cheese Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Apparently? Haven't seen it mentioned anywhere on here. Apologies if I've missed it. 1 Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Or possibly Naismith returning to fitness? Naismith and Sykes back to fitness, Cornick out and Atkinson on loan. 1 Quote
Charlie BCFC Posted January 3 Posted January 3 3 minutes ago, Selred said: BBC reporter. Imagine JKL is returning. I hope not, doing brilliantly there and in a promotion race. With McNally, Dickie and Vyner all starting and Naismith now back we’re quite well covered. Roberts and Tanner can also play in a 3 6 Quote
Selred Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Not against this to be honest, needs game time following his injury. Hopefully can get some form and really challenge next season. 1 Quote
Loosey Boy Posted January 3 Posted January 3 If this one happens alongside the expected departure of Cornick, could it be that we are making room in the budget for a striker to come in on loan? 2 3 Quote
BCFCGav Posted January 3 Posted January 3 I’m for and against this one. Rob getting Championship game time is a big plus but we’re relying heavily on Vyner, McNally and Dickie staying fit, with only Naismith as cover. Has to be a JKL recall, as others have said. 3 Quote
And Its Smith Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Makes sense. A lot of money being paid to him to sit on the bench. 1 Quote
Redshorts Posted January 3 Posted January 3 14 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Or possibly Naismith returning to fitness? Naismith and Sykes back to fitness, Cornick out and Atkinson on loan. Or a CB coming in from Swansea 1 Quote
Dastardly and Muttley Posted January 3 Posted January 3 This is a shame. Decent player, but injuries have held him back. Another with Cornick that LM won’t play. Hope they’re not clearing space to allow him to waste even more money. 7 5 Quote
petehinton Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Certainly needs the minutes, but also one that Manning, bizarrely imo, doesn’t seem to particularly rate 10 Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said: This is a shame. Decent player, but injuries have held him back. Another with Cornick that LM won’t play. Hope they’re not clearing space to allow him to waste even more money. If they are clearing space for the right player at the right price.. say Riis or someone of that calibre I wouldn't be totally averse as he could be our attack leader for several years albeit it would take money from the Summer budget. That aside yeah, we should really have a quiet January IMO. If he wants to recruit in a position whereby we are clearly strong, well stocked or there is a useful pathway absolutely should not be adding someone. Edited January 3 by Mr Popodopolous 2 Quote
1960maaan Posted January 3 Posted January 3 If he's fit enough for loan , I would question why he hasn't even got minutes in a game we were 3-0 at HT. That said , if he's not going to push past the ones starting then getting Knight-Label back to be around the first team would be good and Atkinson gets to prove fitness and get his confidence back. What I wouldn't want is to rely on Naismith or a FB filling in. It does imply we have a plan as we surely wouldn't leave ourselves short of cover with our injury record. 2 2 Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) Okay..the strategic planning in respect of Darling. Vyner, Dickie, McNally, and fitness permitting Naismith. In summer, Atkinson either returns or goes again whereas JKL certainly does go..Naismith given age and injury probably goes. Is he of the level, is he worth it..Pathway, Cost, Squad Strategy? Edited January 3 by Mr Popodopolous Quote
MythikRobins Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) Don't mind it we've got enough cover there. Especially if Naismith might not be going. Edited January 3 by MythikRobins Quote
Robbored Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Obviously Atkinson needs games and he’s not likely to get much opportunity at City with Dickie and Vyner as first choice CBs with Naismith pretty much back in the frame. Why not allow Pompey to get Atkinson fully fit ready to return to City next season? 4 Quote
bearded_red Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Funnily enough I was saying in the pub after the game on Sunday that it would surely make sense for Portsmouth to ask if they could take Atkinson. Quote
BobBobBobbin Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Hope it's a straight loan, sadly imagine it will be with an option. I know he's been out for a long time but the Atkinson who got injured is the best centre back at the club imo. I miss his marauding runs from the back 4 1 Quote
alexukhc Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Rob’s family are in the Hampshire area, makes lots of sense this 1 Quote
Jose Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said: Okay..the strategic planning in respect of Darling. Vyner, Dickie, McNally, and fitness permitting Naismith. In summer, Atkinson either returns or goes again whereas JKL certainly does go..Naismith given age and injury probably goes. Is he of the level, is he worth it..Pathway, Cost, Squad Strategy? No………. Simple as that. The only players we should be looking to bring in if possible is a half decent forward and perhaps competition for Max. Unless we see permanent outgoings. Edited January 3 by Jose 1 1 Quote
