capt_oats

This is the thing though of what you'd currently expect to be our first choice midfield 4; - Pearson's 32 and currently injured and out for up to 6/7 weeks. He'll take a while to get back to match fitness after that. He was also out for a while last season too. Basically, he's not getting any younger. - Lasley's 35 and with the best will in the world to ask him to maintain a high level of performance over for an entire season is totally unrealistic. Of the players we have at the moment Jack Leitch seems the obvious candidate to step in for him on occasion. - Ainsworth as many have pointed out on here, blows hot and cold. To be fair that really shouldn't need highlighting. - Johnson as effective as he is, will be bound to have a dip in form and will plainly need a rest at points. It's also telling that he's been able to switch wings while Ainsworth's been suspended. Which opens up the left sided berth. Looking at it reasonably, then there should clearly be opportunities for Taylor to start in either the left centre or wide left roles. Having said that I've not seen him play beyond a few YouTube clips so I've no idea whether or not he'd be able to fit in in another role but I'd say there's a fair chance of him seeing more than a decent amount of game time.

He's 5' 10"-ish (so the internet tells me).

Going by the manager's press conference earlier it definitely sounds as if he has another player in mind that he's looking to bring in beyond Taylor. Usual "if there's someone that will enhance the group"-type patter but the impression was that there's a specific player he's targeting before the window closes.

By all accounts it looks like Steve Clarke is gutting the side and looking to bring in his own players.

On reflection, given that we had Brobbel in on trial the other week then on the face of it positionally speaking Taylor would seem to tick the same sort of boxes as him so perhaps I shouldn't be too surprised. There's still a good couple of weeks to go in the window and there are still a ton of out of contract players who will still be looking for clubs so assuming there's still budget there then it could well be the case that we may be looking at doing more business this window.

True, didn't really mean to suggest otherwise. Just watched the same goal I think (vs Ipswich?) I think I just had quite a specific 'type' of player that I thought we might be looking to bring in. Based on the signings Bara's made so far I'm fairly confident he has a decent eye for a player and what the team needs so as I say, it'll be interesting to see how he fits in. Fair point made earlier on about Taylor being out of contract at the end of the season. A couple of posts on Reading forums suggests that they reckon that's the last they've seen of him.

Interestingly Transfermarkt (I know) has him as primarily a left mid. Much like yourself, not the sort of midfielder I was expecting. Still a few weeks of the window to go I suppose. Interested to see how he fits in. http://www.transfermarkt.com/jake-taylor/profil/spieler/130230

I kind of hope we don't go 4231 as it's a formation that really runs the risk of isolating the lone striker. given the bodies we have 442, 4411 switching to 433 (as we did at times towards the end of last season) seem suitable formations.

I'm inclined to agree with both of you. I think it depends if we've moved from bringing one midfielder in to two off the back of Pearson's injury. Certainly agree that a ball winner with a bit of presence & physicality would be welcome. However by the same token, I mentioned this earlier possibly on another thread (or possibly this one) so apologies if I'm repeating myself as effective as Ainsworth & Johnson are, much of the "creativity" they offer is down to their pace and direct running. If we're reliant on that then it leaves the possibility of us being a bit one dimensional in an attacking sense. At the risk of speaking in football clichés we don't really seem to have much by way of "genuine" creativity in the middle of the park, someone to "unlock" defences so to speak. Without wanting to fanboy too much I thought Dom Thomas started to offer that a bit yesterday, him taking men on and the nutmegs were eye-catching but to me the fact that he started playing through balls into the channels was something that we had been missing.

re: Chalmers it's obviously early days but I was quietly impressed by him. He's clearly not a left winger but he wasn't brought in to be so it'd be unfair to judge him vs Johnson in the wide position. He does seem more than capable of slotting in as a defensive wide midfielder though. He seems decent with the ball at his feet and overall looks a solid player. Sort of guy you could see giving consistent 7/10 performances. I'd say he definitely looks a more rounded player than your Reid, Ramsden & Kerr's.

On the subject of right back even if Watt isn't available I wonder if there's the opportunity for Kennedy to step in? It's been mentioned he's capable of playing there. Obviously I realise we're only 2 games into the season so it's a bit early to start writing off/dropping players etc but it was notable that Law seemed to be identified as a weak link.

As far as the result goes, it was obviously a boot in the baws. We were worth at least a draw. Performance-wise it was pretty encouraging. Defensively we looked relatively well drilled. Laing looks like he's stepped up a level from where he was last season, he seems to be growing into the ball playing centre half role. There's the potential for a solid foundation there with him, McManus and Ripley. Going forward it looked like we're still finding our feet a bit and to reiterate what everyone else has said, we can't really expect to win games if we don't take chances. The fact that we seemed to be playing with some composure was pleasing though. It'd be nice if we could add some genuine creativity in the middle of the park though as I still have a gnawing concern that our reliance on the pace of the wide players leaves us a wee bit one-dimensional. Either way it's been a while since I've walked away from a 2-0 defeat feeling reasonably encouraged.

