Mick McCarthy - discussion

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
ninian opinion said:
With you totally on the imperative need to sort out midfield but I was just pointing out the defensive frailties which have surfaced since our win at swansea.
There’s no guarantee Morrison/Nelson will be always fit so we do need cover as Flint isn’t good enough to be the main central defender. Is Brown good enough?
For all the good a new midfield will do, it will be wasted if the back door isn’t shut (to use a Dave Jones phrase)!!
Click to expand...

Take your point Nin, but to overhaul like that I think we'd need Santa not Tan. All indications are that the budget is going to be restricted.

To go the whole mile is very unlikely to be on so we'll prioritise - that means the midfield. Having said that, if we can find another "Nelson from Oxford" type at the back, then it would be a sensible move.

Reckon we'll start the new season at the back the way we finish this one - Morro/Flint/Nelson with a pair of wingbacks. Ng is good to go on the right and I hope Bagan gets a shot on the left in Bennett's presumed early season unavailabity. Unless we switch players out of position like Ralls filling in there, we could do with back up on both sides, but that would eat into the budget.

The way to go is Sang in the middle with 2 quality additions - Mowatt types who can control and pass a bloody ball.
 
Oldsparkey said:
Take your point Nin, but to overhaul like that I think we'd need Santa not Tan. All indications are that the budget is going to be restricted.

To go the whole mile is very unlikely to be on so we'll prioritise - that means the midfield. Having said that, if we can find another "Nelson from Oxford" type at the back, then it would be a sensible move.

Reckon we'll start the new season at the back the way we finish this one - Morro/Flint/Nelson with a pair of wingbacks. Ng is good to go on the right and I hope Bagan gets a shot on the left in Bennett's presumed early season unavailabity. Unless we switch players out of position like Ralls filling in there, we could do with back up on both sides, but that would eat into the budget.

The way to go is Sang in the middle with 2 quality additions - Mowatt types who can control and pass a bloody ball.
Click to expand...

Mowatt - yes - and get stuck in when needed.
 
Oldsparkey said:
Bennett's presumed early season unavailabity. .
Click to expand...

Has Joe's contract been renewed? I understood it was still under discussion and then he was injured. Will the club offer new contract now?

Edit - Just seen your post in Summer 2021 - yes it's about the club showing that loyalty
 
Barry Tiger said:
Has Joe's contract been renewed? I understood it was still under discussion and then he was injured. Will the club offer new contract now?

Edit - Just seen your post in Summer 2021 - yes it's about the club showing that loyalty
Click to expand...

If they've got any sense they'd be stupid not to retain his services let alone for the loyalty motive. In just mercenary terms, if we let him go for nothing, where else are you going to get a player of his quality in that position for free?

He came into his own in the wingback role when Mick went to a 3 CB system and we've missed him since his injury. He added a lot to his game with a more forward role. Getting him back match fit quickly may be a concern, but it's well worth the risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluefromBridgend
Nothing changes for me after yesterday’s game.

I lost count of the number of passes Pack and Vaulks cocked up. Why pass to a team mate who’s clearly marked? <doh>

Same old problems - no pace or creativity anywhere until Murphy came on. What was a Ralls doing for most of the match?

And as for Brown’s constant hoicks’s down the line to nobody.<doh>

MM surely will give some of the youngsters game time in last few games to rid us of the dreadful Pack Vaulks etc.....:emoticon-0138-think
 
I can't and won't defend Pack and Ralls. Pack's snail pace decision making and ability to get caught in possession was evident from when we first signed him. He gets left behind so easily and has to resort to fouls and cards as he did again last night. He is a liability.

Ralls is so inconsistent and as Ninian says he can either disappear or run around like a headless chicken. However occasionally it clicks for him and he looks a player. Just not often enough.

I will continue to fight Vaulks corner as he gets his head up and tries to move us forward. Part of the problem is the lack of options ahead of him with no Ng or Bennett/Bagan pushing forward on the wings and no progressive runners from midfield leaving Wilson and Moore his only options and they have been well marked of late.

Given better players around him - get Sang and Colwill in more advanced roles - and we will see a better Vaulks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oldsparkey
BluefromBridgend said:
I can't and won't defend Pack and Ralls. Pack's snail pace decision making and ability to get caught in possession was evident from when we first signed him. He gets left behind so easily and has to resort to fouls and cards as he did again last night. He is a liability.

Ralls is so inconsistent and as Ninian says he can either disappear or run around like a headless chicken. However occasionally it clicks for him and he looks a player. Just not often enough.

I will continue to fight Vaulks corner as he gets his head up and tries to move us forward. Part of the problem is the lack of options ahead of him with no Ng or Bennett/Bagan pushing forward on the wings and no progressive runners from midfield leaving Wilson and Moore his only options and they have been well marked of late.

Given better players around him - get Sang and Colwill in more advanced roles - and we will see a better Vaulks.
Click to expand...

Of the 3 mentioned, Vaulks has more to offer. I'm sure he can do more in the middle of the park than just knocking people over. Ralls is all effort without finesse, and Pack is an accident waiting to happen due to his lack of pace.

For his part, Vaulks tends to put himself about to the extent that he can be reckless on times. "Bull at a gate" with an Arter type attitude on the pitch has it's merits, but sometimes standing off and thinking about his next move beats lunging in trying to intimidate everyone.

He's proved he can pass a ball forward with vision, but this side of his game has been pushed to one side in favour of midfield mugging.
 
Oldsparkey said:
Of the 3 mentioned, Vaulks has more to offer. I'm sure he can do more in the middle of the park than just knocking people over. Ralls is all effort without finesse, and Pack is an accident waiting to happen due to his lack of pace.

For his part, Vaulks tends to put himself about to the extent that he can be reckless on times. "Bull at a gate" with an Arter type attitude on the pitch has it's merits, but sometimes standing off and thinking about his next move beats lunging in trying to intimidate everyone.

He's proved he can pass a ball forward with vision, but this side of his game has been pushed to one side in favour of midfield mugging.
Click to expand...

Nah he hasnt proved he can pass the ball with vision.

He is what he is an aggressive niggly player with a good shot who winds opposition players up.

Passing is not his strong point and thats being nice.

His game is stopping the opposition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oldsparkey and ninian opinion
Hilts24 said:
Nah he hasnt proved he can pass the ball with vision.

He is what he is an aggressive niggly player with a good shot who winds opposition players up.

Passing is not his strong point and thats being nice.

His game is stopping the opposition.
Click to expand...
Its ok having a destroyer in the team provided there is finesse around him.

Win the ball, give it to a team mate who can play.
 
ccfcremotesupport said:
Its ok having a destroyer in the team provided there is finesse around him.

Win the ball, give it to a team mate who can play.
Click to expand...

Paul Ramsey, Mel Sutton, Billy Ronson for example were destroyers. Vaulks is a tame comparison.

If only we could find another John Robinson; what a player he was for sadly a brief time for City
 
  • Like
Reactions: remote
Hilts24 said:
Nah he hasnt proved he can pass the ball with vision.

He is what he is an aggressive niggly player with a good shot who winds opposition players up.

Passing is not his strong point and thats being nice.

His game is stopping the opposition.
Click to expand...

Yeah, maybe you're right - this time......<laugh>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back