City Sign Gillett (Merged)

[Son of Fred]

Do we need another midfielder?

if he has a bit of quality then a definate yes-honestly dont know anything about him im afraid.guess Forest fans will give us a brief...

[Son of Fred]

passes the ball accurately without any fuss and puts his foot in. Great signing, reminds me of Martin Rowlands.

 

 

just have to put up with the posy beginning to this but it's worth it!

thanks for that mate,interesting viewing..good passer who clearly is happy to put a foot in.definately brought in with sitting and protecting our back four strongly in mind..welcome to the madhouse mate!!! 

[Son of Fred]

January can't come quick enough!

 

Looking at the clip there, he looks to be a neat and tidy holding midfield player.

 

Don't forget we have Liam Kelly to come back at some point in the new year, someone has to be leaving from the midfield in Jan surely.

pearson(when fit)! Elliot,kilkenny to name but three..

[spudski]

Dude, in my previous post I was quoting directly from the 5 Pillars statement. 

 

Here's the link http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130206-lansdownfivepillars-641677.aspx

 

and here's the quote again

 

 

 

We arent currently doing that, based on our last 6/7 signings, indeed only McLaughlin and Dunk are under that figure, 5 Pillars gone out the window already?

 

 

 

See above, if you want a 'dig', have one at the 5 pillars we are currently ignoring pretty much after adhering to it rigidly over the summer. Bizarre way of working it, "stick with the pillars", "oh no, we'll ignore them", shocker!

Mate...seriously?

 

You seem to be on a one man mission to constantly be negative about the Club...

 

I can't remember the last time you actually said anything positive.

 

Why are you being so pedantic and nit picking.

 

It's obvious the Club want to recruit youth in the long term.

 

Bringing in older Loan players is not 'signing them'... for a long term policy.

 

It's just helping out in a sticky situation.

 

If SoD were to sign a 25 year old... would you complain again and say they aren't sticking to the 'policy'?

 

Honestly mate... surely you can see the situation?

 

You'd complain even more if we went down because SoD didn't bring in any loan help, because he couldn't find anyone suitable under 24... seriously I do wonder sometimes...

[ciderbeans]

one thing i did notice about his passing, even long passes, was that they were all along the floor. I guess this would be a good thing as weve been crying out for our players to stop hoofing it.

[Kid in the Riot]

See above, if you want a 'dig', have one at the 5 pillars we are currently ignoring pretty much after adhering to it rigidly over the summer. Bizarre way of working it, "stick with the pillars", "oh no, we'll ignore them", shocker!

 

Yes, they rigidly stuck to it in the summer when making PERMANENT signings. We are talking about two 28 day loans. Jesus.

[glynriley]

Yes, they rigidly stuck to it in the summer when making PERMANENT signings. We are talking about two 28 day loans. Jesus.

 

Just for clarity, Gillett is here until Jan 28th.

[spudski]

Mate, who are they playing for? You have to 'sign' a player on loan. There is no 'negativity' just an incredulity, that we aren't sticking to our own 'promises' that were made out to be sacrosanct, this time it will be different. Oh wait, no, no it wont,

 

As for positivity, oh didnt I say that Gillett " may be great, he may fit into the system really well and give us all the things we needed since Cisse sat there," in this very thread, Oh, that's right I did. Good to see that some  people just assume and dont read

I can only think you're on a wind up... no one can be this stupid... seriously?

 

Why can't you see these loan signings for what they are?

 

Instead of being so pedantic and having to knock all the time.

 

I read your posts in disbelief that someone just doesn't get it like you do.

 

Your talk about Midfield overload for example...

 

Do you think Midfielders all offer the same attributes?

 

They are all here for a reason. To offer something different when needed.

 

Even the most uneduacated football fan would know this...

 

This forum is becoming so pedantic...it's making my head hurt.

 

If any forum was judged on being pedantic and lack of football knowledge this forum would win hands down

[BCFC_Dan]

We arent currently doing that, based on our last 6/7 signings, indeed only McLaughlin and Dunk are under that figure, 5 Pillars gone out the window already?

 

 

The last 6/7 signings have been short term ones since the season started due to exceptional circumstances (injury, poor form, abuse from supporters). You can cherry-pick numbers as you wish to make your point, but if you extended your set to include transfers from the summer (when, proper long-term, thought-out, according-to-the-policy recruitment occurs) you'd have to include Flint, Williams, Wagstaff, JET, Wynter and Parrish. Suddenly it's not 2 out of 6 players fitting the policy, it's 8 out of 12 which is a majority.

