He has been training since about feb time now, Im no physical expert but shouldnt he be pretty fit by now? He is a pro sportsman, he should be able to shift a bit of weight. Being out for so long will have affected him, and training doesn't matter for much. Needs to be 'match fit' rather than just fitness levels. The 6 months will do him good, it was a good move imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Teale Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Being out for so long will have affected him, and training doesn't matter for much. Needs to be 'match fit' rather than just fitness levels. The 6 months will do him good, it was a good move imo. Yet we are thinking of risking a injured Bailey playing one who cant even train. Not a good move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Wouldnt you have waited to make sure you get a player in before loaning him out?. I dont agree with Duracell that we are that far ahead of Barnsley we can loan them our players just to get fit. He has been training since about feb time now, Im no physical expert but shouldnt he be pretty fit by now? He is a pro sportsman, he should be able to shift a bit of weight. Fit enough to train, but not fit enough to play well enough for Derby County. Too many times we have rushed Miles and other players back too soon. Match fitness includes match sharpness and if he can get that with another club, then why not? Miles is dangerous to players and spectators alike when he's dopey, I'd much rather he got through that stage at Barnsley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Greening was signed for £670k. We spent at least three times that on the Maguire tribunal fee, Bryson, Shackell and Fielding. Net spend Bunny. In the last year we have spent as much as Forest (net) who have signed 1 permanent player in the same time. They haven't sold anyone, so our net spend is roughly the same i reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 This board is a wolf in sheep's clothing IMO. Most of us know our consumer rights but a clever piece of marketing is enough to suggest, at the very least, that we're being offered something in addition to the customary. It stinks of spin to me. The point is, as far as I'm concerned, they didn't "give" us anything beyond what we're entitled to but dressed it up in such a way that it became an "offer". I take my hat off to them. Couldn't have put it better myself. Like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Teale Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Fit enough to train, but not fit enough to play well enough for Derby County. Too many times we have rushed Miles and other players back too soon. Match fitness includes match sharpness and if he can get that with another club, then why not? Miles is dangerous to players and spectators alike when he's dopey, I'd much rather he got through that stage at Barnsley. No one is match fit yet though as no one has played proper matches for a few months. I dont see how playing Bailey who isnt fit is a better option for the club than someone who has been training for 6 months. If Bailey gets more injured and leaves us with justy Hendrick how was that loan a good idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Not negativity, just an observation For all I know we have several targets anyway. Although it would be nice to know who they were, all the silence on other DM speculation leaves people to make their minds up and often they decide that we're not trying to get one in. Which would be b*ll*cks. It is negative for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Yet we are thinking of risking a injured Bailey playing one who cant even train. Not a good move How did he know Bailey would be injured? Since April we've been after a DM and we bid for Eustace early on (or atleast the DET said we were talking to them fairly early on) so i'm guessing he was presuming that we'd have other players in already. Just bad timing that we have no one fit right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 It is negative for you I'm not well and have stacks of paperwork to do. Blame it on that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 No one is match fit yet though as no one has played proper matches for a few months. I dont see how playing Bailey who isnt fit is a better option for the club than someone who has been training for 6 months. If Bailey gets more injured and leaves us with justy Hendrick how was that loan a good idea? Ahhh. Just seen the Bailey thing, maybe it wasn't so wise. It still doesn't mean Miles isn't in Clough's plans though, his interviews suggest he is. I guess Nigel was putting too much faith in Glick getting his targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curb Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Results - Kept us in the league. Man management - Judgemental but you don't see anyone giving 50% out there do you? Bringing on young players - New Academy set up and youngsters being given a chance. Excellent work. Working under selling conditions and having to recuce the wages of an already sh1te squad? I say hes done well. This season is more of a test than those before it of how successfully he can build a squad. Though we still need to sign a DM and a striker before we judge him properly. His results are among the worst in history for DCFC managers he ranks at (if I remember rightly) around the 8th worst just slightly better than Jewell (who had almost a year without a win) and behind Tommy Docherty. Again there is no question that his results are poor, the only argument revolves around whether he could have done better with the resources available. Man management, not