Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Boro v Hull City (a) 3-1 (Braithwaite, Assombalonga, Leadbitter (pen) )


Recommended Posts

Kev he's only likely to cause problems if played in his proper position, up front. There's little to no chance of him starting ahead of Britt (rightly so imo), so the issue at hand is is he more effective out wide than Fletcher? The answer may still be yes for many, but the Bamford we saw tearing it up in 14/15 was starting as a no 9 for the majority of the season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 388
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  •  

    54

  •  

    37

  •  

    29

  •  

    17

Top Posters In This Topic

Don't want to get into the Bamford best position debate again because its been done to death, but the thought he played as the centre forward for the majority of the 14/15 season just isn't true.

 

22 games as a centre forward - 9 goals/2 assists.

23 games from the wing - 10 goals/6 assists.

 

* stats from transfermrket

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want to get into the Bamford best position debate again because its been done to death, but the thought he played as the centre forward for the majority of the 14/15 season just isn't true.

 

22 games as a centre forward - 9 goals/2 assists.

23 games from the wing - 10 goals/6 assists.

 

* stats from transfermrket

 

Fair enough, I stand corrected!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kev he's only likely to cause problems if played in his proper position, up front. There's little to no chance of him starting ahead of Britt (rightly so imo), so the issue at hand is is he more effective out wide than Fletcher? The answer may still be yes for many, but the Bamford we saw tearing it up in 14/15 was starting as a no 9 for the majority of the season.

 

Bamford scored goals in the early part of that season playing wide 'in the three' although I would agree with you that his best position is playing through the middle.

 

You can compare Bamford and Fletcher in every position on the pitch and Bamford comes out on top in my opinion. Monk is no different to most managers in that he has his favourites and he shows preference to his own signings. It seems like Bamford's face just doesn't fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kev he's only likely to cause problems if played in his proper position, up front. There's little to no chance of him starting ahead of Britt (rightly so imo), so the issue at hand is is he more effective out wide than Fletcher? The answer may still be yes for many, but the Bamford we saw tearing it up in 14/15 was starting as a no 9 for the majority of the season.

 

Bamford scored goals in the early part of that season playing wide 'in the three' although I would agree with you that his best position is playing through the middle.

 

You can compare Bamford and Fletcher in every position on the pitch and Bamford comes out on top in my opinion. Monk is no different to most managers in that he has his favourites and he shows preference to his own signings. It seems like Bamford's face just doesn't fit.

 

People keep saying that but fact is prior to yesterday Bamford and fletcher had both players in 12 league games and Bamford even had more minutes which he still has. He has been given every bit as many chances as fletcher. Monk isn’t favouring Bamford over fletcher. Bamford was on the bench against reading and fletcher was on the bench against hull. Where is the favourism? The difference is Bamford hasn’t delivered so far but Fletcher somewhat has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, he might have just wanted to give him a run out away from home where he won't be as heavily scrutinised as he is at the Riverside, as he's had a bit of stick at home recently (rightly so imo).

 

You might see Bamford on the bench more frequently at home due to the crowd being more patient with him when he comes on. Just a thought, could just as easily be that Fletcher grafts more and is more suited to counter attacking away games though.

 

I think if monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, then he’s going to go with the player he paid £7m for.

 

Well dident Bamford cost 6m?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, he might have just wanted to give him a run out away from home where he won't be as heavily scrutinised as he is at the Riverside, as he's had a bit of stick at home recently (rightly so imo).

 

You might see Bamford on the bench more frequently at home due to the crowd being more patient with him when he comes on. Just a thought, could just as easily be that Fletcher grafts more and is more suited to counter attacking away games though.

 

I think if monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, then he’s going to go with the player he paid £7m for.

 

Well dident Bamford cost 6m?

 

He didn't cost Monk 6m. He was already at the club before Monk arrived

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, he might have just wanted to give him a run out away from home where he won't be as heavily scrutinised as he is at the Riverside, as he's had a bit of stick at home recently (rightly so imo).

 

You might see Bamford on the bench more frequently at home due to the crowd being more patient with him when he comes on. Just a thought, could just as easily be that Fletcher grafts more and is more suited to counter attacking away games though.

 

I think if monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, then he’s going to go with the player he paid £7m for.

