| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? 11:03 - Jan 26 with 3526 views | AYACCA |
Think he'd play the role well and we bid for the greek guy whom I assume would have been a starter with Hirst coming on after 70.. |  | | |  |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:06 - Jan 26 with 2856 views | StokieBlue |
KM has said ideally he wants 3 number 9's so I don't think your hypothesis is correct.
I don't understand why people are continually trying to push Delap out wide. He played there when he was younger but certainly not with the level of success he's got this season playing in the 9. KM has always started him as a 9 even in the friendlies so I think he was always bought for this position.
Delap isn't the issue, the issue is getting the ball to him with people around him supporting so he doesn't have to do it all himself and has options.
I simply don't understand the continuing efforts to move someone described as the best young number 9 in the PL out wide.
SB |  | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:07 - Jan 26 with 2853 views | SomethingBlue |
Nope – always as a centre-forward. |  |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:09 - Jan 26 with 2836 views | SomethingBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:06 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
KM has said ideally he wants 3 number 9's so I don't think your hypothesis is correct.
I don't understand why people are continually trying to push Delap out wide. He played there when he was younger but certainly not with the level of success he's got this season playing in the 9. KM has always started him as a 9 even in the friendlies so I think he was always bought for this position.
Delap isn't the issue, the issue is getting the ball to him with people around him supporting so he doesn't have to do it all himself and has options.
I simply don't understand the continuing efforts to move someone described as the best young number 9 in the PL out wide.
SB |
Has become a weird piece of received wisdom among a fair number of our fans! | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:24 - Jan 26 with 2753 views | NeedhamChris |
There's some oddly definitive views on this issue.
The correct answer is, we have no idea exactly what McKenna was thinking. He has the attributes to be a wide player cutting in, but he's also a good number 9 (albeit not a high scoring one) [Post edited 26 Jan 11:24]
| |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:27 - Jan 26 with 2725 views | NthQldITFC |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:24 - Jan 26 by NeedhamChris |
There's some oddly definitive views on this issue.
The correct answer is, we have no idea exactly what McKenna was thinking. He has the attributes to be a wide player cutting in, but he's also a good number 9 (albeit not a high scoring one) [Post edited 26 Jan 11:24]
|
He's the perfect hard-working battering ram of a number 9, with additional skills thrown in - exactly what KMc wants up there. Why anybody persists with this wide right crap is beyond me. |  |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:32 - Jan 26 with 2680 views | StokieBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:24 - Jan 26 by NeedhamChris |
There's some oddly definitive views on this issue.
The correct answer is, we have no idea exactly what McKenna was thinking. He has the attributes to be a wide player cutting in, but he's also a good number 9 (albeit not a high scoring one) [Post edited 26 Jan 11:24]
|
Well, we have the evidence that McKenna has always played him as a number 9, even in pre-season friendlies. I don't believe he's ever played wide for us unless you can point me to a match where he did.
Given that isn't it more odd to ignore the evidence we do have rather than speculate on evidence we don't? Hirst has been fit for some matches, if he was seen as a 9 option he would have been tried there and we wouldn't have bought so many wide players.
Not sure about your point on not being high-scoring. He's doing pretty well on that front this season in a team that creates few chances.
SB [Post edited 26 Jan 11:33]
| | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:50 - Jan 26 with 2573 views | NeedhamChris |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:32 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
Well, we have the evidence that McKenna has always played him as a number 9, even in pre-season friendlies. I don't believe he's ever played wide for us unless you can point me to a match where he did.
Given that isn't it more odd to ignore the evidence we do have rather than speculate on evidence we don't? Hirst has been fit for some matches, if he was seen as a 9 option he would have been tried there and we wouldn't have bought so many wide players.
Not sure about your point on not being high-scoring. He's doing pretty well on that front this season in a team that creates few chances.
SB [Post edited 26 Jan 11:33]
|
I don't disagree with you, but that still doesn't prove anything definitively so I don't think there's a need for the thought police quite yet.
We all know McKenna likes to change the whole front line during a game - but hasn't ever had a decent striker option to come off the bench if Hirst and Delap were to both start.
Had we successfully signed Ioaniddis, do you think Delap would have always been a sub and Hirst never used?
Either way though, it's fine for people on here to speculate and it's pretty harmless isn't it? | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:52 - Jan 26 with 2559 views | ArnieM |
I think k now he's fit again, we'd benefit from having Hirst as the number 9 and Drlap wide right.
