|
Post by manchestergas on Jan 18, 2016 17:25:05 GMT
Listen to Darrell here about the deal. Then you will see there is no issue and only benefits all parties. Just over 3 minutes in. Has Clarke been on the Just For Men? Or to cut hairdressing costs at the club Nick has ordered him to knick the hair off a Lego figure. Sack the Board, B****ds.
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Jan 18, 2016 19:46:16 GMT
You have to say that on the face of it this seems a very odd decision. No, Ellis has not fully shown he is capable of consistently performing at this level. On the other hand he has clearly shown he can have a major impact as a game changing impact player at this level. 12 goals is a bloody good return for a guy who has largely played as a sub. It is hard to believe that this is a football decision since he is clearly contributing to our success (and if it is a football decision than it seems an utterly bizarre one). Therefore you have to conclude that it is 1 (or a combination) of 3 things. 1. Harrison wants to move away to get 1st team football. 2. Harrison has fallen out with Clarke. 3. We needed to save some money by sticking a player out on loan. I would be dissapointed if it is the first because we should have been stronger than that - this is a player who is having an impact on our season and who has been with us for his whole career it seems a bit of a shame if we can't handle that short term demand better. The other 2 would seem reasonable to me. We don't have a bottomless pit of money and if Clarke was told that in order to get Gaffney he had to offload someone else then that is a fair trade off. Listening to the interview by Darrell he is quite clear how the loan has come about......it's 1 but there has been no falling out between either the player or the manager, it might make our bench weaker for a short period of time but when he comes back it will become stronger than it is now. At Barnet you could see how much Ellis needed match fitness AND sharpness, I actually felt sorry for him because he struggled so much, it was quite clear he somehow needed to get extra game time, with Gaffeny returning he wasn't going to get it. He wants to go out on loan, why, because he wants to get fitter to challenge for a place back in our team, that will be a nice problem for Darrell to have.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Jan 18, 2016 20:01:09 GMT
It's not the opinion that it is not a good decision for the club that is "drama/outrage"....it is the extreme expression of that opinion. An outrageous comment. Piss off to OTIB if you don't like it
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Jan 18, 2016 20:35:51 GMT
You have to say that on the face of it this seems a very odd decision. No, Ellis has not fully shown he is capable of consistently performing at this level. On the other hand he has clearly shown he can have a major impact as a game changing impact player at this level. 12 goals is a bloody good return for a guy who has largely played as a sub. It is hard to believe that this is a football decision since he is clearly contributing to our success (and if it is a football decision than it seems an utterly bizarre one). Therefore you have to conclude that it is 1 (or a combination) of 3 things. 1. Harrison wants to move away to get 1st team football. 2. Harrison has fallen out with Clarke. 3. We needed to save some money by sticking a player out on loan. I would be dissapointed if it is the first because we should have been stronger than that - this is a player who is having an impact on our season and who has been with us for his whole career it seems a bit of a shame if we can't handle that short term demand better. The other 2 would seem reasonable to me. We don't have a bottomless pit of money and if Clarke was told that in order to get Gaffney he had to offload someone else then that is a fair trade off. Listening to the interview by Darrell he is quite clear how the loan has come about......it's 1 but there has been no falling out between either the player or the manager, it might make our bench weaker for a short period of time but when he comes back it will become stronger than it is now. At Barnet you could see how much Ellis needed match fitness AND sharpness, I actually felt sorry for him because he struggled so much, it was quite clear he somehow needed to get extra game time, with Gaffeny returning he wasn't going to get it. He wants to go out on loan, why, because he wants to get fitter to challenge for a place back in our team, that will be a nice problem for Darrell to have. Or is he more concerned the clock's ticking and he needs to do something in order that he gets a contract with a FL club for next season, as I'm not certain we'll offer him one when we can pick up the likes of Gaffney & Taylor for probably alot less money. Fair play to Harrison for being prepared to move so far from home to play 1sr team football.
|
|
|
Post by chelt_gas on Jan 18, 2016 20:58:25 GMT
Hartlepool 9/2 for the win at acc. Harrison goalscorer odds yet to be added
|
|
|
Post by fanatical on Jan 19, 2016 8:31:21 GMT
At last. The situation is explained in clear words. Thought DC made it quite clear in his statement. But guess people wish to see it differently for whatever reason. Sounds like a really sensible and well thought out plan and should only backfire if Ellis where to sustain a serious injury. I hope he scores a hatful
That's a good idea - everybody should sit on the bench so they don't get injured!
