Doh!! For Daggers!!

[Cockney Byrites]

My latest post about the Daggers, Saturday's game and the usual rantings.

Please have a read if you wish.

Many thanks.

http://cockneybyrites.blogspot.com

[Mike the Dagger]

You thought the poor man's Akinfenwa had a decent game?

[Cockney Byrites]

Yeah, I thought he did alright.

[Mike the Dagger]

Expand on that, and compare to how Yussef did against Carlisle in terms of movement, threat and pace (and the assists)?

Did you see him let the 5 yard pass straight at him run under his foot with a few minutes to go? That was my final straw, I lost it I am afraid. Not yelled at one of ours like that since Tomlin moved on.

[Cockney Byrites]

I never said he was better than Yusuff, nor did I pick the team.

Would I have picked him ahead Yusuff, probably not but as he was playing and Yusuff wasn't. I think he did what he was put on the pitch to do.

Granted he faded in the second half and made a few mistakes, but compared to some of the players performances on Saturday, I don't see him as the worst offender. Also he hasn't played regular football lately so he was always going to struggle a bit in the second half.

At times they had to put two players on him, and if our other players had been switched on to that, it could have given us the chance to open them up.

It must be hard for a bloke like Agyemang though as before he had even kicked a ball he was already not wanted by some fans!!

[DI Mike Dashwood]

Totally agree. I don't think he did to bad. Again, I was not best pleased he started as thought it moved away from what had worked against Carlisle, but that is the Manager's call, not his.

I thought for first 20 minutes he did ok, then two things happened. He got isolated as people didn't get near him to pick up second balls (that dropped off him or the defender). And secondly he seemed to be instructed to get pushed out wide more which made it less effective.

He did tire, but that is to be expected, and again, the manager should surely have taken a decision when everyone else could see that??

I do think with loan players they are always up against it with our fans for some reason. Unless they go on to be very very good (Ritchie, McGrath to an extent) then they are always first in line for the stick.

[Lcbdagger]

Agyemang wasn't great... but ultimately the decision to change things and take him off has to be down to the manager... sadly the decision fell to one of the poorest tactically aware managers in the FL...

[Mike the Dagger]

Totally agree. I don't think he did to bad. Again, I was not best pleased he started as thought it moved away from what had worked against Carlisle, but that is the Manager's call, not his.

I thought for first 20 minutes he did ok, then two things happened. He got isolated as people didn't get near him to pick up second balls (that dropped off him or the defender). And secondly he seemed to be instructed to get pushed out wide more which made it less effective.

He did tire, but that is to be expected, and again, the manager should surely have taken a decision when everyone else could see that??

I do think with loan players they are always up against it with our fans for some reason. Unless they go on to be very very good (Ritchie, McGrath to an extent) then they are always first in line for the stick.

He started OK I agree, but after the first 15 minutes or so, did nothing at all of note. I also agree that he tired badly, so quite why Burnett left him on is a total mystery.

The reason (some) loan players have a hard time is that they are brought in to do a job, usually for a month or two, and if they can't do it pretty much from day one, what is the point of them keeping one of ours out of the team? If we are there to get someone match fit for a parent club they would have to be much better than our standard anyway and should show it and add something.

I don't see what a 34 year old journeyman from a club in the same division adds to our forward line when Rhys Murphy needs time on the field to get match fit and Ade Yussuf has started so well, is working so hard, and needs more experience. What is the point of Doidge if he can't get a game too?

We have had a few good loanees, Matt Ritchie being the gold standard obviously, but what about Mark Arber or Mathieu Baudry. Luke Norris was a bit of a Broughton, but had his moments.

I bet we could all list a dozen total crocks we have taken on loan without even thinking and for every good one there are three bad ones IMHO.

[Masked Man]

I thought he was OK for the first half an hour, and offered a big lump option which might have been useful to feed Jamie.

But he went anonymous after that and I didn't even notice him on the pitch in the second half.

[DI Mike Dashwood]

All I am trying to say is, some people have it in for certain loan players as soon as they arrive.

Whether they should be bought in or how they are used is not their call, that is the Managers call. I agree with Mike that we have had a few good ones (Paul Mayo was another who I thought did ok) but a lot of duds, but I think that is down to the Managers.

The players themselves can only put in 100% effort and do their best, which I think they have generally done. If a loan players style doesn't fit in, or he is not what we need, then he can't always be blamed for that. Like the lad from Chelsea who was a more modern/higher league full back as thats how he had been bought up. Stilly should have been aware of that and not bought him in, or not used him as much when he did. But again, not really the lads fault. And Paulson (??) from Liverpool. He was captain of their reserve team but tried a load of 5 yard passes in the first few minutes of one of our games (before Arbs had a quiet word). Now both of those lads were obviously ok players (although not sure where they are now) but their style did not fit with what we wanted/needed, but I do think it's then harsh for our support to get on their cases.

