Best performance of the season with 3/13 on the pitch

indeedido

indeedido

Well-known member
A really encouraging performance and huge improvement yesterday. Also great to win and to really deserve to.
I'm delighted for Carrick and it will undoubtedly provide relief and belief.

The club made 12 signings - half a new squad - in the summer window. Barlaser was also a permanent signing back in January.
Carrick picked only 3 of them to start yesterday.
Dieng looks a good recruit.
Van de Berg played out of position and only because the 2 RB's were not fit - neither of who were signed in the last 2 windows.
O'Brien played out of position at left back, despite us signing 2 LB's in the last window.

Of the other 8 players who started and played so well, only McGree and Lenihan were recruited by our new guru.
Fry, Crooks, Jones, Howson, Hackney and Coburn were already ours.
Credit to Carrick.
Not to Scott. 13 current players signed in the last year and only 3 made the first team. (Obviously can't include the 2 loans from Jan as they aren't here).
 
To play Devil's advocate it's 3 of 10 really isn't it?

2 of the 13 are keepers (who were intended as cover), and Bangura is injured.

Still not great, and naive to think they'd hit the ground running but you can see the intention behind most of them. Most should improve.

I don't really have an issue with the signings we've made, going for potential means they're not all going to pay off. Low fees in most cases so low risk.

The bigger issue is the signings we've not made. Particularly in not adequately replacing at least one of Chuba or Archer with someone more proven. Might get away with it with Coburn, but if we do that's more luck than judgement obviously.
 
Diego said:
Agree with the sentiment behind this as the recruitment has been very worrying. Credit goes to the manager and players.

I do think Dieng and VDB are gonna be brilliant permanent signings
Click to expand...
VDB looks like he could be a brilliant find. Dieng is a good championship keeper who we paid good money for so would expect him to fit in.

The rest of the signings…..
 
Smith was signed under Scott, unless you’ve decided to ignore that - in which case you’d have to factor out Lenihan as well. Also don’t forget management team and his backroom staff were appointed under him too.

Dieng, Lenihan, McGree, Smith and you would imagine O’Brien will be important senior players for us this season. Clarke would’ve been playing but he’d had a very serious injury. Van den Berg looks like a very good young prospect - how will you ignore Scott’s role in that? And Fry, Hackney and Coburn have been tied to fresh long-term contracts, something the club had been criticised for in the past.

I think the club has also turned a profit in the transfer market over the past couple of years - this was also one of Scott’s remits I believe - while improving the final league placing year-on-year? Could be wrong on that though.
 
I think that we tried to run before we could walk with a lot of these players. Rogers and Silvera especially. They both have the potential to come good (Rogers particularly) but needed taking out for a bit as they could have gone off the deep end confidence wise. Silvera was perplexingly poor against Wednesday in that second half.

However, if Silvera could finish we'd be raving about him! He should have had about 6 so far. (But if my auntie had balls etc and so on)
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
Smith was signed under Scott, unless you’ve decided to ignore that - in which case you’d have to factor out Lenihan as well. Also don’t forget management team and his backroom staff were appointed under him too.

Dieng, Lenihan, McGree, Smith and you would imagine O’Brien will be important senior players for us this season. Clarke would’ve been playing but he’d had a very serious injury. Van den Berg looks like a very good young prospect - how will you ignore Scott’s role in that? And Fry, Hackney and Coburn have been tied to fresh long-term contracts, something the club had been criticised for in the past.

I think the club has also turned a profit in the transfer market over the past couple of years - this was also one of Scott’s remits I believe - while improving the final league placing year-on-year? Could be wrong on that though.
Click to expand...
Read my post again. Smith didn’t start.
How on earth do you know Clarke would have played?
Wow, turned a profit. Tough gig that when it involves selling 2 academy players for £22m and a 29 goal player who was our best player last year that Scott had nothing to do with.
 