Ripley for me, not much in it between him and Laing though tbf.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a fine but equally I think the club have a pretty solid argument. - can it be shown that there was adequate stewarding & policing in place? - yes, the club had more than they would normally have for a game vs Celtic. that's a fact that can be demonstrated with evidence as well. - did the club use PSA to warn against encroaching on the field - yes - was the encroachment dealt with without incident? - yes, those who entered the field dispersed within a few minutes. you can argue that the 'scenes' were perhaps unedifying to those of a sensitive nature and an excuse of it was GIRFUY to Sevco probably won't fly though would certainly allow for a bit of context but as far the club's management of the game goes I think they've enough evidence in their favour to say that they 'did everything they could'. could it all have kicked off? of course, but you could say that about any game. did it actually kick off? no, and that fact can largely be attributed to the steps the club had in place to manage it. genuine question as I can't remember/don't know, there have been various comments saying we've got 'previous' for this sort of thing however have we actually ever been warned or censured about it?

Difficult to tell going by highlights but it did seem as if Brobbel was playing more centrally. Every mention of him online seems to have him pegged as a winger however there are a couple of Boro u21 games up on YouTube (same ones as Ripley features in) and he definitely seemed to be playing in that role with them too. Captained them in a couple of games as well as far as I could see. Also, that interview with Craigan is really encouraging.

Yep, just watching now. Dom Thomas and Lionel look like they're having a bloody lovely time.

Brobbel's also spent time on loan at York City with Wes Fletcher and the bold Tony Straker fact fans. Also, +1 on Dom Thomas playing as a #10. It's something I fully endorse.

The Twitter machine has a young(ish) winger with us on trial, Ryan Brobbel (one tweet and no other mention but it seems to have come from someone with a Boro connection of sorts rather than a random ITK account): https://twitter.com/shaunwilson71/status/628523074187567104 Released by Boro at the end of the season. Interesting if so since I wondered if there might be a school of thought that we're a bit light on the left side with Chalmers having had to step in (and doing a solid job by all accounts it has to be said). Also goes back to Flow's reply to someone a while back along the lines of "at least" two more to come in, the two being the much discussed GK and CM. May well be the case that we're not simply restricting our recruitment to those positions though. Edit to add: going by a couple of posts on Boro's forums there were a few people quite surprised he was released with the suggestion he was quite close to breaking into their first team. Make of that what you will. And there's your trialist there in the u20s this afternoon.

I'm saying 2-1 'well also.

Well it is. Absolutely. However both the manager and general manager have come out in the past couple of weeks and said "we want to add a Goalkeeper and a Central Midfielder". We brought in the Goalkeeper on Friday so logic dictates we're still in the market for a CM one way or another. You would have thought that in an ideal world both Cadden and Leitch would be rotating with Pearson and Lasley respectively over the course of the season, maybe stepping in as first choice if there's a slight injury that keeps someone out for a couple of weeks. However, if it is the case that Pearson's out for several months then it leaves us short of a nailed on first team pick and a massively experienced player for a significant chunk of the season. It's a great opportunity for Cadden no question but it's a big ask for him to step into one of our key players shoes. Out of curiosity, who'd step up from the u20s to back up Cadden if he does nail down that role?

As you've pointed out we've already been completely open about us wanting to add a CM. I do wonder whether the Pearson injury (assuming it will actually keep him out for as long as has been suggested on here) might shift our focus as to the type of CM we're looking to bring in. For no reason other than his age I had got the impression it may well be a more holding style player in the Lasley mould we would have been looking at. Obviously aware that Baraclough mentioned during an interview that he had been looking ahead to the January window as well, may well be the case that priorities have changed slightly. We'll find out soon enough I guess.

So the only source for this Samson story is an ITK twitter account with 455 followers that pretty much just regurgitates other news stories? Seems totally legit and not at all like a wee guy who's miles out of date with his rumours & info.

@SPFLFootball about 3 weeks late with their ITK info there. As you say, unless Samson's particularly keen to sit on our bench that would be an odd move to say the least.

Ha! No problem, given the sort of business we've done bringing in players permanently that's not an unreasonable assumption to make. I'm pretty much of the view that we'll have put in an offer we feel worked for us, I'd imagine Bolger would have been one of a number of possible targets that we'd have been interested in. St. Pats KB'd us (which they're perfectly entitled to do) so I'd rather we just moved on to other options rather than try and haggle or up our bid. I'd see the point if, as you say, he was 22/23 and there was the potential for profit but given there are probably a fair number of alternatives out there who would be as good that could be an option for us I'd rather we just move on.

You know Bolger is 26 (27 in a month) right? Hardly qualifies as a promising young player. Which isn't to say he wouldn't do well for us, just that at 27 he wouldn't exactly be a young prospect to develop and sell on. In terms of 'do a job' it was a turn of phrase is all. For what it's worth though, I completely agree with you re: paying a fee if it's viewed as being a suitable investment that would see a return.