|
Post by Captainslapper on Mar 12, 2016 23:07:56 GMT 1
Cranie and Hudson were both crap first half. Thats unusual for Cranie, who's generally pretty good, but just standard stuff from Hudson. They were both crap, sadly for crainie its a common theme against physicality. He is a neat tidy ball player but struggles against strength and height rather than pace. Fair comment. hes not the biggest for a centre back. Today we had 2 centre backs who struggle against strength and height and Lynch, good as he is, is also not that aerially dominant. Priority for the summer HAS to be a good quality Cb who is strong in the air, comfortable on the ball and not slower than a milk float- to partner Lynch. Cranies certainly worth having as back up cos he does that for various positions. Every squad needs at least one of those. Hudson... well i don't have to say whether I think we should keep him or not!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:08:38 GMT 1
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2016 23:08:38 GMT 1
Partly, yes. There is also the question of how they managed to get a free header 2 yards out with the front man missing his header and the keeper nowhere. Absolutely I can't remember which goal it was (might have been the second one), but Hudson went for a header (sort of), got nowhere near and left a giant gaping gap behind him.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:18:46 GMT 1
Post by shawsie on Mar 12, 2016 23:18:46 GMT 1
Lot of truth in that. However, dress it up whichever way you like, Hudson's part in giving away the corner before half time was embarrassing. He is not the future (neither is Cranie) therefore let's address this problem sooner rather than later. Its not so much about the individual errors for me. Hypothetically if we said for arguments sake that none of the goals happened to be Hudson's fault (which isn't true); it still doesn't excuse the fact that he doesn't jump, challenge convincingly for headers or run. He isn't good enough and even if he was, he doesn't fit in with the way we want to play. Retaining him for next season would be a mistake. Ive said many times hes massively over criticised imo on here, but its clear his better days are behind him and i wouldnt be renewing his deal either. If there is a decent young lad coming through, then i wouldnt offer crainie one either - if you aspire to finish top half next season then you wont do it with him at centre back imo and smith is better at full back. Its a big summer for the likes of dempsey, senior, bojaj, holmes, billing, charles, booty etc. Some of them are 19/20 and maybe older now and should be ready for the squad and indeed team if they are ever going to be. we are a club that needs its youngsters to blossom - billing has a bright future if he keeps working and hopefully we will see one or two more force their way in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:24:09 GMT 1
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2016 23:24:09 GMT 1
Its not so much about the individual errors for me. Hypothetically if we said for arguments sake that none of the goals happened to be Hudson's fault (which isn't true); it still doesn't excuse the fact that he doesn't jump, challenge convincingly for headers or run. He isn't good enough and even if he was, he doesn't fit in with the way we want to play. Retaining him for next season would be a mistake. Ive said many times hes massively over criticised imo on here, but its clear his better days are behind him and i wouldnt be renewing his deal either. If there is a decent young lad coming through, then i wouldnt offer crainie one either - if you aspire to finish top half next season then you wont do it with him at centre back imo and smith is better at full back. Its a big summer for the likes of dempsey, senior, bojaj, holmes, billing, charles, booty etc. Some of them are 19/20 and maybe older now and should be ready for the squad and indeed team if they are ever going to be. we are a club that needs its youngsters to blossom - billing has a bright future if he keeps working and hopefully we will see one or two more force their way in. I probably would keep Cranie just for his versatility really. But I agree - he isn't really strong/dominating as would be ideal for a CB. Having said that IF we could bring in a monster to play next to Lynch+Cranie (when Lynch is rested/injured), I think he would be decent back up.
|
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 6,922
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:30:43 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by ben1987 on Mar 12, 2016 23:30:43 GMT 1
Yes lets offer him a new contract we dont need more quality than this absolute titan of a defender. Fetch me the rifle if he was a racehorse he'd have been shot Nobody connected with HTAFC has come out and said 'we are not signing a CB next season, instead we're offering Hudson a new contract'. Stop being such a fucking little bitch, dry your eyes and get yourself off to bed. You beef more than my 3 month old daughter does when she wants feeding. It's every fucking day, same shit over and over and over. It ain't Hudson that needs shooting, you need the bullet just to shut you the fuck up.
