• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Batth to Norwich ** confirmed **

Sons of The Wear said:
Why sell any? What are you trying to say?
They wanted to ditch Pritchard too who has been outstanding for us so far this season and the squad would be weaker without him.
Too many sheep all of a sudden saying Batth wasn’t good enough for us this season which is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Whilst you are right, it does show that people are starting to (rightly I think) have faith in the recruitment team. Selling your player of the season sounds like madness. But (for the moment at least) it is working out well.

Got to hope Seelt and Triantis develop well to keep it looking a good decision
 

Mowgli said:
He couldn't do what o'nien is doing this season, which is going into midfield and overlapping hume on the right wing.

If Mowbray is set on playing this way then there's definitely no room for batth.
Click to expand...

He can defend better though, which is a key point the likes of yourself keep ignoring.

I'm accepting of how Mowbray wants to play and I accept Batth maybe doesn't fit into that if Ballard is fit.

However when Onien gets outmuscled or outjumped again or let's a player run on him on a corner from the edge of the box right the way through it again and he sticks it in the net like the other week- does that not highlight his inadequacies enough for this to be questioned?

For me keeping Batth was a failsafe for if Ballard gets injured whilst we get on with blooding Seelt, whom hopefully will ultimately replace Onien. Because if Ballard does get injured in the meantime (and he puts himself in the way of harm enough for it to have come close the last few games) we'll end up with one of two players adapting to regular competive football in a new country at a good level alongside someone who isn't really a defender or dominant and I can see that costing us.
 
Last edited:
Perryqhill said:
He can defend better though, which is a key point the likes of yourself keep ignoring.

I'm accepting of how Mowbray wants to play and I accept Batth doesn't fit into that.

However when Onien gets outmuscled or outjumped again or let's a player run on him on a corner from the edge of the box right the way through it again and he sticks it in the net like the other week- does that not highlight his inadequacies enough for this to be questioned?

For me keeping Batth was a failsafe for if Ballard gets injured whilst we get on with blooding Seelt, whom hopefully will ultimately replace Onien. Because if Ballard does get injured in the meantime (and he puts himself in the way of harm enough for it to have come close the last few games) we'll end up with one of two players adapting to regular competive football in a new country at a good level alongside someone who isn't really a defender or dominant and I can see that costing us.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of that and have never been convinced with o'nien being centre back in a back 4 tbh.

My point though was that the way the manager is choosing to play means Batth couldn't have played the o'nien role or even step into the Ballard role because he wouldn't have the legs to cover for hume and onien.

The manager basically made Batth redundant to the team.
 
Perryqhill said:
He can defend better though, which is a key point the likes of yourself keep ignoring.

I'm accepting of how Mowbray wants to play and I accept Batth maybe doesn't fit into that if Ballard is fit.

However when Onien gets outmuscled or outjumped again or let's a player run on him on a corner from the edge of the box right the way through it again and he sticks it in the net like the other week- does that not highlight his inadequacies enough for this to be questioned?

For me keeping Batth was a failsafe for if Ballard gets injured whilst we get on with blooding Seelt, whom hopefully will ultimately replace Onien. Because if Ballard does get injured in the meantime (and he puts himself in the way of harm enough for it to have come close the last few games) we'll end up with one of two players adapting to regular competive football in a new country at a good level alongside someone who isn't really a defender or dominant and I can see that costing us.
Click to expand...
Well said. 👍
 
MiddleAgedMan said:
Whilst you are right, it does show that people are starting to (rightly I think) have faith in the recruitment team. Selling your player of the season sounds like madness. But (for the moment at least) it is working out well.

Got to hope Seelt and Triantis develop well to keep it looking a good decision
Click to expand...

I remember as a lad Jim Holton playing for Sunderland. He wasn’t here very long but I thought he was brilliant, one of our best players similar to Batth.
Why we sold him I will never know but it reminds me of this situation with Batth only this time I understand why.
 
It's a really curious one. There's a few theories of why he left. One is for game time, but he's played 1 minute this season for Norwich. Another is contract length but he had a guaranteed one year with them. The other theory was to be closer to where he's from, but he's not.

The only thing I can think is he feels that he's more likely to fight his way into the team there than here. I find it hard to believe we'd not give him a 12 month contract even at 33.
 
Perryqhill said:
He can defend better though, which is a key point the likes of yourself keep ignoring.

I'm accepting of how Mowbray wants to play and I accept Batth maybe doesn't fit into that if Ballard is fit.

However when Onien gets outmuscled or outjumped again or let's a player run on him on a corner from the edge of the box right the way through it again and he sticks it in the net like the other week- does that not highlight his inadequacies enough for this to be questioned?

