Batth to Norwich ** confirmed **

[Stevo22]

That's fine, personally, I see it as nothing similar to Stewart. I don't think his wages will have been an issue at all and it wouldn't have been a financial decision.

I think if you take Batth and 09 you have two slightly above-average championship centre-backs with very different attributes, one suits our style of play, and the other doesn't. Then you have Seelt who I believe they feel will have a ceiling far higher and then numerous cover behind that, it's too many to keep so the obvious to lose is the one that no longer fits.

I'd be happy to still have Batth next to Ballard. I'm also happy to have O'Nien next to Ballard. No big deal either way.

 

[Coeus]

I'd be happy to still have Batth next to Ballard. I'm also happy to have O'Nien next to Ballard. No big deal either way.

Fair do's. I'd be happy enough had we not purchased Triantis and Seelt and remained the same with Baath, Ballard and co, I just think this way is the more ambitious and that way would have been settling.

Same with Pritchard and Dack to Jobe, Adil and co, happy enough but I know my preference and which I believe will see us do better.

 

[The Cabbage]

Also worth remembering that DB was a player who took a while to get up to speed. During the rest of his career in r&w he tended to look lethargic and rusty for a game or two before starting to get his form going. The evidence of the summer (and the league cup game) suggested that this was likely to be the case this season. Definitely not the type of thing you want for a reserve defender whose covering for suspensions and minor injuries.

 

[Stevo22]

Fair do's. I'd be happy enough had we not purchased Triantis and Seelt and remained the same with Baath, Ballard and co, I just think this way is the more ambitious and that way would have been settling.

Same with Pritchard and Dack to Jobe, Adil and co, happy enough but I know my preference and which I believe will see us do better.

Difficult to say really without seeing either Seelt or Triantis in action for us.

 

[Coeus]

Difficult to say really without seeing either Seelt or Triantis in action for us.

Difficult to determine outcome, not the intention.

Far easier for a coach to play an experienced lad who has played hundreds of games at this level, but the club wouldn't have bought the young centre-backs had they not felt their potential was higher otherwise that would be stupid. Say what you want about the club but those in charge of transfers don't appear stupid at the minute.

Should Seelt follow suit in regards to the rapid growth we have seen in the majority of our purchases then the discussion on height and issues L09 has may become a thing of the past shortly. That's how we have invested anyhow.

 

[gipetto]

Also worth remembering that DB was a player who took a while to get up to speed. During the rest of his career in r&w he tended to look lethargic and rusty for a game or two before starting to get his form going. The evidence of the summer (and the league cup game) suggested that this was likely to be the case this season. Definitely not the type of thing you want for a reserve defender whose covering for suspensions and minor injuries.

Good point. When he first started playing, a lot of fans had reservations about him and that was in league one. We persisted with selecting him and he continued to improve, he was very solid last season, but boy had Ballard come on. The lad is a beast of a defender.

 

[Sons of The Wear]

Again. Where is this view point come from?

We didn’t have any defenders or height that game. It’s a complete one off.

People are using that game as a justification to keep Batth. Like we shouldn’t have played that defence, we should have played Batth instead.

It’s just a nonsense argument.

So you are saying people are using one game to justify their reasoning for keeping Danny Batth? Really.

It’s quite simple. He was largely excellent for SAFC last season, was an exemplary professional on and off the pitch and our squad would be stronger if he was still here.

There are now a number of supporters acting like sheep, saying he was disposable, couldn’t pass the ball as required in our current style (yet he performed well in a team that scored regularly last season) etc but not one of his current critics aired these criticisms before the club made it obvious that they wanted to move him on-then all of a sudden all the experts started suggesting he wasn’t what we needed all of a sudden. That’s undeniable unless you have factual evidence to the contrary?

 

[Hooley13]

Also worth remembering that DB was a player who took a while to get up to speed. During the rest of his career in r&w he tended to look lethargic and rusty for a game or two before starting to get his form going. The evidence of the summer (and the league cup game) suggested that this was likely to be the case this season. Definitely not the type of thing you want for a reserve defender who’s covering for suspensions and minor injuries.

Also worth remembering he was our player of the season last year ffs. The game or two you’re talking about was a pre season friendly and a shitty league cup game at the very start of the season in which we got beat in both, most players looked lethargic and rusty. It tends to happen in any king of football.

 

[BucketBiff]

Yep. As I say, a total outlier. But people are using that game to justify keeping Batth.

Like as if that game had our current defence playing, and if only Batth had been here it wouldn’t have happened.

Fact is we had pretty much all out defence out.

A CB with height would have seen us in the playoff final imo. I like O9 at CB but he needs a bigger nastier partner alongside him. At the minute no one really knows how the 2 CBs we brought in during the summer are going to turn out so I get the clamour to have kept hold of DB. On the flip side of that he would take minutes away from the new signings. Tough call made by the club but longer term it’s probably the correct one.

 

[Blyth]

A CB with height would have seen us in the playoff final imo. I like O9 at CB but he needs a bigger nastier partner alongside him. At the minute no one really knows how the 2 CBs we brought in during the summer are going to turn out so I get the clamour to have kept hold of DB. On the flip side of that he would take minutes away from the new signings. Tough call made by the club but longer term it’s probably the correct one.

Of course it would have. But that’s no reason to keep Danny Batth now. It was a one off game.

 

[Keith S30S]

Baath would have been a bench warmer here and now he's a bench warmer at Norwich.

There was much anger and teeth clenching on here when we sold the very average Tom Flanagan. Baath was certainly far better than Tom but barring major injury problems we'll be fine without him especially when Alese is fit to provide cover.

