[Archived] Kenwyne Jones

[tcj_jones]

If there were one place on the pitch you'd want a striker to be a threat, it would be in the penalty box. You might have said the same about Ruud van Nistelrooy in his prime.

[T4E]

Crouch is a penalty area player, not one iota of a threat from outside the box.

[den]

Didn't watch the video T4E, but what I mean by that, is that plenty of managers will organise their game plan to defend high up the field, because they know the oppositions forwards offer no threat from there. Crouch falls into that catageory. Some strikers you must drop deeper because they'll murder you for pace [and they'll kill you in the box as well] - Bellamy?

[FourLaneBlue]

You think Derbyshire was good FLB? I said a couple of seasons back, that if a young striker like Derbyshire was going to make it, then he needed to be in the first team by the age of 21/22. Lots of people disagreed. Same went for Gally. Was I right or wrong?

I do think Derbyshire was good yes. Certainly good enough to be a squad player and to be then sold on for a healthy fee.

As for writing off players after one match - who are you talking about? I've never done that.

It certainly has seemed that way a few times. I refer to Derbyshire after the 1-0 win against Nancy for example. Plus didn´t you see Zigic once and declare him not good enough? Not a witch-hunt den...just differing opinions.

Crouch is a penalty area player, not one iota of a threat from outside the box.

I disagree. Crouch is very useful outside the box as well and brings plenty to the team.

Didn't watch the video T4E, but what I mean by that, is that plenty of managers will organise their game plan to defend high up the field, because they know the oppositions forwards offer no threat from there. Crouch falls into that catageory.

That is only relevant if Crouch is up there on his own and there is no pace in the rest of the side to exploit a breakaway. Just because you have a Crouch in the side does not mean cannot also have a Bellamy. In fact...sounds like a damn good combination.

Again - where have I said that I want someone who plays well all the time? If you're going to pick up on my posts, at least quote them correctly.

Then why keep going on about the game at Ewood then? Or one Crouch game at Ewood? Players have bad games...

If you wish me to formally quote you every time we have a discussion or I take the horrendous step of extrapolating the views of others somewhat then it will be easier not to have debates at all and just all agree. This isn´t a debating society.

As for us not being able to attract players who play consistently well, - we've just bought and sold Rocky. We also had Bellamy etc, etc......

Both of them had bad games and dry patches for the club and particularly Santa Cruz in the second season. Yet we do not focus on those. It seemed like you were focusing on the poor game Jones had at Ewood too much in relation to the overall scheme of things.

[1864roverite]

Those fans who prefer Beattie, take a watch of SSNews, he is slightly overweight if you look closely. No doubt been on the beer over summer.

[ABBEY]

diets and health tips by wazza gibbo

[1864roverite]

Ive earned mine Abbey

[ABBEY]

me too...ah well the gf is calling hahaha tara

[den]

I do think Derbyshire was good yes. Certainly good enough to be a squad player and to be then sold on for a healthy fee.

Derbyshire was nowhere near good enough for the Prem FLB, I doubt you would get much backing on that one.

It certainly has seemed that way a few times. I refer to Derbyshire after the 1-0 win against Nancy for example. Plus didn´t you see Zigic once and declare him not good enough? Not a witch-hunt den...just differing opinions.

I've seen Derbyshire many times FLB. Don't know why you mention the Nancy game. He's not good enough, everyone knows that. Yes I watched Zigic a couple of times on TV and he looked hopeless, - you think differently?

I disagree. Crouch is very useful outside the box as well and brings plenty to the team.

Useful? He's a striker and offers no threat at all if the opposition defends high up the field He's not going to hurt anyone from 40 yards out or from the half way line. Portsmouth as a team were awful at Ewood and never got forward. That totally nullified Crouch because he has nothing to offer in situations like that. I take it you saw the game. This is what happens when you play big strikers that can cause havoc inside the box, but simply don't have enough when your team doesn't have enough possession - ala Samba away from home. If you sign big strikers with no pace, they're inevitably going to be crap anywhere but at home.

That is only relevant if Crouch is up there on his own and there is no pace in the rest of the side to exploit a breakaway. Just because you have a Crouch in the side does not mean cannot also have a Bellamy. In fact...sounds like a damn good combination.

we could have Torres up front with him and that would work great. Wouldn't really be a judgement on Crouch though, would it?

