James Hanson eager for return of injured winger Kyel Reid to boost Bradford City supply line

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: James Hanson thrived on crosses from winger Kyel Reid James Hanson thrived on crosses from winger Kyel Reid

James Hanson cannot wait to see Kyel Reid flying down the flank for City again.

Phil Parkinson admits that Hanson has lacked the ammunition since the dangerman winger tore a groin muscle against Rochdale.

Hanson broke a 16-game goal duck at Bristol Rovers with a trademark header from Garry Thompson’s cross.

And while City hang on for Reid’s return, Parkinson wants to see those playing out wide give the big targetman more to work with.

He said: “Hans hadn’t scored for a while but he’s missed the supply line as well.

“With Reidy and Zav (Hines), we were getting a lot of crosses in the box. Our stats will tell you that’s not been the case of late.

“That’s what the big man thrives on and I’m so pleased for him to get a goal. His all-round play has deserved it over recent weeks and that will do him the world of good.”

Reid is making steady progress with his recovery and could be back in action again in a couple of weeks. His return will not be soon enough for Hanson.

The striker said: “It will be a big help when Reidy’s back because you know exactly what sort of winger he is. I hope Thommo will do the same on the other side.

“I’m not making excuses (for not scoring). I’ve had some good chances in the past couple of games.

“I’d had a few half-chances before the goal at Bristol Rovers and thought it was going to be one of those days again. But I kept going and finally got my reward.

“It was a great ball in from Thommo. It had the power on the ball and just needed directing and I was delighted to see it go in.

“You want that sort of supply and hopefully now the first one has gone in, I can go on a little run. I’d like to get to ten by the end of the year.”

Parkinson felt Hanson’s goal cleared a major hurdle for the team as much as the centre forward himself.

The City chief said: “It’s so important for him and for us. You always need your strikers to score.

“I’d had a bit of a go at him at half-time. His overall game was okay but I didn’t think he was going into the box with enough intent. I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”

Comments (44)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:33am Wed 28 Nov 12

tyker2 says...

good strikers need croses: geat strikers make their own goals to a large extent
good strikers need croses: geat strikers make their own goals to a large extent tyker2

8:34am Wed 28 Nov 12

Freddy says...

*
Quote:-
" I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote.
*
Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '.
*
Did we sign a Winger on loan???..
*
"Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?.
*
* Quote:- " I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote. * Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '. * Did we sign a Winger on loan???.. * "Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?. * Freddy

8:42am Wed 28 Nov 12

passionate says...

Freddy wrote:
* Quote:- " I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote. * Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '. * Did we sign a Winger on loan???.. * "Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?. *
Tell you what why not play 4 wingers and 6 strikers...never mind playing with shape and balance...
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * Quote:- " I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote. * Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '. * Did we sign a Winger on loan???.. * "Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?. *[/p][/quote]Tell you what why not play 4 wingers and 6 strikers...never mind playing with shape and balance... passionate

8:51am Wed 28 Nov 12

ID498 says...

tyker2 wrote:
good strikers need croses: geat strikers make their own goals to a large extent
Great strikers to a large extent don't ply their trade in league 2
[quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: good strikers need croses: geat strikers make their own goals to a large extent[/p][/quote]Great strikers to a large extent don't ply their trade in league 2 ID498

9:02am Wed 28 Nov 12

Waynus1971 says...

Pleased for Hanson that he finally got the monkey off his back and found the net, however, I don't get this excuse we are making for him.

Hanson only scored 2 goals with his head (and 5 in total) with Reid & Hines playing. If we were putting in as much ball as PP is now making out, how come Hanson only scored 2?

PP hit the nail on the head with his critique of Hanson at half-time. Of late, Hanson has done all his good work outside the area and hasn't done enough to get into the box or to make something happen when he did.

What is poor management/coaching, is that it took until half time in his umpteenth game before he was told where he was going wrong...!
Pleased for Hanson that he finally got the monkey off his back and found the net, however, I don't get this excuse we are making for him. Hanson only scored 2 goals with his head (and 5 in total) with Reid & Hines playing. If we were putting in as much ball as PP is now making out, how come Hanson only scored 2? PP hit the nail on the head with his critique of Hanson at half-time. Of late, Hanson has done all his good work outside the area and hasn't done enough to get into the box or to make something happen when he did. What is poor management/coaching, is that it took until half time in his umpteenth game before he was told where he was going wrong...! Waynus1971

9:18am Wed 28 Nov 12

tyker2 says...

ID498 wrote:
tyker2 wrote:
good strikers need croses: geat strikers make their own goals to a large extent
Great strikers to a large extent don't ply their trade in league 2
precisely. As for Freddy's geat idea. ubbish I say because the balnce of this team would be ruined by such an idiotic proposal. I say having wingers breaking from midfield or wing backs hitting the bye line to pull the ball back will not only result in more goals for Hanson but for wells as well.
[quote][p][bold]ID498[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tyker2[/bold] wrote: good strikers need croses: geat strikers make their own goals to a large extent[/p][/quote]Great strikers to a large extent don't ply their trade in league 2[/p][/quote]precisely. As for Freddy's geat idea. ubbish I say because the balnce of this team would be ruined by such an idiotic proposal. I say having wingers breaking from midfield or wing backs hitting the bye line to pull the ball back will not only result in more goals for Hanson but for wells as well. tyker2

9:41am Wed 28 Nov 12

JowLad says...

Freddy wrote:
*
Quote:-
" I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote.
*
Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '.
*
Did we sign a Winger on loan???..
*
"Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?.
*
Really bored of reading your comments, you spout so much rubbish and your use of CAPITALS all the time is just painful, but I guess some people just like to hear themselves speak...

Anyway Hanson is the 2nd highest paid player I think so I believe he should be able to create more for himself, however a 6ft plus striker will always need a wing supply.

Anybody know when Hines is back?
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * Quote:- " I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote. * Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '. * Did we sign a Winger on loan???.. * "Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?. *[/p][/quote]Really bored of reading your comments, you spout so much rubbish and your use of CAPITALS all the time is just painful, but I guess some people just like to hear themselves speak... Anyway Hanson is the 2nd highest paid player I think so I believe he should be able to create more for himself, however a 6ft plus striker will always need a wing supply. Anybody know when Hines is back? JowLad

9:54am Wed 28 Nov 12

chin up says...

Wow can't believe I have read the comment "....poor coaching from PP because it took him upteenth games to realise Hanson wasn't getting into the box...."

Really is unlikely that the manager that has got us looking like promotion challengers and fighting in all cups, has got us this far without being able to notice certain deficiencies of the team.

What is more likely that PP reinforced the message to Hanson that he wasn't getting into the box enough and the penny dropped. It might have taken Hanson to realise this through PP shouting at him. Who knows how? Who cares really? Hanson scored and hopefully he will go on a bit of a scoring run.

Then there is some genius idea from someone above to play 3 strikers and a wingers...who would protect the defence / who would defend? I really haven't the time to explain the problems with shape to the team that would cause. When losing and with only 10/15 mins to go you could gamble on doing this, but not from the start of a game.

