Poyet starts search again (From The Argus)

McNulty is a left footed defensive player, contracted to Brighton, able to play at left back or centre back, and playing at a higher level. Sounds perfect.

Never_Wrong wrote:
McNulty is a left footed defensive player, contracted to Brighton, able to play at left back or centre back, and playing at a higher level. Sounds perfect.

Except he wants to play every week and not be a squad player which is why he is out on loan!

He's also on a season long loan so cannot be called back.

troubles wrote:
He's also on a season long loan so cannot be called back.

Jim McNulty is on a six month loan contract ....

MKWirral wrote:

troubles wrote:
He's also on a season long loan so cannot be called back.

Jim McNulty is on a six month loan contract ....

Fantastic News Brighton can have him back at the in February.... In time for that all important push to 12th Place.

We've only played 4 league games! Give the guys a chance!

Have to say it's one of the examples of Poyet showing his naivety. He's been a good manager so far but his big weakness is to burn his bridges. McNulty doesn't want to be here because Poyet made it clear he didn't want him. As the first post says, he's a perfect replacement and a really experienced manager would have said prove him wrong and win a place. Just hope Painter stays fit and unsuspended until January.

I agree with Kumquat...Mcnulty should have been kept and given the chance to fight for his place...what do the club gain by loaning him out?

btw he's currently injured again

kentseagull wrote:
I agree with Kumquat...Mcnulty should have been kept and given the chance to fight for his place...what do the club gain by loaning him out?

I think its laughable that you don't think that is exactly what Gus said to him. 'Stay here and fight' would have been the message. But unfortunately for Gus/BHA McNulty didn't have any desire to play second fiddle and perhaps knew that, with someone of Painter's ability ahead of him, only an injury would give him a run in the side.

**

Move on - please. He doesn't want to be here so now we need to find someone who does and we'll use the wages we're saving on Jim to pay the new chap.

Scarfer1 wrote:

kentseagull wrote: I agree with Kumquat...Mcnulty should have been kept and given the chance to fight for his place...what do the club gain by loaning him out?

I think its laughable that you don't think that is exactly what Gus said to him. 'Stay here and fight' would have been the message. But unfortunately for Gus/BHA McNulty didn't have any desire to play second fiddle and perhaps knew that, with someone of Painter's ability ahead of him, only an injury would give him a run in the side. ** Move on - please. He doesn't want to be here so now we need to find someone who does and we'll use the wages we're saving on Jim to pay the new chap.

Disagree. McNulty is better passer, better going forward and quicker. Painter is a solid defender. Both in the squad would be ideal. Wrong to say Painter is better, especially as McNulty plays at a higher level. McNulty lost his place due to injury after a long lay off and defensive stability was a must in a relegation battle. We need him back in Feb.

Wayne_the_Clown wrote:

Scarfer1 wrote:

kentseagull wrote: I agree with Kumquat...Mcnulty should have been kept and given the chance to fight for his place...what do the club gain by loaning him out?

I think its laughable that you don't think that is exactly what Gus said to him. 'Stay here and fight' would have been the message. But unfortunately for Gus/BHA McNulty didn't have any desire to play second fiddle and perhaps knew that, with someone of Painter's ability ahead of him, only an injury would give him a run in the side. ** Move on - please. He doesn't want to be here so now we need to find someone who does and we'll use the wages we're saving on Jim to pay the new chap.

Disagree. McNulty is better passer, better going forward and quicker. Painter is a solid defender. Both in the squad would be ideal. Wrong to say Painter is better, especially as McNulty plays at a higher level. McNulty lost his place due to injury after a long lay off and defensive stability was a must in a relegation battle. We need him back in Feb.

Yes, McNulty WAS all those things, before his very unfortunate injury. However, he never recaptured that form. I was a big fan of Jim McNulty, but I believe Painter is a better option for us now.
.
I agree McNulty would be a good backup, or even an option to bring off the bench to create a more attacking formation, but as other posters have mentioned - HE DOES NOT WANT TO SIT ON THE BENCH. Please can we stop bringing him up every time this subject comes up.

