Harvey Barnes

[SAK]

2 minutes ago, Novocastrian said:

Must admit I wasn’t paying too much attention by the end but did Barnes contribute much? In my mind he’s only really effective running onto a throughball like against Villa.

That’s his game running in on through balls or playing one twos to get a shot off.

 

Edit to answer the question: No, he was on for a short time.

 

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by SAK

[Aiston]

3 minutes ago, Novocastrian said:

Must admit I wasn’t paying too much attention by the end but did Barnes contribute much? In my mind he’s only really effective running onto a throughball like against Villa.

 

Only on for 15 minutes but we created basically fuck all.

[Beth]

Him left and Gordon right for Brentford please.

[Holloway]

Harvey ain't going to dig you out the shite

[Myleftboot]

Squad player. Not a game changer.

[nufc123]

Just now, Holloway said:

Harvey ain't going to dig you out the shite

At least he knows to shoot. Didnt test the Brighton keeper for 90 min apart from Wilson.

[Holloway]

Just now, nufc123 said:

At least he knows to shoot. Didnt test the Brighton keeper for 90 min apart from Wilson.

Yeah he's direct but somewhat predictable

[joeyt]

Very early days but if we prefered Barnes to Maddison it looks a poor choice

[nufc123]

Just now, Holloway said:

Yeah he's direct but somewhat predictable

Lets see what he can do with a couple of starters 

[Holloway]

Just now, nufc123 said:

Lets see what he can do with a couple of starters 

Fair 

[The Prophet]

Difficult to judge him off bit-part performances.

[Shearergol]

1 minute ago, joeyt said:

Very early days but if we prefered Barnes to Maddison it looks a poor choice

We wanted both. 

[joeyt]

2 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

We wanted both. 

 

We couldn't afford both, if we could only have afforded one then Maddison would have been the better choice but admitedly it's very early days

 

 

 

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by joeyt

[Shearergol]

Just now, joeyt said:

 

We couldn't afford both, if we could only have afforded one then Maddison would have been the better choice but admitedly it's very early days

 

g

Maddison chose Spurs. That’s the issue.

[joeyt]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

Maddison chose Spurs. That’s the issue.

 

Presumably because they offered him more money. I've no idea how much Tonali is on but I'd imagine similar to what Maddison is on now and what we want to offer Bruno

[Myleftboot]

7 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

Maddison chose Spurs. That’s the issue.

Spurs play with a number 10 we don’t.

[buzz]

9 minutes ago, Myleftboot said:

Spurs play with a number 10 we don’t.

 

Leicester often played the same shape as us though and he was quite capable as a number 8 type. Unless his move to Spurs was specifically to do with promises about playing as a 10

[Myleftboot]

1 minute ago, buzz said:

 

Leicester often played the same shape as us though and he was quite capable as a number 8 type. Unless his move to Spurs was specifically to do with promises about playing as a 10

Probably. He’ll have the England squad in the back of his mind.

[r0cafella]

Yeah it depends right, I think as a left winger I prefer Barnes, he will get more goals from wide than Maddison. We don’t play with a 10 and this have little utility for Maddison he’d be a square peg in a round hole in our system. 

[ExiledGeordie]

I don’t really understand bringing Barnes in after signing Gordon in Jan if we’re not going to try to play both of them either side of a striker (likely Gordon on the right?) This must’ve been considered when they looked at signing both of them otherwise you’re massively limiting your options with just Almiron and Murphy for that RW slot. Otherwise they might as well have just gone in for a RW in the first place.

[gbandit]

7 minutes ago, ExiledGeordie said:

I don’t really understand bringing Barnes in after signing Gordon in Jan if we’re not going to try to play both of them either side of a striker (likely Gordon on the right?) This must’ve been considered when they looked at signing both of them otherwise you’re massively limiting your options with just Almiron and Murphy for that RW slot. Otherwise they might as well have just gone in for a RW in the first place.

I agree with this. The long-term plan must include Gordon playing in a different role as Barnes will only play on the left. Gordon did switch to the right against Brighton and he looked absolutely fine there so I think we’ll see it fairly soon 

[ExiledGeordie]

1 hour ago, gbandit said:

I agree with this. The long-term plan must include Gordon playing in a different role as Barnes will only play on the left. Gordon did switch to the right against Brighton and he looked absolutely fine there so I think we’ll see it fairly soon 

Teams know exactly what Miggy is going to do too so it’s fairly predictable really. We need to mix things up a bit. I’m sure Howe has various ideas in mind but you’d think Barnes will surely come in next game after the international break. He’s a finisher and we’re missing chances. 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2023 by ExiledGeordie

[The College Dropout]

The more I think about it - the more I think Barnes was only signed as a bit of a FFP hack to replace ASM. 

 

He's older than Tonali with PL experience but not been given significant game time. I hope he's just been warmed into the starting line-up but I'm not convinced.

 

Plans obviously change so I still have hope. But if the plan was to play Barnes LW and Gordon RW we would've tried it for more than 10 minutes in over 360 minutes of football.

[ExiledGeordie]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

The more I think about it - the more I think Barnes was only signed as a bit of a FFP hack to replace ASM. 

 

He's older than Tonali with PL experience but not been given significant game time. I hope he's just been warmed into the starting line-up but I'm not convinced.

 

Plans obviously change so I still have hope. But if the plan was to play Barnes LW and Gordon RW we would've tried it for more than 10 minutes in over 360 minutes of football.

Yeah that’s a good point that we haven’t seen it at all yet in games which is a bit odd. If he’s not considering it why sign another LW? Time will tell ofcourse 

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, ExiledGeordie said:

Yeah that’s a good point that we haven’t seen it at all yet in games which is a bit odd. If he’s not considering it why sign another LW? Time will tell ofcourse 

I think we saw it a little bit against Brighton?

 

We sold ASM who featured in 80% of matches he was fit for. And started maybe 20-25% of matches he was fit for. So he needed replacing. And he's been replaced with someone arguably more suited to the system.