If this was a genuine option then I would imagine there would be a handful of teams playing this formation already. There isn't because it leaves you open to leaking goals in from the counter attack.
Wow can't believe I have read the comment "....poor coaching from PP because it took him upteenth games to realise Hanson wasn't getting into the box...." Really is unlikely that the manager that has got us looking like promotion challengers and fighting in all cups, has got us this far without being able to notice certain deficiencies of the team. What is more likely that PP reinforced the message to Hanson that he wasn't getting into the box enough and the penny dropped. It might have taken Hanson to realise this through PP shouting at him. Who knows how? Who cares really? Hanson scored and hopefully he will go on a bit of a scoring run. Then there is some genius idea from someone above to play 3 strikers and a wingers...who would protect the defence / who would defend? I really haven't the time to explain the problems with shape to the team that would cause. When losing and with only 10/15 mins to go you could gamble on doing this, but not from the start of a game. If this was a genuine option then I would imagine there would be a handful of teams playing this formation already. There isn't because it leaves you open to leaking goals in from the counter attack. chin up

12:17pm Wed 28 Nov 12

nowt fresh says...

Yes but he did start his post " Pleased for Hanson that he finally got the monkey off his back and found the net"
lol.
Yes but he did start his post " Pleased for Hanson that he finally got the monkey off his back and found the net" lol. nowt fresh

1:35pm Wed 28 Nov 12

bettyswollocks says...

chin up wrote:
Wow can't believe I have read the comment "....poor coaching from PP because it took him upteenth games to realise Hanson wasn't getting into the box...." Really is unlikely that the manager that has got us looking like promotion challengers and fighting in all cups, has got us this far without being able to notice certain deficiencies of the team. What is more likely that PP reinforced the message to Hanson that he wasn't getting into the box enough and the penny dropped. It might have taken Hanson to realise this through PP shouting at him. Who knows how? Who cares really? Hanson scored and hopefully he will go on a bit of a scoring run. Then there is some genius idea from someone above to play 3 strikers and a wingers...who would protect the defence / who would defend? I really haven't the time to explain the problems with shape to the team that would cause. When losing and with only 10/15 mins to go you could gamble on doing this, but not from the start of a game. If this was a genuine option then I would imagine there would be a handful of teams playing this formation already. There isn't because it leaves you open to leaking goals in from the counter attack.
You're alright, I think most of us know.

That sort of gung ho formation doesn't even work in football manager so where that idea came from I don't know!
[quote][p][bold]chin up[/bold] wrote: Wow can't believe I have read the comment "....poor coaching from PP because it took him upteenth games to realise Hanson wasn't getting into the box...." Really is unlikely that the manager that has got us looking like promotion challengers and fighting in all cups, has got us this far without being able to notice certain deficiencies of the team. What is more likely that PP reinforced the message to Hanson that he wasn't getting into the box enough and the penny dropped. It might have taken Hanson to realise this through PP shouting at him. Who knows how? Who cares really? Hanson scored and hopefully he will go on a bit of a scoring run. Then there is some genius idea from someone above to play 3 strikers and a wingers...who would protect the defence / who would defend? I really haven't the time to explain the problems with shape to the team that would cause. When losing and with only 10/15 mins to go you could gamble on doing this, but not from the start of a game. If this was a genuine option then I would imagine there would be a handful of teams playing this formation already. There isn't because it leaves you open to leaking goals in from the counter attack.[/p][/quote]You're alright, I think most of us know. That sort of gung ho formation doesn't even work in football manager so where that idea came from I don't know! bettyswollocks

2:18pm Wed 28 Nov 12

shoesmaker4 says...

hason needs more pace on the ball in my opinion there is to much flighty balls coming in to him and with more pace on the ball all you have to do is direct the header rarther than nearley brake your neck trying to score thats how i see it eny way come on city
hason needs more pace on the ball in my opinion there is to much flighty balls coming in to him and with more pace on the ball all you have to do is direct the header rarther than nearley brake your neck trying to score thats how i see it eny way come on city shoesmaker4

3:01pm Wed 28 Nov 12

bcfc1903 says...

Thompson proved that if you put quality crosses into the box then BCFC have the players to get on the end of them. A quality cross doesn't have to headed into the net...good quality low cosses cause just as much panic in the opposition defenders. It doen't take a genius to work out that the more quality crosses delivered the more goals BCFC will score. Reid gives you pace...goals and the ability to cross a good ball...add to this cocktail the opposition double teaming Reid and on occasions Reid having three players trying to stop him and his presence in the team adds up to more space for other BCFC players to play in and create in games. Reid a big loss which has been handled well by the team...it says alot about this squad of players that they have continued to regularly pick up points while losing key squad members for long periods. This leads me to the conclusion that we have a squad of players more than capable of getting promoted this season.

**
We shout with pride...we never hide...Claret and Amber.
Thompson proved that if you put quality crosses into the box then BCFC have the players to get on the end of them. A quality cross doesn't have to headed into the net...good quality low cosses cause just as much panic in the opposition defenders. It doen't take a genius to work out that the more quality crosses delivered the more goals BCFC will score. Reid gives you pace...goals and the ability to cross a good ball...add to this cocktail the opposition double teaming Reid and on occasions Reid having three players trying to stop him and his presence in the team adds up to more space for other BCFC players to play in and create in games. Reid a big loss which has been handled well by the team...it says alot about this squad of players that they have continued to regularly pick up points while losing key squad members for long periods. This leads me to the conclusion that we have a squad of players more than capable of getting promoted this season. ** We shout with pride...we never hide...Claret and Amber. bcfc1903

3:20pm Wed 28 Nov 12

Peter300 says...

Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James. Peter300

4:02pm Wed 28 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

Freddy wrote:
*
Quote:-
" I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote.
*
Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '.
*
Did we sign a Winger on loan???..
*
"Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?.
*
Freddy are you for real? I have to agree with an earlier post about your tunnel vision on three up front, the second day, if not more you have posted this. Fair enough you are entitled to post what you like. However, your over use of capital letters to hammer home your point, Why? I've read a lot of your posts and the lay out...Are you OK? Mentally i mean, apologies if you are ill, if you have not had confirmation, then a visit to the quack would not be a waste of your time....
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * Quote:- " I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote. * Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '. * Did we sign a Winger on loan???.. * "Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?. *[/p][/quote]Freddy are you for real? I have to agree with an earlier post about your tunnel vision on three up front, the second day, if not more you have posted this. Fair enough you are entitled to post what you like. However, your over use of capital letters to hammer home your point, Why? I've read a lot of your posts and the lay out...Are you OK? Mentally i mean, apologies if you are ill, if you have not had confirmation, then a visit to the quack would not be a waste of your time.... PaddyBantam

4:41pm Wed 28 Nov 12

audal says...