LaPennaBianca said:
I think that we tried to run before we could walk with a lot of these players. Rogers and Silvera especially. They both have the potential to come good (Rogers particularly) but needed taking out for a bit as they could have gone off the deep end confidence wise. Silvera was perplexingly poor against Wednesday in that second half.

However, if Silvera could finish we'd be raving about him! He should have had about 6 so far. (But if my auntie had balls etc and so on)
Click to expand...
I think Silvera's movement has been outstanding - he is constantly in dangerous positions.

That is something that is very difficult to teach - instinct for where the ball is going to fall.

But he has also lost all the confidence that he had in his good performance against Huddersfield.

Alot of change, many youngsters and a few of the experienced heads injured during pre-season set us in a tough position. That was partly our fault, but partly unlucky.

We are now in a position to gradually introduce the new signings - which is probably what we would have wanted to do all along.
 
Piccadilly Day Tripper said:
I don't think its fair to write off the more inexperienced new signings yet, its a very long season.

Hopefully the penny has dropped on the level of intensity needed to climb ourselves up the table. I think Coburn gets it, others will follow. It's a good time to play Watford next week.
Click to expand...
Hear hear.

We're mourning the loss of Akpom after writing him off so soon. Let's not forget how Forss and McGree shared similar criticism in the short term after their arrival, and Lenihan though to a lesser extent.

The other mourned players, all on loan, were also recruited with Scott in his role.

Crooks and Jones have been written off in the last couple of weeks, integral to yesterday's win.

There's been a big upheaval, players need time to settle.
 
I was thinking the same thing yesterday, five of our new signings were on the bench.
Latte Lath... will have another chance, and could play as a 10. I like his movement off the ball.
Rogers... Not a striker, not a good No 10
Silvera.... Div 1 standard, way behind Jones.
Engel.... Not a Championship player, says it all when a Midfielder takes your place...
Greenwood.... Wow I now know why dirty Leeds allowed him to join us.

All the above should and will start in the cup on Tuesday night, but not sure when they will start a league game, maybe Lath as a 10
 
indeedido said:
Read my post again. Smith didn’t start.
How on earth do you know Clarke would have played?
Wow, turned a profit. Tough gig that when it involves selling 2 academy players for £22m and a 29 goal player who was our best player last year that Scott had nothing to do with.
Click to expand...
How do you know Clarke wouldn’t have started? He was signed as a first-choice senior player and started each game until injury.

Again, you just sound quite bitter about Kieron Scott. I understand some of it but it just seems a bit odd TBH. There always seems to be a way to ignore stuff that is inconvenient.

I just feel it’s way, way too early to be judging most of the business done this summer. It’s September.
 
Also I did misunderstand your point - I took the title to mean 3 of the 13 involved yesterday, but I think you’re saying 3 of Scott’s signings overall?
 
5 of the starting 11 were signed whilst Scott was here, as were all 3 subs.

4 of the starting 11 came through the academy.

Only Crooks, Howson and McNair in the entire squad yesterday were signings made under a different recruitment.
 
viv_andersons_nana said:
Also I did misunderstand your point - I took the title to mean 3 of the 13 involved yesterday, but I think you’re saying 3 of Scott’s signings overall?
Click to expand...
No, There are 13 players signed this year that are still here.2 Jan loans had to go back.
Of those 13 players signed, only 3 started yesterday.
Clarke has nothing to do with it.
I make no secret that I think Scott is hopeless.
What inconvenience am I ignoring?
 
indeedido said:
No, There are 13 players signed this year that are still here.2 Jan loans had to go back.
Of those 13 players signed, only 3 started yesterday.
Clarke has nothing to do with it.
I make no secret that I think Scott is hopeless.
What inconvenience am I ignoring?
Click to expand...
Well why are you starting from this January? It doesn’t make sense. Of the team that started yesterday, 5 were signed under Scott - Dieng, van den Berg, Lenihan, O’Brien, McGree. As were the three subs that came on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top