Dolman Block B Posted January 3 Posted January 3 I wouldn’t let him go on loan if one of the other three get injured then we are back in the shite 2 Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 minute ago, Dolman Block B said: I wouldn’t let him go on loan if one of the other three get injured then we are back in the shite Naismith is almost back I reckon, not yet but nearly. Sykes ditto. Quote
Northern Red Posted January 3 Posted January 3 If we're relying on Naismith to stay fit then we'll deserve to be struggling for options when the inevitable happens. 6 Quote
cidercity1987 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 I don't really get the idea that Atkinson isn't good enough. He was certainly playing well up to his injury and we seem to have spent an awful lot of money upgrading an area we were pretty much covered in. The only way anymore central defensive signings make sense (Darling?)is if the rumoured interest in Vyner and Dickie are true, particularly as I am very fond of Tanner and Roberts in the wide CB in a 3 position 1 Quote
LondonBristolian Posted January 3 Posted January 3 With three at the back, I'd want another defender in the squad. I realise Tanner and Roberts can cover but we may need them at full back. Naismith is better than some fans give him credit for but I think he's played 5 or 6 games in 14 months and it's a big gamble to expect him to stay fit for the second half of the season. 2 Quote
LondonBristolian Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) 5 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said: With three at the back, I'd want another defender in the squad. I realise Tanner and Roberts can cover but we may need them at full back. Naismith is better than some fans give him credit for but I think he's played 5 or 6 games in 14 months and it's a big gamble to expect him to stay fit for the second half of the season. (Just to add to this, I'd have no problem with the additional defender being someone from the youth set-up but Araoye and JKL seem further away than they were a year ago and I've no idea if anyone else in the under-21s is at a point where they could step up) Edited January 3 by LondonBristolian Quote
GrahamC Posted January 3 Posted January 3 18 minutes ago, bearded_red said: Funnily enough I was saying in the pub after the game on Sunday that it would surely make sense for Portsmouth to ask if they could take Atkinson. Said exactly the same thing at HT, especially as we don’t play them again. I’m not sure we will recall JKL unless we get an injury this month, both Tanner (RCB) & Roberts (LCB) can play there & we have clearly decided to keep Naismith around. Important time for him, needs a run of games & was never getting that here. 3 Quote
Dastardly and Muttley Posted January 3 Posted January 3 2 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said: (Just to add to this, I'd have no problem with the additional defender being someone from the youth set-up but Araoye and JKL seem further away than they were a year ago and I've no idea if anyone else in the under-23s is at a point where they could step up) No one from the u23s would be trusted to step up under current management, even if they could. 2 Quote
cidercity1987 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 This would be a great signing for Pompey BTW. I cannot believe they turned up for an actual Championship game with Pack and Towler CB's Quote
petehinton Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 minute ago, cidercity1987 said: This would be a great signing for Pompey BTW. I cannot believe they turned up for an actual Championship game with Pack and Towler CB's Played Pack at CB at their place against us, and that didn’t go too badly for them! 1 Quote
Sandhurst Red Posted January 3 Posted January 3 I'm amazed he's not been given minutes in recent weeks. I'd even go as far as saying i'm annoyed by it. If this is true, I hope it is to get minutes to then be considered again next year. Anyone know his contract situation? Prior to his injury (and the more recent form of Dickie - we'll forget Sunday at 92 mins...) he is the best CB we have. With Tanner and McRorie back, i'd play Atkinson over Vyner everytime - someone who i still can't see beyond being an average League One player. Forget the recent clean sheets - the only thing Vyner provides is a bit of physicality - everything else he lacks, and i'm convinced teams target him, knowing of his frailties. 3 1 Quote
BobBobBobbin Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Just now, alexukhc said: Modern day boom boom With the added bonus of being a fine player on the ball! 2 Quote
Henry Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) 6 minutes ago, petehinton said: Played Pack at CB at their place against us, and that didn’t go too badly for them! Went from Bobby Moore to Taylor Moore in a couple of weeks. Edited January 3 by Henry 1 6 Quote
