Having to play a full back centre forward


You say that but when I was posting this in January. People on here were saying Speakman knows what he is doing we wont be taken for a ride.
Well guess what jusr because we wouldnt spend a few milliion we are not going to have a chance to get 150 million
There is no way they were ever going to gamble a few million to win 150 million, not a chance in hell. I actually think that’s the right decision but it shouldn’t have stopped us signing a striker, money that went elsewhere should have been put towards a striker as the obvious priority.

Either way, my point was more that 10 of these threads every week achieves fuck all.
 
Last edited:
Baffling how many were defending the decision not to bring someone in, was obvious we'd struggle without a proper #9
It's not baffling at all though is it?

Literally everyone would have taken a striker.

The issue is whenever this boring debate comes up, people just assume that we'll be signing someone class, and it wouldn't be the second coming of Will Grigg.

If you trust your process, and all signs point to the fact that we should, then you don't deviate from it or panic buy someone we don't think will contribute.

It's an utterly pointless debate because any time we win it doesn't get mentioned, and the only way for someone not to turn around and go "we should have just signed a striker man fuck sake any striker", would be if we made the playoffs. But even then you'd still probably get some people whinging that we would have been in the automatics if we signed a striker.

The debate completely ignores any semblance of nuance because it never factors in that the striker we signed could have been shite, might not have fit in to the system, our league form tanks anyway trying to incorporate him and we're also lumped with his wages for 3 years, which impacts on next season's budgets and so on.
 
It's not baffling at all though is it?

Literally everyone would have taken a striker.

The issue is whenever this boring debate comes up, people just assume that we'll be signing someone class, and it wouldn't be the second coming of Will Grigg.

If you trust your process, and all signs point to the fact that we should, then you don't deviate from it or panic buy someone we don't think will contribute.

It's an utterly pointless debate because any time we win it doesn't get mentioned, and the only way for someone not to turn around and go "we should have just signed a striker man fuck sake any striker", would be if we made the playoffs. But even then you'd still probably get some people whinging that we would have been in the automatics if we signed a striker.

The debate completely ignores any semblance of nuance because it never factors in that the striker we signed could have been shite, might not have fit in to the system, our league form tanks anyway trying to incorporate him and we're also lumped with his wages for 3 years, which impacts on next season's budgets and so on.
We identified 5 who we thought would improve us and managed to do a deal for none of them.
 
And managers and coaches always get it right ? We've tried pushing up defenders and giving Ekwah a more forward role and it's clear however hard Gelhardt works he's a No 10 not a CF. We can rinse and repeat or try something different surely.

Nope all the lads you mention should not be near the first team so he must be a million miles off.
 
Not sure why 2 years comes into it. We went up.

We need a striker now. A one who we didn't sign two years ago might not have been suitable for top end champo.

January of this year was the only time we've been mega desperate, and there's been no suitable suggestions put forward.
We (the fans) don’t know who was available but there must have been a number of players across the European leagues who we could have brought in. If the club had done that & we still found ourselves in this position then fair does, at least we gave it a go.
 
I am watching a really talented team struggling to break down an organised defence because we did not sign an experienced striker and having to play a full back as a make shift striker.
I said it at the time and every week since and does not matter how this game finishes it was beyond ridiculous not signing a striker and will cost us promotion.

You do know that we'd still lose games even with a striker yeah?
 
Its so annoying watching a talented side trying their hearts out being let down by those at the top

Feel bad for the players and mowbray who have been let down badly.

Gelhardt only a bairn and not up to playing 90 minutes it seems.

Chasing a game by a single goal and 20 minutes left we have to being him off to play nae kernt up top. Embarrassing
 
You do know that we'd still lose games even with a striker yeah?

I was saying this when we were winning games as you know because you were sticking up for Speakman.

We have a really talented team and it is soul destroying watching them struggle to break down teams without a focal point.

Two points made by the comnentators.
We were toothless.
The wingers are not confident of c rossing the ball quickly now.

I said at the end of January it would derail our promotion push and it has
 
It's not baffling at all though is it?

Literally everyone would have taken a striker.

The issue is whenever this boring debate comes up, people just assume that we'll be signing someone class, and it wouldn't be the second coming of Will Grigg.

If you trust your process, and all signs point to the fact that we should, then you don't deviate from it or panic buy someone we don't think will contribute.

It's an utterly pointless debate because any time we win it doesn't get mentioned, and the only way for someone not to turn around and go "we should have just signed a striker man fuck sake any striker", would be if we made the playoffs. But even then you'd still probably get some people whinging that we would have been in the automatics if we signed a striker.

The debate completely ignores any semblance of nuance because it never factors in that the striker we signed could have been shite, might not have fit in to the system, our league form tanks anyway trying to incorporate him and we're also lumped with his wages for 3 years, which impacts on next season's budgets and so on.

We needed 2 strikers, not just one. 3 is the minimum requirement.

You are talking as though the pool of players that can improve us and fit our system is tiny. It isn't. We are a championship club, we need players who can compete at this level, who are mobile, who can press and link up well with some of the good technical players we have.

Just because we could have signed someone shite doesn't make no signing 2 strikers acceptable.

This a professional football club in a 46 game league. We have handicapped ourselves severely by not having sufficient numbers in the second most specialised area on the pitch.

What next, we don't sign backup Goalkeepers and blame 'bad luck" when patto gets injured or suspended? Injuries are part and parcel of the game.
 

Back
Top