 

If you extend further back to include McInnes' permanent signings you can add Kelly, Cunningham and Baldock to that list.

 

The club haven't "abandoned" the strategy completely (at least I hope they haven't) they've just been forced to make short-term signings to cover over cracks, which frankly is to be expected given the state of the club.

[!james]

Ooh ooh is this the 'produce one sided stats of transfers to argue your point' part of the topic??

 

Permanent transfers Age Marlon Pack 22 Marlon Harewood 33 Elliot Parish 23 Jay Emmanuel-Thomas 22 Scott Wagstaff 23 Aden Flint 23 Jordan Wynter 19 Derrick Williams 20 Frank Fielding 25 Mitch Brundle 18 Dave Richards (loan to perm) 19 Average age 22.5

 

Loans/short term deals Age Lewis Dunk 21 Stephen McLaughlin 23 James O'Connor 28 Nicky Shorey 32 Simon Gillett 27 Karleigh Osborne 25 Average age 26

 

Players in red age 24 or under

 

Average age of combined permanent and loan signings: 23.7

 

 

 

[RedM]

Sounds like Steve galliers. Anyone?

I loved Galliers, great player for us. Yes he immediately came to mind, like I said that's what I'm hoping for.

[Kid in the Riot]

No, I'm talking about all our signings since then. Harewood, Shorey??? Ring any bells? No?  Okay then. just checking.  Ill even chuck in that Cardiff Keeper Richards? who is 19, and that still doesnt mean we have adhered, we've signed more older than within our defined boundaries. We either create rules and stick to them or we don't make such promises. It's not rocket science KITR

 

For starters the pillars aren't rules, are they? Harewood and Shorey, the latter who is also on loan - what's your point? Time and time again it has been explained that you need experienced heads amongst a young squad. It's not rocket science.

[Lew-T]

Ooh ooh is this the 'produce one sided stats of transfers to argue your point' part of the topic??

Permanent transfers Age Marlon Pack 22 Marlon Harewood 33 Elliot Parish 23 Jay Emmanuel-Thomas 22 Scott Wagstaff 23 Aden Flint 23 Jordan Wynter 19 Derrick Williams 20 Frank Fielding 25 Mitch Brundle 18 Dave Richards (loan to perm) 19 Average age 22.5

Loans/short term deals Age Lewis Dunk 21 Stephen McLaughlin 23 James O'Connor 28 Nicky Shorey 32 Simon Gillett 27 Karleigh Osborne 25 Average age 26

Players in red age 24 or under

Average age of combined permanent and loan signings: 23.7

There you go Ralph, you can have a lye down now.

[Gazred]

I can only think you're on a wind up... no one can be this stupid... seriously?

 

Why can't you see these loan signings for what they are?

 

Instead of being so pedantic and having to knock all the time.

 

I read your posts in disbelief that someone just doesn't get it like you do.

 

Your talk about Midfield overload for example...

 

Do you think Midfielders all offer the same attributes?

 

They are all here for a reason. To offer something different when needed.

 

Even the most uneduacated football fan would know this...

 

This forum is becoming so pedantic...it's making my head hurt.

 

If any forum was judged on being pedantic and lack of football knowledge this forum would win hands down

 

I stuck him on ignore a couple months back, most negative poster on here, rather not read it myself, so i dont!

[Nogbad the Bad]

Maybe just me who finds the possession game incredibly oring. Old-fashioned but give me two flying wingers and a 6ft forward up top any day. Watching the ball go tentatively side to side back to front tiki taki is blooming dull from my view of the pitch.

In any case, I stand by my point, the football is just as ineffective and just as predictable, only for now we are passing for passing's sake only for an eventual revert to type ball.

 

You're certainly not the only one - I made a similar post last night which for some reason got lost on the point of posting.

 

If this posession football we're aiming for doesn't lead to regular threats on the opposition goal then it's just that - boring.

 

Albert, our most exciting player for many years, was sidelined by SO'D for periods last season because he didn't fit in to the style the team was playing.

 

That sort of thinking won't do for me, it's the exciting, extraordinary players I expect to see when I pay to watch professional football, not tippy tappy ten yard passes that the most ordinary of players can achieve.

