You're the manager

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laddo

Surely if a straight swap is chosen it's Mitchell not Sam?

---

Well we know that's the order IB has them in so that's why I said that. He's probably readier as well so that'd be less of a risk.
But as I've said on other threads, I see a lot of potential in Sam. Since he arrived at the club, he's never had what Knight was given - 5 straight games (no goals, nearly all defeats - but no worries, Lewis' time will come). I don't think we can have Sam at the club, on that long contract, without ever giving him more than 2 games to stake a place. Before he goes, wouldn't it be good to at least be able to say we did that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laddo

Both Kyle and Rùben would be a big loss for any game but I would worry more if Woots was missing. Harder to replace.

---

This has got to be wrong. Woots it's the man more at the end of things. But Ruben through his movement across the line and back and forth, turning ability, dribbles, clever little passes, creates so many difficult moments for the opposition - and those things are literally irreplaceable at National League level. You can be pretty sure it's him giving the opposing coach sleepless nights, when he probably has a big centre-half in his team to grapple with Woots all afternoon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matt_magpie

I definitely think there’s a player in Mitchell, seems to get some stick on here from some but I’m not sure based on what really. I can’t see us losing both RR and KW and tbf CR has got nowhere near his potential levels yet, we were talking about him as our best player by far not too long ago. On the question I think Mitchell would go in but I do think Burchnall would be more than comfortable trying a false 9.

---

You wouldn't think we would lose 3 centre backs at the same time but we did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by i961pie

You wouldn't think we would lose 3 centre backs at the same time but we did.

---

Sorry I had gone off on my own tangent thinking about them leaving in Jan which wasn’t the topic. It’s a tough when you play with one out and out striker as it’s unlikely you are going to have a ready made proven one sat on the bench as their not going to stomach that, when you have 2 up front you can mix it up a little between 3 proven ones as we did with Woots, Thomas and Dennis. The good thing I think is we have 3 top level goal threats in KW, RR and CR, I think Vincent will get a few as he just gets everywhere and Burchnall I think is smart enough to find a way to make it work. Jan’s going to be key but I think even more so before then, if we can get right up there hopefully KW and RR may think it’s worth hanging around for at least for a few months b4 a move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laddo

Surely if a straight swap is chosen it's Mitchell not Sam?

Both Kyle and Rùben would be a big loss for any game but I would worry more if Woots was missing. Harder to replace.

---

I agree with You that Wootton would be a bigger loss. Nothing against Rodriguez, he's a fantastic player and would be sorely missed
But wootton for me along with Palmer are players that perform consistently every game
Wootton works tirelessly every game, whether he's getting service or not. His defensive work on set pieces cannot be under estimated too. His link up and hold up play is fantastic, especially in a league full of big physical defenders and on top of that scores frequently
I can't think of another player at our level that offers all that

Tired of reading about January, they're our players under contract, if the owners decided to sell which I don't think will be the case then they can do one too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maddogslater

Tired of reading about January, they're our players under contract, if the owners decided to sell which I don't think will be the case then they can do one too.

---

We know you think the owners are "clueless" mds but to say if the owners sells one of our star players you want them to sell up and move on is a tad OTT and melodramatic even by NCM standards#viva

Interesting to see people talking about a false 9. The good thing is that this actually suits IBs tictacs and it’s not unusual to see Wootton slipping into that role as well when needed to. Very often he will come deep for the ball which frees up space for the runners, it’s actually become quite common for the modern day number 9 to play this way.

Either way you would have to drop Mitchell straight into that role unless we sign a replacement. Alternatively we go full on Pep and forget having a striker altogether!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laddo

So close.

I think Mitchell or False 9 as suggested.

---

I have seen enough of those forward players on the bench, and the reason they are on the bench is simply that they are not good enough. Why bring these players in and knowingly weaken the team...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_anticlough

Well we know that's the order IB has them in so that's why I said that. He's probably readier as well so that'd be less of a risk.
But as I've said on other threads, I see a lot of potential in Sam. Since he arrived at the club, he's never had what Knight was given - 5 straight games (no goals, nearly all defeats - but no worries, Lewis' time will come). I don't think we can have Sam at the club, on that long contract, without ever giving him more than 2 games to stake a place. Before he goes, wouldn't it be good to at least be able to say we did that?



This has got to be wrong. Woots it's the man more at the end of things. But Ruben through his movement across the line and back and forth, turning ability, dribbles, clever little passes, creates so many difficult moments for the opposition - and those things are literally irreplaceable at National League level. You can be pretty sure it's him giving the opposing coach sleepless nights, when he probably has a big centre-half in his team to grapple with Woots all afternoon.

---

As you know I rate Ravashing Rùben Rodrigues as much as anyone on here but if he was missing, Cal comes in and takes his role and I feel we have the midfield options with Palmer, Francis Vincent, JOB plus other options to fill in. Yes we lose RR's undoubted talent and abilities you correctly list and wouldn't be as good but we have far more cover than if we lost Kyle.

We don't have a similar and certainly not a like for like replacement for Wootton , we would lose his hold up play, his physical nature, ability in the air, goalscoring ability and his defensive work at set pieces. Mitchell and Sam are inferior clearly currently and more importantly offer much different skill sets. Kyle is the only player we have that I don't think we have a replacement for at present

All subjective, all horses for courses, no right no wrong etc. I think if RR is out the answer is easier , but was more interested in people's thoughts on if Kyle was missing for a few games only*


*. Not sold in January.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laddo

As you know I rate Ravashing Rùben Rodrigues as much as anyone on here but if he was missing, Cal comes in and takes his role and I feel we have the midfield options with Palmer, Francis Vincent, JOB plus other options to fill in. Yes we lose RR's undoubted talent and abilities you correctly list and wouldn't be as good but we have far more cover than if we lost Kyle.
*


*. Not sold in January.

---

We actually saw what happens when we lose Ruben's creative influence as recently as April - a full month when it was defeat after defeat after defeat. Stale performances where we didn't create anything - Woots played in all of them

Anyway, a bit of a needless debate, one hypothetical scenario against another.
On the original question of missing 2 or 3 games, I say No Woots, No Worries. Yeah, we'd have to find out about our back-ups (something we need to do), but I think with all the creativity behind them, we'd be pleasantly surprised.