Jump to content

Well Up For It!

2015/16 Ins & Outs

Recommended Posts

If he is out for 4 months we should be looking for a player on a permanent deal and maybe a loan deal nearer the end of the window

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck sake! I don't believe this!

Time for Leitch to step up and claim his starting place. Or maybe Chalmers can move over once Ainsworth comes back. Disappointing if true, but not exactly the end of the world. Baraclough's signing philosophy was to have 2 players competing for each position and to give youngsters a chance. So let's see it in action.

 

It's not exactly an unusual footballing problem to solve, but feel free to get depressed and miserable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont think Leitch will be good enough to step up. Massive blow if Pearson's out he was walking ok when he got up after treatment im hoping he'll be ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for Leitch to step up and claim his starting place. Or maybe Chalmers can move over once Ainsworth comes back. Disappointing if true, but not exactly the end of the world. Baraclough's signing philosophy was to have 2 players competing for each position and to give youngsters a chance. So let's see it in action.

 

It's not exactly an unusual footballing problem to solve, but feel free to get depressed and miserable.

dont think chalmers is any quicker than Leitch. Hows about kennedy? big quick lad. Was suprised he was not brought on at right back and law pushed forward into right midfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based upon?

I'd say his appearances to date. He's due a chance, yes, and I might be proved wrong, but so far hasn't overly impressed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The young players who we have promoted to first team squad may be technically good, but lack the physique to compete i feel. Hopefully our fitness guru will sort that out in the comming months. Of course in the short term its a problem that needs addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By most accounts, Leitch did well in preseason so deserves his chance. Different type of player to Pearson so we may have to adapt our style of play slightly. Cadden seems a more natural replacement but may not be seen as quite ready to start...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By most accounts, Leitch did well in preseason so deserves his chance. Different type of player to Pearson so we may have to adapt our style of play slightly. Cadden seems a more natural replacement but may not be seen as quite ready to start...

That's because he is a year older and played last season and the year before

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know Bolger is 26 (27 in a month) right? Hardly qualifies as a promising young player. Which isn't to say he wouldn't do well for us, just that at 27 he wouldn't exactly be a young prospect to develop and sell on.

 

In terms of 'do a job' it was a turn of phrase is all.

 

For what it's worth though, I completely agree with you re: paying a fee if it's viewed as being a suitable investment that would see a return.

I didn't know that to be fair. I did read the article and thought he was 22/23 for some reason.

 

I guess my main point is as you have said there - age or not we should be prepared with our current board to pay a fee, or up it, if they think it will be good for us for the team and the future for a fee. Basically, I don't want us to just sign a midfield equivalent of Lee Miller haha

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading between the lines I reckon Pearson's injury will have had this reaction.

 

Up until 3pm on Saturday, if we got the right central midfielder for the right deal then ideal. Otherwise our current young lads would have maybe been enough cover to get us through to the next window where you assume we'd be able to pillage St. Pat's. A loanee? perhaps .... but again only if the right guy with the potential of owning him or he comes from a high flying team looking to blood him.

 

At 4:45, the search is galvanised, while what we already have could see us through, our midfield have been lacking and the only major difference from what we had available at the start of last season is the loss of Carswell (and sorry to say that isn't a bad thing). Therefore I reckon the search has switched from being passive/opportunistic to being full on. A loanee being a distinct possibility in the short term as Pearson's arrival was key to our turnaround.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know that to be fair. I did read the article and thought he was 22/23 for some reason.

 

I guess my main point is as you have said there - age or not we should be prepared with our current board to pay a fee, or up it, if they think it will be good for us for the team and the future for a fee. Basically, I don't want us to just sign a midfield equivalent of Lee Miller haha

 

Ha! No problem, given the sort of business we've done bringing in players permanently that's not an unreasonable assumption to make.

 

I'm pretty much of the view that we'll have put in an offer we feel worked for us, I'd imagine Bolger would have been one of a number of possible targets that we'd have been interested in. St. Pats KB'd us (which they're perfectly entitled to do) so I'd rather we just moved on to other options rather than try and haggle or up our bid. I'd see the point if, as you say, he was 22/23 and there was the potential for profit but given there are probably a fair number of alternatives out there who would be as good that could be an option for us I'd rather we just move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit unexpected after bringing in a keeper on Friday but I guess Barraclough really doesn't rate Dan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would Samson make the move from being no. 2 at Kilmarnock to no. 2 at Motherwell? Assuming that Ripley will play otherwise why would Boro have let him come on loan...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would Samson make the move from being no. 2 at Kilmarnock to no. 2 at Motherwell? Assuming that Ripley will play otherwise why would Boro have let him come on loan...?

 

@SPFLFootball about 3 weeks late with their ITK info there.

 

As you say, unless Samson's particularly keen to sit on our bench that would be an odd move to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see that being right!! as much as i'm not a fan of Dan I'd prefer seeing him as no2 than that arse Samson!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont see us bringing in another keeper there's just no need for it,the thought of wasting some of our budget for the next 2 years on a clown like samson doesn't sound good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Twitter @MotherwellFC

×