My argument there would be why did the club sign Eddie in the first place. If he had stayed then Eddie would be in the team now imo especially now we are losing. Its a shame he bailed before the wheels started to come off. He was our only plan b option.Polkadot wrote:When Eddie played a lot of people said the team was weaker and that he didn't contributed enough and that we missed Bamford. When he's gone a lot of people talk about him like he was so great and so much better than Bamford.Viduka Hits The Mark wrote:The club bought in Eddie, MB didn't think he was up to the job for whatever reason we lose him and we are where we are.
Patrick Bamford
Re: Patrick Bamford
-
- Arthur Fairclough's milliner
- Posts: 2368
- Joined: 11 Aug 2014, 16:33
Re: Patrick Bamford
2 entirely different players. He never got a sustained run in the team so for me it was hard to judge, he was also injured for 4-5 weeks too (could be wrong about the length of the injury). Not just a striker we need, we need someone in the middle of the park too. Minimum of 3 players required and those need to be challenging for first team spots.Polkadot wrote:When Eddie played a lot of people said the team was weaker and that he didn't contributed enough and that we missed Bamford. When he's gone a lot of people talk about him like he was so great and so much better than Bamford.Viduka Hits The Mark wrote:The club bought in Eddie, MB didn't think he was up to the job for whatever reason we lose him and we are where we are.
- Selby White
- LUFCTALK Moderator
- Posts: 17206
- Joined: 25 Mar 2012, 11:32
Re: Patrick Bamford
Tend to agree Dom on this.DominanceUK wrote:2 entirely different players. He never got a sustained run in the team so for me it was hard to judge, he was also injured for 4-5 weeks too (could be wrong about the length of the injury). Not just a striker we need, we need someone in the middle of the park too. Minimum of 3 players required and those need to be challenging for first team spots.Polkadot wrote:When Eddie played a lot of people said the team was weaker and that he didn't contributed enough and that we missed Bamford. When he's gone a lot of people talk about him like he was so great and so much better than Bamford.Viduka Hits The Mark wrote:The club bought in Eddie, MB didn't think he was up to the job for whatever reason we lose him and we are where we are.
Keep your face always toward the sunshine - and shadows will fall behind you.
Re: Patrick Bamford
I agree, 2 different players. Both decent, none of them really good (but Eddie might be in a few years).DominanceUK wrote:2 entirely different players. He never got a sustained run in the team so for me it was hard to judge, he was also injured for 4-5 weeks too (could be wrong about the length of the injury). Not just a striker we need, we need someone in the middle of the park too. Minimum of 3 players required and those need to be challenging for first team spots.Polkadot wrote:When Eddie played a lot of people said the team was weaker and that he didn't contributed enough and that we missed Bamford. When he's gone a lot of people talk about him like he was so great and so much better than Bamford.Viduka Hits The Mark wrote:The club bought in Eddie, MB didn't think he was up to the job for whatever reason we lose him and we are where we are.
If you compare Bamford with Mitrovic, it's quite obvious that Mitrovic is clearly a better striker. But that's not a big surprise, Mitrovic costed about 25m, Bamford about 8m. That's a huge difference in price which also reflects on the pitch. Which also shows a bit of the problem with strengthening the team. If we want to replace Bamford with a clearly better striker it might be almost impossible unless we spend a LOT of money...
I also agree about the midfield. With all the injuries we have it's been way to thin in midfield (even if Dallas in general have been playing well also in this position), and if we can't expect Foreshaw and Roberts to return we should try to bring in another guy.
- Barlow Boy
- LUFCTALK Moderator
- Posts: 11928
- Joined: 22 Jan 2012, 19:28
- Location: Barlow, obviously.
Re: Patrick Bamford
He’s getting the blame, as it’s him missing the chances. As I said previously, I don’t get this he works his socks off/gives his all stuff, that’s an absolute minimum for me but you’re correct that others have to step up too.Selby White wrote:It's often one player that gets the blame, currently it's PB but if he goes i will guarantee attention will turn on someone else.Barlow Boy wrote:I’m all for backing the players, I haven’t missed a home game for eight years, but there are cut off points and most of us reached theirs today.Davycc wrote:Selby White wrote:Was thinking of visiting the Salem witch trials.
But why bother when there is a better hunt going on here.
Just hope players don't read.
It's a team game after all.
Think everyone accepts he gives his all and is missing a few but he isn't alone and there are others that should shoulder some responsibility.
And this is far from the worst place.
When you retire, you switch bosses - from the one that hired you, to the one that married you.
Re: Patrick Bamford
OK my hangover is nearly gone, would've been but I remembered the game yesterday and it came back. Bamford is never a JFH, Becford Viduka or Sniffer far from it but he's a better striker than what he's showing us now. Did he play a hard pressing game at other clubs, is this maybe why he's struggling? The fella definitely needs a break as in resting. I do think if someone comes in and leads the front for a few game he could be vital towards the end of the season.Barlow Boy wrote:He’s getting the blame, as it’s him missing the chances. As I said previously, I don’t get this he works his socks off/gives his all stuff, that’s an absolute minimum for me but you’re correct that others have to step up too.Selby White wrote:It's often one player that gets the blame, currently it's PB but if he goes i will guarantee attention will turn on someone else.Barlow Boy wrote:I’m all for backing the players, I haven’t missed a home game for eight years, but there are cut off points and most of us reached theirs today.Davycc wrote:Selby White wrote:Was thinking of visiting the Salem witch trials.
