By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Ah, so not both playing in the same team, with the same supply etc then?
From what you've seen of Pitman, would you think he's the most effective in our team? We don't know as yet what Garner would be like, as he hasn't been signed yet. Difficult to judge him before he has.
I don't think Pitman is the answer, otherwise, he would've been so last season. Therefore, I'm happy to reserve judgment on Garner until he has signed and played for us.
Ah, so not both playing in the same team, with the same supply etc then?
From what you've seen of Pitman, would you think he's the most effective in our team? We don't know as yet what Garner would be like, as he hasn't been signed yet. Difficult to judge him before he has.
I don't think Pitman is the answer, otherwise, he would've been so last season. Therefore, I'm happy to reserve judgment on Garner until he has signed and played for us.
I just asked the question, giving the most relevant unbiased info that i had space for in the answer options.
Although Pitman can be a good striker at this level, he does not work with the way we play under Mick and Garner will, so on that basis, I'd rather have Garner.
2
Garner or Pitman? on 14:24 - Jun 12 with 5949 views
Although Pitman can be a good striker at this level, he does not work with the way we play under Mick and Garner will, so on that basis, I'd rather have Garner.
Which begs the questions a) why did McCarthy sign a player that doesn't fit into his system and b) is the requirement from evans/milne to play more attractive football going to be ignored by the manager
Garner or Pitman for waht - A strong target man who dictates the tempo of an attrack? Garner- and under that his primary role is to create and score, so his Championship goal ratio isn't indicative of really anything significant.
Pitman is more of a finishing style of striker, so comparing him to garner is apples and oranges
Which begs the questions a) why did McCarthy sign a player that doesn't fit into his system and b) is the requirement from evans/milne to play more attractive football going to be ignored by the manager
[Post edited 12 Jun 2017 14:25]
Mick probably just thought that, while in contact with Bournemouth, let's try and get a decent striker on a free. I doubt we would have signed Pitman if Bournemouth didn't buy Mings.
Mick probably just thought that, while in contact with Bournemouth, let's try and get a decent striker on a free. I doubt we would have signed Pitman if Bournemouth didn't buy Mings.
Also we all know that Pitman is a good finisher with Ryan Fraser coming on loan at the time Mick expected the chances would come unfortnatly Frazer spent quite a lot of time out injured.
0
Garner or Pitman? on 15:51 - Jun 12 with 5813 views
I hoped neither way, but expected Garner to poll more as there is an itfc loyalty factor. If he had chosen not to come and i put out the same poll, the results would be totally different.
strange figures? not sure how championship stats don't relate to our status in the championship.
The inclusion of figures was strange in itself. One is a "Number 10" type and the other is a "Number 9" type - Kind of like asking people to vote between Bialkowski and Skuse based on their dribbling ratio
The inclusion of figures was strange in itself. One is a "Number 10" type and the other is a "Number 9" type - Kind of like asking people to vote between Bialkowski and Skuse based on their dribbling ratio
Shouldn't a number 9 have a better strike rate due to playing up front, rather than a number 10 playing a deeper role?
Make that £1m now to buy a player more suited to long ball, in direct contravention of Evans 5 point plan or whatever it was.
You can't square this circle.
McCarthy doesn't give a F### about Evans's 5 point plan!
Garner will offer a lot to the team and hopefully Sears and McGoldrick will benefit from his workrate and score more goals. Pitman is a good finisher and will always score more than Garner but offers little else, so hopefully Garner will be better for the team.
Most fans agreed with Murphy it's not just his goals we'd miss - the whole gameplan was built around him hassling the opposition and holding up play and it's clear we missed that last season, Mick can't play any other way....
The inclusion of figures was strange in itself. One is a "Number 10" type and the other is a "Number 9" type - Kind of like asking people to vote between Bialkowski and Skuse based on their dribbling ratio
is it like that squad number guy asking us to choose best number 30's when one was a keeper and one a midfielder.
I liked Pitman but he never had the stamina to play regularly and he rarely looked fit. We need another striker to go with Garner, McGoldrick and Sears all the same if Pitman is on his way out, and I'm simply not counting Moore as a genuine 4th 1st team striker. We are missing a solid number 10.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
