| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss 21:31 - May 7 with 13200 views | keebsdad |
Defending: suspect.
Final pass: appalling.
Too impetuous.
Yes, he's one-of-our-own and likes a fist pump but that does not excuse his lack of quality.
PS JD wasn't much better. |  | | |  |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 08:39 - May 9 with 1441 views | Asa |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 08:36 - May 9 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Your point could be levelled at ANY player if we somehow unearthed a gem for their position, so it's rather redundant in a Harry Clarke thread. Or any thread really.
"Do you honestly think the XI we’ve favoured recently is the one that plays the majority of games next season assuming Hirst and Luongo stay?"
Absolutely, yes. Gamechanger have been purchasing players in view of a step up. Harry Clarke's one of those. Herbs and Portmanking above have it spot on. |
Sunderland have added about 3 or 4. I expect we will do similar.
But it’s a good point that it could be anyone. Chaplin could be the one to struggle having been the star for all we know at this stage.
I certainly think this squad holds it own and wins more than it loses. I think a bit more magic in the squad so that a handful of the current bench is replaced sees us aiming a little higher. | | | |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 08:54 - May 9 with 1422 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 08:39 - May 9 by Asa |
Sunderland have added about 3 or 4. I expect we will do similar.
But it’s a good point that it could be anyone. Chaplin could be the one to struggle having been the star for all we know at this stage.
I certainly think this squad holds it own and wins more than it loses. I think a bit more magic in the squad so that a handful of the current bench is replaced sees us aiming a little higher. |
Yep, I pretty much agree with all of that. Still not sure why this is in a Harry Clarke thread. He's one of the least likely to be replaced. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 08:55 - May 9 with 1424 views | NthQldITFC |
Accidental upvote on this of all threads FFS - beat me with a sh!tty stick until I squeal.
Harry might need a bit of fine tuning (which he will get here) but he scares the sh!t out of the opposition and intimidates and puts them on the back foot. |  |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 09:12 - May 9 with 1384 views | GavTWTD |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 08:55 - May 9 by NthQldITFC |
Accidental upvote on this of all threads FFS - beat me with a sh!tty stick until I squeal.
Harry might need a bit of fine tuning (which he will get here) but he scares the sh!t out of the opposition and intimidates and puts them on the back foot. |
I've removed your upvote. I wouldn't do that normally but this warrants it. I don't like this thread. I think its unfair to highlight someone that I'm sure will have a great season in the Championship and will develop. It's clear he's been bought to be a regular next season and I hate the thought of Harry reading the title of this thread and not all the arguments against.
The trouble with people, myself included, is that we tend to remember the last game, which wasn't great, and not the excellent debut he made. We've a right good player here.
Now stop bumping this thread  |  |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 09:24 - May 9 with 1342 views | ThatMuhrenCross |
"Tell me you don't watch Town games without saying you don't watch Town games..."
Clarke is in a completely different stratosphere to JD. |  |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 10:33 - May 9 with 1291 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 09:12 - May 9 by GavTWTD |
I've removed your upvote. I wouldn't do that normally but this warrants it. I don't like this thread. I think its unfair to highlight someone that I'm sure will have a great season in the Championship and will develop. It's clear he's been bought to be a regular next season and I hate the thought of Harry reading the title of this thread and not all the arguments against.
The trouble with people, myself included, is that we tend to remember the last game, which wasn't great, and not the excellent debut he made. We've a right good player here.
Now stop bumping this thread |
Yeah sorry Gav, won't bump it anymore. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 10:44 - May 9 with 1288 views | CityBlue |
yes his passion has slightly imbalanced his temperament at times but I think that with an entire preseason of coaching with the club we will see a massive difference in his style of play. |  |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 10:44 - May 9 with 1288 views | BigCommon |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 00:03 - May 9 by The_Flashing_Smile |
You said:
"Its always good to have local lads in the first team, though. But that shouldn't be the reason they are picked."
No-one suggested it was, or should be. So not sure what the point of that last sentence was. |
I was speaking metaphorically. I just meant that sometimes, homegrowns get a lot of leaway when it comes to any critisism.
I mean, if you dare to criticise a homegrown player, there's a section of the fan base that chuck bricks at you.
That brick comment? Also a metaphor. (Just in case). |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 11:42 - May 9 with 1222 views | Stewart27 |
Everybody deserves an opinion.
But your opinion is so wrong you don’t deserve an opinion.
Absolutely clueless attention seeker wanting to be disliked. | | | |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 13:05 - May 9 with 1168 views | N2_Blue |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 14:45 - May 8 by keebsdad |
Well that went well!
i thought I would wait for the 'one of our own' storm to die out before commenting again.
Just so you know I have been supporting ITFC since the mid 60's and have seen a number of the 'one of our own' brigade fade and die with great regularity. Probably the first I recall being 'bigged' up was Robin Turner in 1975 ... whatever happened to him?