 

Well dident Bamford cost 6m?

 

He didn't cost Monk 6m. He was already at the club before Monk arrived

 

I am aare of that, jut pointed out that Bamford was not cheap, and we are not likely to get that money back at this rate

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.skysports.com/football/hull-city-vs-mboro/374791

 

Highlights but sadly does not clear up the reason for the sending off though the referee indicates a push on someone.............I think

 

I've heard the sending off was for dissent

 

Can dissent ever be enough to be a straight red card? It wasn't a 2nd yellow.

 

Interesting that he definitely was originally shown a yellow but that hasn't gone down on record. If that's the case then surely it would mean the ref has amended his decision to just book Hector and give him a straight red, which would also imply that he was sent off for something related to the penalty... very confusing.

 

Doesn't even affect us anymore but it is certainly interesting.

 

looked to me like ref initially though fletcher cut across hector got tangled and tripped up, so a foul but unintentional, penna and booking. i thought hector barged into the bag of him, which is what the lino must have told the ref. he changed the non intentional to a deliberate attempt to stop a goal scoring opportunity and sent him off.

 

As the ref walked over to him he looked to be doing an elbow gesture. Not sure if it was in relation to the challenge on fletcher or something while the pen was about to be taken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, he might have just wanted to give him a run out away from home where he won't be as heavily scrutinised as he is at the Riverside, as he's had a bit of stick at home recently (rightly so imo).

 

You might see Bamford on the bench more frequently at home due to the crowd being more patient with him when he comes on. Just a thought, could just as easily be that Fletcher grafts more and is more suited to counter attacking away games though.

 

I think if monk is split 50/50 on Bamford and Fletcher, then he’s going to go with the player he paid £7m for.

 

Well dident Bamford cost 6m?

 

He didn't cost Monk 6m. He was already at the club before Monk arrived

 

I am aare of that, jut pointed out that Bamford was not cheap, and we are not likely to get that money back at this rate

 

Fair point. I can't disagree with that

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kev he's only likely to cause problems if played in his proper position, up front. There's little to no chance of him starting ahead of Britt (rightly so imo), so the issue at hand is is he more effective out wide than Fletcher? The answer may still be yes for many, but the Bamford we saw tearing it up in 14/15 was starting as a no 9 for the majority of the season.

 

Bamford scored goals in the early part of that season playing wide 'in the three' although I would agree with you that his best position is playing through the middle.

 

You can compare Bamford and Fletcher in every position on the pitch and Bamford comes out on top in my opinion. Monk is no different to most managers in that he has his favourites and he shows preference to his own signings. It seems like Bamford's face just doesn't fit.

 

People keep saying that but fact is prior to yesterday Bamford and fletcher had both players in 12 league games and Bamford even had more minutes which he still has. He has been given every bit as many chances as fletcher. Monk isn’t favouring Bamford over fletcher. Bamford was on the bench against reading and fletcher was on the bench against hull. Where is the favourism? The difference is Bamford hasn’t delivered so far but Fletcher somewhat has.

 

Just had a look at our lineups throughout the season, you are right Fletcher hasn't had any more opportunity than Bamford overall. Fair play I take your point.

 

Games started: PB - 4 vs 3 AF

Started on the bench: - PB 9 vs 10 AF.

 

All Bamford's starts were in the first 6 games so you could argue that he has had a chance. However you could also argue whether 4 starts is enough to prove himself?

 

The stats suggest that when Bamford didn't start well then he fell down the pecking order. In the last 6 games Fletcher has started more games and played more minutes. Maybe Bamford had more of a chance earlier in the season but it appears that he's now behind Fletcher in Monk's eyes.

 

What we could ask ourselves is whether we think Bamford is capable of recapturing his form from 2.5 years ago? I would say he is because he hasn't had any major injuries, he's just out of form and low on confidence. If you think he's finished at 24 years old then that's the end of discussion fair enough.

 

Then we come to Fletcher; have we seen enough of him to convince us that he should be starting games or coming off the bench ahead of Bamford? I'm not sure I have.

Do we think Fletcher is capable of hitting the heights Bamford has already hit in his career?