My old friend "Freddy" posts more sense on this site than people realise. i can forgive the lad "passionate"posted wed a.m. but tyker2 should have more basis for his opinion re. wingers plus 3 up front. remember old man when 5-3-2-1 was exciting? McCOLE, LAYNE STOKES, CAMPBELL,WINDASS. never ran up and down like a blue arse fly. so stop asking HANSON to do what his mentors didn't and let the lad stay up front and do what he wants to do.
My old friend "Freddy" posts more sense on this site than people realise. i can forgive the lad "passionate"posted wed a.m. but tyker2 should have more basis for his opinion re. wingers plus 3 up front. remember old man when 5-3-2-1 was exciting? McCOLE, LAYNE STOKES, CAMPBELL,WINDASS. never ran up and down like a blue arse fly. so stop asking HANSON to do what his mentors didn't and let the lad stay up front and do what he wants to do. audal

4:55pm Wed 28 Nov 12

Danstarr69 says...

Reid and good crosses? Never thought they'd appear in the same sentence. Reids crosses are usually too long, too high or hard low shots at the near post.
Reid and good crosses? Never thought they'd appear in the same sentence. Reids crosses are usually too long, too high or hard low shots at the near post. Danstarr69

5:01pm Wed 28 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

If you put yourself out there, then people are going to comment back, some responses, a person may not like. You only have to look at Waynus the 'aynus.
If you put yourself out there, then people are going to comment back, some responses, a person may not like. You only have to look at Waynus the 'aynus. PaddyBantam

5:03pm Wed 28 Nov 12

s.b.c says...

Freddy wrote:
*
Quote:-
" I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote.
*
Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '.
*
Did we sign a Winger on loan???..
*
"Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?.
*
Absolutely correct.

Its so obvious in every game.

Whilst appreciating what P.P. has achieved so far this season and the the loss of players to injury.

We are obviously going to, and have been struggling to score goals, simply because players are not going forward and supporting the two strikers when needed to

I don't know the stats, but its possible James Hanson spends almost as much time in his own half as the oppositions. We do have defenders.

Not suggesting we throw caution to the wind, just be more adventurous when the occasion demands it.
[quote][p][bold]Freddy[/bold] wrote: * Quote:- " I don’t mind strikers missing chances as long as they get in that six-yard box.”-Unquote. * Can we have THREE Strikers up front please -' Parky ? '. * Did we sign a Winger on loan???.. * "Thommo 's " cross/ball in, was perfect. Surely more of this type of cross into The Box should be practised in training.--Plus, with THREE in and around the Box periphery, there are more possibilities of chances occurring, and goals being scored?. *[/p][/quote]Absolutely correct. Its so obvious in every game. Whilst appreciating what P.P. has achieved so far this season and the the loss of players to injury. We are obviously going to, and have been struggling to score goals, simply because players are not going forward and supporting the two strikers when needed to I don't know the stats, but its possible James Hanson spends almost as much time in his own half as the oppositions. We do have defenders. Not suggesting we throw caution to the wind, just be more adventurous when the occasion demands it. s.b.c

5:33pm Wed 28 Nov 12

macca1969 says...

Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you. macca1969

9:05pm Wed 28 Nov 12

COLATS says...

macca1969 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
Pot kettle??
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.[/p][/quote]Pot kettle?? COLATS

9:11pm Wed 28 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

COLATS wrote:
macca1969 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
Pot kettle??
Agreed - biggest moaner on here - Mr Projecter
[quote][p][bold]COLATS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.[/p][/quote]Pot kettle??[/p][/quote]Agreed - biggest moaner on here - Mr Projecter PaddyBantam

9:25pm Wed 28 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

In response to three up front means losing one from the middle, you have two holding midfielders which leaves one 'creative' to supply to the strikers, which is who? Agree James needs the ball in the box at pace, 3 up front would not work within the current set up, purely because we lack that creative influence, current lack of goals is due to no natural wide man supplying the ball in the box. Thompson needs farming out in January, i would suspect he earns top(ish) dollar, him out, wide man or creative middle man in if possible and go with 4 4 2. James to stay further up the pitch instead of dropping back. Or Thompson out, Hannah back in a three up front....but where does the creative influence come from. A team going for promotion generally speaking always has one or two midfielders chipping in with 8/10 goals, sadly lacking this from our current team. Gary Jones not having the desired influence at the moment Jones 2 needs to be in the team - Doyle holding role, Jones 'spraying the pass to the front three! Nakki & Ross feeding of James' flick on's.
In response to three up front means losing one from the middle, you have two holding midfielders which leaves one 'creative' to supply to the strikers, which is who? Agree James needs the ball in the box at pace, 3 up front would not work within the current set up, purely because we lack that creative influence, current lack of goals is due to no natural wide man supplying the ball in the box. Thompson needs farming out in January, i would suspect he earns top(ish) dollar, him out, wide man or creative middle man in if possible and go with 4 4 2. James to stay further up the pitch instead of dropping back. Or Thompson out, Hannah back in a three up front....but where does the creative influence come from. A team going for promotion generally speaking always has one or two midfielders chipping in with 8/10 goals, sadly lacking this from our current team. Gary Jones not having the desired influence at the moment Jones 2 needs to be in the team - Doyle holding role, Jones 'spraying the pass to the front three! Nakki & Ross feeding of James' flick on's. PaddyBantam

9:53pm Wed 28 Nov 12

macca1969 says...

PaddyBantam wrote:
COLATS wrote:
macca1969 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
Pot kettle??
Agreed - biggest moaner on here - Mr Projecter
I'm the biggest moaner on here! Are you for real
[quote][p][bold]PaddyBantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]COLATS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.[/p][/quote]Pot kettle??[/p][/quote]Agreed - biggest moaner on here - Mr Projecter[/p][/quote]I'm the biggest moaner on here! Are you for real macca1969

10:00pm Wed 28 Nov 12

macca1969 says...

COLATS wrote:
macca1969 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
Pot kettle??
Pot-kettle? You just make yourself sound dafter by the day. My beef with Peter is he never expresses any opinions about the team,club ir players but just jumps in with the stupid pensioner waynus stuff and Shaun has been here and there and plays golf crap which to be honest is getting boring. I prefer to read peoples opinions on the stuff that matters even if I don't agree, that's what this forum is for, its called debate and what I enjoy. Not Peters petty crap
[quote][p][bold]COLATS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.[/p][/quote]Pot kettle??[/p][/quote]Pot-kettle? You just make yourself sound dafter by the day. My beef with Peter is he never expresses any opinions about the team,club ir players but just jumps in with the stupid pensioner waynus stuff and Shaun has been here and there and plays golf crap which to be honest is getting boring. I prefer to read peoples opinions on the stuff that matters even if I don't agree, that's what this forum is for, its called debate and what I enjoy. Not Peters petty crap macca1969