 

[Blyth]

So you are saying people are using one game to justify their reasoning for keeping Danny Batth? Really.

No what I’m saying is people just keep coming back to “if he’d been fit for that game we would have gone through”

You could have said the same for Ballard. Or having a left back at left back and a right back at right back.

People like yourself using the absolute extreme to justify keeping him. In reality we were massively short at CB and full backs last season. We’ve addressed it.

Again. The Luton game is an absolute nonsense argument to use. We had Roberts playing right back man

Baath would have been a bench warmer here and now he's a bench warmer at Norwich.

There was much anger and teeth clenching on here when we sold the very average Tom Flanagan. Baath was certainly far better than Tom but barring major injury problems we'll be fine without him especially when Alese is fit to provide cover.

100%

 

[BucketBiff]

Baath would have been a bench warmer here and now he's a bench warmer at Norwich.

There was much anger and teeth clenching on here when we sold the very average Tom Flanagan. Baath was certainly far better than Tom but barring major injury problems we'll be fine without him especially when Alese is fit to provide cover.

Good point.

 

[Sons of The Wear]

Baath would have been a bench warmer here and now he's a bench warmer at Norwich.

There was much anger and teeth clenching on here when we sold the very average Tom Flanagan. Baath was certainly far better than Tom but barring major injury problems we'll be fine without him especially when Alese is fit to provide cover.

His name is Batth, Keith and Alese has yet to prove himself at SAFC-as a centre back to date he's looked weak in the air for his height and in no way looks as dominant and aggressive a defender as Batth who did little wrong in an impressive time on Wearside. Did you say at the end of last season that Batth would be warming our bench this season? No, no one did!

 

[Mowgli]

His name is Batth, Keith and Alese has yet to prove himself at SAFC-as a centre back to date he's looked weak in the air for his height and in no way looks as dominant and aggressive a defender as Batth who did little wrong in an impressive time on Wearside. Did you say at the end of last season that Batth would be warming our bench this season? No, no one did!

The manager was happy to cut him aside when we changed the way we played though. Most people on here 100% back Mowbray but this certainly seems to be something people can't get on with.

I'm not o'niens biggest fan at centre back defensively but he makes a big difference attacking wise when you've got hume dropping in and o'nien overlapping out wide.

Batth simply couldn't play that role or even the ballard role that would require him to be covering loads of space by himself. By bringing Batth in you would have to change the whole way the team attack now.

 

[Ilios]

His name is Batth, Keith and Alese has yet to prove himself at SAFC-as a centre back to date he's looked weak in the air for his height and in no way looks as dominant and aggressive a defender as Batth who did little wrong in an impressive time on Wearside. Did you say at the end of last season that Batth would be warming our bench this season? No, no one did!

Alese is vastly better suited to the way we play than Batth. He's quick, mobile, good on the ball, and comfortable carrying it forward and passing out from the back. He's ideal to step in at LCB for how we play. He has the added advantage of being 6'3 and powerful to boot.

He's also someone who can play LB as well, and he's 11 years younger than Batth.

 

[Keith S30S]

His name is Batth, Keith and Alese has yet to prove himself at SAFC-as a centre back to date he's looked weak in the air for his height and in no way looks as dominant and aggressive a defender as Batth who did little wrong in an impressive time on Wearside. Did you say at the end of last season that Batth would be warming our bench this season? No, no one did!

Batth is dominant in the air but slow on the ground. He's only going to get slower too. He isn't the greatest passer and prone to the odd injury.

O'Nien is quicker and a better passer as is Alese.

Certainly Batth was a big miss against Luton, he was injured again, but we only come up against that type of opposition a couple of times a season.

Danny did well for 18 months but his time is over and as things stand we simply aren't missing him IMO.

 

[Sons of The Wear]

No what I’m saying is people just keep coming back to “if he’d been fit for that game we would have gone through”

You could have said the same for Ballard. Or having a left back at left back and a right back at right back.

People like yourself using the absolute extreme to justify keeping him. In reality we were massively short at CB and full backs last season. We’ve addressed it.

Again. The Luton game is an absolute nonsense argument to use. We had Roberts playing right back man

100%

We don't know if we have addressed it as we've signed an inexperienced Australian and a Dutch reserve team player-no one can be certain if they could fit straight in and replace someone like Ballard effectively.

Additionally regarding your full backs comment, Cirkin is once gain injured as he has been for large chunks of his time here and we are now back to playing a right footed player in his position and not a specialist left footed left back so there's a position we are short in. Cirkin's a good player but the number of lay offs for a relatively young player is worrying as are the number of long term injures we seem to have generally on a consistent basis.

 

[Mowgli]

We don't know if we have addressed it as we've signed an inexperienced Australian and a Dutch reserve team player-no one can be certain if they could fit straight in and replace someone like Ballard effectively.
.

Interested to know how you think Batth will slot in and replace Ballard when we play this system? He will have hume and o'nien both wandering and no protection around him to hide his lack of mobility.

Bringing batth in would have to result in changing the way we are. Its that simple.

 

[Sons of The Wear]

Alese is vastly better suited to the way we play than Batth. He's quick, mobile, good on the ball, and comfortable carrying it forward and passing out from the back. He's ideal to step in at LCB for how we play. He has the added advantage of being 6'3 and powerful to boot.

He's also someone who can play LB as well, and he's 11 years younger than Batth.

Did you say this before the club made it clear they wanted rid of Batth who served us admirably? Yes or no?
Alese is not a specialist left back, he is an average fill in, we need to stop the round pegs in square holes situations wherever possible.