Silvio Dante Posted January 3 Posted January 3 40 minutes ago, BCFCGav said: I’m for and against this one. Rob getting Championship game time is a big plus but we’re relying heavily on Vyner, McNally and Dickie staying fit, with only Naismith as cover. Has to be a JKL recall, as others have said. I think this sums it up. We have had opportunity to give Atkinson minutes recently in the event he’s needed in the Portsmouth game when comfortable. The fact we didn’t probably suggests he’s falling into the Cornick shaped twilight zone of being on the bench but not in consideration. As of right now, we might be confident of match fitness but not match sharpness as he’s not had the minutes. My feeling is I’d like him to get minutes at this level to prove to himself and us that his injuries are behind him (it is doubtful as to the level he’ll reach after two years out but even at 80% he’s still a good option at this level). I wouldn’t even be considering replacing him with a permanent signing and an approaching fitness Naismith and a recalled JKL has to be the call. Have a horrible feeling it’ll be with a view to a permanent though. 2 Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) 2 minutes ago, petehinton said: Played Pack at CB at their place against us, and that didn’t go too badly for them! They seem a very different side at Home of late. Also beat Preston 3-1, Coventry 4-1 and Swansea 4-0..0-0 v Norwich too as well as 3-0 v us of course. Edited January 3 by Mr Popodopolous Quote
Mr Hankey Posted January 3 Posted January 3 As much as i like Atkinson, i think people maybe underestimating the impact of having pretty much 2 years out - perhaps he just hasn't come back in training the way they hoped he would? Maybe 6 months away can get him back to where we need him, or perhaps it's 6 months away for him to earn himself a move whilst we recoup some money & save some wages? 14 Quote
Jose Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Just now, Sandhurst Red said: I'm amazed he's not been given minutes in recent weeks. I'd even go as far as saying i'm annoyed by it. If this is true, I hope it is to get minutes to then be considered again next year. Anyone know his contract situation? Prior to his injury (and the more recent form of Dickie - we'll forget Sunday at 92 mins...) he is the best CB we have. With Tanner and McRorie back, i'd play Atkinson over Vyner everytime - someone who i still can't see beyond being an average League One player. Forget the recent clean sheets - the only thing Vyner provides is a bit of physicality - everything else he lacks, and i'm convinced teams target him, knowing of his frailties. I honestly think Vyner has so many attributes to be a very good player but he loses concentration too often and his passing can be awful at times. Which is frustrating as he looks comfortable on the ball and can pick a pass. Strange one. 2 1 Quote
Sandhurst Red Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Just now, Jose said: I honestly think Vyner has so many attributes to be a very good player but he loses concentration too often and his passing can be awful at times. Which is frustrating as he looks comfortable on the ball and can pick a pass. Strange one. Spot-On. He should be a better player, but often panics, gives away the ball cheaply and those around us play a game each time - what minute will we get a 'Vyner' - an unforced error that gifts the opposition a chance. I never like to put a downer on any City player - but sorry, for me, if we are serious about competing about the top end of the division, he's not the calibre we require. 2 3 1 Quote
Jose Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) Just now, Sandhurst Red said: Spot-On. He should be a better player, but often panics, gives away the ball cheaply and those around us play a game each time - what minute will we get a 'Vyner' - an unforced error that gifts the opposition a chance. I never like to put a downer on any City player - but sorry, for me, if we are serious about competing about the top end of the division, he's not the calibre we require. We are paying him like a top player if rumours are to be believed. Edited January 3 by Jose Quote
Davefevs Posted January 3 Posted January 3 44 minutes ago, And Its Smith said: Makes sense. A lot of money being paid to him to sit on the bench. He’s not on a big wage in terms of peer ranking in the squad. He signed a deal whilst injured for a bit of security and wasn’t in as string a bargaining position as he would’ve been before Sunderland (a). He hates u21 football, so he either sits in the bench and remains patient, or he goes and gets done first team footie. A champ loan is good as we get to see him at this level for hopefully 20 games. And he comes back in the summer ready to compete with a year left on his deal. A fit Big-Rob had something to offer to us. 8 1 Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 minute ago, Sandhurst Red said: Spot-On. He should be a better player, but often panics, gives away the ball cheaply and those around us play a game each time - what minute will we get a 'Vyner' - an unforced error that gifts the opposition a chance. I never like to put a downer on any City player - but sorry, for me, if we are serious about competing about the top end of the division, he's not the calibre we require. Just now, Jose said: We are paying him like a top player if rumours are to be believed. Vyner in a 3...Think he's better in a paid with Dickie and Fullbacs, those 2, Max and maybe Knight in the middle or James Idk was part of the cornerstone for 4th best defence last year. Quote