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jan 19, 2016 9:49:49 GMT
Has Clarke been on the Just For Men? Or to cut hairdressing costs at the club Nick has ordered him to knick the hair off a Lego figure. Sack the Board, B****ds. It really is the single worst piece of Photoshop editing that I've seen and I've seen a few & done a few pmsl
|
|
|
Post by mrbluesky on Jan 19, 2016 11:29:36 GMT
You have to say that on the face of it this seems a very odd decision. No, Ellis has not fully shown he is capable of consistently performing at this level. On the other hand he has clearly shown he can have a major impact as a game changing impact player at this level. 12 goals is a bloody good return for a guy who has largely played as a sub. It is hard to believe that this is a football decision since he is clearly contributing to our success (and if it is a football decision than it seems an utterly bizarre one). Therefore you have to conclude that it is 1 (or a combination) of 3 things. 1. Harrison wants to move away to get 1st team football. 2. Harrison has fallen out with Clarke. 3. We needed to save some money by sticking a player out on loan. I would be dissapointed if it is the first because we should have been stronger than that - this is a player who is having an impact on our season and who has been with us for his whole career it seems a bit of a shame if we can't handle that short term demand better. The other 2 would seem reasonable to me. We don't have a bottomless pit of money and if Clarke was told that in order to get Gaffney he had to offload someone else then that is a fair trade off. i have a feeling we have gone over budget signing lawrence and chaffney and to ease that problem harrison has gone on loan.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1979 on Jan 19, 2016 13:32:23 GMT
Much rather loaning players out to lower L2 teams than several levels below, was never sure what the latter achieved.
Nothing opens past 10pm in Hartlepool so Ellis can concentrate on his football....
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Jan 19, 2016 14:01:32 GMT
You have to say that on the face of it this seems a very odd decision. No, Ellis has not fully shown he is capable of consistently performing at this level. On the other hand he has clearly shown he can have a major impact as a game changing impact player at this level. 12 goals is a bloody good return for a guy who has largely played as a sub. It is hard to believe that this is a football decision since he is clearly contributing to our success (and if it is a football decision than it seems an utterly bizarre one). Therefore you have to conclude that it is 1 (or a combination) of 3 things. 1. Harrison wants to move away to get 1st team football. 2. Harrison has fallen out with Clarke. 3. We needed to save some money by sticking a player out on loan. I would be dissapointed if it is the first because we should have been stronger than that - this is a player who is having an impact on our season and who has been with us for his whole career it seems a bit of a shame if we can't handle that short term demand better. The other 2 would seem reasonable to me. We don't have a bottomless pit of money and if Clarke was told that in order to get Gaffney he had to offload someone else then that is a fair trade off. i have a feeling we have gone over budget signing lawrence and chaffney and to ease that problem harrison has gone on loan. Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s**t pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench?
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Jan 19, 2016 14:07:43 GMT
Given he has six goals this season then get him back now if he's going to score between nine and twelve in the second 1/2 of the season.
|
|
|
Post by mrbluesky on Jan 19, 2016 15:06:23 GMT
i have a feeling we have gone over budget signing lawrence and chaffney and to ease that problem harrison has gone on loan. Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s*** pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench? yes i take your point but the club may not want to admit its a budget forced loan or maybe dc thinks the best way to manage a personality like ellis who wants to go out and play football is to allow such a thing?
|
|
strung out
Administrator
Paul Hardyman
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 758
|
Post by strung out on Jan 19, 2016 15:08:33 GMT
i have a feeling we have gone over budget signing lawrence and chaffney and to ease that problem harrison has gone on loan. Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s*** pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench? We only have four games while he's away, and Darrell Clarke presumably thinks that with Taylor, Gaffney, Easter, plus Bodin potentially, Harrison would be unlikely to play much of a role over those four games. If he manages to get 7 games in for Hartlepool, potentially taking points off our promotion rivals, then he's more use with them than he is with us. If he comes back having taken points off rivals and in goalscoring form, then it gives DC numerous options for the final couple of months of the season.