|
|
htfc63
Darren Bullock Terrier
Posts: 875
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:45:40 GMT 1
Post by htfc63 on Mar 12, 2016 23:45:40 GMT 1
Depends on what the clubs aspirations are going forward. Sign Hudson in the knowledge he will play some reasonable games however will also play some stinkers or put your faith in a younger , fitter up and coming centre back who can make mistakes however at least has the potential to improve. I know what I would go for.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:54:02 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by mids on Mar 12, 2016 23:54:02 GMT 1
Yes lets offer him a new contract we dont need more quality than this absolute titan of a defender. Fetch me the rifle if he was a racehorse he'd have been shot Nobody connected with HTAFC has come out and said 'we are not signing a CB next season, instead we're offering Hudson a new contract'. Stop being such a fucking little bitch, dry your eyes and get yourself off to bed. You beef more than my 3 month old daughter does when she wants feeding. It's every fucking day, same shit over and over and over. It ain't Hudson that needs shooting, you need the bullet just to shut you the fuck up. Jeeez someone's in a bad mood
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:54:22 GMT 1
Post by Nickhudds.UTT on Mar 12, 2016 23:54:22 GMT 1
Dont get how wagner thinks hes good
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 12, 2016 23:57:07 GMT 1
Post by Sugy , Paignton Devon Terrier on Mar 12, 2016 23:57:07 GMT 1
There can be little or no room for error at championship level as that will result in the defensive farse that gifted Burnley the game.
What town lack is some kind of consistency in almost every position.
Defeat in the rusty toolbox next week cannot be considered an option , and Wagner needs to realise his best side that can grind out a vital result.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 1:47:57 GMT 1
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Mar 13, 2016 1:47:57 GMT 1
Neither Hudson or Craine should be anywhere near the Town starting eleven next season. Both were garbage today (or is it yesterday now?) and are simply not good enough at Championship level.
Two new centre backs is an absolute priority (in addition to Lynch) in the summer!
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 2:10:24 GMT 1
Post by Captainslapper on Mar 13, 2016 2:10:24 GMT 1
Its so unfair to lump Cranie in with Hudson. Yes he had a dreadful first half today, but that is really unusual for him. Bad games are a real rarity. Hopefully he won't be a 1st team starter next season as we'll sign someone better to play alongside Lynch but hes plenty good enough to be one of the 2 back ups we need and to play to a high standard when called on.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 2:54:16 GMT 1
Post by davidpgowinghtafc on Mar 13, 2016 2:54:16 GMT 1
All these recent comments are assuming that Town will play CHAMPIONSHIP football next season.
On today's showing and looking at the fixture list this is by no means certain.
I sincerely hope Town is in this same division next season but I am getting nervous. 13 point gap now reduced to 6 points is not good.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Mar 13, 2016 7:25:24 GMT 1
All these recent comments are assuming that Town will play CHAMPIONSHIP football next season. On today's showing and looking at the fixture list this is by no means certain. I sincerely hope Town is in this same division next season but I am getting nervous. 13 point gap now reduced to 6 points is not good. Maybe you might want to take the 40-1 to go down that's freely available .. seems only town fans see it as a possibility
|
|
Yuta be a terrier
Andy Booth Terrier
That Gary Taylor fletcher will never make a footballer.....
Posts: 3,479
Member is Online
|
Post by Yuta be a terrier on Mar 13, 2016 8:12:30 GMT 1
1st goal - Cranie outjumped in the 6 yard box from a corner, Burnley scorer reacts quickest to loose ball. 2nd goal - Cranie and Davidson outnumber Gray on touchline who feeds unmarked Boyd who plays cross between defender and keeper for Vokes to score. 3rd goal Smith allows his marker to get in front of him and score with header inside the 6 yard box from a corner. But it's Hudson who is at fault apparently. Did you go yesterday? That's not a shitty question, I can see why you may think that from the highlights but if you were there then you must have seen the farcical attempts at clearing the ball from Hudson that lead to the corner for the 3rd. Also, Cranie plated really well yesterday and the fact that Gray never got in behind or even got a sniff is testament to that. The 1st goal you could argue the lad is climbing all over Cranie and I would say Whitehead should have thrown his head on when the lad volleys it. The 2nd, Cranie has every right to follow Gray out wide it's Davidson feeble attempt at helping him that leaves Boyd wide open. To cap it off just look at Hudson indecision as Boyd runs towards the box for the 2nd. Need to cover the near post and Vokes there. As a footballer and an athlete Hudson offers little so when he isn't able to read the play of co-ordinate the defence then it really is time to go. On a seperate note I think Wagner needs to take some blame here. Huws and scannell weren't fully fit and by dropping Dempsey and Pato for Huws and Matmour we drastically reduced the physicality of the team which is what cost us yesterday. Surely if you have seen Burnley this season you know they are a big physical unit. We were never going to be tall enough regardless who we played (we missed Lynch so bad tho) but we could have matched the physical intensity with the right selection.
