Rafa Mir | Vital Football

Rafa Mir

Atlético Madrid are after him as well. I think it’s a cautionary tale about strikers and Forest - we don’t tend to get them enough of the ball for them to showcase their talents. Even very good strikers miss their fair share of good chances - we as fans tend to scrutinise their every miss without asking whether their talents are being utilised to their fullest.

Grabban and Taylor have both been victims of this - neither player has had the optimal structure behind them that would give them the best chance of success. Grabban is an average finisher with great positional sense, but we’ve limited him to playing with his back to goal.
 
Chivalry Augustus said:
Atlético Madrid are after him as well. I think it’s a cautionary tale about strikers and Forest - we don’t tend to get them enough of the ball for them to showcase their talents. Even very good strikers miss their fair share of good chances - we as fans tend to scrutinise their every miss without asking whether their talents are being utilised to their fullest.

Grabban and Taylor have both been victims of this - neither player has had the optimal structure behind them that would give them the best chance of success. Grabban is an average finisher with great positional sense, but we’ve limited him to playing with his back to goal.
Click to expand...
It's not a cautionary tale at all in my opinion.

He was shit and didn't do what we needed him for- score goals. He rarely looked like he ever would, and he offered little or nothing to compensate for that lack.

He wasn't our player anyway, so we were suffering that lack of effectiveness for the benefit of Wolves.

If there are any recriminations about how he is doing now, it is on them; he was their player.
 
In fairness Wolves knew they had a player with bags of ability but it was a case of getting it out of him. He seems to have been one of those players who struggle to translate training ground brilliance into on-field effectiveness.

After numerous seasons of doing nothing he is now finally starting to show what he is made of.
 
Chivalry Augustus said:
Grabban is an average finisher with great positional sense, but we’ve limited him to playing with his back to goal.
Click to expand...

I kinda see him the other way around, mainly only as a decent finisher, terrible positional play, spends more time on the flanks and never breaks the line and hardly in the box, rarely wins headers or a 50/50 battle. Fox in the box is the only strength I thought he had
 
Pope John XXIII said:
It's not a cautionary tale at all in my opinion.

He was shit and didn't do what we needed him for- score goals. He rarely looked like he ever would, and he offered little or nothing to compensate for that lack.

He wasn't our player anyway, so we were suffering that lack of effectiveness for the benefit of Wolves.

If there are any recriminations about how he is doing now, it is on them; he was their player.
Click to expand...
He barely started any games for us.Unfortunately players are labelled as "sh*t" too easily/quickly in my opinion. The days of players getting time to prove themselves rarely exists nowadays. Many Rangers fans were not over impressed with Worral but fortunately we have seen how he has developed into a very good defender.
 
Ingy said:
He barely started any games for us.Unfortunately players are labelled as "sh*t" too easily/quickly in my opinion. The days of players getting time to prove themselves rarely exists nowadays. Many Rangers fans were not over impressed with Worral but fortunately we have seen how he has developed into a very good defender.
Click to expand...
He's a young loan player. The arrangement is entirely transactional; we develop him and give him game time because he gives us something performative in return.

If he's our youngster then we perhaps have some obligation to give him game time to develop even if he isn't really contributing to that.

He wasn't our youngster. We don't need to sit through poor performances or lack of end product to aid his development. Why should we? He's not our player

Mir would have got plenty of minutes if he had performed well or contributed well in the minutes he had. He didn't. Given that, we owed him nothing
 
Pope John XXIII said:
He's a young loan player. The arrangement is entirely transactional; we develop him and give him game time because he gives us something performative in return.

If he's our youngster then we perhaps have some obligation to give him game time to develop even if he isn't really contributing to that.

He wasn't our youngster. We don't need to sit through poor performances or lack of end product to aid his development. Why should we? He's not our player

Mir would have got plenty of minutes if he had performed well or contributed well in the minutes he had. He didn't. Given that, we owed him nothing
Click to expand...
It's small margins though rather than being "s h*t".He played ok initially but missed a couple of chances which if they had gone in would have been labelled differently.By the way,I never said we had to play him but simply stated he is not sh*t just because he failed to score us ... in my opinion.
 
Ingy said:
It's small margins though rather than being "s h*t".He played ok initially but missed a couple of chances which if they had gone in would have been labelled differently.By the way,I never said we had to play him but simply stated he is not sh*t just because he failed to score us ... in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he is shit. I'm saying he was shit. Because we needed him to score goals, or to help others to do so more effectively, and he didn't.

Now, for other clubs and his country, he is. And good luck to him
 
Pope John XXIII said:
He's a young loan player. The arrangement is entirely transactional; we develop him and give him game time because he gives us something performative in return.

If he's our youngster then we perhaps have some obligation to give him game time to develop even if he isn't really contributing to that.

He wasn't our youngster. We don't need to sit through poor performances or lack of end product to aid his development. Why should we? He's not our player

Mir would have got plenty of minutes if he had performed well or contributed well in the minutes he had. He didn't. Given that, we owed him nothing
Click to expand...

you said no thanks to doig if he was to go to Burnley ot Watford and then be loaned to us. Thats very transactional so why against that move?
 
Well feel free to explain, I do wonder what the difference is between the two theoretical deals
 
Pope John XXIII said:
He's a young loan player. The arrangement is entirely transactional; we develop him and give him game time because he gives us something performative in return.

If he's our youngster then we perhaps have some obligation to give him game time to develop even if he isn't really contributing to that.

He wasn't our youngster. We don't need to sit through poor performances or lack of end product to aid his development. Why should we? He's not our player

Mir would have got plenty of minutes if he had performed well or contributed well in the minutes he had. He didn't. Given that, we owed him nothing
Click to expand...

its always a strange one. I mean one presumes someone shows something in training at last to get in the side and i do think any player needs probably 8 games. It felt like he had 8 minutes. Tho totally agree, he was shit lol
Guerrero was another one really, tho he looked ok in flashes, he didnt really get a run either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.