Jump to content

Adama Traore


mwj

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Why?

He won't answer you, that would be too specific.

This way if Traore does go on strike Rich can say "see I'm ITK!"

And if he doesn't then his post will just be passed off as a joke.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Zatman said:

Ashley Young development is that we had John Robertson here who was a good coach and a top class winger in his day who thought Young how and when to put in a cross.

 

genuinely wondering...any proof of this? ill be interested to read what he did etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

always thought he was stupid af and that i never thought he deserved to start games because situation we was in. But not starting/playing him more  is kind of criminal as soon as were confirmed were relegated. Sinclair wont improve as a player given age etc etc...Adama might...Surely the way to make him improve is to give him gametime and just spend time going over his games over the last few games  that is left showing him where he makes mistakes, and then spending preseason correcting a lot of it

Edited by gharperr
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another game in which we didn't have to worry about the mistakes he might make. Thank God. 

Give it a rest Jonah. We get it.

In response to your earlier post to me, I've said before that I'd like to see him play more. But the fact is that he's raw and he's not going to win us games single-handedly. You've asked how often the players picked ahead of him 'pull it off', but the issue is that our whole team is crap.

Here's an example. As you obviously need it spelling out. Sinclair played well today. At times he took on players in a fashion that Adama would have been proud of. But when you have a static striker in the box, a lack of movement in forward positions and a midfield who are intent on passing sideways, all of these amazing runs won't do anything.

That's the problem. If we had a great team who were ticking along nicely, then there would have been a much stronger case all season for Adama to get much more game time. But as we have a crap team, playing crap football with consistently crap movement, giving a raw player a run of starts was a dangerous possibility. It could have either made us more crap or might have gotten us the odd goal. It could have gone either way.

Up until the point that we were as good as down, I could definitely see the logic in just giving him 20-30 minute cameos to see what he can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Another game in which we didn't have to worry about the mistakes he might make. Thank God. 

I know! I'm so glad he had the likes of Bacuna and Sinclair in advanced roles, they offer such incredible cover for the fullbacks. I'm so glad Traore wasn't on the pitch to leave Hutton badly exposed.

Edited by Dr_Pangloss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

it a rest Jonah. We get it.t 

In response to your earlier post to me, I've said before that I'd like to see him play more. But the fact is that he's raw and he's not going to win us games single-handedly. You've asked how often the players picked ahead of him 'pull it off', but the issue is that our whole team is crap.

Here's an example. As you obviously need it spelling out. Sinclair played well today. At times he took on players in a fashion that Adama would have been proud of. But when you have a static striker in the box, a lack of movement in forward positions and a midfield who are intent on passing sideways, all of these amazing runs won't do anything.

That's the problem. If we had a great team who were ticking along nicely, then there would have been a much stronger case all season for Adama to get much more game time. But as we have a crap team, playing crap football with consistently crap movement, giving a raw player a run of starts was a dangerous possibility. It could have either made us more crap or might have gotten us the odd goal. It could have gone either way.

Up until the point that we were as good as down, I could definitely see the logic in just giving him 20-30 minute cameos to see what he can do.

A crap team playing crap football and you wanted the same players being picked. Continue to go round in circles but just madness. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A crap team playing crap football and you wanted the same players being picked. Continue to go round in circles but just madness. 

Where have I said I want the same players picked?

And did you notice that I put 'up until relegation was as good as confirmed'... Ie: I now believe he should be playing.

(Which I seem to have to type every time I post in this thread because some people clearly can't read).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Coached him? Not much of a logical leap is it?

Actually yes...was young always destined to be top midfielder whoever waS coaching him at that stage of his career  or was it because he had the coaching of specifically a winger coach ....definition of narratives if it's just "he was coach at time". ..if you struggle understanding that then ..wow

Edited by gharperr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

Where have I said I want the same players picked?

And did you notice that I put 'up until relegation was as good as confirmed'... Ie: I now believe he should be playing.

(Which I seem to have to type every time I post in this thread because some people clearly can't read).

It was in response to Eric Black and a general rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â