|
|
|
Post by stinkypete on Mar 13, 2016 9:27:02 GMT 1
Hudson gets some over the top stick on here but the cock up leading to the corner for third goal was shocking! Just get rid we've got ourselves back in the game right on half time!! Also if Smithies had performed like Steer yesterday there would have been a meltdown on here, not claiming corners that are pretty much underneath the crossbar is very poor goalkeeping. Wouldn't be keeping Steer.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 9:42:49 GMT 1
Post by Nickhudds.UTT on Mar 13, 2016 9:42:49 GMT 1
Hudson gets some over the top stick on here but the cock up leading to the corner for third goal was shocking! Just get rid we've got ourselves back in the game right on half time!! Also if Smithies had performed like Steer yesterday there would have been a meltdown on here, not claiming corners that are pretty much underneath the crossbar is very poor goalkeeping. Wouldn't be keeping Steer. Steer is worse than Murphy time to drop him.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 14:26:29 GMT 1
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Mar 13, 2016 14:26:29 GMT 1
1st goal - Cranie outjumped in the 6 yard box from a corner, Burnley scorer reacts quickest to loose ball. 2nd goal - Cranie and Davidson outnumber Gray on touchline who feeds unmarked Boyd who plays cross between defender and keeper for Vokes to score. 3rd goal Smith allows his marker to get in front of him and score with header inside the 6 yard box from a corner. But it's Hudson who is at fault apparently. Did you go yesterday? That's not a shitty question, I can see why you may think that from the highlights but if you were there then you must have seen the farcical attempts at clearing the ball from Hudson that lead to the corner for the 3rd. Also, Cranie plated really well yesterday and the fact that Gray never got in behind or even got a sniff is testament to that. The 1st goal you could argue the lad is climbing all over Cranie and I would say Whitehead should have thrown his head on when the lad volleys it. The 2nd, Cranie has every right to follow Gray out wide it's Davidson feeble attempt at helping him that leaves Boyd wide open. To cap it off just look at Hudson indecision as Boyd runs towards the box for the 2nd. Need to cover the near post and Vokes there. As a footballer and an athlete Hudson offers little so when he isn't able to read the play of co-ordinate the defence then it really is time to go. On a seperate note I think Wagner needs to take some blame here. Huws and scannell weren't fully fit and by dropping Dempsey and Pato for Huws and Matmour we drastically reduced the physicality of the team which is what cost us yesterday. Surely if you have seen Burnley this season you know they are a big physical unit. We were never going to be tall enough regardless who we played (we missed Lynch so bad tho) but we could have matched the physical intensity with the right selection. Sorry but that ALWAYS is a shitty question..... it is a leading question that means you want to invalidate one's opinion. And as such I will not dignify it with an answer, the answer though is out there through my other postings if you want to know! Cranie has looked decent most of the season but yesterday I felt he was our poorest defender and did you notice the immediate action before your farcical description of Hudson's play for the corner, it started with IMO just as farcical an attempt of a headed clearance by Cranie. It's all about opinions, and sadly opinions are fed by one's own beliefs, to point the finger at Hudson for the second when we were outnumbered 3 against 2 in our own penalty area after the cock up on the touchline, is evidence of this, over commitment either way makes the decision easy for the ball carrier. Any decent play by Burnley in that situation would likely lead to a goal and it was an excellent ball played between the first defender (Hudson) and the keeper just as Scannell played on Tuesday against Reading. By co-ordinating the defence what exactly do you mean! That sounds like you are wanting to blame him for others errors, was it his fault Cranie should have been stronger when outjumped/muscled from the corner and Whitehead didn't anticipate Ward swivelling to volley home the first. Was it Hudson's fault Davidson was attracted to the ball and left Boyd, that Cranie didn't cover the through ball from Gray to Boyd or that Steer didn't anticipate the rolled in cross. For the third, his (and Cranie's) defence should have been much better, but it only led to the corner and if individually, we did our jobs from the corner it would have been irrelevant, Smith and Steer both could and should have done a lot better from the corner.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 14:43:53 GMT 1
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2016 14:43:53 GMT 1
