^^^thatQuote:
Originally Posted by sheepcrooky
Printable View
^^^thatQuote:
Originally Posted by sheepcrooky
Errrm ... yer half correct ....Quote:
Originally Posted by rico94
As Ah've observed, when a young/new player gets a run, they usually get a fair bit o' support on here ... and get the benefit o' the doubt if they are nae the finished article .... initially ...
However, if they dinna become 'world class' efter 6 games, they are 'shyte', 'wage thieves', 'Billy big bas', 'nivver a plaaaer', 'Ayr United level', ... or .... alternatively ...
Like Brooooooce, or Scottiiiieeeee .... as long as they dinna get 5 or 6 starts in a row, they get longer tae stay in the reckonin athoot folks gettin on their case bg-style and bein' adjudged as 'shiiiiiite' .... and potentially mair than half a dizzen games tae at least think they might develop as 'world class'.
Dinna get ma wrang .... As much as onybody else, Ah would love tae see mair home grown/developed guys get a break .... but there's some on here fa maybe represent exactly fit are bein 'protected' fae.
Erm - Watkins by the length of fuuckin Union Street min.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Julio
If AFC now felt the need to start signing fat, uninterested, IRA loving, utter waster scumbags like Stokes, then we as a club are in way more trouble than I thought.
Jesus Christ, the boy had talent and pished it away. By the look of him it’ll be January afore he’ll be fit enough to run 20 yards.
He’ll do absolutely fuuck all at Livi. I’m amazed they signed him tbh.
Watkins moved for £1m not long ago (& yes I know Maynard got big bucks spent on him too) but Watkins was a decent SPL player as I recall at ICT.
Given our situation, I’m not sure exactly who folk think we’d be able to sign short term this urgently.
Anyone but Anthony fuuckin Stokes though...
Moog, I normally agree with pretty much everything you say.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Moog
With this post I do too.
Stokes is a c**t, a horrible c**t.
Where I do disagree is about Watkins.
He’s not an out & out centre forward.
That’s what we desperately need.
That said, I wish him well & would be happy to admit I was wrong in a few weeks/months time.... here’s hoping.
The current crop of youngsters clearly aren’t rated or trusted by mcinnes - they’re in for one game and regardless of how they play are out the next, while older players retain their places regardless of their performances.
Example - Scott Wright was probably the only player who looked to have any kind of spark in the first hour of thursdays game but he will most certainly not be starting today. If we could adapt our style a little to pass the ball more on the ground I actually think he could play up front - he is quite good at taking the ball with his back to goal and turning quickly either direction. He’d obviously be no use whatsoever if we persisted in battering long high balls forward.
With all the midfielders and wingers we have surely we should be able to find a combination that can play some decent football whereby we don’t need to sign someone just because they’re over 6ft to play up front - and someone who’s not even a striker at that. We all know the only reason Watkins has been signed is because of his “physicality” as McInnes always says.
This is what we’ve been reduced to. Arguing over who’s better between a fat Tony Stokes & utility player who doesn’t score.
Wooooah, Derek McInnes...
If Stokes was a central midfielder, McInnes would've been all over him like a rash.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mason89
Don’t worry....
About a thing......
cause when Marley Watkins scores
It’s gonna be alright
ok, I’ll get my coat
fifyQuote:
Originally Posted by don_corleone
FIFY both 😀Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Corleone