Cauley Woodrow - what did we see in him?

[RobintheRed Red]

9 hours ago, Aaron-Bcfc said:

When I saw a video of Fulham fans screaming "don't shoot" when he was in a dangerous position I knew we were getting some proper shite. Stop ******* playing him Johnson 

Yes hes crap mate

[RobintheRed Red]

18 hours ago, BCFC Richard said:

Just thought I'd point out that it's not actually that long ago that people were saying on here that he should be in because Fammy was a waste of space and Woodrow had done well in a cup game. He actually hasn't had that many chances and could easily come good to write him off completely is silly. 

was rated behind matt smith at fulham who also couldnt get in fulham team just saying

[Offside]

Much too early to write him off. The main question mark for me, though, is over what type of striker he is. Fox in the box? Not sure. Hold-up player who who is comfortable winning headers or playing with his back to the goal until support arrives? Not based on yesterday. Pacey striker who plays off the shoulder of the last defender? Doesn't look like it. Woodrow and Reid (and Reid was out of sorts yesterday, although the knock he received probably didn't help) didn't really link up at all yesterday and caused Leeds very few problems. Not a combination that seems to work.

[Jacki]

It’s early days for me, so the jury is still out, but I’ve seen nothing in Woodrow so far. He’s not quick, doesn’t look like a poacher, and isn’t strong enough to be a target man from what I’ve seen. Diedhiou, Đurić, Taylor and Reid all look like far better options. Hope I’m wrong, because as I say it’s too early to form a proper judgement, but the signs aren’t positive so far. 

[Xiled]

I don't think Diedhiou has 90 minutes of running in him (yet). With Leeds as mobile as they are, maybe the plan was to give him a run-out once Reid and Woodrow had chased the Leeds defence for at least the first half. Unfortunately from 2-0 down, we were more focused on damage limitation and never in the game.

Certainly keeping him fresh for Crystal Palace makes sense. The Watford and Stoke games had very little riding on them but doing well on Tuesday would put us in a different spotlight. The age old cup dilemma, when do you start playing your 'first' eleven?

I've not seen anything in Woodrow yet but I also thought Leko was going to pull teams to pieces. You can be wrong making early predictions either way.

[downendcity]

On 10/21/2017 at 17:34, nickolas said:

Yep. 

No pace. No power. No height. No ounce of scoring ability it would seem. 

I really hope we arent lining him up for a permanent contract!!

We usually discover this lack of ability only after we've signed a player permanently.

[ashton_fan]

He didn't get any service from the midfield on Saturday. Remember he plays in the same England team as Tammy and has been picked ahead of him on occasions. Also helped Burton stay up with his goals last season so people on here are writing him off too early.

[wendyredredrobin]

I asked when we signed him what a forward that coulsnt get a game with fulham could do for us but hoped to be proved wrong.  Unfortunately, I have seen little from him to convince me he is worth signing.

If he wants a regular game, he needs to drop to L1, he is only going to be sat on the bench with most Championship clubs.

We have a couple of our own forwards who are young, quick and have better development prospects.

I do wonder whether he was just signed for cover while Milan was out with the opportunity to show us that he was worth a contract.  To be fair against Leeds though, he didn't get much service.

[nickolas]

5 hours ago, downendcity said:

We usually discover this lack of ability only after we've signed a player permanently.

Exactly why i hope weve kindof gotten away with just a loan and no permanent deal! 

[Donkeeebles]

There's no doubt he was poor Saturday (as were most of them) I do however feel he contributed more than Reid who I thought was terrible. That was the same front pairing as the Derby game and they did pretty well that day so I didn't see it as an outrageous decision to play them. Based on that Derby match I'm not going to write off Woodrow just yet but he does have to start contributing more even from the bench. 

[robin_unreliant]

On 21/10/2017 at 19:14, redfieldred said:

Question - are we going to judge every player on the pitch today by that performance. I would certainly hope not because too many were asked to do jobs they are not natural at and once again pack was left to do virtually all the defensive work in midfield with very little assistance, he was ok for the last part of the first half, but as he tired the mistakes came in, mistakes I haven't seen from him since he bad part of last season, hegeler also, being asked to do the wrong job - possibly Woodrow is not an out and out striker and would be better played in the 10 position. 

It seems that half our attacking players are wanting to play the 10 position.

Not lead striker so pressure's off there.

Not CM exactly so not too much tackling

Not wide so don't need to cover FB.

Hmmm....wonder why they all fancy that role? Imo none of them have the ability needed to be effective in that role. You need a lot of vision, skill and good positioning to play it properly. BR is probably the best fit and makes sense to put him there as he can't do the dirty stuff.