Did you go yesterday? That's not a shitty question, I can see why you may think that from the highlights but if you were there then you must have seen the farcical attempts at clearing the ball from Hudson that lead to the corner for the 3rd. Also, Cranie plated really well yesterday and the fact that Gray never got in behind or even got a sniff is testament to that. The 1st goal you could argue the lad is climbing all over Cranie and I would say Whitehead should have thrown his head on when the lad volleys it. The 2nd, Cranie has every right to follow Gray out wide it's Davidson feeble attempt at helping him that leaves Boyd wide open. To cap it off just look at Hudson indecision as Boyd runs towards the box for the 2nd. Need to cover the near post and Vokes there. As a footballer and an athlete Hudson offers little so when he isn't able to read the play of co-ordinate the defence then it really is time to go. On a seperate note I think Wagner needs to take some blame here. Huws and scannell weren't fully fit and by dropping Dempsey and Pato for Huws and Matmour we drastically reduced the physicality of the team which is what cost us yesterday. Surely if you have seen Burnley this season you know they are a big physical unit. We were never going to be tall enough regardless who we played (we missed Lynch so bad tho) but we could have matched the physical intensity with the right selection. Sorry but that ALWAYS is a shitty question..... it is a leading question that means you want to invalidate one's opinion. And as such I will not dignify it with an answer, the answer though is out there through my other postings if you want to know! Cranie has looked decent most of the season but yesterday I felt he was our poorest defender and did you notice the immediate action before your farcical description of Hudson's play for the corner, it started with IMO just as farcical an attempt of a headed clearance by Cranie.It's all about opinions, and sadly opinions are fed by one's own beliefs, to point the finger at Hudson for the second when we were outnumbered 3 against 2 in our own penalty area after the cock up on the touchline, is evidence of this, over commitment either way makes the decision easy for the ball carrier. Any decent play by Burnley in that situation would likely lead to a goal and it was an excellent ball played between the first defender (Hudson) and the keeper just as Scannell played on Tuesday against Reading. By co-ordinating the defence what exactly do you mean! That sounds like you are wanting to blame him for others errors, was it his fault Cranie should have been stronger when outjumped/muscled from the corner and Whitehead didn't anticipate Ward swivelling to volley home the first. Was it Hudson's fault Davidson was attracted to the ball and left Boyd, that Cranie didn't cover the through ball from Gray to Boyd or that Steer didn't anticipate the rolled in cross. For the third, his (and Cranie's) defence should have been much better, but it only led to the corner and if individually, we did our jobs from the corner it would have been irrelevant, Smith and Steer both could and should have done a lot better from the corner. For me, Cranie has been decent and that's as far as I'd go. 6/10 most weeks. He should only be 3rd choice centre back (at best) and 2nd choice right back. A good free transfer and decent utility player, but would only ever be a starter in a team that won't get into the top 12. We should be aiming to have Lynch as the weakest of our 2 centre backs to try and improve defensively (i.e. try to get somebody at least as good as Lynch). Hudson, Wallace and Cranie will not improve a Championship defence IMO. This might seem unrealistic but we have to aim for better than our current defence.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 15:28:38 GMT 1
Post by haveitback on Mar 13, 2016 15:28:38 GMT 1
Hudson was poor yest, Yes but he was far from the only person to let the team down, The selection of Huws and the fact he lasted 90 min was even worse, I am aware Wagner spoke about this after the game and the fact had Billing not been ill the Huws would not have started, But this lad offered nothing all game, He was soft in tackles, was guilty of ball watching. Let the ball run past him endless times, It was like playing with ten men, He also let Hudson down in clearing the ball for one of there goals, A fact Hudson let him know about, I have watched Huws closely and i fail to see what all the hype is about this lad, He cert is not worth anywhere near the figure been mentioned for him or paid. Town can cert invest that money on better players than him, In fact we started the match with better players than him on the bench. I have slatted Hudson in the past but under Wagner he has improved greatly, He had a bad day yest against the table topping falling over team that is Burnley, Bad day at the office but lets move on, I for one though hope that was Huws last game for us, We have better and are better than what he offers.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 15:37:46 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by impact on Mar 13, 2016 15:37:46 GMT 1
1st goal - Cranie outjumped in the 6 yard box from a corner, Burnley scorer reacts quickest to loose ball. 2nd goal - Cranie and Davidson outnumber Gray on touchline who feeds unmarked Boyd who plays cross between defender and keeper for Vokes to score. 3rd goal Smith allows his marker to get in front of him and score with header inside the 6 yard box from a corner. But it's Hudson who is at fault apparently. Did you go yesterday? That's not a shitty question, I can see why you may think that from the highlights but if you were there then you must have seen the farcical attempts at clearing the ball from Hudson that lead to the corner for the 3rd. Also, Cranie plated really well yesterday and the fact that Gray never got in behind or even got a sniff is testament to that. The 1st goal you could argue the lad is climbing all over Cranie and I would say Whitehead should have thrown his head on when the lad volleys it. The 2nd, Cranie has every right to follow Gray out wide it's Davidson feeble attempt at helping him that leaves Boyd wide open. To cap it off just look at Hudson indecision as Boyd runs towards the box for the 2nd. Need to cover the near post and