 

This style of football, unless it's very successful, leading to goals and excitement, will empty the stands at AG. The players simply aren't good enough to do it to a standard that will bring success imo, so with the most exciting players being forced to modify their game under threat of exclusion, we are left with a very unappealing spectacle.

[spudski]

You're certainly not the only one - I made a similar post last night which for some reason got lost on the point of posting.

 

If this posession football we're aiming for doesn't lead to regular threats on the opposition goal then it's just that - boring.

 

Albert, our most exciting player for many years, was sidelined by SO'D for periods last season because he didn't fit in to the style the team was playing.

 

That sort of thinking won't do for me, it's the exciting, extraordinary players I expect to see when I pay to watch professional football, not tippy tappy ten yard passes that the most ordinary of players can achieve.

 

This style of football, unless it's very successful, leading to goals and excitement, will empty the stands at AG. The players simply aren't good enough to do it to a standard that will bring success imo, so with the most exciting players being forced to modify their game under threat of exclusion, we are left with a very unappealing spectacle.

I think you'll need a time machine mate... that sort of football you want is dying for a reason... it's been worked out and too easy to defend against.

We've played that way for years... 2 wingers and a couple forwards.

It's no coincidence that we are back in League 1

You are also so wrong if you believe close possession football is easy and ordinary players can do it well.

It takes brains and intelligence to understand it and then carry it out.

It's no wonder we as a nation are miles behind others, because we've stuck with traditional wingers and forwards for far too long.

I also think you are in a minority... plenty of people enjoy possession based football.

When done well... Barcelona... Swansea and Arsenal to a lesser degree... it's a joy to watch.

We are going for youth to train in this way for the long term.

It needs to happen or well forever be dinosaurs in footballing terms.

[The Casual Connoisseur]

Not so sure about that. Given Gilletts size, I'd say Bobby Reids place is probably most in jeapordy

I hope you are joking. Bobby is an exciting attacking player who keeps things moving and can make things happen, especially when playing with Taylor (as Saturday proved).

Gillett is a holding midfielder, still unsure why we've brought him in, unless its simply for cover, or the club knows there's a possibility of losing someone in January?

[glynriley]

I hope you are joking. Bobby is an exciting attacking player who keeps things moving and can make things happen, especially when playing with Taylor (as Saturday proved).

Gillett is a holding midfielder, still unsure why we've brought him in, unless its simply for cover, or the club knows there's a possibility of losing someone in January?

 

Just the way I see it. Will be surprised if we start with 2 players who are 5'7 in midfield.

 

I reckon Reid will play tomorrow, don't change a winning side and all that caper, and Gillett will start on Tuesday as SOD has said many times that Bobby struggles with Saturday, Tuesday, Saturday games.

[!james]

To you both below, did you miss the bit where I said  transfers since the Summer? Nope? okay then TRANSFERS SINCE THE SUMMER! or since towards the end of the transfer window, if you prefer. I've already mentioned this several times, clearly it's been missed so will need it writ large.

 

 

Which one is it? Which one fits the agenda more?

 

MAKE YOUR MIND UP!

[Aizoon]

Maybe just me who finds the possession game incredibly oring. Old-fashioned but give me two flying wingers and a 6ft forward up top any day. Watching the ball go tentatively side to side back to front tiki taki is blooming dull from my view of the pitch.

In any case, I stand by my point, the football is just as ineffective and just as predictable, only for now we are passing for passing's sake only for an eventual revert to type ball.

 

I do take your point, but I disagree. Still, it's a good point, well made, and that argument's been going ever since someone first kicked a pig's bladder around a field.

 

Makes a change from some of the moronic SOD OUT posts on here

[spudski]

 

 

            I give up mate... trying to have a serious football discussion with you is nigh on impossible.

 

Until you actually grasp and understand what is happening and the reasons for such signings...then it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with you.

 

Like others have noted, you are seeing things that fit your agenda.

 

Picking on little things to fit your negativity.

 

You can call it all you like... it's still negative and Pedantic.

 

This is football for Christ sake.

 

You make plans and they don't always work.

You try to fix them and continue working with the plans and players in training.

Bringing in short term loans to help us is not going to damage others prospects.

 

Players have come in to do a job...it's taking longer than we would have liked for some, but it doesn't mean they have abandoned ship. They'll be working hard behind the scenes and in training.