The reason I'd prefer Hirst as #9 is because he's got more exoerirnce and guile and brings the other forwards into play more effectively. Delap is an outstanding young talent. But teams just treble mark him now, rendering him ineffective. We need more experienced players in the forward line, and so ,
My front line would be
Hirst
Broadhead, ????, Delap
For the number 10 take your pick from
Chaplin (if fit)
Hutchinson
Ensico
Phillogene |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:57 - Jan 26 with 2520 views | SomethingBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:24 - Jan 26 by NeedhamChris |
There's some oddly definitive views on this issue.
The correct answer is, we have no idea exactly what McKenna was thinking. He has the attributes to be a wide player cutting in, but he's also a good number 9 (albeit not a high scoring one) [Post edited 26 Jan 11:24]
|
He was definitely signed to be a nine. | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:05 - Jan 26 with 2477 views | StokieBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:52 - Jan 26 by ArnieM |
I think k now he's fit again, we'd benefit from having Hirst as the number 9 and Drlap wide right.
The reason I'd prefer Hirst as #9 is because he's got more exoerirnce and guile and brings the other forwards into play more effectively. Delap is an outstanding young talent. But teams just treble mark him now, rendering him ineffective. We need more experienced players in the forward line, and so ,
My front line would be
Hirst
Broadhead, ????, Delap
For the number 10 take your pick from
Chaplin (if fit)
Hutchinson
Ensico
Phillogene |
Delap has more experience in the PL as a 9 than Hirst.
What do you mean by "guile" in this context.
I think a lot of this narrative is unsupported by any evidence.
The fact he is marked by multiple players is because we can't get support to him, Hirst would also be marked by multiple players if we continue to play the same way.
SB | | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:09 - Jan 26 with 2456 views | StokieBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 11:50 - Jan 26 by NeedhamChris |
I don't disagree with you, but that still doesn't prove anything definitively so I don't think there's a need for the thought police quite yet.
We all know McKenna likes to change the whole front line during a game - but hasn't ever had a decent striker option to come off the bench if Hirst and Delap were to both start.
Had we successfully signed Ioaniddis, do you think Delap would have always been a sub and Hirst never used?
Either way though, it's fine for people on here to speculate and it's pretty harmless isn't it? |
Of course people can speculate but it's also fine for people to rebuff the speculation when the evidence clearly shows it's unlikely to be the case.
Can I ask why you continually feel to jump on posts, especially by certain posters? What is wrong with countering arguments with evidence? To call it the "thought police" is ridiculous and designed to provoke (which you've achieved).
We literally have a national journalist posting on this thread saying he was bought as a number 9. Now that could be construed as an appeal to authority fallacy but he certainly knows more than most of us.
SB | | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:14 - Jan 26 with 2431 views | BarcaBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:05 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
Delap has more experience in the PL as a 9 than Hirst.
What do you mean by "guile" in this context.
I think a lot of this narrative is unsupported by any evidence.
The fact he is marked by multiple players is because we can't get support to him, Hirst would also be marked by multiple players if we continue to play the same way.
SB |
It's bizarre. We have arguably the hottest young number 9 in the country but people are still suggesting we put him wide for no other reason than they are clueless with clueless reasoning.
I really like and rate Hirst. I can see the logic of starting him in a couple of games for Delap to get some rest if needed but to start him so Delap plays wide is just daft. |  | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:26 - Jan 26 with 2371 views | NeedhamChris |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:09 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
Of course people can speculate but it's also fine for people to rebuff the speculation when the evidence clearly shows it's unlikely to be the case.
Can I ask why you continually feel to jump on posts, especially by certain posters? What is wrong with countering arguments with evidence? To call it the "thought police" is ridiculous and designed to provoke (which you've achieved).
We literally have a national journalist posting on this thread saying he was bought as a number 9. Now that could be construed as an appeal to authority fallacy but he certainly knows more than most of us.
SB |
Where we're disagreeing here is the conclusiveness of your evidence. You have no idea what would have happened had we had 3 quality strikers - so using what has happened since we failed to get one doesn't prove what might have happened.
In terms of para 2 - I didn't reply to you directly, and will leave the immense irony and self awareness fail alone.
It's really not something that needs rebuffing. | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:27 - Jan 26 with 2363 views | NeedhamChris |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:14 - Jan 26 by BarcaBlue |
It's bizarre. We have arguably the hottest young number 9 in the country but people are still suggesting we put him wide for no other reason than they are clueless with clueless reasoning.
I really like and rate Hirst. I can see the logic of starting him in a couple of games for Delap to get some rest if needed but to start him so Delap plays wide is just daft. |
Have you even read the OP? It says nothing about whether he is now intended for the wide role. | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:28 - Jan 26 with 2350 views | MK1 |
I think we brought him as a wide player, but he has developed nicely as a number 9. Think he will stay there now. |  |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:31 - Jan 26 with 2306 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:27 - Jan 26 by NeedhamChris |
Have you even read the OP? It says nothing about whether he is now intended for the wide role. |
Also, does Delap really play as a No9?