italian dave Posted January 3 Posted January 3 35 minutes ago, 1960maaan said: If he's fit enough for loan , I would question why he hasn't even got minutes in a game we were 3-0 at HT. That said , if he's not going to push past the ones starting then getting Knight-Label back to be around the first team would be good and Atkinson gets to prove fitness and get his confidence back. What I wouldn't want is to rely on Naismith or a FB filling in. It does imply we have a plan as we surely wouldn't leave ourselves short of cover with our injury record. I think maybe because the 0 was more important than anything else? I felt at times during the second half that we seemed to be playing as though we’d rather it ended 3-0 than 4-1. I can see the sense of it…just worry that we’ve thought before we’ve got defensive cover sorted, and then the injuries come along! 1 Quote
BobBobBobbin Posted January 3 Posted January 3 2 minutes ago, Jose said: I honestly think Vyner has so many attributes to be a very good player but he loses concentration too often and his passing can be awful at times. Which is frustrating as he looks comfortable on the ball and can pick a pass. Strange one. The passing stuff is because of the type of passes he is trying to execute. Line breakers through the middle of the pitch. The hardest pass to play and he has a pretty high success rate for a second tier centre half. Paul Scholes gave the ball away a lot too... He could play it simple but we'd never actually play out. Football is about risks; if you celebrate the success you have to tolerate the failures. Same goes for players like Anis. 6 3 Quote
Nogbad the Bad Posted January 3 Posted January 3 14 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said: I don't really get the idea that Atkinson isn't good enough. He was certainly playing well up to his injury and we seem to have spent an awful lot of money upgrading an area we were pretty much covered in. The only way anymore central defensive signings make sense (Darling?)is if the rumoured interest in Vyner and Dickie are true, particularly as I am very fond of Tanner and Roberts in the wide CB in a 3 position I must have missed this. No surprise if there's interest in Dickie, although I'm not aware of anything specific, but I'm surprised about Vyner. Who is supposedly interested in Zac? Quote
Sandhurst Red Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Just now, Mr Popodopolous said: Vyner in a 3...Think he's better in a paid with Dickie and Fullbacs, those 2, Max and maybe Knight in the middle or James Idk was part of the cornerstone for 4th best defence last year. Fair comment about 4th best defence last season - but I would urge you to watch back the goals we have conceded this year. There is a high % common trend..... and Vyner is often responsible in having given the ball away, being out of position or being slow to react to rebounds. I like him, and have no doubt his pride to represent the club - but for me, a pre-injury Atkinson is a much superior CB choice than Vyner is. Quote
Nugget Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Great move for all if true. See how he fares for next season to prove his fitness & get game time. Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Sandhurst Red said: Fair comment about 4th best defence last season - but I would urge you to watch back the goals we have conceded this year. There is a high % common trend..... and Vyner is often responsible in having given the ball away, being out of position or being slow to react to rebounds. I like him, and have no doubt his pride to represent the club - but for me, a pre-injury Atkinson is a much superior CB choice than Vyner is. I will watch some back, still not fully sold on the Back 3 though..McNally and some of his form does leave a dilemma sure. Vyner was our Players Player of the Season 2 years ago but I was and still am a big pre-injury Atkinson fan. Edited January 3 by Mr Popodopolous 2 Quote
RED4LIFE Posted January 3 Posted January 3 53 minutes ago, Redshorts said: Or a CB coming in from Swansea To paraphrase Blackadder- "what was that Darling?" Quote
Sandhurst Red Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 minute ago, BobBobBobbin said: The passing stuff is because of the type of passes he is trying to execute. Line breakers through the middle of the pitch. The hardest pass to play and he has a pretty high success rate for a second tier centre half. Paul Scholes gave the ball away a lot too... He could play it simple but we'd never actually play out. Football is about risks; if you celebrate the success you have to tolerate the failures. Same goes for players like Anis. I respect your view but feel we watch very different games. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong statistically about the line breaking passes you mention, but those aside - it is the basic passes that he often gets wrong. Simple passes that should allow a player to step onto the ball with an in-stride, often require an adjustment. His crossing in the final 3rd is also, unacceptable`for a professional at his level. I'm all for taking risks - but my point is, Atkinson always was that passing out CB who could pick out a pass. I've no doubt that Vyner has been asked to play the same way, but I don't believe his success rate is anywhere as high as you suggest. 1 Quote