 

Anyway....said enough on the subject..you've given me a headache... i'm off for a spot of lunch and a pint

[BCFC_Dan]

To you both below, did you miss the bit where I said  transfers since the Summer? Nope? okay then TRANSFERS SINCE THE SUMMER! or since towards the end of the transfer window, if you prefer. I've already mentioned this several times, clearly it's been missed so will need it writ large.

 

 

 

Ah great. Well I'm measuring the team's performance on the last ONE GAME! 

 

Sean O'Driscoll has a 100% win record and is the best manager the club has ever had.

 

Now come back when you want to debate using proper figures and not an arbitrary subset that happens to back up your argument. 

[Kid in the Riot]

If they are not rules for the club to follow, KITR, what are they then? just there to be completely ignored? Something that looks pretty? Rhetoric?

 

Nickey Shorey isnt on loan, we've signed him on a short term contract following his release from Reading http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23897529

 

My point is that we seem to have abandoned the principle as soon as the going has gotten tough.  

"Time and time again"...... it's bobbins. I've pointed out Crewe, Oldham and Carlisle among others and also Swindon when they beat us had younger squads than we have had out. Our squad also has experience, much of it at a higher level. The players we have ARE good enough, the tactics employed currently ARE NOT.  I refuse to buy into the self perpetuating myth that experience heads will help, when the players we do have, in large, experience. 

 

Using another example, look at Blackburn who put out a team of average age 22.45 and indeed have the youngest team in the Champs, they are currently 12th http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/championship/altersschnitt/wettbewerb_GB2.html

 

Or look at Southampton who sit 5th in the Prem, their lowest average age for a team is 24.2 http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/premier-league/altersschnitt/wettbewerb_GB1.html. Villa's are younger still and they are 12th.  

Having young teams does not mean that success is impossible. 

 

Everyone it seems, apart from you, understands the reasoning behind the youth recruitment pillar. No, it is NOT a hard and fast rule as I see it.

 

The problem we previously had was signing EXPENSIVE, AGING players on LENGTHY contracts. Do you agree?

 

Now tell me - are we still doing that?

 

You are panicking unnecessarily. If in the summer we give the likes of Elliott, Fontaine and Kilkenny 4 year deals then clearly we have not learned a thing.

 

But we won't be, and I do not see any issue in signing a bit of experience on short term deals. Long term, it will not prevent good quality youngsters coming through the under 18s and 21s and into the first team.

[GrahamC]

Why does anyone bother to debate with him?

 

Put him on ignore, it is repetitive, selective nonsense.

[!james]

Summer ends traditionally around the Vernal Equidox on the 21st September, though some will say that it ends at the end of August. Conveniently, that's (End of August) is traditionally when the transfer window ends. So by those grounds, both statements (Since the Summer and towards the end of the transfer window) are correct as they relate to the same thing.

When you've stopped messing about with the semantics, would you like to acknowledge that I've already made the point that we adhered to the Pillar regarding transfers throughout the transfer window, and appear to have abandoned it some what since, or would you prefer just to have a dig and go on about agendas? This isnt some kind of committee meeting !James. It's a discussion forum. Im trying to discuss

Me semantics?! Fantastic, thanks for that best laugh I've had today so far!

Quite happy to have a dig about your agenda as you clearly have one and I'm clearly not the only person who has picked up on this. Feel free to go and swallow a thesaurus again, trawl the internet for facts and come back with another witty reply though...

[JamesBCFC]

City 169 I hope Ive pulled the right bits out of your response

 

It seems to me that the loans have been brought in because players weren't performing or their position became 'untenable'- eg with Fontaine, leading him going on loan and o'connor coming in, o'connor gets injured so we bring dunk in.I'm sure that if one or two midfielders got injured there would be complaints of lack of depth- we now have a loan that ends around the time Kelly comes back

 

Who hasnt been performing and who is untenable in Midfield? Wynter? Who signed him in the first place? Lack of Depth? 

 

Our midfielders, central or otherwise (cribbed from TTO on Ziderheads)

 

11.Marvin Elliott

12.Liam Kelly........Xmas

13.Bobby Reid

14.Neil Kilkenny

15.Jordan Wynter

16 Stephen Pearson..Operation

18.Marlon Pack

18a.Simon Gillett

18b McLaughlin

22.Scott Wagstaff

 

23.Joe Bryan

 

That's 11 into 4/5 or 9 with two injured and 10 if you count JET as a midfielder (some do) and back to 11/12 when adding in Morrell/Burns .Bit stacked, isnt it?