judgemental, there isn't one player who's improved under him, and we are still paying the wages of otherwise good players who are now unplayable and unsellable. Remind me how many young players have come through and established themselves in the first team again. Your last sentence, again is the argument of whether he could do better with the resources available, and I see you've already made an excuse for our failure this season before it's even begun. Bulletproof. I know you can't bring yourself to criticise anything to do with the management, being a football fan means you have to suspend logic, but even you must be able to see his results have been very poor so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SillyBilly Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 results - poor, no argument. man management - good, probably his best point bringing on young players - good, plenty of hope for the future other criteria? - tactically naive at times. apart from the results its all opinions tho'. I'm a little more grumpy than that = :mad: Results- Only thing that matters The rest- Who cares providing results are good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curb Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I'm a little more grumpy than that = :mad: Results- Only thing that matters The rest- Who cares providing results are good? That's true enough, if we were getting better results, then there wouldn't be an argument, it would make everything else justified, however we aren't, is staying up in the CCC enough for us now? but even if results weren't improving, we should be able to see a steady improvement, however we're starting from scratch yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SillyBilly Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 That's true enough, if we were getting better results, then there wouldn't be an argument, it would make everything else justified, however we aren't, is staying up in the CCC enough for us now? but even if results weren't improving, we should be able to see a steady improvement, however we're starting from scratch yet again. Indeed, tbh I don't even know what I think of Clough anymore, can't see the wood for the trees. Pendulum opinion. I won't defend his record though, its been dyer and I still haven't got over the absymal cup exits from last season either. In my more pessimistic hours I tend towards thinking we've just gone from one naff squad to an equally naff sqaud whilst still paying far beyond what should be paid for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex W Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 His results are among the worst in history for DCFC managers he ranks at (if I remember rightly) around the 8th worst just slightly better than Jewell (who had almost a year without a win) and behind Tommy Docherty. Again there is no question that his results are poor, the only argument revolves around whether he could have done better with the resources available. Man management, not judgemental, there isn't one player who's improved under him, and we are still paying the wages of otherwise good players who are now unplayable and unsellable. Remind me how many young players have come through and established themselves in the first team again. Your last sentence, again is the argument of whether he could do better with the resources available, and I see you've already made an excuse for our failure this season before it's even begun. Bulletproof. I know you can't bring yourself to criticise anything to do with the management, being a football fan means you have to suspend logic, but even you must be able to see his results have been very poor so far. Results temper on playing squad and ability to improve it. The playing squad was awful, it needed to be downscaled, and with little budget to improve it. Include the awful injury crisis in the second year and you see why we weren't that successful. But we are still in the league where others have fallen through into League One. I would call that a success. Unplayable and unsellable? And who might those be? And you say they haven't imrpoved, I could point out several, but I think i'll point out his biggest turn around. Mr Savage. Are you saying that he wasn't able to manage players after how well he dealt with him? Granted, he's not brilliant when annoyed as everyone knows, but in his eyes if you don't perform to his standards you're out. Every player who plays under him gives 100%, or they're gone. While affecting some relationships, you'll never see a side not giving their all for him. We haven't had any to come through yet, the fact Jewell did was down purely to luck. We've now a steady academy who are performing well and some of those players are now beginning to break through. Had Mark O'brian not had his heart trouble and then injury, he already would have. If a manager is not provided the proper tools to do the job, then he cannot be blamed when he does not perform to his absoloute ability. He is, however, close to having a squad of his own making. Then you may judge him properly. I can and do sometimes, though it is lost in translation as most people think me endlessly positive. My entire career is going to involve my own judgement on footballing matters, so i'd be a fool to just agree with everything I hear. But what I have said here is my honest opinion. I think hes done a decent job, if not spectacular, and has many setbacks not of his own doing. (And a few that have been, either by his actions or decisions). When he has his striker and then defensive midfielder, I will judge him on results and expect a top half finish. I have seen enough to suggest that when Clough has a squad