Jose Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Just now, BobBobBobbin said: The passing stuff is because of the type of passes he is trying to execute. Line breakers through the middle of the pitch. The hardest pass to play and he has a pretty high success rate for a second tier centre half. Paul Scholes gave the ball away a lot too... He could play it simple but we'd never actually play out. Football is about risks; if you celebrate the success you have to tolerate the failures. Same goes for players like Anis. Oh come on, he is passing the ball out of play so often after over hitting it. It’s a cop out for him to get rid of the ball down the line to absolutely no one. The reason I find it frustrating is because he’s capable. His nice ball into feet for the second against Plymouth a prime example of him able to do it. He can actually carry the ball well too. Confidence thing maybe? I don’t know. Just think he’s got the attributes to be better than he is. Quote
INCRED Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 hour ago, Selred said: Not against this to be honest, needs game time following his injury. Hopefully can get some form and really challenge next season. I’m not against it as playing a few u21 games isn’t ideal although I’m sure he would be on a recall if we needed him back Quote
Silvio Dante Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Just now, TDarwall said: It's offical & there's a comment from Tinnion! Bollocks. But congratulations on spelling “official” wrong in honour of Tinnion. 8 Quote
Mr Popodopolous Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Good luck Rob. Hope he can find some semblance of consistent gametime in the first instance and then some form and flourish (ball carrying eventually). 1 Quote
Silvio Dante Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Evening Post reporting it as a “straight” loan deal - the OS story doesn’t state either way. Quote
steveybadger Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 hour ago, petehinton said: Certainly needs the minutes, but also one that Manning, bizarrely imo, doesn’t seem to particularly rate I rate him too but he’s barely been fit until quite recently. And who would you drop? And we have other cover in a back 3 or 4. It also possibly tests out whether he is actually still good / fit enough to play at this level? Quote
One Team Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 hour ago, petehinton said: Certainly needs the minutes, but also one that Manning, bizarrely imo, doesn’t seem to particularly rate You can’t add a ‘y’ to his name that’s the reason! 9 minutes ago, TDarwall said: It's offical & there's a comment from Tinnion! But, but he’s been sacked?! Quote
ashton_fan Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Given Roberts, Pring and Tanner can also cover CB plus we can play with a back four if short this is low risk, plus there may be a recall option if things go completely pear shaped 1 Quote
W-S-M Seagull Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Another one bites the dust. Good move for him to get some regular football but he should have had some minutes for us by now. There has been a couple of opportunities to do so. Quote
Redrascal2 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 hour ago, Loosey Boy said: If this one happens alongside the expected departure of Cornick, could it be that we are making room in the budget for a striker to come in on loan? Sounds like we are recouping some of the money spent in the Summer. Quote
Redrascal2 Posted January 3 Posted January 3 4 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said: Another one bites the dust. Good move for him to get some regular football but he should have had some minutes for us by now. There has been a couple of opportunities to do so. Agree with that. Disappointed we have not seen him playing for us particularly after our repeated failures to hold on to a lead. Hope he comes back. Quote
HengroveReds Posted January 3 Posted January 3 (edited) Rob excellent pre injury, 18 months out and not played a minute so think he deserves minutes as will be very rusty, suprised he’s got a champ loan to be honest! Next few months on loan will be telling to see if he has a career at city still. We can revert to back 4 if current 3 injured, Naismith back Roberts can play LCB, Tanner too at RCB- we’ll be fine Edited January 3 by HengroveReds 2 Quote
David Brent Posted January 3 Posted January 3 42 minutes ago, Jose said: We are paying him like a top player if rumours are to be believed. That’s fair imo Quote
Mr Hankey Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Biggest disappointment in this is the fact this confirms that Tinnion hasn’t gone anywhere. 9 Quote
Super Posted January 3 Posted January 3 1 hour ago, petehinton said: Certainly needs the minutes, but also one that Manning, bizarrely imo, doesn’t seem to particularly rate Or he thinks the 3 we have are just better which they are imo. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.