Tuesday night at QPR showed us the best and the worst of Jimmy Bullard. Our new quarter-back dictated play for 45 minutes, taking the ball in tight spaces, opening up the play intelligently, freeing Healy and Leadbitter to break through into the space between the home sides back four and midfield.

Healy's departure changed all that though. As good as Drury was against Hull and in patches against QPR, his defensive game in terms of pressing in the right places clearly still needs some work. With Healy gone, our midfield trio was a little lightweight against a side that needs to be closed down in the middle of the park arguably more than any other in the division.

We dominated the early exchanges because Healy stopped Derry from dictating their play, but with Healy gone our urgency in defence slackened off. They started to keep the ball well and he pressure mounted. Healy and Leadbitter could do Bullard's running for him; Drury and Leadbitter couldn't.

I don't think Bullard won one tackle in the second half at a time when the holding midfielder needed to be getting stuck in and winning the ball back for his team. At home, as the game goes on, he will be super for us; sat on the edge of the area picking out passes etc, but away from home, when the opposition always come into it more as the second half progresses he is a liability.

Oddly, he could perhaps still being doing a job in the Premier League, where the pace of the game is slightly less, but if we do get him permanently in the summer, then he will be 34 by the time we get promoted if all goes to plan next year. By 34, he'll need a Zimmer frame to get about with those knees and will be no good for us.

A season-long loan next season may suit both us and Hull, but I hope he doesn't play every game when he's available simply because he's Jimmy Bullard. He needed to come off on Tuesday night in my opinion and I hope Town fans don't get swept up in the current Bullard love in.

Yes, he's good, very good in the right circumstances (like in the first half on Tuesday), but on the flip side he can, will and has let us down defensively.

MCGOODERZ added 20:24 - Feb 25 erm. Don't agree.
0

Facefacts added 21:21 - Feb 25 Thanks for this blog. It's getting more unusual to see analysis of this type these days. Not everyone can see why games change as they do, as this one clearly did, when (I hear) Neil Warnock made his half time tactical changes. The QPR away end is a good vantage point to analyse the game in this way, and a relatively small pitch (or so it seems as you're quite close to the action even though high up). About Jimmy Bullard, I wasn't at the game, and haven't seen him play recently, but he's spent a long time out and probably isn't up to dominating the whole game against teams like QPR, who are clearly the top side in our league. Unlike QPR we don't really have a strong established midfield that's played together for most of the season. It's easy to say it now, after the event, but maybe the injury to Colin Healy stopped Paul Jewell subbing Jimmy Bullard as he'd already had to use Adam Drury. From what you say, the injury to Colin Healy was a big turning point in the game. In the summer, I still think Jimmy Bullard will still go back to Hull City (if not already back with them through injury). No-one gives up that kind of money at his stage of his career, nor should he. He's sitting on a great contract and that's not going to change.

0

CleverTrevor added 08:40 - Feb 26 Interesting blog, food for thought there. My take would be slightly different. Bullard is the closest player we've had to another Jimmy - Mr Magilton - in the way he dropped deep, took the ball from the centre halves and took the game forward. also his lovely little balls over the head of full backs and inside the wide man reminded me a lot of Super-Jim. And when Magilton player for us, he always had a water carrier alongside him - not because he didn't give 100% effort, but because that isn't his forte and there is no point paying him a wage to make play happen if he is going to have to spend all his time stopping the opposition. Personally, I would love Bullard to be here this season and next. We could couple him with players who support him, like Healy, Norris, Leadbitter etc, and allow him to mellow into a quarterback-style playmaker. That is clearly going to be his future, as he gets older. The problem, of course, is his salary. Given that Hull are already paying a large chunk of that (more than half of it) there could be a deal to be done. It would be worth them taking a hit (settling up 50% of his contract, for instance) and selling him on for a fee. For instance, he's on 45k a week - that's £2.4m a year, £4.8m over the last two years of his contract. If Hull paid him off £3.5m, got a £1m fee for him (so, in total, it only cost them £2.5m in pay-off - less than they are currently paying of his salary, while on loan), he could come to us on 12k a week + bonuses and be up on the deal, overall. Of course, the big question is whether it would be us doing the deal, or someone else. And there would surely be other clubs in for him, on that deal. But the point is, a deal CAN be done.

0

Dalty added 10:11 - Feb 26 Good, interesting post. I think Norris's industry is especially missed in these situations. I personally think though that Bullard - knees permitting - could still play another 5 years at the top level. I think his intelligence and quality on the ball should compensate for any physical decline in that time as long as he's paired with the right player, similar to the way Scholes needs someone like Fletcher at Man U.

0

dirtydingusmagee added 10:25 - Feb 26 Agree to a point,still think he would be a great squad member and wish he could stay,unfortunately that is not likely .
0

warkysmoustache added 12:48 - Feb 26 Totally agree, I live in Hull and the papers here were full of the same comments. Ever since he did a knee for a second time a couple of years ago he has shied away from challenges - afraid to get stuck in. Great passer, good vision but is likely to be a liability after the honeymoon is over. Nigel Pearson commented that his heart wasn't in it at Hull - perhaps that was a cloaked way of saying he doesn't work hard enough for the team?

0

jas0999 added 20:43 - Feb 27 Good blog - few can deny that Bullard's set piece delivery is very good - but is that enough to justify paying him a reported £20K per week? Not in my opinion. He doesn;t get stuck in - he creates very little and is no better than the players we already have. Lots of sideways passes - not a lot else. Overall a waste of money.
0

Blogs 295 bloggers