 

I'm sure that if one or two midfielders got injured there would be complaints of lack of depth- we now have a loan that ends around the time Kelly comes back

 

See above

 

Here you've chosen only things that suit you're argument, if we look at permanent transfers it's 7 under 24 and 2 over (unless shorey is a permanent transfer, I'm not sure, in which case it's 7/3)

 

No, I quoted directly from the 5 pillars, and then looked at our last signings Osbourne at 25 is over that age range (just, but still over). Over the summer then in the main yeah we stuck to it. Since then it's gone out the window! So much for adhering to it

 

In regards to strength in depth I wouldn't say we had that at CB, and we just about have enough in midfield and as we are coming up to a part oft he season where fixtures get contested, it's not going to hapurt to have an extra player we can use

I wouldnt say we have either, re CB nor upfront, given their general ineptitude.  In midfield we are more than stacked

I didn't say that any of our midfield was untenable, I was using what sod had said about Fontaine as an example, although and I may be wrong I think it applied to Kilkenny as well. With wynter as I've said in a previous post but possibly on a different thread, only sod and other people within the club know why he isn't playing, for all we know he been playing in the development squad/reserves since his return from injury or perhaps sod thought that as pressure was building on the team as we hadn't won a league game until last week then it would be the best idea to use wynter, the fact is we don't know the reason and it could be many things.

Yes you quoted from the 5 pillars, but it didn't say that there would be no signings over 24, only that most would be. The club has stuck to this for permanent transfers even to the extent that shorey who playing in the premier league a couple of seasons ago is only here until the end of the season, and the loan deals have all been short term ones.

So 9 with 2 injured and in that 9, 3 of them aren't usually played centrally- Bryan, wagstaff and McLaughlin

Bobby Reid usually plays as an attacking minded midfielder

Then there's Kilkenny who i think we've seen the last of

And that leaves 4 into 2 places out of wynter, pack, Elliot and Gillett- wynter is young and inexperienced, pack is young and has decent experience but not at this level, and now we have Elliot and Gillett who have good experience at this level and above

[BCFC_Dan]

Fair enough, oh wait, that was sarcasm wasnt it.  I have used 'proper' figures. You just dont agree with them. It's a discussion forum, it happens 

 

 

No, what you're doing is taking an arbitrary subset of data and using it to back up your argument whilst discarding any figures that don't fit. That happens a lot, too, but it doesn't make it right.

 

I would be concerned if the players signed recently on short term contracts were recruited over the summer on long term ones. That would indeed be ignoring the strategy.

 

I will also be concerned if we find ourselves in this same position year after year.

 

What we have here, at the moment, though, is a one-off reaction to circumstance. We have injuries. We have terrible form. We have an unbalanced squad which lacks experience in key positions and has a couple of high earners consuming large amounts of budget for little added value. It's a situation that calls for exactly the kind of short-term signings the club has been making.

 

You seem to have an opinion that making these signings is detrimental to the development of young players already at the club. Possibly that's the case. Possibly they could all come in and, despite their lack of experience, despite the pressure on the team with one league win all season, despite the pressure from fans expecting success, turn in the kind of performances required. That seems unlikely to me, though, and it clearly seems equally unlikely to the manager. You're allowed to think differently, that's fine. It doesn't make the rest of your argument more valid, though.

[Major Isewater]

I do take your point, but I disagree. Still, it's a good point, well made, and that argument's been going ever since someone first kicked a pig's bladder around a field.

Makes a change from some of the moronic SOD OUT posts on here

SOD Out

[Portland Bill]

Ralph, you have been slaughtering the manager and the club all season,the manager brings in 2 players to try and change our fortune and you still find an agenda to slag everything off.

What are you actually trying to achieve with all this constant whining about everything Bristol City?

[!james]

Re the BIB, so what is it then? No one seems to know? or wants to say it in the open!   *I can tell you the answer, I don't have one*

 

That the majority of your posts are negative? That you are consistently trying to undermine what the club is trying to achieve? The constant digs at the manager?

 

You must have been gutted when we won last weekend!