But why bother when there is a better hunt going on here.
Just hope players don't read.
It's a team game after all.
Think everyone accepts he gives his all and is missing a few but he isn't alone and there are others that should shoulder some responsibility.
And this is far from the worst place.
All at Amazon Books
The Funny Corner
When Santa Got Stuck Up The Chimney
The Thrones Murders
The Funny Corner
When Santa Got Stuck Up The Chimney
The Thrones Murders
- PhoenixUnited
- Dick Ray's Talent Spotter
- Posts: 1743
- Joined: 30 May 2018, 09:12
Re: Patrick Bamford
In the cold light of day it is all very well giving stick to just Patrick Bamford although all his shortcomings were laid bare and clearly he is not one of these strikers that seems to be in the right place at the right time and clinically sharp. However, although this seemed to be an open game, it was pretty sterile. Keepers at both end had barely anything to do and as for us other than the penalty save their man was never in troubled. We were ropey all round and that Philips tackle was stupid in the extreme
Promotion at this rate? Hmmm m
Promotion at this rate? Hmmm m
Keep The Faith / WAL
- Another Northern Soul
- LUFCTALK Moderator
- Posts: 7537
- Joined: 01 Nov 2015, 09:55
Re: Patrick Bamford
Missing a penalty is near unforgiveable for me TBH but it doesn't mean I'm going to blame him for everything that's wrong. As BB says, working 100% for the team is a must, and yesterday was a match where we need others to up their input as it's another 'postage stamp' of a pitch. PB had the guts to try that audacious lob from around halfway yesterday and that would have been a belting goal, yet there was the chance he made for himself but then shot wide with his right foot... that for me was an awful miss, especially after doing what I thought was the hard bit.Davycc wrote:OK my hangover is nearly gone, would've been but I remembered the game yesterday and it came back. Bamford is never a JFH, Becford Viduka or Sniffer far from it but he's a better striker than what he's showing us now. Did he play a hard pressing game at other clubs, is this maybe why he's struggling? The fella definitely needs a break as in resting. I do think if someone comes in and leads the front for a few game he could be vital towards the end of the season.Barlow Boy wrote:He’s getting the blame, as it’s him missing the chances. As I said previously, I don’t get this he works his socks off/gives his all stuff, that’s an absolute minimum for me but you’re correct that others have to step up too.Selby White wrote:It's often one player that gets the blame, currently it's PB but if he goes i will guarantee attention will turn on someone else.Barlow Boy wrote:I’m all for backing the players, I haven’t missed a home game for eight years, but there are cut off points and most of us reached theirs today.Davycc wrote:Selby White wrote:Was thinking of visiting the Salem witch trials.
But why bother when there is a better hunt going on here.
Just hope players don't read.
It's a team game after all.
Think everyone accepts he gives his all and is missing a few but he isn't alone and there are others that should shoulder some responsibility.
And this is far from the worst place.
I'd like Andre Gray to be loaned to us, I think he's the type we need because it's what MB wants, an attacking player who can if needs be play the CF role. He's strong and dynamic, both qualities which I think we're seeing too little of at the moment in the side.
- Leonickroberts
- Jimmy Armfield's cardigan knitter
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: 12 Jul 2011, 08:16
Re: Patrick Bamford
Was chatting to PB's family after the match yesterday, and while they rightly accepted he didn't have his best game, they also pointed out something I think is a much bigger problem; the total lack of goals from attacking midfielders and inside forwards/wide players.
For me, PB has done his job consistently well all season, given that his job is to lead the line, drop deep, hold up the ball, pull defenders away (English defenders tend to follow the centre forward rather than play zonally) and generally bully the defence. He's on for 20 goals this season which is more than reasonable given the team he plays in.
Imo, Harrison, Costa, Alioski and Klich should be each aiming for 7-10 goals. Because they aren't playing as strikers their lack of goal contribution gets them off the hook, and PB doesn't have that luxury, in spite of the fact that the tactics and style played by Bielsa, Pep, Porch et al rely on goals from everywhere to supplement the CF's own.
For me, PB has done his job consistently well all season, given that his job is to lead the line, drop deep, hold up the ball, pull defenders away (English defenders tend to follow the centre forward rather than play zonally) and generally bully the defence. He's on for 20 goals this season which is more than reasonable given the team he plays in.
Imo, Harrison, Costa, Alioski and Klich should be each aiming for 7-10 goals. Because they aren't playing as strikers their lack of goal contribution gets them off the hook, and PB doesn't have that luxury, in spite of the fact that the tactics and style played by Bielsa, Pep, Porch et al rely on goals from everywhere to supplement the CF's own.
'When he plays on snow, he doesn't leave any footprints’
Re: Patrick Bamford
I agree : he should feel guiltyDominanceUK wrote:... he's had a ridiculous amount of guilt-edged chances.. .