nicky forster? lol

Jim McNulty pre-injury was undoubtedly a different player to the one first assessed by GP, once match fitness had returned .... The very nature of JMc's medical condition was always going to be psychologically, as well as physically restricting when returning to play, no matter how brave the player himself might appear to be from the outset.
Despite the fact that his general reactions and overall pace had slowed, and his commitment to the tackle was not quite what it had been, Jim McNulty was still a player with tremendous skill and ability. Enough ability to attract the attention of a Championship manager, but not enough to match the prerequisites of a fledgling manager with very definite ideas on the type of footballer he wishes to play in his promotion chasing League One squad ....
Gus might well have believed that the best way of obtaining JMc's former playing self, a level which he has only heard about and not seen, would be to loan him out to play regular football, in the hope that the JMc of old will return as a result ....
Some believe that the skill level between League One and the Championship is closer now than it has been .... Well, that may well be so, but the fact remains that there is still a little more time and space to play on the ball in the higher league level, and this factor alone will allow JMc the time and space to redefine his career ....
I would be more than happy to see the Jim McNulty of old return to our ranks at a future date, because he is a class act, and more than capable of playing football at any level .... Whatever transpires in the coming months, I can only wish the guy every success .... Hopefully allowing GP to reassess the full-back in a positive light ....

mark by the sea wrote:
nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

Wayne_the_Clown wrote:

Scarfer1 wrote:

kentseagull wrote: I agree with Kumquat...Mcnulty should have been kept and given the chance to fight for his place...what do the club gain by loaning him out?

I think its laughable that you don't think that is exactly what Gus said to him. 'Stay here and fight' would have been the message. But unfortunately for Gus/BHA McNulty didn't have any desire to play second fiddle and perhaps knew that, with someone of Painter's ability ahead of him, only an injury would give him a run in the side. ** Move on - please. He doesn't want to be here so now we need to find someone who does and we'll use the wages we're saving on Jim to pay the new chap.

Disagree. McNulty is better passer, better going forward and quicker. Painter is a solid defender. Both in the squad would be ideal. Wrong to say Painter is better, especially as McNulty plays at a higher level. McNulty lost his place due to injury after a long lay off and defensive stability was a must in a relegation battle. We need him back in Feb.

Wayne, you may be a Clown but you talk sense, lol. There are still a load of Jim McN fans on this board (me, among them) & I agree with many of the other posts. We do need him back in Feb & he needs to fight for his place back. Squad rotation is not such a bad thing for a Manager if you are in a (League) position to do it. Come on gus, think about it.............:~)

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

2 players sitting out most games through injury or on the bench, taking up valuable wages which could be, and have been, spent to strengthen elsewhere in the squad? would have thought that would have the opposite effect...

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

2 players sitting out most games through injury or on the bench, taking up valuable wages which could be, and have been, spent to strengthen elsewhere in the squad? would have thought that would have the opposite effect...

On an unknown Norwegian kid last minute panic buy you mean? We need qualitry cover up front and at left-back and we had it in those two.

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

2 players sitting out most games through injury or on the bench, taking up valuable wages which could be, and have been, spent to strengthen elsewhere in the squad? would have thought that would have the opposite effect...

On an unknown Norwegian kid last minute panic buy you mean? We need qualitry cover up front and at left-back and we had it in those two.

It's not cover if they are injured (which I believe they both are at the moment!).
.
I can't see how it was a panic buy... he's a 'development squad' player... Can't see Poyet panicking that he can't field enough reserve strikers! Who knows, he might be a good bit of business, can't see why you are laying into him?!
.
We are now strong up front, so it's really just the left back position which can be covered by Taricco until we find someone who WANTS to fight for their place.

Lot about McNulty here and his want to play for Albion ,well how about LA LA who says he is a TOON through & through man(how sad) and is coming to play games think his shirt should be blue /black& white stripes,if that is loan players take forget it .
We want players whose flag is nailed to the post & we will see if at end of season whether he wants here or not.

Yes i am from old school but will never change.

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

2 players sitting out most games through injury or on the bench, taking up valuable wages which could be, and have been, spent to strengthen elsewhere in the squad? would have thought that would have the opposite effect...

On an unknown Norwegian kid last minute panic buy you mean? We need qualitry cover up front and at left-back and we had it in those two.

It's not cover if they are injured (which I believe they both are at the moment!). . I can't see how it was a panic buy... he's a 'development squad' player... Can't see Poyet panicking that he can't field enough reserve strikers! Who knows, he might be a good bit of business, can't see why you are laying into him?! . We are now strong up front, so it's really just the left back position which can be covered by Taricco until we find someone who WANTS to fight for their place.

strong up front? think thats a bit early to say, with murray fit and in the mood we are always in with a chance of scoring, but take him out and frankly its a unknown quantity, taking the club into the championship is one thing staying there another, dont think we have more than 5 who are good enough for that division, sparrow bennet, caldi, painter, and murray are about it, possiby greer, but he is 30, and according to swindon fans slow? ( they would say that)

mark by the sea wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

2 players sitting out most games through injury or on the bench, taking up valuable wages which could be, and have been, spent to strengthen elsewhere in the squad? would have thought that would have the opposite effect...