10:05pm Wed 28 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

macca1969 wrote:
COLATS wrote:
macca1969 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
Pot kettle??
Pot-kettle? You just make yourself sound dafter by the day. My beef with Peter is he never expresses any opinions about the team,club ir players but just jumps in with the stupid pensioner waynus stuff and Shaun has been here and there and plays golf crap which to be honest is getting boring. I prefer to read peoples opinions on the stuff that matters even if I don't agree, that's what this forum is for, its called debate and what I enjoy. Not Peters petty crap
view on three up front?
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]COLATS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.[/p][/quote]Pot kettle??[/p][/quote]Pot-kettle? You just make yourself sound dafter by the day. My beef with Peter is he never expresses any opinions about the team,club ir players but just jumps in with the stupid pensioner waynus stuff and Shaun has been here and there and plays golf crap which to be honest is getting boring. I prefer to read peoples opinions on the stuff that matters even if I don't agree, that's what this forum is for, its called debate and what I enjoy. Not Peters petty crap[/p][/quote]view on three up front? PaddyBantam

10:22pm Wed 28 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

macca1969 wrote:
COLATS wrote:
macca1969 wrote:
Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
Pot kettle??
Pot-kettle? You just make yourself sound dafter by the day. My beef with Peter is he never expresses any opinions about the team,club ir players but just jumps in with the stupid pensioner waynus stuff and Shaun has been here and there and plays golf crap which to be honest is getting boring. I prefer to read peoples opinions on the stuff that matters even if I don't agree, that's what this forum is for, its called debate and what I enjoy. Not Peters petty crap
That was a good debate, should have had a moan instead.
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]COLATS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.[/p][/quote]Pot kettle??[/p][/quote]Pot-kettle? You just make yourself sound dafter by the day. My beef with Peter is he never expresses any opinions about the team,club ir players but just jumps in with the stupid pensioner waynus stuff and Shaun has been here and there and plays golf crap which to be honest is getting boring. I prefer to read peoples opinions on the stuff that matters even if I don't agree, that's what this forum is for, its called debate and what I enjoy. Not Peters petty crap[/p][/quote]That was a good debate, should have had a moan instead. PaddyBantam

10:54pm Wed 28 Nov 12

macca1969 says...

Give us a chance mate. To be honest I am not too keen on three up top as I have never seen it working especially for us. Stuart tried it and we were a bit gung ho Taylor tried it and it was more 451. I think you have to have the correct personnel for it to work well. I still think pp is doing a great job in keeping us in contention without some key players,so in the way I don't think anyone can criticise how he sets the team up as its working. I'd like to see Reid back asap and this young West ham lad given a go this Friday night whilst we wait on reids and hines to be fit. If its not broken don't mend it. In January it would be nice if we could sign as nice creative midfielder but I am sure whatever we think is wrong parky will have his plans and I do trust him to get it correct. Next year we will all be saying goodbye to horrible league and celebrating promotion.
Give us a chance mate. To be honest I am not too keen on three up top as I have never seen it working especially for us. Stuart tried it and we were a bit gung ho Taylor tried it and it was more 451. I think you have to have the correct personnel for it to work well. I still think pp is doing a great job in keeping us in contention without some key players,so in the way I don't think anyone can criticise how he sets the team up as its working. I'd like to see Reid back asap and this young West ham lad given a go this Friday night whilst we wait on reids and hines to be fit. If its not broken don't mend it. In January it would be nice if we could sign as nice creative midfielder but I am sure whatever we think is wrong parky will have his plans and I do trust him to get it correct. Next year we will all be saying goodbye to horrible league and celebrating promotion. macca1969

7:26am Thu 29 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

macca1969 wrote:
Give us a chance mate. To be honest I am not too keen on three up top as I have never seen it working especially for us. Stuart tried it and we were a bit gung ho Taylor tried it and it was more 451. I think you have to have the correct personnel for it to work well. I still think pp is doing a great job in keeping us in contention without some key players,so in the way I don't think anyone can criticise how he sets the team up as its working. I'd like to see Reid back asap and this young West ham lad given a go this Friday night whilst we wait on reids and hines to be fit. If its not broken don't mend it. In January it would be nice if we could sign as nice creative midfielder but I am sure whatever we think is wrong parky will have his plans and I do trust him to get it correct. Next year we will all be saying goodbye to horrible league and celebrating promotion.
Agree with you on all points there - ah well, not much of a debate when you actually agree! As well as a shortage of goals from James, the midfield has to put their hands up too, but, what can you do when you have the injuries we have had. I reckon the midfield would have had some focus from PP if he hadn't had to focus on the nightmare injury list from defence. All things considered both the team and PP have done excellent under the circumstances. Having Reid, Hines, Davies back will in itself feel like new signings. But, goals do have to come from somewhere else other than Nakki. I would seriously look at shipping Thompson & Connell out in January and replacing them with Hannah - give the lad another chance - and another striker and a Syers type midfielder - i think he is what we have missed from midfield this season, i would have bet a pound or two that Syers in this team would be on possibly 5/6 goals so far.
[quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: Give us a chance mate. To be honest I am not too keen on three up top as I have never seen it working especially for us. Stuart tried it and we were a bit gung ho Taylor tried it and it was more 451. I think you have to have the correct personnel for it to work well. I still think pp is doing a great job in keeping us in contention without some key players,so in the way I don't think anyone can criticise how he sets the team up as its working. I'd like to see Reid back asap and this young West ham lad given a go this Friday night whilst we wait on reids and hines to be fit. If its not broken don't mend it. In January it would be nice if we could sign as nice creative midfielder but I am sure whatever we think is wrong parky will have his plans and I do trust him to get it correct. Next year we will all be saying goodbye to horrible league and celebrating promotion.[/p][/quote]Agree with you on all points there - ah well, not much of a debate when you actually agree! As well as a shortage of goals from James, the midfield has to put their hands up too, but, what can you do when you have the injuries we have had. I reckon the midfield would have had some focus from PP if he hadn't had to focus on the nightmare injury list from defence. All things considered both the team and PP have done excellent under the circumstances. Having Reid, Hines, Davies back will in itself feel like new signings. But, goals do have to come from somewhere else other than Nakki. I would seriously look at shipping Thompson & Connell out in January and replacing them with Hannah - give the lad another chance - and another striker and a Syers type midfielder - i think he is what we have missed from midfield this season, i would have bet a pound or two that Syers in this team would be on possibly 5/6 goals so far. PaddyBantam

9:55am Thu 29 Nov 12

shoesmaker4 says...

have got to agree i think we could be slightley short on the goals front if not careful we need more goals from other players two help the front to abit more this is a constructive point all in all though we are doing well this year keep it up lads and we wont be to far off at the end of season and good look to all for a good result for tomorrow come on city
have got to agree i think we could be slightley short on the goals front if not careful we need more goals from other players two help the front to abit more this is a constructive point all in all though we are doing well this year keep it up lads and we wont be to far off at the end of season and good look to all for a good result for tomorrow come on city shoesmaker4

1:28pm Thu 29 Nov 12

bcfc1903 says...

I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books.

**
We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber.
I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books. ** We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber. bcfc1903

3:45pm Thu 29 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

bcfc1903 wrote:
I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books.