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Jan 19, 2016 17:16:16 GMT
Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s*** pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench? We only have four games while he's away, and Darrell Clarke presumably thinks that with Taylor, Gaffney, Easter, plus Bodin potentially, Harrison would be unlikely to play much of a role over those four games. If he manages to get 7 games in for Hartlepool, potentially taking points off our promotion rivals, then he's more use with them than he is with us. If he comes back having taken points off rivals and in goalscoring form, then it gives DC numerous options for the final couple of months of the season. In a nutshell, as they say.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Jan 19, 2016 18:02:03 GMT
i have a feeling we have gone over budget signing lawrence and chaffney and to ease that problem harrison has gone on loan. Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s*** pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench? Where are you getting 12 goals from Irish? Soccerbase says 6. Apart from a penalty on Saturday, he's not scored since October. He's a young man who needs game time to find his form, imo.
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Jan 19, 2016 19:00:10 GMT
i have a feeling we have gone over budget signing lawrence and chaffney and to ease that problem harrison has gone on loan. Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s*** pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench? Irish, I understand what you are saying and don't disagree entirely with some of what you as well as a few others with similar ones are saying but I think you are all making far more out of this than needs to be. I'm happy to accept what our manager has said in his interview plus the article attributed to Ellis where he spoke to Andy Monkhouse before making his decision to go on loan to Hartlepool. I guess we'll find out if it works out or not over the next couple of weeks and if it doesn't then you can come back and give us an earful for trusting the managers judgement on this.
|
|
gass
Joined: July 2014
Posts: 118
|
Post by gass on Jan 19, 2016 19:02:29 GMT
Harrison in the starting 11 tonight for Hartlepool
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Jan 19, 2016 19:05:27 GMT
Harrison in the starting 11 tonight for Hartlepool He could really do us a favour there.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jan 19, 2016 19:07:09 GMT
i have a feeling we have gone over budget signing lawrence and chaffney and to ease that problem harrison has gone on loan. Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s*** pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench? Once again you post and there is nothing that I don't agree with. Spot on the money and I think our fans have been programmed to not question such decisions. Me ? I am just way too cynical to accept it. Great post fella
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Jan 19, 2016 19:12:58 GMT
Others appear to think not. I actually don't have a problem if it is a budget issue - that seems completely reasonable to me and I'd have accepted that as an explanation. We do have to balance resources and priorities. I have more concerns about DC's explanation that this is a footballing decision. Why on earth send a guy out on loan who is capable of actively contributing to the side? We're in January, not September, so if Harrison is demanding 1st team football frankly the response should be 'tough s*** pal and if you don't like it find another club at the end of the season' (it's hardly in his interest to down tools or sulk for 5 months given he's out of contract - wherever he is, he'll have to give it everything to earn another contract somewhere). He's contracted to Rovers, he's doing a reasonable job in the role he is playing for Rovers; what's good for his wider career is none of our concern right now. This is about short term need and we're in a dogfight for promotion! I've never come across a manager who would rather not have an extra player in his squad. The same arguments that have applied to Harrison could equally well apply to any of our other 'bench' players - is the suggestion they should go out on loan too so they come back with more match fitness? I'm not buying the argument that Harrison is better off starting at Hartlepool than sitting on our bench either. If he carries on as he is then he'll end up with 15-18 goals largely as a squad player in a team that has been in a promotion hunt - I think that's a pretty attractive starting point for League 2 clubs looking to upgrade their forward line for next season given his age. If he goes to Hartlepool he could be starting in a misfiring side that is mired in a relegation battle - OK, he could score the goals that fire them to safety. More likely though, as in 2014, he gets caught up in a squad down on morale and struggling to create opportunities for their forward players. So if he's gone there out of choice I think he's been pretty badly advised because people could see him struggling in that side, see his record from 2014 and think 'not up to it'. Rather than stay with us and carry on chipping in from the bench and I think he keeps a reputation as a genuinely promising prospect at this level. Unless of course he's had a lifelong burning desire to play for Ronnie Moore.... For me this makes little sense as a 'footballing' decision for either Rovers or Harrison - although it does at least make some sense for Harrison, it makes no sense for Rovers as far as I can see. It's not a criticism of Clarke, he has made very good calls all season - just a comment that if this is the explanation I'm not really buying it. All else being equal, why wouldn't you want an impact player like Harrison sitting on your bench? Where are you getting 12 goals from Irish? Soccerbase says 6. Apart from a penalty on Saturday, he's not scored since October. He's a young man who needs game time to find his form, imo. Where's Irish quoted 12 FG, I can't see that but you're right he's only scored 6, 2 of which are penalties. He's only going on loan for 4 weeks and potentially could play up to 7 games. That has enormous potential for us on his return and for the rest of the season.
|
|