Sufi Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 42 minutes ago, GeordieDazzler said: My pet theory is that his lack of game time has to do with the fee only being certain amount of he starts enough games and we’ll begin starting him when he can’t reach that number. could be but it would make more sense if it’s appearances not starts. He’s been sitting on the bench while 3-4 youngsters have come in this season for a cameo at like 80th min to get their debuts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 Hope he starts Tuesday! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodneyCisse Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 He was class when he came on wasn’t he? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteV Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 2 hours ago, GeordieDazzler said: My pet theory is that his lack of game time has to do with the fee only being certain amount of he starts enough games and we’ll begin starting him when he can’t reach that number. It’s been near enough confirmed (without being officially confirmed) that the clause is related to our league position. As long as we don’t finish 16th, he’s here for the foreseeable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 1 minute ago, RodneyCisse said: He was class when he came on wasn’t he? Not a patch on Burn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe1984 Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 1 minute ago, RodneyCisse said: He was class when he came on wasn’t he? He usually is. Very rarely gets to being the issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteV Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 Just now, RodneyCisse said: He was class when he came on wasn’t he? Indeed. The best part about it being he looked defensively capable, which has obviously been the question mark. Don’t think there’s ever been a question mark (at least IMO) about his ability in possession. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BergenMagpie Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Delighted for him. Hopefully this will be the beginning of the end of the weekly wanker roundtable debate on him being the worst transfer of all time. The last 80 odd pages here have been copy paste aids Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 He was excellent. Aggressive in the tackle, direct, and made some anticipated interceptions. He worked his bollocks off and looked a real handful. Loved his cameo. Has to start going forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beth Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Wouldn't be at all surprised if Dummett comes in at CB and Burn played LB on Tuesday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 He was class. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Looked good, hopefully it was evidence of the extra time Howe and the coaches have put into his development. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Massive 20 minutes from him. Hope he’s done enough to start on Tues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groundhog63 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Why not start with the back 4 that finished. Murphy Schar Burn Hall Nee idea who plays RW like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holmesy Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 3 minutes ago, Groundhog63 said: Why not start with the back 4 that finished. Murphy Schar Burn Hall Nee idea who plays RW like Could Anderson do a job at RW? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groundhog63 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 (edited) 1 minute ago, Holmesy said: Could Anderson do a job at RW? Why not? Kid's fearless and skillfully. I know he sees himself as a CM but, why not. Edited April 1 by Groundhog63 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotus Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 I wouldn’t get too excited. Wham were totally defeatist by the time Hall came on. If Trips is fit to start I wouldn’t be surprised to see some permutation that means Hall is on the bench again. And, tbh it would probably be for a good reason. He made some good blocks when he came on but it was mostly high up the pitch. I do trust Howe to judge if he’s ready to be positionally sound when defending our box. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaj Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Even if he is suspect defensively, we are absolutely terrible at the back at the moment without him so we may as well be terrible at the back with him albeit with more of an attacking threat that he brings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
duo Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Has to start on Tuesday - we've no one else fit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upthemags Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 With what he's shown us in such restricted circumstances, it would be malpractice to start Burn over him at LB. He was an instant game changer for us, and was crucial to the build up for that second Harvey Barnes goal if memory serves. Beggars can't be choosers and we can't be leaving what limited quality we have to fester on the bench with the season on the line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 21 minutes ago, Upthemags said: With what he's shown us in such restricted circumstances, it would be malpractice to start Burn over him at LB. He was an instant game changer for us, and was crucial to the build up for that second Harvey Barnes goal if memory serves. Beggars can't be choosers and we can't be leaving what limited quality we have to fester on the bench with the season on the line. I think it was the Isak scuffed chance that he starts from deep and then pops up for the cutback. The last apps have perhaps suited his talents, with the way the games were when he came on. But he was impressive nonetheless. Feels like he would be pushing for a start even if Lascelles and Tino were available. But he has to start tomorrow, surely? Even if Trippier is back. I’d rather him at RB and Hall LB. Than Krafth coming in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NWMag Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 This is the thing, we brought Krafth on instead and still shipped 3 goals. Can’t imagine it would have been more if Hall had come on originally. just give him some starts man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCormick Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Where’s Targett, out of interest anyway? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BermyToon Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 4 minutes ago, McCormick said: Where’s Targett, out of interest anyway? He's out injured with an achilles tendonitis; he wasn't the best piece of business for £15M. I hope Hall gets to start at LB for the rest of the season. Burn can play as a centre-half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now