**
We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber.
Like Hannah, Hanson was quite prolific in non-league. I'd dispute your statement that he is short of goals, 16 games without scoring? Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt? Its agreed on this site that the gap in class between BS and our league for those teams that have been promoted up is not massive. Ross has scored 8? since being at Grimsby, that boost in confidence may well serve him well should he return back to us. You also have to ask the question as a team do we play to the strengths in Ross' game? In order for James to score and for him to be at his biggest threat the ball has to come in to the box at pace and bang on the money, then, hopefully we see him at his best. But i would argue James HAS been short on goals, this is supported both by James & PP, so i don't get your statement that he isn't?? As a team we need more goals from midfield, this is a real problem for us at the moment. Personally i would bring Ross back, let Thompson & Connell go in January and seek to bring in an attacking midfielder in the mold of Syers and try and find that golden egg that all teams are looking for, a striker that scores goals - on a regular basis 1 in 16 is not enough. Hopefully James will now get a few goals as he did earlier in the season, otherwise he is going to struggle to get 15, i remember after his flying start to the season he said he was hoping to get 20+, hopefully he will still do that, cos if he does i'd say we would be pretty nailed on for promotion wouldn't you?
[quote][p][bold]bcfc1903[/bold] wrote: I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books. ** We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber.[/p][/quote]Like Hannah, Hanson was quite prolific in non-league. I'd dispute your statement that he is short of goals, 16 games without scoring? Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt? Its agreed on this site that the gap in class between BS and our league for those teams that have been promoted up is not massive. Ross has scored 8? since being at Grimsby, that boost in confidence may well serve him well should he return back to us. You also have to ask the question as a team do we play to the strengths in Ross' game? In order for James to score and for him to be at his biggest threat the ball has to come in to the box at pace and bang on the money, then, hopefully we see him at his best. But i would argue James HAS been short on goals, this is supported both by James & PP, so i don't get your statement that he isn't?? As a team we need more goals from midfield, this is a real problem for us at the moment. Personally i would bring Ross back, let Thompson & Connell go in January and seek to bring in an attacking midfielder in the mold of Syers and try and find that golden egg that all teams are looking for, a striker that scores goals - on a regular basis 1 in 16 is not enough. Hopefully James will now get a few goals as he did earlier in the season, otherwise he is going to struggle to get 15, i remember after his flying start to the season he said he was hoping to get 20+, hopefully he will still do that, cos if he does i'd say we would be pretty nailed on for promotion wouldn't you? PaddyBantam

3:56pm Thu 29 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

If we have a bit of cash come January Ismail McCloud might be worth an investigating, not sure if the lad carries baggage as i was surprised nobody picked him up in the summer when he left Barnet and if Pompey are due a points reduction he might fancy a move as they will be relegated come the summer anyway, the lad scores goals in this division, that's a fact, but like i said i'm not sure if he is a bad influence
If we have a bit of cash come January Ismail McCloud might be worth an investigating, not sure if the lad carries baggage as i was surprised nobody picked him up in the summer when he left Barnet and if Pompey are due a points reduction he might fancy a move as they will be relegated come the summer anyway, the lad scores goals in this division, that's a fact, but like i said i'm not sure if he is a bad influence PaddyBantam

4:49pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Waynus1971 says...

Peter300 wrote:
Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You thick tw4t...! Have I nothing positive to say about Hanson?
What about the umpteen posts where I have praised the defensive aspects of his game, the chasing down and harrying of defenders, the numerous balls he has headed (flicked) on?

However, because I have mentioned what his own managed has since publicly said, you feel the need to claim I only find fault.

Let me remind you how I started the above post (just in case you missed the comment from 'nowt fresh');
"Pleased for Hanson that he finally got the monkey off his back and found the net".

Now run along you Peter Vile.
[quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You thick tw4t...! Have I nothing positive to say about Hanson? What about the umpteen posts where I have praised the defensive aspects of his game, the chasing down and harrying of defenders, the numerous balls he has headed (flicked) on? However, because I have mentioned what his own managed has since publicly said, you feel the need to claim I only find fault. Let me remind you how I started the above post (just in case you missed the comment from 'nowt fresh'); "Pleased for Hanson that he finally got the monkey off his back and found the net". Now run along you Peter Vile. Waynus1971

4:58pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Waynus1971 says...

chin up wrote:
Wow can't believe I have read the comment "....poor coaching from PP because it took him upteenth games to realise Hanson wasn't getting into the box...." Really is unlikely that the manager that has got us looking like promotion challengers and fighting in all cups, has got us this far without being able to notice certain deficiencies of the team. What is more likely that PP reinforced the message to Hanson that he wasn't getting into the box enough and the penny dropped. It might have taken Hanson to realise this through PP shouting at him. Who knows how? Who cares really? Hanson scored and hopefully he will go on a bit of a scoring run. Then there is some genius idea from someone above to play 3 strikers and a wingers...who would protect the defence / who would defend? I really haven't the time to explain the problems with shape to the team that would cause. When losing and with only 10/15 mins to go you could gamble on doing this, but not from the start of a game. If this was a genuine option then I would imagine there would be a handful of teams playing this formation already. There isn't because it leaves you open to leaking goals in from the counter attack.
To be fair, PP doesn't say that Hanson "hasn't been getting into the box, he said wasn't going into the box...". The difference is, the first statement makes it sound like a regular issue (which in my opinion it has been for a few months), whereas, the other comment (PPs) makes it sound like the issue was just in this game.

I'm not saying PP is a poor coach; far from it. The improvement this season in our play (and in certain players' performances) proves otherwise. I just think he could have addressed this issue with Hanson's lack of drive and determination to get into the box much sooner.
[quote][p][bold]chin up[/bold] wrote: Wow can't believe I have read the comment "....poor coaching from PP because it took him upteenth games to realise Hanson wasn't getting into the box...." Really is unlikely that the manager that has got us looking like promotion challengers and fighting in all cups, has got us this far without being able to notice certain deficiencies of the team. What is more likely that PP reinforced the message to Hanson that he wasn't getting into the box enough and the penny dropped. It might have taken Hanson to realise this through PP shouting at him. Who knows how? Who cares really? Hanson scored and hopefully he will go on a bit of a scoring run. Then there is some genius idea from someone above to play 3 strikers and a wingers...who would protect the defence / who would defend? I really haven't the time to explain the problems with shape to the team that would cause. When losing and with only 10/15 mins to go you could gamble on doing this, but not from the start of a game. If this was a genuine option then I would imagine there would be a handful of teams playing this formation already. There isn't because it leaves you open to leaking goals in from the counter attack.[/p][/quote]To be fair, PP doesn't say that Hanson "hasn't been getting into the box, he said wasn't going into the box...". The difference is, the first statement makes it sound like a regular issue (which in my opinion it has been for a few months), whereas, the other comment (PPs) makes it sound like the issue was just in this game. I'm not saying PP is a poor coach; far from it. The improvement this season in our play (and in certain players' performances) proves otherwise. I just think he could have addressed this issue with Hanson's lack of drive and determination to get into the box much sooner. Waynus1971

5:01pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Waynus1971 says...