For those who don't know it the definition of a discussion is: talk or write about (a topic) in detail, taking into account different issues or ideas. It is not to lob gratuitous insults but then when have the members of this board ever been able to resist gratuitous insults.
Yes, Harry Clarke is athletic but that is a far as it goes for me. His positioning is suspect and he is unaware of what he is supposed to be doing (look at him ball-watching for Fleetwood's 2nd). I live abroad so watch most matches on Ifollow and the expression "an over-hit pass from Clarke" should be on repeat for the commentators. I am surprised that he has 75.9% passing accuracy according to The Athletic but is behind Burgess and Edmundson on that metric and they couldn't hit a barn door at the start of the season.
My biggest complaint is the lack of end product: he has precisely 1 assist for the season. He's a show pony, pure and simple.
Get over yourselves. |
There is so much wrong in this post where to start?
In fact it’s not worth it as clearly you don’t know very much about football if this is your opinion.
Having as many down votes as I’ve seen on a post other than Frimley’s smarmy moment should tell you al you need to know about how ridiculous your view or Harry Clarke is. |  |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 13:07 - May 9 with 1157 views | Skip_Intro |
am I the only one feeling sorry for keeb with a dad like that? |  | | |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 13:53 - May 9 with 1086 views | keebsdad |
I have to say I'm glad to have got to the 100 points mark as it does show what passion you all seem to have for someone I don't rate.
I'm a bit surprised that my lack of posting for 4 years makes my opinion invalid but then who in their right mind would post on here to get dog's abuse?
Yes, Clarke has the opportunity to be improved (note the passive use of 'improved') by the coaching staff but in IMHO (to which I am entitled but seem to be in a minority) he will be found out defensively next season by teams with better players and better coaches. As a result he will not be able to get forward as much and thus whatever service he provides for Burns (or his replacement) will be limited.
This will also reduce the 'fear' you all seem to think he engenders in opposing defences by running at them. I too was impressed on his debut by his athleticism, the fact that he plays with his head up, his desire to get forward etc. but his end product is lacking with too many misplaced passes both in the attacking third and out of defence.
I have nothing against the lad, I just don't get the hype.
PS I am not a budgie.
PPS I have no intention of posting 'I told you so' if / when he get replaced. | | | |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 14:02 - May 9 with 1036 views | Herbivore |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 10:44 - May 9 by BigCommon |
I was speaking metaphorically. I just meant that sometimes, homegrowns get a lot of leaway when it comes to any critisism.
I mean, if you dare to criticise a homegrown player, there's a section of the fan base that chuck bricks at you.
That brick comment? Also a metaphor. (Just in case). |
It goes the other way at times too though. For example, Woolf has been outstanding this season but there's a section of fans on here who are reluctant to praise him and come out with a load of guff about how he can't defend whenever he has a slight blip (which has been a rare thing since McKenna arrived). Other home grown players have similarly been given a tough time by some of our fans. |  |
| |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 20:17 - May 9 with 912 views | gosblue |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 14:02 - May 9 by Herbivore |
It goes the other way at times too though. For example, Woolf has been outstanding this season but there's a section of fans on here who are reluctant to praise him and come out with a load of guff about how he can't defend whenever he has a slight blip (which has been a rare thing since McKenna arrived). Other home grown players have similarly been given a tough time by some of our fans. |
Woolfy and Burgess both went through dodgy spells in the first half of the season but they were immense after that. Is it coincidence that those improvements came with the addition of Clarke and Luango? Let’s not forget that Clarke made 18 championship appearances for Stoke in the first half of the season. My Stokie mate was gutted when he came here. | | | |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 20:33 - May 9 with 874 views | braveblue |
Nonsense. | | | |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 21:32 - May 9 with 816 views | Vic |
| Harry Clarke - not the answer. Discuss on 13:53 - May 9 by keebsdad |
I have to say I'm glad to have got to the 100 points mark as it does show what passion you all seem to have for someone I don't rate.
I'm a bit surprised that my lack of posting for 4 years makes my opinion invalid but then who in their right mind would post on here to get dog's abuse?
Yes, Clarke has the opportunity to be improved (note the passive use of 'improved') by the coaching staff but in IMHO (to which I am entitled but seem to be in a minority) he will be found out defensively next season by teams with better players and better coaches. As a result he will not be able to get forward as much and thus whatever service he provides for Burns (or his replacement) will be limited.
This will also reduce the 'fear' you all seem to think he engenders in opposing defences by running at them. I too was impressed on his debut by his athleticism, the fact that he plays with his head up, his desire to get forward etc. but his end product is lacking with too many misplaced passes both in the attacking third and out of defence.
I have nothing against the lad, I just don't get the hype.
PS I am not a budgie.
PPS I have no intention of posting 'I told you so' if / when he get replaced. |
Don’t worry, I’ve bookmarked it and will put it up again when it’s obvious what an idiot opinion your OP was. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