Vokes there. As a footballer and an athlete Hudson offers little so when he isn't able to read the play of co-ordinate the defence then it really is time to go. On a seperate note I think Wagner needs to take some blame here. Huws and scannell weren't fully fit and by dropping Dempsey and Pato for Huws and Matmour we drastically reduced the physicality of the team which is what cost us yesterday. Surely if you have seen Burnley this season you know they are a big physical unit. We were never going to be tall enough regardless who we played (we missed Lynch so bad tho) but we could have matched the physical intensity with the right selection. If you thought Cranie played really well yesterday we must have been watching a different game. At least partly at fault for 2/3 goals and you could argue the 3rd, his passing was terrible and he played some awful balls back to Steer to try and deal with. You may have also noticed that actually most of the time Gray was playing off Hudson and Vokes off Cranie (ie quick v slow, aerially dominant v aerially weak). So if you think Gray didn't get in behind at all (he did btw) it would be just as much if not more Hudson's good work.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 15:54:57 GMT 1
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Mar 13, 2016 15:54:57 GMT 1
1st goal - Cranie outjumped in the 6 yard box from a corner, Burnley scorer reacts quickest to loose ball. 2nd goal - Cranie and Davidson outnumber Gray on touchline who feeds unmarked Boyd who plays cross between defender and keeper for Vokes to score. 3rd goal Smith allows his marker to get in front of him and score with header inside the 6 yard box from a corner. But it's Hudson who is at fault apparently. Did you go yesterday? That's not a shitty question, I can see why you may think that from the highlights but if you were there then you must have seen the farcical attempts at clearing the ball from Hudson that lead to the corner for the 3rd. Also, Cranie plated really well yesterday and the fact that Gray never got in behind or even got a sniff is testament to that. The 1st goal you could argue the lad is climbing all over Cranie and I would say Whitehead should have thrown his head on when the lad volleys it. The 2nd, Cranie has every right to follow Gray out wide it's Davidson feeble attempt at helping him that leaves Boyd wide open. To cap it off just look at Hudson indecision as Boyd runs towards the box for the 2nd. Need to cover the near post and Vokes there. As a footballer and an athlete Hudson offers little so when he isn't able to read the play of co-ordinate the defence then it really is time to go. On a seperate note I think Wagner needs to take some blame here. Huws and scannell weren't fully fit and by dropping Dempsey and Pato for Huws and Matmour we drastically reduced the physicality of the team which is what cost us yesterday. Surely if you have seen Burnley this season you know they are a big physical unit. We were never going to be tall enough regardless who we played (we missed Lynch so bad tho) but we could have matched the physical intensity with the right selection. Your last point is a particularly good one wagbo. Leaving Pato and Dempsey out reduced our freshness/physicality rather than enhanced it. Ditto Huws and Scannell. For the second goal surely the key was that we had two players challenging for the same ball on the left flank, leaving one of theirs unmarked. We have conceded quite a few goals this season like that - two players challenging for the same ball.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 15:58:44 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by wtd on Mar 13, 2016 15:58:44 GMT 1
Michael Keane was terrific yesterday. He's the standard required... unfortunately.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 16:59:12 GMT 1
Post by terrierpark on Mar 13, 2016 16:59:12 GMT 1
Yes lets offer him a new contract we dont need more quality than this absolute titan of a defender. Fetch me the rifle if he was a racehorse he'd have been shot Nobody connected with HTAFC has come out and said 'we are not signing a CB next season, instead we're offering Hudson a new contract'. Stop being such a fucking little bitch, dry your eyes and get yourself off to bed. You beef more than my 3 month old daughter does when she wants feeding. It's every fucking day, same shit over and over and over. It ain't Hudson that needs shooting, you need the bullet just to shut you the fuck up. No your quite right Ben nobody has come out and said,"'we are not signing a CB next season, instead we're offering Hudson a new contract'. But one can read betwen the lines, and even if the club had said it we both know full well what they say and what actually happens can be two different things dont we ben? There are absoultely diddly squat noises coming from the club about a ctre back been a priority so why would you think otherwise brainstem? Every man and his dog wants a striker and a ctre back and has done for over a year but the messiah likes his wingers doesnt he ? The truth is you simpleton you dont know any more than i , its anybodys guess what type of players will be signed, afterall ignoring the current needs of the squad obvious to thousands seems to be the norm doesnt it or we would have been signing a ctre back on loan and that striker wouldnt we? Oh i'm sorry i have had the temerity to complain, well pardon me all over, i am so sorry. Maybe after yesterdays stunning performance from the defence, Mr W might have to reasses, perhaps you should too after you have washed your mouth out first.