PaddyBantam wrote:
If you put yourself out there, then people are going to comment back, some responses, a person may not like. You only have to look at Waynus the 'aynus.
Yawn...!
[quote][p][bold]PaddyBantam[/bold] wrote: If you put yourself out there, then people are going to comment back, some responses, a person may not like. You only have to look at Waynus the 'aynus.[/p][/quote]Yawn...! Waynus1971

5:04pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Waynus1971 says...

COLATS wrote:
macca1969 wrote:
Peter300 wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.
You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.
Pot kettle??
Are you for real? Isn't your issue with 'macca' about his posts not being in unison with yours?? Isn't that why you got into a spat with him in the first place?

So how can you now accuse him of 'no opinions of his own'....!
[quote][p][bold]COLATS[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]macca1969[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Peter300[/bold] wrote: Pensioner Waynus does not like Hanson full stop. That's why he 'reported' him to City for drinking his shandies too quickly. It's hardly suprising that pensioner Waynus has not a good word to say about James.[/p][/quote]You really are boring no opinions of your own just bad mouthing waynus and Shaun who both no more about football than you.[/p][/quote]Pot kettle??[/p][/quote]Are you for real? Isn't your issue with 'macca' about his posts not being in unison with yours?? Isn't that why you got into a spat with him in the first place? So how can you now accuse him of 'no opinions of his own'....! Waynus1971

5:20pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Waynus1971 says...

PaddyBantam wrote:
bcfc1903 wrote: I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books. ** We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber.
Like Hannah, Hanson was quite prolific in non-league. I'd dispute your statement that he is short of goals, 16 games without scoring? Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt? Its agreed on this site that the gap in class between BS and our league for those teams that have been promoted up is not massive. Ross has scored 8? since being at Grimsby, that boost in confidence may well serve him well should he return back to us. You also have to ask the question as a team do we play to the strengths in Ross' game? In order for James to score and for him to be at his biggest threat the ball has to come in to the box at pace and bang on the money, then, hopefully we see him at his best. But i would argue James HAS been short on goals, this is supported both by James & PP, so i don't get your statement that he isn't?? As a team we need more goals from midfield, this is a real problem for us at the moment. Personally i would bring Ross back, let Thompson & Connell go in January and seek to bring in an attacking midfielder in the mold of Syers and try and find that golden egg that all teams are looking for, a striker that scores goals - on a regular basis 1 in 16 is not enough. Hopefully James will now get a few goals as he did earlier in the season, otherwise he is going to struggle to get 15, i remember after his flying start to the season he said he was hoping to get 20+, hopefully he will still do that, cos if he does i'd say we would be pretty nailed on for promotion wouldn't you?
Whilst I agree with you regarding Hanson's lack of goals, I don't get the comparison between Hanson going 16 games and Hannah not getting 16 games? They are completely different players and bring different skills to the table. Hanson hasn't scored enough this season (and others have now said the same), but there is no doubting that he does bring other qualities to our team. If Hannah didn't score goals (never mind waiting 16 games), what else would he bring?

Surely, if Wells was out long term, Hannah would be given a chance to stake a claim BESIDE Hanson and if he did, I would expect him to be almost as prolific. If he wasn't, we would be in deep trouble..!

What does make me laugh is that you started your comments by agreeing with 'Colats' about me and 'macca'. Did you know that 'Colats' disagreed about Hannah (the fella you are now bigging up)? Apparently, one of them said he wasn't good enough to play at this level and the other poster questioned this view and asked for evidence, since Hannah has has very few starts.

I will let you work out which one said what...! Perhaps you wouldn't be so quick to jump to Colats' defence??
[quote][p][bold]PaddyBantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bcfc1903[/bold] wrote: I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books. ** We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber.[/p][/quote]Like Hannah, Hanson was quite prolific in non-league. I'd dispute your statement that he is short of goals, 16 games without scoring? Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt? Its agreed on this site that the gap in class between BS and our league for those teams that have been promoted up is not massive. Ross has scored 8? since being at Grimsby, that boost in confidence may well serve him well should he return back to us. You also have to ask the question as a team do we play to the strengths in Ross' game? In order for James to score and for him to be at his biggest threat the ball has to come in to the box at pace and bang on the money, then, hopefully we see him at his best. But i would argue James HAS been short on goals, this is supported both by James & PP, so i don't get your statement that he isn't?? As a team we need more goals from midfield, this is a real problem for us at the moment. Personally i would bring Ross back, let Thompson & Connell go in January and seek to bring in an attacking midfielder in the mold of Syers and try and find that golden egg that all teams are looking for, a striker that scores goals - on a regular basis 1 in 16 is not enough. Hopefully James will now get a few goals as he did earlier in the season, otherwise he is going to struggle to get 15, i remember after his flying start to the season he said he was hoping to get 20+, hopefully he will still do that, cos if he does i'd say we would be pretty nailed on for promotion wouldn't you?[/p][/quote]Whilst I agree with you regarding Hanson's lack of goals, I don't get the comparison between Hanson going 16 games and Hannah not getting 16 games? They are completely different players and bring different skills to the table. Hanson hasn't scored enough this season (and others have now said the same), but there is no doubting that he does bring other qualities to our team. If Hannah didn't score goals (never mind waiting 16 games), what else would he bring? Surely, if Wells was out long term, Hannah would be given a chance to stake a claim BESIDE Hanson and if he did, I would expect him to be almost as prolific. If he wasn't, we would be in deep trouble..! What does make me laugh is that you started your comments by agreeing with 'Colats' about me and 'macca'. Did you know that 'Colats' disagreed about Hannah (the fella you are now bigging up)? Apparently, one of them said he wasn't good enough to play at this level and the other poster questioned this view and asked for evidence, since Hannah has has very few starts. I will let you work out which one said what...! Perhaps you wouldn't be so quick to jump to Colats' defence?? Waynus1971

8:12pm Thu 29 Nov 12

bcfc1903 says...

PaddyBantam wrote:
bcfc1903 wrote:
I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books.