Adam Miller is another to spring to mind. So he was a t0$$er at Aldershot, but came in and tried, but some people couldn't forget he was a t0$$er at Aldershot!!!

[dagger4eva]

It may well have been hard for Aygeymang but what else do you expect..? He's a 34 year old journeyman whos not REALLY done a great deal in his career in footballing terms, and a lot of people's fears about what he had to offer, or didnt have as the case proved didnt take long to be realised.

Add this to the fact the main basis of WB's post Southport rant was how we had gone SOOOOOO long without last seasons top scorer in rhys murphy. And yet he saw fit to play the oaf that is aygeymang infront of both him and one of the stars of the carlisle game in yusuff.

So I mean no harm to P.A. at all and im sure hes an amazing chap, Id just prefer it if he was an amazing chap at a club well away from ours.
Wayne and his two cronies can join him too

[Adrian]

There are two points really.
1) Should a player have been brought in on loan and played?
2) When a loanee is played do they do the job expected?

Based on Saturday, for me the answer to those two questions in regards to Agyemang is No and then Yes.
He did his job. It was just that the job wasn't the right one.
It was almost like we looked at the Carlisle game, said right we've found something that worked so we won't bother with it again now.

I have an issue with the way we use loan players at the moment. To me they're ending up holding back our own players while not being a significant enough provement to justify their use.

There have been some good loan signings in the past but they've tended to be an exception.
And Adam Miller wasn't a tosser at Aldershot, he was just a tosser

[Kevin]

I have an issue with the way we use loan players at the moment. To me they're ending up holding back our own players while not being a significant enough provement to justify their use.

I think that's the "some reason" that fans may get on some of these chaps backs if they play pretty toilet - it's the double whammy of being pants as well as screwing our own players over.

We brought in young Ayo on loan to bolster the defence - it needed bolstering..especially when playing 3 at the back (or 8 as we did Saturday). He's come in, shown a lot of effort but has actually added something to the team.

Patrick Agyemang has displaced Yusuff, as well as keeping out Murphy and Doidge. Unless he played exceptionally well (which he quite clearly did not), he was always going to be one of the first to be had a go at. I thought he showed a bit of effort for the first 15-20mins, then looked like he was ready for a nice sit down. The issue I have is that he hasn't added anything to the team - one of our 3 other strikers should have played.

I know Dashers has said "that is the Managers call", which is a fair point. Unfortunately, the current manager making those calls appears not to know his arse from his elbow, as well as seeming tactically inept - hence regularly dishing out tripe like Saturday's game for the past 12 months.

[leewilson]

All I am trying to say is, some people have it in for certain loan players as soon as they arrive.

Whether they should be bought in or how they are used is not their call, that is the Managers call. I agree with Mike that we have had a few good ones (Paul Mayo was another who I thought did ok) but a lot of duds, but I think that is down to the Managers.

The players themselves can only put in 100% effort and do their best, which I think they have generally done. If a loan players style doesn't fit in, or he is not what we need, then he can't always be blamed for that. Like the lad from Chelsea who was a more modern/higher league full back as thats how he had been bought up. Stilly should have been aware of that and not bought him in, or not used him as much when he did. But again, not really the lads fault. And Paulson (??) from Liverpool. He was captain of their reserve team but tried a load of 5 yard passes in the first few minutes of one of our games (before Arbs had a quiet word). Now both of those lads were obviously ok players (although not sure where they are now) but their style did not fit with what we wanted/needed, but I do think it's then harsh for our support to get on their cases.

Adam Miller is another to spring to mind. So he was a t0$$er at Aldershot, but came in and tried, but some people couldn't forget he was a t0$$er at Aldershot!!!

I liked Adam Miller. He was the subject of many arguments between myself and Adrian on here.

[Diggerthedog]

There are two points really.
1) Should a player have been brought in on loan and played?
2) When a loanee is played do they do the job expected?

Based on Saturday, for me the answer to those two questions in regards to Agyemang is No and then Yes.
He did his job. It was just that the job wasn't the right one.
It was almost like we looked at the Carlisle game, said right we've found something that worked so we won't bother with it again now.

I have an issue with the way we use loan players at the moment. To me they're ending up holding back our own players while not being a significant enough provement to justify their use.

There have been some good loan signings in the past but they've tended to be an exception.
And Adam Miller wasn't a tosser at Aldershot, he was just a tosser

I Agree with everything Adrian has said above. Hate seeing a Loan come in and offer nothing more then we already have, in this case something a lot worse. How many strikers will we have been through come May, it's too many already.

Koko blew it big time on Saturday dropping The waiter for the eater.