Then why keep going on about the game at Ewood then? Or one Crouch game at Ewood? Players have bad games...

FLB, because I quote one game, it doesn't mean that's the only game I've seen - you know that.

If you wish me to formally quote you every time we have a discussion or I take the horrendous step of extrapolating the views of others somewhat then it will be easier not to have debates at all and just all agree. This isn´t a debating society.

I don't want you to formally quote me, just don't interpret things wrongly

[Hughesy]

Anything in the rumours that we have made a bid??

[mark1875]

i aint seen any confirmation anywhere :s

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

We can and MUST do better than the likes of Jones.

[andyroversmad]

I think Jones would be a bad signing.

[Blue blood]

We can and MUST do better than the likes of Jones.

Bentley for example wasn't top class when we got him, Hughes turned him into the player he was. Tbh I think that a lot of the time we need to either go for hidden talents, or players who have a lot of promise who the management think they have a good chance of developing to the next level.

Jones on his day is a very good player. If Sam thinks he can get develop him to the next level, or even just get more consistency out of the guy, then he would be a very good signing, and one we'd recoup our money on eventually.

[Amo]

I would still prefer Bent, wages permitting. He offers us something completely different.

[Blue blood]

I think Bent is a top quality player too, but I don't think he fits big Sam's style of play, and the fee and wages will be well beyond us.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

We can and MUST do better than the likes of Jones.

It was around this time last year that he was being touted as Chelsea's replacement for Drogba. All he has done wrong since then is pick up an injury. I think he'd do us just fine but I dont think he'd come and I doubt Sunderland would let him go.

[Hughesy]

Bent will probably cost double of Jones, thats the difference.

Id still prefer to take a risk on Janko over Jones for about £6m.

[1864roverite]

You have to look at what he would bring to Rovers.

He has height.

He is fast.

He wins a lot of headers.

He can score with head and feet.

He brings into play a second forward and can hold the ball up well.

He roughs defenders up and is not afariad to get stuck in.

He is still under 28yrs of age.

Now then, how many forwards in the PL fit that mould ?

My opinion is that he and McCarthy can play together and score goals. The same could be said for wither Roberts and/or di Santo.

Should Rovers get him, its fine by me. A fee of say £6M-£8m leaves a healthy pot of money to play with, and if Andrews goes, it boosts the pot to sign the midfielder we crave.

Good business if you ask me.

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

I'm really warming to the idea of Jones. He fits the Sam mould perfectly, probably more than Davies does. He is built for percentage football.

Den, I understand your point about teams playing a high line, but if we play percentage football like we did last season, defences won't be given a choice. And Jones is rather quick, so if an opponent does play a high back line, we have a little more pace to punish them than we have had since the days of Bellamy.

[den]

You have to look at what he would bring to Rovers.

He has height.

He is fast.

He wins a lot of headers.

He can score with head and feet.

He brings into play a second forward and can hold the ball up well.

He roughs defenders up and is not afariad to get stuck in.

He is still under 28yrs of age.

Now then, how many forwards in the PL fit that mould ?

Sheffki Kuqi did

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

Kuqi was never fast.

[1864roverite]

Whoooaaa Den

DID being the appropriate word. He was awful wasnt he but at least we made a significant profit on him

[tcj_jones]

Kuqi wasn't fast, he couldn't score (whether that be with his head or his feet), he couldn't hold up the ball well and I don't even think he was under 28 when he joined us.

He was an honest tryer and not in remotely the same league as Jones. It's like comparing Keith Andrews with Steven Gerrard!

[den]

Kuqi wasn't fast, he couldn't score (whether that be with his head or his feet), he couldn't hold up the ball well and I don't even think he was under 28 when he joined us.

He was an honest tryer and not in remotely the same league as Jones. It's like comparing Keith Andrews with Steven Gerrard!

Kuqi scored a number of important goals for us, if I remember correctly. Nor was he slow. Once he'd got a head of steam up, which could admittedly take a while, he could move a bit.

Anyway, I was just trying to make the point, that trying to clarify a players strengths and weaknesses on the internet is pretty difficult. I say that "Kenwyne Jones doesn't threaten from outside the area" and someone else replies "nor did RVN"

S'impossible innit