**
We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber.
Like Hannah, Hanson was quite prolific in non-league. I'd dispute your statement that he is short of goals, 16 games without scoring? Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt? Its agreed on this site that the gap in class between BS and our league for those teams that have been promoted up is not massive. Ross has scored 8? since being at Grimsby, that boost in confidence may well serve him well should he return back to us. You also have to ask the question as a team do we play to the strengths in Ross' game? In order for James to score and for him to be at his biggest threat the ball has to come in to the box at pace and bang on the money, then, hopefully we see him at his best. But i would argue James HAS been short on goals, this is supported both by James & PP, so i don't get your statement that he isn't?? As a team we need more goals from midfield, this is a real problem for us at the moment. Personally i would bring Ross back, let Thompson & Connell go in January and seek to bring in an attacking midfielder in the mold of Syers and try and find that golden egg that all teams are looking for, a striker that scores goals - on a regular basis 1 in 16 is not enough. Hopefully James will now get a few goals as he did earlier in the season, otherwise he is going to struggle to get 15, i remember after his flying start to the season he said he was hoping to get 20+, hopefully he will still do that, cos if he does i'd say we would be pretty nailed on for promotion wouldn't you?
You'll get 15 goals from Hanson this season whoever he plays with ...on whether you get it.. (think about the 15 goals that i'm talking about)..he's got six so far this season, so i don't think he's short of goals as i believe he'll score the total i've given this season..Hanson brings so much more to the team than goals though ..i guess we'll see come the end of April what the total is.. Hannah from what i've seen isn't quite good enough, i fancy he'll be sold come January. I was for bringing Hannah back but we've got a couple more players in so i would imagine he'll stay at Grimsby until his loan deal expires or he is bought by Grimsby or some other Blue Square team with cash. Obviously you can score from most deliveries into the box as long as you can connect with the ball...of course the better the delivery the more chance a forward has of scoring. Yes, the more goals each player scores the more likely the team has of being successful.
[quote][p][bold]PaddyBantam[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bcfc1903[/bold] wrote: I don't think Hanson is short of goals...he's a 15 goal a season man...obviously he brings far more to the table than goals. He's a good target man who wins alot of ball giving the opposition defenders big problems. Nahki Wells is a far more dangerous player playing along side Hanson than with any other striker on BCFC's books. ** We shout with pride...We'll never hide...Claret and Amber.[/p][/quote]Like Hannah, Hanson was quite prolific in non-league. I'd dispute your statement that he is short of goals, 16 games without scoring? Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt? Its agreed on this site that the gap in class between BS and our league for those teams that have been promoted up is not massive. Ross has scored 8? since being at Grimsby, that boost in confidence may well serve him well should he return back to us. You also have to ask the question as a team do we play to the strengths in Ross' game? In order for James to score and for him to be at his biggest threat the ball has to come in to the box at pace and bang on the money, then, hopefully we see him at his best. But i would argue James HAS been short on goals, this is supported both by James & PP, so i don't get your statement that he isn't?? As a team we need more goals from midfield, this is a real problem for us at the moment. Personally i would bring Ross back, let Thompson & Connell go in January and seek to bring in an attacking midfielder in the mold of Syers and try and find that golden egg that all teams are looking for, a striker that scores goals - on a regular basis 1 in 16 is not enough. Hopefully James will now get a few goals as he did earlier in the season, otherwise he is going to struggle to get 15, i remember after his flying start to the season he said he was hoping to get 20+, hopefully he will still do that, cos if he does i'd say we would be pretty nailed on for promotion wouldn't you?[/p][/quote]You'll get 15 goals from Hanson this season whoever he plays with ...on whether you get it.. (think about the 15 goals that i'm talking about)..he's got six so far this season, so i don't think he's short of goals as i believe he'll score the total i've given this season..Hanson brings so much more to the team than goals though ..i guess we'll see come the end of April what the total is.. Hannah from what i've seen isn't quite good enough, i fancy he'll be sold come January. I was for bringing Hannah back but we've got a couple more players in so i would imagine he'll stay at Grimsby until his loan deal expires or he is bought by Grimsby or some other Blue Square team with cash. Obviously you can score from most deliveries into the box as long as you can connect with the ball...of course the better the delivery the more chance a forward has of scoring. Yes, the more goals each player scores the more likely the team has of being successful. bcfc1903

9:12pm Thu 29 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

'Aynus i don't big anyone up i post what i think regardless of what others think, if i agree with a statement i will say so, just as if i disagree. I don't form 'tag' teams with other posters, bit old for playing games. As for Hannah and what he brings, i guess we will never know will we? Like i said i posted MY comment based on what i thought as an 'independent'. As for the post on Macca being a moaner, it was tongue in cheek, he didn't seem to have a big issue with it. Seems from your volley of posts - bad day at the office? Last point on Hannah, PP obviously thinks he is not good enough, he saw him everyday in training, i'm just saying that from what we have got from Thompson i would rather have Hannah at least trying to prove what he can do, rather than someone who has played mostly as a winger, who now claims to be a striker and in MY opinion failing at both while here at City, so why not give Ross a go what is there to lose.

Is that ok Waynus? Do you mind me having an opinion on this T&A forum? Or do we just have to listen to you and your views based on....? And how you don't understand the comparison i was making between James & Ross, i can't help that, it seems pretty clear to me.

Hope you have a better day tomorrow, have an early night!!
'Aynus i don't big anyone up i post what i think regardless of what others think, if i agree with a statement i will say so, just as if i disagree. I don't form 'tag' teams with other posters, bit old for playing games. As for Hannah and what he brings, i guess we will never know will we? Like i said i posted MY comment based on what i thought as an 'independent'. As for the post on Macca being a moaner, it was tongue in cheek, he didn't seem to have a big issue with it. Seems from your volley of posts - bad day at the office? Last point on Hannah, PP obviously thinks he is not good enough, he saw him everyday in training, i'm just saying that from what we have got from Thompson i would rather have Hannah at least trying to prove what he can do, rather than someone who has played mostly as a winger, who now claims to be a striker and in MY opinion failing at both while here at City, so why not give Ross a go what is there to lose. Is that ok Waynus? Do you mind me having an opinion on this T&A forum? Or do we just have to listen to you and your views based on....? And how you don't understand the comparison i was making between James & Ross, i can't help that, it seems pretty clear to me. Hope you have a better day tomorrow, have an early night!! PaddyBantam

11:29pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Waynus1971 says...

PaddyBantam wrote:
'Aynus i don't big anyone up i post what i think regardless of what others think, if i agree with a statement i will say so, just as if i disagree. I don't form 'tag' teams with other posters, bit old for playing games. As for Hannah and what he brings, i guess we will never know will we? Like i said i posted MY comment based on what i thought as an 'independent'. As for the post on Macca being a moaner, it was tongue in cheek, he didn't seem to have a big issue with it. Seems from your volley of posts - bad day at the office? Last point on Hannah, PP obviously thinks he is not good enough, he saw him everyday in training, i'm just saying that from what we have got from Thompson i would rather have Hannah at least trying to prove what he can do, rather than someone who has played mostly as a winger, who now claims to be a striker and in MY opinion failing at both while here at City, so why not give Ross a go what is there to lose.

Is that ok Waynus? Do you mind me having an opinion on this T&A forum? Or do we just have to listen to you and your views based on....? And how you don't understand the comparison i was making between James & Ross, i can't help that, it seems pretty clear to me.

Hope you have a better day tomorrow, have an early night!!
I think you will find it was you that started the volley of abuse fella. No, not a bad day at the office, but I'm not going to sit back whilst others call me "aynus", "pensioner" etc.

I'm pleased you have posted your opinion. It is much more mature than just reading your name-calling posts.

And for the record, I actually agree with you regarding Hannah. I simply do not understand why you refer to Hannah as a replacement for Hanson; they are completely different players, bringing the team different qualities. Hanson didn't score for 16 games but Wells, Connell or Hannah wouldn't be left in the team if they went several matches without scoring. Why? Because Hanson does more than just score, whereas the others are in the team to score.

"Agreed - biggest moaner on here - Mr Projector"? Doesn't sound much like 'tongue-in-cheek' to me fella. As for Macca not having a big issue, did he not respond to you, asking if you were "for real"?

