Harvey Barnes

[LFEE]

9 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

That illustrates my point perfectly, clubs are willing to deal with us on their own terms, the exact same scenario occurs across the league everyone is watching out for themselves. Nobody is doing anyone favours it's just we love to play the victim. 

Your point was literally the opposite earlier. I’ve just illustrated it was wrong… 

 

“This clubs don't want to sell to us narrative is clearly bullshit mind. Given most of our signings are from other British clubs.”

 

Tell me who we’ve signed who a club hasn’t wanted to sell?

 

 

Edited October 28, 2024 by LFEE

[r0cafella]

2 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Your point was literally the opposite earlier. I’ve just illustrated it was wrong… 

 

“This clubs don't want to sell to us narrative is clearly bullshit mind. Given most of our signings are from other British clubs.”

 

Tell me who we’ve signed who a club hasn’t wanted to sell?

 

 

 

Yes my point was clubs will deal with us on their own terms which is precisely what has happened, no anti Newcastle bias exists purely because it's business. 

 

Every club has agency hence we can't buy players which aren't for sale, this goes for all clubs. All sales are done on a willing buyer willing seller basis. 

[LFEE]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

Yes my point was clubs will deal with us on their own terms which is precisely what has happened, no anti Newcastle bias exists purely because it's business. 

 

Every club has agency hence we can't buy players which aren't for sale, this goes for all clubs. All sales are done on a willing buyer willing seller basis. 

I agree with your second point but I think you are being naive if you don’t think clubs are making it more difficult for us. Just remind yourself of their attitudes when there was a sniff of us getting relegated to even loaning some players and the rules they’ve introduced to prevent our progress. 
 

Until we are a destination where the players are very keen to head to we’ve an uphill struggle. Hence back to the point I was making we got Barnes because it was a rare opportunity for us to nip in. Had Maddison not been for sale he possibly could’ve ended up at Spurs for example.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, LFEE said:

I agree with your second point but I think you are being naive if you don’t think clubs are making it more difficult for us. Just remind yourself of their attitudes when there was a sniff of us getting relegated to even loaning some players and the rules they’ve introduced to prevent our progress. 
 

Until we are a destination where the players are very keen to head to we’ve an uphill struggle. Hence back to the point I was making we got Barnes because it was a rare opportunity for us to nip in. Had Maddison not been for sale he possibly could’ve ended up at Spurs for example.

I think naturally other clubs will try and get as much money out of us as possible, this is exactly what happens when a Man united comes knocking. Of course the have shitty attitudes us being good is bad for business of those top 6 clubs however I'm under no illusions that if they could pass on some rejects to us they happily would. 

 

Your second paragraph seems to refer to our attractiveness is as a destination ? My underlying point refers to us saying other PL clubs don't want to deal with us, which isn't the case imo. They just want to take us to the cleaners which is business. 

[The College Dropout]

The ‘we spent £40m on Gordon 6 months earlier but he wasn’t good straight away so we spent another £40m on Barnes’ argument is a bad one.  

[LFEE]

2 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

I think naturally other clubs will try and get as much money out of us as possible, this is exactly what happens when a Man united comes knocking. Of course the have shitty attitudes us being good is bad for business of those top 6 clubs however I'm under no illusions that if they could pass on some rejects to us they happily would. 

 

Your second paragraph seems to refer to our attractiveness is as a destination ? My underlying point refers to us saying other PL clubs don't want to deal with us, which isn't the case imo. They just want to take us to the cleaners which is business. 

So I will return to my point. Which great player have we managed to extract without the club being absolutely desperate? None. They’ve only done business when out of their hands. So to me that limits our market in the division severely. Until a player wants to come so bad the club sets a realistic fee. Guehi didn’t and Palace teased us until the window expired.

 

January window is going to be fascinating. I’ve no idea what’s going to happen and what direction we take. My guess would be abroad. 

[timeEd32]

3 hours ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

I don't remember this period

 

A lot of that summer was spent complaining about the Gordon signing and debating where he'd play. I said this on June 1, 2023...
 

Quote

I think one of the things likely setting some people up for disappointment or confusion in this window is the general perception of Gordon vs. how Ashworth / Howe view him.

 

We know Howe eases players in and we heard from the player himself that his fitness was not up to the standard. Assuming he fixes that I think it's a mistake to assume our first XI doesn't include him or that he's at least not a big part of our plans. I think comments like "Howe clearly likes Joelinton more at LW" or "why did we pay £45M for a squad player?" are making potentially faulty assumptions.

 

It's not clear to me if we like him for his versatility and may use him in a number of positions moving forward or if we used him in a few places out of need. But if we don't bring in an obvious RW or we sell Maxi and don't replace him or if we don't bring in competition for Longstaff then I think it's possible the answer to any of those is Gordon.

 

Gordon started the season as the LW, but Brentford in September we started with Barnes left and Gordon right. Then three days later we played Milan with Gordon left and Murphy right (Murphy came off for Miggy early 2nd half and Gordon came off for Wilson with Isak shifting wide). Then five days later at Sheffield United we started with Barnes/Wilson/Miggy. It seems the plan was to rotate the front three to deal with the added fixtures, but then Barnes was hurt for ages and Wilson/Isak took turns being injured. Gordon turned into one of the league's best left wingers by the next time we see Barnes.

 

The kind version of what happened is a reasonable plan got derailed by injuries and a previous signing became an excellent LW making the Barnes signing a bit redundant. Not ideal, but understandable.

