Why would TM be after Pritch and why would he go there TM rarely played him? I mean I don't want to mention the conspiracy but .....
I asked the same elsewhere and it was suggested Pritchard is only playing as Roberts is injured and it would usually be a midfield of Neil, Ekwah, Jobe, Clarke and Roberts
Unless we replace him with Amad. With what’s going on currently at utd I think it’s possible they bring players in and he becomes free.
I don’t think their takeover will complete in time for that. More likely in the summer IMO. But by then the ship may have sailed.
I think we all think that Pritch should be ahead of Jobe as link man and Jobe competes for a cm. Equally we all cried out for more height and physicality last year so we miss that without Jobe who does work hard and press. My issue with Jobe is he takes 3 touches and runs when the ball could move quicker. Effectively slowing us down
It's starting to feel more and more like something is in place that Jobe has to start. So he plays up front at the cost of a striker (don't care what Jude or anyone else says he isn't going to be a striker if he forgets he is up front and drops back into midfield for 80% of the match!) or players that we would want to play instead of him end up out of position (Pritch on the right, at least I think that's who was supposed to be there end it ended up being not ****er!).
I think showing the lad he isn't guaranteed a start could help hos development anyway. Make him improve and fight for it! He deserved his spot early.on in the season, now not so much! And if there is something in place where he plays if fit, whoever put it in place (Jobes team or the club) need to take a long hard look at the future! This could effect his development, being in crap form could put off teams willing to pay big money all in all it would be better for everyone if he was dropped to bench and had to earn his way in. Up until recently it would have taken much to take Ekwahs spot as he looked poor after injury but looked to be on the up recently!
Of course and Beale is getting some of the **** for this, as was Mowbray. He isn’t **** Jobe and people are implying that. He’s a good signing and I think experience will make him stronger. But it’s ok for an 18 year old to drop in and out of the side.
I might get pelters for this because I genuinely believe we’ve agreed to start Jobe most games. And I think they think he will be an 8 but isn’t good enough yet so they’re playing him as a 10 as it’s a position he can’t cause damage in. The problem is it completely hampers us. It’s actually not fair on the lad. He may very well end up becoming a scapegoat and drawing ire from supporters, even more than he is now. He’s going to be a great player. But he’s only going to be a great player if he gets experience playing in the right position in a team playing well. Playing him out of position, in a team playing poorly, will likely see him still playing championship football in 5 years proof will be in pudding next season to see how much game time Rigg gets (assuming Rigg chooses to stay, he doesn’t have to). We are getting told patience is necessary for Riggs development (I agree). But no such patience is being shown Jobe. Which is one of several reasons I’m convinced he’s being pushed to start by his Dad.
I’m also convinced Ekwah and Jobe would both be better players in 6 months if they each played 45 mins of each game rather than 90. (obviously I don’t mean prearranged half time subs, I just mean an even split)
Just a thought on Jobe and these rumours of having to play clauses. Doesn't that set an incredibly dangerous precedent if we have agreed to it? What's to stop Rigg asking for the same? Surely we wouldn't agree to it? Playing full time no matter what form your in can't be good for any players development