Your posts can be churlish, until you enter a proper debate, as you eventually did (above) with Macca. I just hope you can do so again, instead of trying to pick points with me...!

Now can we leave the name calling to the kids in the playground?
[quote][p][bold]PaddyBantam[/bold] wrote: 'Aynus i don't big anyone up i post what i think regardless of what others think, if i agree with a statement i will say so, just as if i disagree. I don't form 'tag' teams with other posters, bit old for playing games. As for Hannah and what he brings, i guess we will never know will we? Like i said i posted MY comment based on what i thought as an 'independent'. As for the post on Macca being a moaner, it was tongue in cheek, he didn't seem to have a big issue with it. Seems from your volley of posts - bad day at the office? Last point on Hannah, PP obviously thinks he is not good enough, he saw him everyday in training, i'm just saying that from what we have got from Thompson i would rather have Hannah at least trying to prove what he can do, rather than someone who has played mostly as a winger, who now claims to be a striker and in MY opinion failing at both while here at City, so why not give Ross a go what is there to lose. Is that ok Waynus? Do you mind me having an opinion on this T&A forum? Or do we just have to listen to you and your views based on....? And how you don't understand the comparison i was making between James & Ross, i can't help that, it seems pretty clear to me. Hope you have a better day tomorrow, have an early night!![/p][/quote]I think you will find it was you that started the volley of abuse fella. No, not a bad day at the office, but I'm not going to sit back whilst others call me "aynus", "pensioner" etc. I'm pleased you have posted your opinion. It is much more mature than just reading your name-calling posts. And for the record, I actually agree with you regarding Hannah. I simply do not understand why you refer to Hannah as a replacement for Hanson; they are completely different players, bringing the team different qualities. Hanson didn't score for 16 games but Wells, Connell or Hannah wouldn't be left in the team if they went several matches without scoring. Why? Because Hanson does more than just score, whereas the others are in the team to score. "Agreed - biggest moaner on here - Mr Projector"? Doesn't sound much like 'tongue-in-cheek' to me fella. As for Macca not having a big issue, did he not respond to you, asking if you were "for real"? Your posts can be churlish, until you enter a proper debate, as you eventually did (above) with Macca. I just hope you can do so again, instead of trying to pick points with me...! Now can we leave the name calling to the kids in the playground? Waynus1971

12:05am Fri 30 Nov 12

PaddyBantam says...

i never said Ross was a replacement for Hanson, Thompson, yes. I didn't question Hanson's other attributes either, you have obviously misread my post. The Macca 'issue' you are making an issue that isn't there and you have actually referenced it more than Macca himself - it was and still is a non event - let it go Waynus...
i never said Ross was a replacement for Hanson, Thompson, yes. I didn't question Hanson's other attributes either, you have obviously misread my post. The Macca 'issue' you are making an issue that isn't there and you have actually referenced it more than Macca himself - it was and still is a non event - let it go Waynus... PaddyBantam

11:54am Fri 30 Nov 12

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

I'd prefer to use Baker as our final choice of striker, let's face it, Hannah if still at the club would be behind JH,NW,AC and GT in Parky's plans.

Regarding goals scored, Nahki has already reached the total Connell scored as joint top scorer for Swindon, the champions, last season. If Hanson reaches 13+ and Nahki continues his good haul then the weak area of the team is as Dann suggested back in September that goals from other areas will be our stumbling block. Maybe Reid will chip in with a few on his return. At least Atkinson is trying to pop up in and around the box and loose a few shots off now.
I'd prefer to use Baker as our final choice of striker, let's face it, Hannah if still at the club would be behind JH,NW,AC and GT in Parky's plans. Regarding goals scored, Nahki has already reached the total Connell scored as joint top scorer for Swindon, the champions, last season. If Hanson reaches 13+ and Nahki continues his good haul then the weak area of the team is as Dann suggested back in September that goals from other areas will be our stumbling block. Maybe Reid will chip in with a few on his return. At least Atkinson is trying to pop up in and around the box and loose a few shots off now. Prisoner Cell Block A

1:53am Sat 1 Dec 12

Waynus1971 says...

PaddyBantam wrote:
i never said Ross was a replacement for Hanson, Thompson, yes. I didn't question Hanson's other attributes either, you have obviously misread my post. The Macca 'issue' you are making an issue that isn't there and you have actually referenced it more than Macca himself - it was and still is a non event - let it go Waynus...
Okay, in relation to Macca, I will drop it. However, I will add that in a text to me yesterday he ended with "but then again, I am the biggest moaner aren't I? LOL". Clearly your tongue-in-cheek wasn't as apparent as you thought.

With regard to Hannah and Hanson, did you not type,"Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt?"? No mention of Thommo, only a comparison that Hanson hasn't scored in 16 and that Ross wouldn't have been given as many blank days at the office...!
[quote][p][bold]PaddyBantam[/bold] wrote: i never said Ross was a replacement for Hanson, Thompson, yes. I didn't question Hanson's other attributes either, you have obviously misread my post. The Macca 'issue' you are making an issue that isn't there and you have actually referenced it more than Macca himself - it was and still is a non event - let it go Waynus...[/p][/quote]Okay, in relation to Macca, I will drop it. However, I will add that in a text to me yesterday he ended with "but then again, I am the biggest moaner aren't I? LOL". Clearly your tongue-in-cheek wasn't as apparent as you thought. With regard to Hannah and Hanson, did you not type,"Yes, agreed he does bring quite a bit to the team, but if Nakki was injured, could we count on James? Would Ross have been given 16 games in a City shirt?"? No mention of Thommo, only a comparison that Hanson hasn't scored in 16 and that Ross wouldn't have been given as many blank days at the office...! Waynus1971

11:02am Sat 1 Dec 12

PaddyBantam says...

I meant, could we count on Hanson to score the number of goals that Wells has, which currently is double the amount Hanson has scored. On the flip side, i am pleased that Hanson has scored in his last two games... As for Thompson, i hope he is able to secure a move away in January whether this is engineered by PP or of his own making. Maybe when we were after him the first time and he chose Scunthorpe he may have done better, but personally i think he has been a big let down and no doubt his wages could be better spent... Are we going to close the Hanson debate now or are we going to continue to split hairs? He is back scoring now, so that is what matters most. As for Macca, what can i say? It was tongue in cheek and nothing personal was meant, but after a period of self-reflection he feels he moans a lot, he is in good company!!
I meant, could we count on Hanson to score the number of goals that Wells has, which currently is double the amount Hanson has scored. On the flip side, i am pleased that Hanson has scored in his last two games... As for Thompson, i hope he is able to secure a move away in January whether this is engineered by PP or of his own making. Maybe when we were after him the first time and he chose Scunthorpe he may have done better, but personally i think he has been a big let down and no doubt his wages could be better spent... Are we going to close the Hanson debate now or are we going to continue to split hairs? He is back scoring now, so that is what matters most. As for Macca, what can i say? It was tongue in cheek and nothing personal was meant, but after a period of self-reflection he feels he moans a lot, he is in good company!! PaddyBantam

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree