Rotherham | Page 2 | Vital Football

Rotherham

Robinson is arguably a worse defender than Naismith tbh but is so quick he gets away with mopping up his own mistakes.

Against Rotherham it will likely be a lot of long ball to defend against and I'd suggest Naismith is probably the better of the pair in the air.
 
dont even think we should give powell a game he will be off in the summer so lets play the players loyal to the club
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
Robinson is arguably a worse defender than Naismith tbh but is so quick he gets away with mopping up his own mistakes.

Against Rotherham it will likely be a lot of long ball to defend against and I'd suggest Naismith is probably the better of the pair in the air.
Click to expand...
If he is so bad why on earth was he not ditched months ago or at least at the start of January. Cook must have thought he was good enough.
 
Naismith never was, still is not and won’t ever come close to being the best option at LB. playing 10 men is preferable.

He may be OK in his best position (though not sure where that is?) but he has been by far our poorest player in each and every game he had played at LB and in which Gibson hasn’t featured.

Robinson straight back in for me.

In any case we are inexplicably poor away and so not expecting much. Hoping, but not expecting.
 
bickymon said:
dont even think we should give powell a game he will be off in the summer so lets play the players loyal to the club
Click to expand...
What is a loyal player? Money rules with all players. Playing Powell will give us that much more a chance of finishing higher up this overated league.
 
TS_Latics said:
Naismith never was, still is not and won’t ever come close to being the best option at LB. playing 10 men is preferable.

He may be OK in his best position (though not sure where that is?) but he has been by far our poorest player in each and every game he had played at LB and in which Gibson hasn’t featured.

Robinson straight back in for me.

In any case we are inexplicably poor away and so not expecting much. Hoping, but not expecting.
Click to expand...
Arguably Gibson has been one of our worst signings last summer. He is pretty naff.
 
TS_Latics said:
Naismith never was, still is not and won’t ever come close to being the best option at LB. playing 10 men is preferable.

He may be OK in his best position (though not sure where that is?) but he has been by far our poorest player in each and every game he had played at LB and in which Gibson hasn’t featured.

Robinson straight back in for me.

In any case we are inexplicably poor away and so not expecting much. Hoping, but not expecting.
Click to expand...

Corect.
 
Lazysid said:
The problem is you can never tell when these doom mongers are being serious or actually mean what they post.
Click to expand...
Hardly a doom monger - just realistic about a certain player looking lost out of position. I support the team vigorously every game and cheer every player in a Latics shirt for 90 minutes, but that doesn’t mean I am bling to any individual deficiencies.

Think we’ll stay up comfortably. But that will be in spite of playing Gibson and Naismith so often.

Next season we can find better options and be rid of these and other inadequate players and hopefully push on.
 
Hoping for a 2-0 win by the way. Though my expectations are lower - I do love to be presently surprised from time to time by our lads however.

UTFT.
 
jeffs right said:
If he is so bad why on earth was he not ditched months ago or at least at the start of January. Cook must have thought he was good enough.
Click to expand...
And if he's not good enough it just underlines the failed requirement for left back recruitment in the Jan window
 
exiled tic said:
Who says he is on the bench?
Click to expand...
Exactly my point !
He shouldn't be on the bench - he should be in the starting line up or not in the matchday squad.
As for not being match fit having not played for some time - didn't seem to affect Clarke too much last week and he was apparently ill as well
 
Naismith has been put at LB in an injury crisis and has been slagged off mercilessly. So who should have played LB? Come on, who would have been better?
 
dwdan said:
Naismith has been put at LB in an injury crisis and has been slagged off mercilessly. So who should have played LB? Come on, who would have been better?
Click to expand...
Reece James or Nathan Byrne, the left back FM dev squad or u18s - it's a specialist position full / wing back.
For me it's more about cook constantly selecting him to play there when he's not up to it. That said Naismiths lack of positional awareness has been on occasion awful for a pro footballer.
 
Hampton said:
Reece James or Nathan Byrne, the left back FM dev squad or u18s - it's a specialist position full / wing back.
For me it's more about cook constantly selecting him to play there when he's not up to it. That said Naismiths lack of positional awareness has been on occasion awful for a pro footballer.
Click to expand...
So many experts on this forum who have never owned a pair of boots.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
Robinson is arguably a worse defender than Naismith tbh but is so quick he gets away with mopping up his own mistakes.

Against Rotherham it will likely be a lot of long ball to defend against and I'd suggest Naismith is probably the better of the pair in the air.
Click to expand...

I actually don't think there's that much difference in the defensive capabilities of the two. Let's be honest though, neither of them are really good enough. We should've signed a left back really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.