On an unknown Norwegian kid last minute panic buy you mean? We need qualitry cover up front and at left-back and we had it in those two.

It's not cover if they are injured (which I believe they both are at the moment!). . I can't see how it was a panic buy... he's a 'development squad' player... Can't see Poyet panicking that he can't field enough reserve strikers! Who knows, he might be a good bit of business, can't see why you are laying into him?! . We are now strong up front, so it's really just the left back position which can be covered by Taricco until we find someone who WANTS to fight for their place.

strong up front? think thats a bit early to say, with murray fit and in the mood we are always in with a chance of scoring, but take him out and frankly its a unknown quantity, taking the club into the championship is one thing staying there another, dont think we have more than 5 who are good enough for that division, sparrow bennet, caldi, painter, and murray are about it, possiby greer, but he is 30, and according to swindon fans slow? ( they would say that)

what i mean is that we don't need any more backup strikers when we have: 1) Murray, 2) Barnes, 3) Sandaza, 4) Agdestein, 5) Baz, 6) Holroyd, 7) Hart

well the jury is out on three of those, and the verdict on two is well known! take murray out that 7 and one of them will have to step up to the mark..

mark by the sea wrote:
well the jury is out on three of those, and the verdict on two is well known! take murray out that 7 and one of them will have to step up to the mark..

Mark thought your recent optimistic posts were a turning point! However you seem to have regressed. How can some of the previous posters know that we will need Mc Nulty back in Feb? We could be 10 points clear at the top of the table by then. Andy Murray could have won the Australian Open,Audley Harrison could be the WBA Heavyweight champ and Wayne Rooney could have slept with Coleen again. lol

mark by the sea wrote:
well the jury is out on three of those, and the verdict on two is well known! take murray out that 7 and one of them will have to step up to the mark..

Mark thought your recent optimistic posts were a turning point! However you seem to have regressed. How can some of the previous posters know that we will need Mc Nulty back in Feb? We could be 10 points clear at the top of the table by then. Andy Murray could have won the Australian Open,Audley Harrison could be the WBA Heavyweight champ and Wayne Rooney could have slept with Coleen again. lol

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

2 players sitting out most games through injury or on the bench, taking up valuable wages which could be, and have been, spent to strengthen elsewhere in the squad? would have thought that would have the opposite effect...

On an unknown Norwegian kid last minute panic buy you mean? We need qualitry cover up front and at left-back and we had it in those two.

It's not cover if they are injured (which I believe they both are at the moment!). . I can't see how it was a panic buy... he's a 'development squad' player... Can't see Poyet panicking that he can't field enough reserve strikers! Who knows, he might be a good bit of business, can't see why you are laying into him?! . We are now strong up front, so it's really just the left back position which can be covered by Taricco until we find someone who WANTS to fight for their place.

strong up front? think thats a bit early to say, with murray fit and in the mood we are always in with a chance of scoring, but take him out and frankly its a unknown quantity, taking the club into the championship is one thing staying there another, dont think we have more than 5 who are good enough for that division, sparrow bennet, caldi, painter, and murray are about it, possiby greer, but he is 30, and according to swindon fans slow? ( they would say that)

what i mean is that we don't need any more backup strikers when we have: 1) Murray, 2) Barnes, 3) Sandaza, 4) Agdestein, 5) Baz, 6) Holroyd, 7) Hart

I can't believe you don't get it. We need back-up strikers because the only one who has proven it at this level is Murray and even he is struggling. Sandaza to be fair might be the answer, but the rest are either rubbish, old or developing. Barnes will be the part I think, but if w eare serious about challenging for promotion we need two top goalscorers and quality cover. Murray, Sandaza, Barnes and Forster would be a start. if you can't see tthat one of the reasons Poyet downgraded his prediction for us was exactly because he bought a norwegian kid and brought his mate out of retirement at left-back then, well i don't know what to say. He complained about not being allowed to spend all the money on a striker and then moans about not being able to get a left-back. He's done a goo djob in the transfer market but let's not pretend that in two positions he had options. I'd bet big money that if he knew he'd have trouble in the transfer market, Forster would still be here. Oh and by the way using the fact that both McNulty and Forster are injured at the moment is called hindsight in my book.

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

kumquat wrote:

BZ25 wrote:

mark by the sea wrote: nicky forster? lol

Forster & McNulty seem to be the answer to everything on here don't they?!

Well they would be the answer to our lack of strength in depth in crucial positions, yes.