 

My argument is that the best Patrick Bamford is a better option than the best Ashley Fletcher. We should be trying harder to drag that out of him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kev he's only likely to cause problems if played in his proper position, up front. There's little to no chance of him starting ahead of Britt (rightly so imo), so the issue at hand is is he more effective out wide than Fletcher? The answer may still be yes for many, but the Bamford we saw tearing it up in 14/15 was starting as a no 9 for the majority of the season.

 

Bamford scored goals in the early part of that season playing wide 'in the three' although I would agree with you that his best position is playing through the middle.

 

You can compare Bamford and Fletcher in every position on the pitch and Bamford comes out on top in my opinion. Monk is no different to most managers in that he has his favourites and he shows preference to his own signings. It seems like Bamford's face just doesn't fit.

 

People keep saying that but fact is prior to yesterday Bamford and fletcher had both players in 12 league games and Bamford even had more minutes which he still has. He has been given every bit as many chances as fletcher. Monk isn’t favouring Bamford over fletcher. Bamford was on the bench against reading and fletcher was on the bench against hull. Where is the favourism? The difference is Bamford hasn’t delivered so far but Fletcher somewhat has.

 

Just had a look at our lineups throughout the season, you are right Fletcher hasn't had any more opportunity than Bamford overall. Fair play I take your point.

 

Games started: PB - 4 vs 3 AF

Started on the bench: - PB 9 vs 10 AF.

 

All Bamford's starts were in the first 6 games so you could argue that he has had a chance. However you could also argue whether 4 starts is enough to prove himself?

 

The stats suggest that when Bamford didn't start well then he fell down the pecking order. In the last 6 games Fletcher has started more games and played more minutes. Maybe Bamford had more of a chance earlier in the season but it appears that he's now behind Fletcher in Monk's eyes.

 

What we could ask ourselves is whether we think Bamford is capable of recapturing his form from 2.5 years ago? I would say he is because he hasn't had any major injuries, he's just out of form and low on confidence. If you think he's finished at 24 years old then that's the end of discussion fair enough.

 

Then we come to Fletcher; have we seen enough of him to convince us that he should be starting games or coming off the bench ahead of Bamford? I'm not sure I have.

Do we think Fletcher is capable of hitting the heights Bamford has already hit in his career?

 

My argument is that the best Patrick Bamford is a better option than the best Ashley Fletcher. We should be trying harder to drag that out of him.

 

I more or less agree with everything you say. All I’m saying is that I can understand why Monk is currently looking fletchers way. Bamford will get his chances and it’s up to him to take them and not try to be too clever.

 

I don’t think he is finished at all but I theink the last 2,5 years have really taken its toll and set him back. BAck then he looked set to become a star future prem player but now I think it’s touch and go whether he will ever be a premier league regular.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kev he's only likely to cause problems if played in his proper position, up front. There's little to no chance of him starting ahead of Britt (rightly so imo), so the issue at hand is is he more effective out wide than Fletcher? The answer may still be yes for many, but the Bamford we saw tearing it up in 14/15 was starting as a no 9 for the majority of the season.

 

Bamford scored goals in the early part of that season playing wide 'in the three' although I would agree with you that his best position is playing through the middle.

 

You can compare Bamford and Fletcher in every position on the pitch and Bamford comes out on top in my opinion. Monk is no different to most managers in that he has his favourites and he shows preference to his own signings. It seems like Bamford's face just doesn't fit.

 

People keep saying that but fact is prior to yesterday Bamford and fletcher had both players in 12 league games and Bamford even had more minutes which he still has. He has been given every bit as many chances as fletcher. Monk isn’t favouring Bamford over fletcher. Bamford was on the bench against reading and fletcher was on the bench against hull. Where is the favourism? The difference is Bamford hasn’t delivered so far but Fletcher somewhat has.

 

Just had a look at our lineups throughout the season, you are right Fletcher hasn't had any more opportunity than Bamford overall. Fair play I take your point.

 

Games started: PB - 4 vs 3 AF

Started on the bench: - PB 9 vs 10 AF.

 

All Bamford's starts were in the first 6 games so you could argue that he has had a chance. However you could also argue whether 4 starts is enough to prove himself?

 

The stats suggest that when Bamford didn't start well then he fell down the pecking order. In the last 6 games Fletcher has started more games and played more minutes. Maybe Bamford had more of a chance earlier in the season but it appears that he's now behind Fletcher in Monk's eyes.

