In bringing Hulse on, Hughes was clearly asking a question that Hulse has yet to answer positively. So he impressed a tad yesterday... Does a wee flicker of light signal a new dawn? Long odds that wouldn't tempt a nine bob note out of me!
Has Hulse ever been fully fit and played in a 4-4-2 for us? He's become a bit of a joke to us but he's scored goals wherever he's been apart from us, looked a fair bit leaner yesterday than he has been and might be more of an asset than many assume.
Interesting points. I actually rated him at Derby and was thrilled when we signed him. But that was 442 as you mention - albeit with Kris Commons as partner...
Personally I think he'd try harder if he was. I just think he's a bit of an enigma. A square peg who expresses his opinion without thinking it through. Ends up defending the indefensible - and in that sense incurring the wrath of those who find him unconvincing at best.
He's a WUM alright. I don't even find him subtle. Post after post designed to get us arguing with one another, his credentials as an "old-school" fan occasionally backed up with something gleaned from Wikipedia.
Agree with others on here, Hulse did some good things when he came on. unfortunately he was flicking the ball on for Macheda, who was appalling again. Hulse may get a couple of chances to show what he can do to MH over the next 2/3 games before our new strikeforce arrives(??). So its last chance saloon for him. As for Macheda, I can only hope that position he is in/our current style of play don't suit him and that MH can do something about it, otherwise send him back asap!
That's blasphemy! Don't you ever let me catch you mention those two names in the same sentence again! Not even Sparky could strike a volley like Falco. As far as I can see, Macheda would struggle to simply strike a ball. Not saying you're wrong, but if you're right, I'm prepared to give Macheda a five-year-deal asap