2 players sitting out most games through injury or on the bench, taking up valuable wages which could be, and have been, spent to strengthen elsewhere in the squad? would have thought that would have the opposite effect...

On an unknown Norwegian kid last minute panic buy you mean? We need qualitry cover up front and at left-back and we had it in those two.

It's not cover if they are injured (which I believe they both are at the moment!). . I can't see how it was a panic buy... he's a 'development squad' player... Can't see Poyet panicking that he can't field enough reserve strikers! Who knows, he might be a good bit of business, can't see why you are laying into him?! . We are now strong up front, so it's really just the left back position which can be covered by Taricco until we find someone who WANTS to fight for their place.

strong up front? think thats a bit early to say, with murray fit and in the mood we are always in with a chance of scoring, but take him out and frankly its a unknown quantity, taking the club into the championship is one thing staying there another, dont think we have more than 5 who are good enough for that division, sparrow bennet, caldi, painter, and murray are about it, possiby greer, but he is 30, and according to swindon fans slow? ( they would say that)

what i mean is that we don't need any more backup strikers when we have: 1) Murray, 2) Barnes, 3) Sandaza, 4) Agdestein, 5) Baz, 6) Holroyd, 7) Hart

I can't believe you don't get it. We need back-up strikers because the only one who has proven it at this level is Murray and even he is struggling. Sandaza to be fair might be the answer, but the rest are either rubbish, old or developing. Barnes will be the part I think, but if w eare serious about challenging for promotion we need two top goalscorers and quality cover. Murray, Sandaza, Barnes and Forster would be a start. if you can't see tthat one of the reasons Poyet downgraded his prediction for us was exactly because he bought a norwegian kid and brought his mate out of retirement at left-back then, well i don't know what to say. He complained about not being allowed to spend all the money on a striker and then moans about not being able to get a left-back. He's done a goo djob in the transfer market but let's not pretend that in two positions he had options. I'd bet big money that if he knew he'd have trouble in the transfer market, Forster would still be here. Oh and by the way using the fact that both McNulty and Forster are injured at the moment is called hindsight in my book.

Going on the point you are trying to make, we don't need a 'back-up' striker, we need someone who is going to contribute a lot of goals to the cause.
.
1) Murray, 2) Barnes, 3) Sandaza, 4) Agdestein, 5) Baz, 6) Holroyd, 7) Hart. They are all, bar Murray, either GP's signings, or he has extended their contract (Hart). If Gus thinks we should have more than 7 strikers in our squad, I really don't think he would go on about 22/23 man squads all of the time!
.
Murray, Barnes & Sandaza are our main strikers. Gus has more faith in Barnes than people give him credit for & he expects big things from Sandaza. We are not Man City, we cannot hoard top quality strikers & let them warm the bench or play for the reserves. We have 4 back-ups for the main 3 (who will be fighting over 2, or even 1 postion). The 4 back-ups were ALL chosen by Gus Poyet. Whether you rate them or not, our manager must think they are up to the task in hand.

He doesn't rate them and that's why he bought an unknown norwegian. Sandaza came afterwards and as i said may be one of the answers. Why do you think he substituted Barnes and Murray last time and publicly said we don't score goals? As for him choosing the back-ups, maybe he did but doesn't mean he doesn't think they are good enough. If Holroyd and Hart were the answer we wouldn't have Sandaza or the norwegian.

kumquat wrote:
He doesn't rate them and that's why he bought an unknown norwegian. Sandaza came afterwards and as i said may be one of the answers. Why do you think he substituted Barnes and Murray last time and publicly said we don't score goals? As for him choosing the back-ups, maybe he did but doesn't mean he doesn't think they are good enough. If Holroyd and Hart were the answer we wouldn't have Sandaza or the norwegian.

For Holroyd or Hart to come on upfront, we would need injuries to Murray, Barnes, Sandaza, Baz & Agdestein similtaniously. That is very unlikely! Why would we pay someone a huge wage to be 6th/7th place backup striker? It doesn't make sense.
.
I believe Poyet did that to spur them on & make them prove him wrong. I hope it works.
.
Even if Poyet has changed his mind on a couple of his strikers, I believe 5 is more than enough.
.
Name the strikers in our squad the 2 times we went up from League One to the Championship...

So why are Holroyd and Hart there? Murray, I think, is quality at that level, but struggling for confidence right now. The rest we are all taking a punt on. I'm not questioning that 5 is enough. I agree. I'm saying that he's ended up with 7 because he doesn't rate most of them and if he'd known it would be so hard to get a decent striker he wouldn't have burned his bridges with Forster. That's all.