| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird 10:02 - Aug 7 with 1322 views | chicoazul |
that we have what is now clearly a change of strategy in terms of trying to play a bit more football, moving it through the midfield, buying creative players for that area, but letting Pitman go and sidelining McG and buying now one but two hard working battering rams in Garner and Waghorn? |  |
| |  |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:04 - Aug 7 with 1275 views | Heathlander |
Why have you gat a bear with you? |  | | |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:05 - Aug 7 with 1270 views | Reuser_is_God |
You still need strikers who offer a focal point.
McGoldrick will be a starter once fit too. |  |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:05 - Aug 7 with 1280 views | SomethingBlue |
Who has sidelined McGoldrick? Pretty clear the reason he wasn't really involved on Saturday was that he'd been ill and not played much. I think the key for us is to have a number of strings to our bow and be able to comfortably play two or three different systems. Waghorn would help with that even if he doesn't bowl me over. |  |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:06 - Aug 7 with 1253 views | Kieran_Knows |
But our better football also consists of pressing from the front, which, lets be honest, Pitman never did/would never have done.
Sidelining McGoldrick? I think it's pretty evident that when he has been fit, he has played. Which I suspect will still be the case now. |  |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:06 - Aug 7 with 1250 views | portmanking |
I wouldn't call Garner or Waghorn battering rams. They are hard-working and tenacious but they have just as much quality on the ball as Pitman.
Selling Pitman was great business because he never ever really looked like he belonged at ITFC, he never played with a smile on his face and he was probably one of the least McCarthy-esque players we've had on our books for a long time. | | | |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:06 - Aug 7 with 1247 views | tractorboy1978 |
I don't think it's a change completely, it is reverting back to what was successful a couple of seasons back. Hard graft, pressing from the front, out running our opponents but this time we have players that are better with the ball as well. I still think McGoldrick will be the first name on the team sheet when he is fully fit. | | | |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:07 - Aug 7 with 1235 views | ITFC1983 |
Let Elder Grizzly go FFS |  |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:08 - Aug 7 with 1228 views | BLUEBEAT |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:05 - Aug 7 by SomethingBlue |
Who has sidelined McGoldrick? Pretty clear the reason he wasn't really involved on Saturday was that he'd been ill and not played much. I think the key for us is to have a number of strings to our bow and be able to comfortably play two or three different systems. Waghorn would help with that even if he doesn't bowl me over. |
Too stressful relying on McG when you never know if he'll be fit. This signing alleviates that with the added bonus of having an understanding of Garner already. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:08 - Aug 7 with 1227 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:05 - Aug 7 by Reuser_is_God |
You still need strikers who offer a focal point.
McGoldrick will be a starter once fit too. |
I'm not 100% sure on that. Think Garner and Waghorn might be our 1st choice. Can see either Sears or McG moving on and potentially a Academy player or young loan player stepping up to the 1st team.
Especially given Micks comments on having to move players out before players can come in. |  |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:11 - Aug 7 with 1193 views | Kieran_Knows |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:08 - Aug 7 by Cheltenham_Blue |
I'm not 100% sure on that. Think Garner and Waghorn might be our 1st choice. Can see either Sears or McG moving on and potentially a Academy player or young loan player stepping up to the 1st team.
Especially given Micks comments on having to move players out before players can come in. |
Which he has done, he's moved Pitman out to bring Waghorn in, whilst also still looking to offload Bru. | |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:12 - Aug 7 with 1184 views | chicoazul |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:05 - Aug 7 by SomethingBlue |
Who has sidelined McGoldrick? Pretty clear the reason he wasn't really involved on Saturday was that he'd been ill and not played much. I think the key for us is to have a number of strings to our bow and be able to comfortably play two or three different systems. Waghorn would help with that even if he doesn't bowl me over. |
Waghorn and Garner are the most money we have spent on players for years. They are both nailed on to start. | |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:12 - Aug 7 with 1174 views | Reuser_is_God |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:08 - Aug 7 by Cheltenham_Blue |
I'm not 100% sure on that. Think Garner and Waghorn might be our 1st choice. Can see either Sears or McG moving on and potentially a Academy player or young loan player stepping up to the 1st team.
Especially given Micks comments on having to move players out before players can come in. |
No, our strikers for the season will be Sears, McGoldrick, Garner & Waghorn. | |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:15 - Aug 7 with 1138 views | BLUEBEAT |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:12 - Aug 7 by Reuser_is_God |
No, our strikers for the season will be Sears, McGoldrick, Garner & Waghorn. |
It's a good mix. Am happy with that. | |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:15 - Aug 7 with 1133 views | SomethingBlue |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:12 - Aug 7 by chicoazul |
Waghorn and Garner are the most money we have spent on players for years. They are both nailed on to start. |
Don't think so — I think they just give us four senior strikers who can compete well together. We'll need them. [Post edited 7 Aug 2017 10:16]
| |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:16 - Aug 7 with 1109 views | Reuser_is_God |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:12 - Aug 7 by chicoazul |
Waghorn and Garner are the most money we have spent on players for years. They are both nailed on to start. |
On that basis McGoldrick will start as he's our highest paid striker. [Post edited 7 Aug 2017 10:17]
| |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:20 - Aug 7 with 1060 views | pointofblue |
We've got Garner who's like a terrier, constantly snapping at players and happy to go after a ball whilst being able to get forward quickly too. Waghorn has a bit to him so should be able to hold the ball up and bring others into play. In comparison McGoldrick is made of glass, Sears fades in and out of play and Pitman hardly ever left the final third. | |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:24 - Aug 7 with 1027 views | chicoazul |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:16 - Aug 7 by Reuser_is_God |
On that basis McGoldrick will start as he's our highest paid striker. [Post edited 7 Aug 2017 10:17]
|
McG is injury prone and in the last year of his contract I believe. I hope im wrong as I dont rate Waghorn that much and McG is great but I would be surprised if we see much more of him given Mick likes Sears (because Sears does what he is told). | |
| |
| Bear with me here but isnt it a bit weird on 10:35 - Aug 7 with 967 views | Guthrum |
I see what you're saying, but having Garner and Waghorn is not necessarily at cross-purposes with that. They can provide the power to take advantage of the supply-line from the more creative midfield/wide setup and force the ball into the goal.
Means we can use McGoldrick more sparingly, keeping him fitter for longer and giving him at least one other solid forward in the area to work with when he is on the pitch (the lack of which rendered him pretty ineffective last season). Can see him being used as a super-sub to deploy his trickery against tiring defences who have been battered by Garner and Waghorn for an hour.
Pitman is a slightly odd case. A gifted individual marksman, but I never saw him as the kind who could pitch in to a battle in the box. Had a habit of ranting at teammates during games. I have a feeling he probably wanted to leave, anyway. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
