thenodrog Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 I do firmly believe that after the defensive midfield position, playing the striker role is least demanding position on the pitch. Thats why strikers always cost most money eh rover6?
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Billy Castell Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 We could do with Matt now, as almost all our strikers are injured. I wonder if we can call him back. He is frustrating for me, as he shows glimpses of skill and promise, but has never quite put it together our a period of time. Whether thats because he has rarely had a run in the team, or his ability is limited is a debate for those who have managed to see more games than me. The comparasion with Beattie is probably accurate. He's less frustrating than Roberts though.
Backroom Tom Posted April 7, 2009 Backroom Posted April 7, 2009 If we are in a position were we are safe going into the last two games I'd like to see Blackman recalled and given a run out. I can't see past Matt plying his trade next season either in Greece or in the championship one way or another, which is his level in my opinion. As for him being less frustrating than Roberts, the only better thing about him is a cooler head sometimes 1 on 1 however he wouldn't get a third of the chances Roberts gets.
blue phil Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Is this the same Matt Derbyshire that has scored consistantly in greece and for the under 21s. When he plays for us he scores important goals and wins us games. All this rubbish about him not doing anything else but score is just that, if your paying the lad as a striker you want him to do that and furthermore he won't do that if you insist on playing him as a right winger. Matt Derbyshire has talent, I'd rather he was scoring goals for us than against us and he would go to another premiership club. Good post standing out from the nonsense written above it . Why do some people assume that a player has be either a world beater or a lower league nonentity ? We all know he's not a winger but Derbyshire is plenty good enough to be brought on a striker when needed . There's a lot more to the team than 11 men these days . He's nowhere near as good as Cruz , obviously , but preferable to an overweight Mccarthy and , at times , to an inconsistent Roberts .
tonygreenbank Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 Surely with our current problems it is wrong to not have Matty back. I agree he is not a brilliant player yet but he gets picked for the U21`s and is confidence must be sky high at the moment. We are in desperate need of cover. Over to you Sam
den Posted April 7, 2009 Posted April 7, 2009 If we are in a position were we are safe going into the last two games I'd like to see Blackman recalled and given a run out. He played for the reserves last night
Backroom Tom Posted April 7, 2009 Backroom Posted April 7, 2009 Why did I think he was on loan? Then again i was out of the country for a while
Hughesy Posted April 7, 2009 Author Posted April 7, 2009 He was on loan but he has now come back from that.
joey_big_nose Posted April 8, 2009 Posted April 8, 2009 Derbyshire has got a good work-rate though. He lacks any sort of strength to hold people off and sometimes his passing can be a let down. Still think he's the best natural finisher we've got, if he can improv the other parts of his game he can be a top quality player in my opinion. There is no way Derbyshire is a better finisher than McCarthy, although he does work five times as hard. I want Derbyshire to come good. God knows we need it! But you do have to wonder considering that he has little strength, is average in the air, doesn't have much in the way of skill, and not really fast - how is he going to impose himself on a decent premiership defence? His movement and finishing are good of course, but that doesn't really make you a Prem striker. Name me a striker who has been a success on those two attributes alone? It think you would have to go back to Robbie Fowler in his liverpool days, and even he was good in the air also.
dingles staying down 4ever Posted April 9, 2009 Posted April 9, 2009 Teams need a sub who can come on in the second half and pinch a goal when the opposotion is tired. Man Utd had Ole Gunnar and the great Liverpool side had David Fairclough. Derbs falls into the same catergary. He is not strong or skillful enough when evryone is fresh but is good when defenders are tired. From what I gather is it the same role he is doing at Olympicakios that had frustrated him at Ewood. Man City was not the game to bring him on as a right midfielder as we were trying to protect a lead and we all know he hasn't got that ability. If he had been put front and told to run into gaps behind their defence things might have been different but hind sight is a wonderful thing. It is clear that the City game is the game that consigned Matty's Rovers' career to the history books. Since he has gone, Rovers have drawn too many games and IMO having Matt on the bench meant he may of come on and pinched a goal to win us some of these games as he has done in the past.
thenodrog Posted April 9, 2009 Posted April 9, 2009 Name me a striker who has been a success on those two attributes alone? It think you would have to go back to Robbie Fowler in his liverpool days, and even he was good in the air also. For those that remember, this lad was very similar in physiqe, style and career to Derbyshire. Came from lower leagues and ended up back in the lower leagues, when signing for a club in the top division for a season or two did not allow for 40 years of a luxury retirement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Taylor_(...ller_born_1953)
waggy Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 the loaning out of derbs becomes more bizzare by the day,he would have been a welcome addition to the team on saturday,if only to carrt lardarse's deodrant
Hughesy Posted April 14, 2009 Author Posted April 14, 2009 Who would you rather we had waggy. Derbyshire or Givet & Diouf? Its that simple.....
robborover Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Who would you rather we had waggy. Derbyshire or Givet & Diouf? Its that simple..... And not having Givet would have meant that Warnock would have played at LB instead of midfield. And that would mean more playing time for Mokeona. We also would not have anyone to play RM.
waggy Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Who would you rather we had waggy. Derbyshire or Givet & Diouf? Its that simple..... it's never that simple,rovers are not that stuck for cash,id rather have steve kindon than spit the dog though
Hughesy Posted April 14, 2009 Author Posted April 14, 2009 According to you they are not - but according to Sam in his Q&A session the other week - they had to do it so that they could do these two deals. Who knows best - you or him? Diouf offers us more than Matty did - 99% of all rovers fans can see that from the games he has played so far. As for Givet - he has been a class act since he joined. If you would rather have Matty over these two then you must be a dingle because anyone can see that we would be in a much weaker position given that situation.
waggy Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 According to you they are not - but according to Sam in his Q&A session the other week - they had to do it so that they could do these two deals. Who knows best - you or him? Diouf offers us more than Matty did - 99% of all rovers fans can see that from the games he has played so far. As for Givet - he has been a class act since he joined. If you would rather have Matty over these two then you must be a dingle because anyone can see that we would be in a much weaker position given that situation. according to sam samba's a centre forward
Hughesy Posted April 14, 2009 Author Posted April 14, 2009 According to Samba himself - he used to be until he was converted to a central defender.
rovgers Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 according to sam samba's a centre forward Wasn't it in the press a few weeks ago that Samba told Sam that he played up front as a centre forward untill he was 17?
jonv Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Wasn't it Samba up front that caused Spurs all kind of problems and helped in a big way to get 3 points from them?
ABBEY Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Who would you rather we had waggy. Derbyshire or Givet & Diouf? Its that simple..... if its as simple as that we dont deserve prem footy. According to Samba himself - he used to be until he was converted to a central defender. i wonder why there must of been a reason
47er Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 Well Abbey, I don't follow your conclusion but someone had to go before the 2 deals could be done.In the circumstances what would you have done? Shows how tight a margin Rovers are operating under our owners. Also shows how irrelevant Waggy's criticisms are but nothing new there.
Eddie Posted April 14, 2009 Posted April 14, 2009 According to Samba himself - he used to be until he was converted to a central defender. Changed before he was a professional.
modes98 Posted April 15, 2009 Posted April 15, 2009 Not sure if it's been mentioned but the Olympiacos' season seems to end on 28th April (Wigan weekend). Will Matty then return and be able to play?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.