that he likes they can perform to exceptional levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curb Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Results temper on playing squad and ability to improve it. The playing squad was awful, it needed to be downscaled, and with little budget to improve it. Include the awful injury crisis in the second year and you see why we weren't that successful. But we are still in the league where others have fallen through into League One. I would call that a success. Unplayable and unsellable? And who might those be? And you say they haven't imrpoved, I could point out several, but I think i'll point out his biggest turn around. Mr Savage. Are you saying that he wasn't able to manage players after how well he dealt with him? Granted, he's not brilliant when annoyed as everyone knows, but in his eyes if you don't perform to his standards you're out. Every player who plays under him gives 100%, or they're gone. While affecting some relationships, you'll never see a side not giving their all for him. We haven't had any to come through yet, the fact Jewell did was down purely to luck. We've now a steady academy who are performing well and some of those players are now beginning to break through. Had Mark O'brian not had his heart trouble and then injury, he already would have. If a manager is not provided the proper tools to do the job, then he cannot be blamed when he does not perform to his absoloute ability. He is, however, close to having a squad of his own making. Then you may judge him properly. I can and do sometimes, though it is lost in translation as most people think me endlessly positive. My entire career is going to involve my own judgement on footballing matters, so i'd be a fool to just agree with everything I hear. But what I have said here is my honest opinion. I think hes done a decent job, if not spectacular, and has many setbacks not of his own doing. (And a few that have been, either by his actions or decisions). When he has his striker and then defensive midfielder, I will judge him on results and expect a top half finish. I have seen enough to suggest that when Clough has a squad that he likes they can perform to exceptional levels. So that's a 'no' then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotherhamRam Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 We has Clough let addison go if he does actually rate him (I dont believe he does) if we have no players to fill that role. Looks stupid to me Daft statement re Addison. If we did not rate him why offer the contract extension? Why not just offer him as a player swap on perm deal for Shackell as they wanted him? This is purely down to Addison needing game time and plenty of it and the opportunity to get match fit at Championship level. He has not played properly for 18months he is going to be no where near to what we want and his confidence playing will be low after such a long injury. Fans at pride Park are not to supportive at times when things are going wrong and at the end of the season he is was struggling and fans did not give him the space to adjust. It is time people look at the big picture we want Addison back fit, but not just fit but match fit and ready to kick start his career. At present with his current level of play you have Shackell, Barker and Anderson in front of him at Centre Back and Bryson and Bailey in front for the one or two defensive midfielder positions. He needs game time and at Barnsley he will play every week and get himself back to that level. Not playing or struggling at Derby infront of 25000 expecting fans apposed to 12000 at Oakwell who don't give their players the same stick as we do when going wrong will boost his confidence. With long term injuries the physocigolical effects are just as bad as the physical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotherhamRam Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Greening was signed for £670k. We spent at least three times that on the Maguire tribunal fee, Bryson, Shackell and Fielding. Trying to figure out your point here, it sounds like a good deal in sense when you conisder you have named 4 players for the signing on fee which is 3 times more than we pay=id for Green that means either Maguire, Fielding or Bryson was a free buy. This means that Clough and Glick can barter better thand Jewell and Click could, So in this case as people tend to blame Clough for the protracted and faiing bids maybe he should get the credit for getting better deals for the money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 WHAT? Net spend we are probably one of the lowest. Forest have bought one player....Greening. I bet their net spend is nearly the same as ours. You don't think it was a marketing ploy then? One of the lowest? Who has spent significantly more other than Leicester? Marketing ploy? Depends what you call a ploy. Would say it was marketing yes but are people really going to buy a season ticket just because there is a chance to take it back in 3 months if they are not happy? I very much doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 One of the lowest? Who has spent significantly more other than Leicester? Marketing ploy? Depends what you call a ploy. Would say it was marketing yes but are people really going to buy a season ticket just because there is a chance to take it back in 3 months if they are not happy? I very much doubt it. Brighton on one player. West Ham Hull Ipswich Leicester Cardiff Portsmouth Anyone would think we don't have one of the biggest turnovers in the league. That list took 2 mins......there's probably another 3 or 4 i've missed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.