 

The negative version of what happened is we spent a lot of money on a very specialized player and we did so in the position where we already had the most options. We felt comfortable doing this because we naively thought a 29 year old RW off the season of his life would continue that form and/or we felt we needed to replace the outgoing LW because we weren't sure where Gordon fit. 

 

There's some bad luck involved, but also poor planning given our finances. None of this is the fault of Barnes, who will create and score goals, but we'd be in a really rough place if not for Gordon's versatility.

[TRon]

5 hours ago, Smal said:

I don’t remember him running back much. If anything it was the opposite because, by his own admission, he was really unfit.

 

There was quite a few criticising him for sure, I wasn't one of them. I thought he did alright, and I thought he was a hard worker even then.

[Lotus]

3 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

The ‘we spent £40m on Gordon 6 months earlier but he wasn’t good straight away so we spent another £40m on Barnes’ argument is a bad one.  

Have to agree. Imagine we bought Tino for £40m and then 6 months later spend another £40m on another RB in case Tino wasn’t going to be good enough.

If you trust in your reasons that a player is right for the club and they end needing a bit of work you stick to the plan, surely?

[Shearergol]

1 hour ago, Lotus said:

Have to agree. Imagine we bought Tino for £40m and then 6 months later spend another £40m on another RB in case Tino wasn’t going to be good enough.

If you trust in your reasons that a player is right for the club and they end needing a bit of work you stick to the plan, surely?

 

I genuinely think we were squad building. I know we're not used to it, and it's not worked out that well (yet).

[Pablo123]

5 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

The ‘we spent £40m on Gordon 6 months earlier but he wasn’t good straight away so we spent another £40m on Barnes’ argument is a bad one.  

Especially because we bought Gordon to play on the right, I think?

[Jackie Broon]

16 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

I genuinely think we were squad building. I know we're not used to it, and it's not worked out that well (yet).

 

Also he was a replacement for ASM who didn't fit into Howe's style of play / was our only saleable asset we were wiling to part with for PSR purposes.

[SUPERTOON]

1 minute ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

Also he was a replacement for ASM who didn't fit into Howe's style of play / was our only saleable asset we were wiling to part with for PSR purposes.

Barnes isn’t exactly suited for Howe’s style either tbh.

[Shearergol]

9 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

Barnes isn’t exactly suited for Howe’s style either tbh.

 

I'm not sure what Howe's style is anymore

 

Barnes has been one of our most effective players this season though.

[SUPERTOON]

Just now, Shearergol said:

 

I'm not sure what Howe's style is anymore

 

Barnes has been one of our most effective players this season though.

Fair point, he doesn’t fit into what I Howe’s style was.

[r0cafella]

14 hours ago, LFEE said:

So I will return to my point. Which great player have we managed to extract without the club being absolutely desperate? None. They’ve only done business when out of their hands. So to me that limits our market in the division severely. Until a player wants to come so bad the club sets a realistic fee. Guehi didn’t and Palace teased us until the window expired.

 

January window is going to be fascinating. I’ve no idea what’s going to happen and what direction we take. My guess would be abroad. 

My friend I'm not sure what point your making, of course we can't easily buy players from clubs who are under no pressure to sell easily, but this applies to the entire league hence my examples of Arsenal and Chelsea paying huge sums for great players they didn't want to sell. If you flip the script if we'd offer 100m for Bowen west ham would take it. 

[Geogaddi]

Thought he was really poor on Sunday , looks more like an impact player than a regular starter to me .

[Lush Vlad]

Never gets a run of games as a starter and it always seems like he gets subbed off after 60 odd minutes, anyway. However good, bad or indifferent he is on the day.  
 

Hard to fully judge him as a starting player IMO. As he is in and out of the team every 5 minutes. 
 

He was not good on Sunday. Although Gusto was decent against him, plus he did get away with numerous fouls on him. Well, in the ref’s view whenever it was someone else doing it they were  

I still thought we managed to get him 1 v 1 a few times and it was often promising. Just one too many touches or the attack breaking down.  
 

I’d like to see him get a run on the left if Gordon is out for a while. It’s hardly like we have many goals in the team as it is. 

[buzza]

Gusto is one of the best full backs in the league at the moment. Don't think anyone gets much change out of him!

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Gusto was/is good but I thought Barnes should have had at least 2 or 3 more attacking free kicks as well. 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2024 by AyeDubbleYoo

[OoOGazOoO]

No me Gusto

 

 

Edited October 29, 2024 by OoOGazOoO

[Ikon]

I've said it from the beginning, i cannot understand why we signed him.

[Ronaldo]

3 minutes ago, Ikon said:

I've said it from the beginning, i cannot understand why we signed him.

Yeah. Very fine finisher but absolutely not what we needed to spend £40m on given his massive limitations as a winger. 

[Yorkie]

Can't understand what the mystery is tbh. ASM went, leaving Gordon as our only LW, who was also expected to fill in at CF to relieve Isak and Wilson. Barnes was a quality goalscoring winger available at a competitive price so we signed him. 

[HaydnNUFC]

6 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Can't understand what the mystery is tbh. ASM went, leaving Gordon as our only LW, who was also expected to fill in at CF to relieve Isak and Wilson. Barnes was a quality goalscoring winger available at a competitive price so we signed him. 

 

We also had players that could play on the left as was evident in 2022-23 in Joelinton, Anderson, Willock and worse case scenario Isak.

 

On the right two players who are not good enough remained, and still do.