|
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 6,922
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 17:18:43 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by ben1987 on Mar 13, 2016 17:18:43 GMT 1
Nobody connected with HTAFC has come out and said 'we are not signing a CB next season, instead we're offering Hudson a new contract'. Stop being such a fucking little bitch, dry your eyes and get yourself off to bed. You beef more than my 3 month old daughter does when she wants feeding. It's every fucking day, same shit over and over and over. It ain't Hudson that needs shooting, you need the bullet just to shut you the fuck up. No your quite right Ben nobody has come out and said,"'we are not signing a CB next season, instead we're offering Hudson a new contract'. But one can read betwen the lines, and even if the club had said it we both know full well what they say and what actually happens can be two different things dont we ben? There are absoultely diddly squat noises coming from the club about a ctre back been a priority so why would you think otherwise brainstem? Every man and his dog wants a striker and a ctre back and has done for over a year but the messiah likes his wingers doesnt he ? The truth is you simpleton you dont know any more than i , its anybodys guess what type of players will be signed, afterall ignoring the current needs of the squad obvious to thousands seems to be the norm doesnt it or we would have been signing a ctre back on loan and that striker wouldnt we? Oh i'm sorry i have had the temerity to complain, well pardon me all over, i am so sorry. Maybe after yesterdays stunning performance from the defence, Mr W might have to reasses, perhaps you should too after you have washed your mouth out first. You're right, I know fuck all. I also accept your apology.
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 19:34:50 GMT 1
Post by Captainslapper on Mar 13, 2016 19:34:50 GMT 1
Ive no idea why Wagner is even considering offering Hudson a new deal ( or why he keeps starting with him now ), but I don't for one minute think he sees Hudson as a first choice option next season.
'Reading between the lines...' is just a phrase that translates into ' Making my own deluded bullshit up...'
|
|
|
Hudson
Mar 13, 2016 20:05:34 GMT 1
via mobile
Post by natbrownsgloves on Mar 13, 2016 20:05:34 GMT 1
Don't post often but feel the need. If a new first team CB to partner Lynch who, on his day, rubs shoulders with the best of them, isnt om the cards we will all be massively dissapointed. Hudson should be kept on as a mentor and 4th choice CB at best. As others have said you can't be that slow out of the traps without creating problems for the other CB (Hence why Lynch looks so good sometimes?) Yesterday highlighted, regardless of who we were playing, we are shite at both defending AND attacking corners. Reminds me of the days post Booth in league 1 pre Hoyle era. That must change.
|
|
|
Post by morleyterrier on Mar 20, 2016 7:47:22 GMT 1
I thought Hudson had a great game yesterday, it wasn't his Man that scored either.
The pairing of Lynch and Hudson is strong and credit also to Lynch for a good game (and before anybody says it, yes I agree Hudson is better with Lynch alongside him but you could say that would be the case with any Championship centre-back playing alongside Lynch).
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Mar 20, 2016 8:07:04 GMT 1
I thought Hudson had a great game yesterday, it wasn't his Man that scored either. The pairing of Lynch and Hudson is strong and credit also to Lynch for a good game (and before anybody says it, yes I agree Hudson is better with Lynch alongside him but you could say that would be the case with any Championship centre-back playing alongside Lynch). Lynch was outstanding yesterday, he covers so much for Hudson...their best break in the 2nd half displayed Hudson's lack of pace but Lynch covered for him. Hudson is a real 100% man, committed and a good communicator but time is/has caught up with him at this level
|
|