I'm not sure his heat map would reflect that. And hes not scored from open play since early Nov.
I actually think he would be more effective as a 10, with Hirst in the 9 role.
For Delap to score, he usually needs to provide his own assists!! |  |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:33 - Jan 26 with 2295 views | cymroglas |
I don’t know really …..I think probably not although we were in the market for a Centre Forward after buying Delap but have been so since.
For my part you don’t need to give a forensic analysis to justify your opinion - especially when you were not forceful and just putting it out there with a question mark at the end.
Sometimes I don’t understand why views are ambushed here - whether it is backed with evidence or not….who cares they are just opinions on a forum…..its like saying something to your mate in the pub | | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:33 - Jan 26 with 2281 views | BarcaBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:28 - Jan 26 by MK1 |
I think we brought him as a wide player, but he has developed nicely as a number 9. Think he will stay there now. |
There's no way we brought him here to be a wide player, he was bought as a 9. McKenna has never played him wide, it would mean we got no strikers in last Summer, it's nonsense. | | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:35 - Jan 26 with 2279 views | Dennyx4 |
I believe he was bought as he was versatile. Could play number 9 but could also play wide right.
If the Broja deal had gone through and he was fit, could easily have seen Delap play wide right or in one of the positions behind Broja.
The fact we didn’t get the 3rd number nine, has meant Delap has solely been used as a 9 and he has exceeded expectations. [Post edited 26 Jan 12:37]
|  | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:37 - Jan 26 with 2262 views | pointofblue |
It's getting to the point where Delap is the only remaining physical option to play as a right winger, with Ogbene and Burns down. Hutchinson and Jaden can obviously play there, but both are nippier, more lightweight. If we can bring in a striker then I wouldn't be adverse to the move out of need - as long as the new man has some strength about him. | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:42 - Jan 26 with 2216 views | MK1 |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:35 - Jan 26 by Dennyx4 |
I believe he was bought as he was versatile. Could play number 9 but could also play wide right.
If the Broja deal had gone through and he was fit, could easily have seen Delap play wide right or in one of the positions behind Broja.
The fact we didn’t get the 3rd number nine, has meant Delap has solely been used as a 9 and he has exceeded expectations. [Post edited 26 Jan 12:37]
|
Agree. It was because the Broja and Parathanikios deals didn't happen, that meant Delap was needed up top. He has done brilliantly, be can still see him playing wide right if we got a top notch number 9 in. | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:45 - Jan 26 with 2191 views | NeedhamChris |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:33 - Jan 26 by cymroglas |
I don’t know really …..I think probably not although we were in the market for a Centre Forward after buying Delap but have been so since.
For my part you don’t need to give a forensic analysis to justify your opinion - especially when you were not forceful and just putting it out there with a question mark at the end.
Sometimes I don’t understand why views are ambushed here - whether it is backed with evidence or not….who cares they are just opinions on a forum…..its like saying something to your mate in the pub |
100% agree. | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:47 - Jan 26 with 2165 views | BarcaBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:31 - Jan 26 by Marshalls_Mullet |
Also, does Delap really play as a No9?
I'm not sure his heat map would reflect that. And hes not scored from open play since early Nov.
I actually think he would be more effective as a 10, with Hirst in the 9 role.
For Delap to score, he usually needs to provide his own assists!! |
How about we put him in goal, big lad and good passing range? Delap was brought here as a 9, he's arguably the English number 9 with the most potential in the country, he's doing a great job, we have half a dozen 10s.
I just find this thread completely weird, it's like everyone is missing the obvious. Delap is pretty good at where he plays right now, | | | |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:48 - Jan 26 with 2159 views | NeedhamChris |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:33 - Jan 26 by BarcaBlue |
There's no way we brought him here to be a wide player, he was bought as a 9. McKenna has never played him wide, it would mean we got no strikers in last Summer, it's nonsense. |
It would only mean we got no strikers in because we subsequently failed to get more strikers in.
If only the number 9 shirt had been vacant for Delap... | |
| |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:54 - Jan 26 with 2072 views | BarcaBlue |
| Was Delap Originally brought in for the Burns Role? on 12:48 - Jan 26 by NeedhamChris |
It would only mean we got no strikers in because we subsequently failed to get more strikers in.
If only the number 9 shirt had been vacant for Delap... |
Yeah, that seals it. The number on the back of a shirt. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