 

What we could ask ourselves is whether we think Bamford is capable of recapturing his form from 2.5 years ago? I would say he is because he hasn't had any major injuries, he's just out of form and low on confidence. If you think he's finished at 24 years old then that's the end of discussion fair enough.

 

Then we come to Fletcher; have we seen enough of him to convince us that he should be starting games or coming off the bench ahead of Bamford? I'm not sure I have.

Do we think Fletcher is capable of hitting the heights Bamford has already hit in his career?

 

My argument is that the best Patrick Bamford is a better option than the best Ashley Fletcher. We should be trying harder to drag that out of him.

 

I more or less agree with everything you say. All I’m saying is that I can understand why Monk is currently looking fletchers way. Bamford will get his chances and it’s up to him to take them and not try to be too clever.

 

I don’t think he is finished at all but I theink the last 2,5 years have really taken its toll and set him back. BAck then he looked set to become a star future prem player but now I think it’s touch and go whether he will ever be a premier league regular.

 

I know you personally haven't wrote Bamford off but many on here have questioned whether he's the same player.

It seems crazy at such a young age to wonder whether his best days are behind him.

 

In hindsight I'm sure he'll regret going to Palace on loan 2 years ago rather than come back to us again. I think he started badly there and then he's just gone on a downward spiral since.

 

If people want to say he's not a Premier league footballer then it would be hard to argue, I was never convinced he was at that level even when at his best for us. The thing is we are not a Premier league club anymore and I'd rather judge him on what he can do in the Championship.

 

I'm convinced that when he finds the right club and manager he'll be absolutely lethal again in this division. Even in his little cameos recently I still think Bamford has looked good, his movement off the ball is superb and in the Cardiff game we looked more threatening when he came on.

 

Maybe Fletcher will become a good player in the future I just think he's a few years behind Bamford in his development.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kev he's only likely to cause problems if played in his proper position, up front. There's little to no chance of him starting ahead of Britt (rightly so imo), so the issue at hand is is he more effective out wide than Fletcher? The answer may still be yes for many, but the Bamford we saw tearing it up in 14/15 was starting as a no 9 for the majority of the season.

 

Bamford scored goals in the early part of that season playing wide 'in the three' although I would agree with you that his best position is playing through the middle.

 

You can compare Bamford and Fletcher in every position on the pitch and Bamford comes out on top in my opinion. Monk is no different to most managers in that he has his favourites and he shows preference to his own signings. It seems like Bamford's face just doesn't fit.

 

People keep saying that but fact is prior to yesterday Bamford and fletcher had both players in 12 league games and Bamford even had more minutes which he still has. He has been given every bit as many chances as fletcher. Monk isn’t favouring Bamford over fletcher. Bamford was on the bench against reading and fletcher was on the bench against hull. Where is the favourism? The difference is Bamford hasn’t delivered so far but Fletcher somewhat has.

 

Just had a look at our lineups throughout the season, you are right Fletcher hasn't had any more opportunity than Bamford overall. Fair play I take your point.

 

Games started: PB - 4 vs 3 AF

Started on the bench: - PB 9 vs 10 AF.

 

All Bamford's starts were in the first 6 games so you could argue that he has had a chance. However you could also argue whether 4 starts is enough to prove himself?

 

The stats suggest that when Bamford didn't start well then he fell down the pecking order. In the last 6 games Fletcher has started more games and played more minutes. Maybe Bamford had more of a chance earlier in the season but it appears that he's now behind Fletcher in Monk's eyes.

 

What we could ask ourselves is whether we think Bamford is capable of recapturing his form from 2.5 years ago? I would say he is because he hasn't had any major injuries, he's just out of form and low on confidence. If you think he's finished at 24 years old then that's the end of discussion fair enough.

 

Then we come to Fletcher; have we seen enough of him to convince us that he should be starting games or coming off the bench ahead of Bamford? I'm not sure I have.

Do we think Fletcher is capable of hitting the heights Bamford has already hit in his career?

 

My argument is that the best Patrick Bamford is a better option than the best Ashley Fletcher. We should be trying harder to drag that out of him.

 

Bamford did start the cup game tue. Ok not a league game but fletcher didn’t start

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...