For me keeping Batth was a failsafe for if Ballard gets injured whilst we get on with blooding Seelt, whom hopefully will ultimately replace Onien. Because if Ballard does get injured in the meantime (and he puts himself in the way of harm enough for it to have come close the last few games) we'll end up with one of two players adapting to regular competive football in a new country at a good level alongside someone who isn't really a defender or dominant and I can see that costing us.
Click to expand...

Let's be fair though, the club were never going to carry an experienced fifth centre back purely as a failsafe when they've just invested heavily in two players in that very position. The squad is probably too big currently anyway.

Having to pay Danny Batth's (apparently considerable) wages for a season because we don't trust our signings to step up basically defeats the object of our transfer policy. Other centre backs in the league with similar or less experience than Seelt stepped up last season. We've paid good money for him, if he can't be trusted to fill in as our third centre back, we shouldn't have bought him.
 
FulwellViaLeeds said:
Let's be fair though, the club were never going to carry an experienced fifth centre back purely as a failsafe when they've just invested heavily in two players in that very position. The squad is probably too big currently anyway.

Having to pay Danny Batth's (apparently considerable) wages for a season because we don't trust our signings to step up basically defeats the object of our transfer policy. Other centre backs in the league with similar or less experience than Seelt stepped up last season. We've paid good money for him, if he can't be trusted to fill in as our third centre back, we shouldn't have bought him.
Click to expand...
Also, we'll have Cirkin and Alese back very soon, and then can both play CB as well.
 
FulwellViaLeeds said:
Let's be fair though, the club were never going to carry an experienced fifth centre back purely as a failsafe when they've just invested heavily in two players in that very position. The squad is probably too big currently anyway.

Having to pay Danny Batth's (apparently considerable) wages for a season because we don't trust our signings to step up basically defeats the object of our transfer policy. Other centre backs in the league with similar or less experience than Seelt stepped up last season. We've paid good money for him, if he can't be trusted to fill in as our third centre back, we shouldn't have bought him.
Click to expand...

They haven't invested heavily though and we dont have five experienced centre backs- Seelt yes, Triantis was buttons. I can see the club wanting to put some faith into Seelt and given the clubs looking at him previously you can expect him to be one of four centre halves fighting for a start.

But he's played about 40 games over a couple of seasons for PSV reserves - coming to a country and the need for him being given time and protection to adapt shouldn't be underestimated.

As for Triantis he's a speculative punt having played about 25 senior games I Aus. Coming on from such a low level he'd likely be best going out on loan in January.

On paper we might have 4 centre backs, but the reality is we've seen last season how an injury or two can decimate what 'on paper' looks like. We have one senior centre back who is 24. Then a utility player who is there to aid our play from the back- the two others are both 20 in new countries and their senior experience is questionable.


Keeping Batth till January would have mitigated any injuries and given lads a chance to adapt.
 
Last edited:
MiddleAgedMan said:
Whilst you are right, it does show that people are starting to (rightly I think) have faith in the recruitment team. Selling your player of the season sounds like madness. But (for the moment at least) it is working out well.

Got to hope Seelt and Triantis develop well to keep it looking a good decision
Click to expand...
To sell your player of the season and leave yourself with only 2 senior CBs and two kids who've never played a game is madness tbh. Could end up going really wrong for us, unless we've pulled another rabbit out of the hat with Seelt or the Tree.
 
Perryqhill said:
They haven't invested heavily though and we dont have five experienced centre backs- Seelt yes, Triantis was buttons. I can see the club wanting to put some faith into Seelt and given the clubs looking at him previously you can expect him to be one of four centre halves fighting for a start.

But he's played about 40 games over a couple of seasons for PSV reserves - coming to a country and the need for him being given time and protection to adapt shouldn't be underestimated.

As for Triantis he's a speculative punt having played about 25 senior games I Aus. Coming on from such a low level he'd likely be best going out on loan in January.

On paper we might have 4 centre backs, but the reality is we've seen last season how an injury or two can decimate what 'on paper' looks like. We have one senior centre back who is 24. Then a utility player who is there to aid our play from the back- the two others are both 20 in new countries and their senior experience is questionable.


Keeping Batth till January would have mitigated any injuries and given lads a chance to adapt.
Click to expand...
You can’t carry 6 centre backs in a squad that normally plays with 2.
 
Chewit said:
I remember as a lad Jim Holton playing for Sunderland. He wasn’t here very long but I thought he was brilliant, one of our best players similar to Batth.
Why we sold him I will never know but it reminds me of this situation with Batth only this time I understand why.
Click to expand...
Passed away in 1993 sadly . Legend at Man United
The song ......" 6ft 2... eyes of blue big Jim Holtons after you"
 
MiddleAgedMan said:
Whilst you are right, it does show that people are starting to (rightly I think) have faith in the recruitment team. Selling your player of the season sounds like madness. But (for the moment at least) it is working out well.

Got to hope Seelt and Triantis develop well to keep it looking a good decision
Click to expand...
We still don’t have a reliable centre forward do we?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top