Brazilian Posted September 14, 2015 Report Share Posted September 14, 2015 If Taylor was one of our own youths I dont think we would be even talking about this. I think its safe to say, that is not a common opinion, plenty of 'our own' have had had careers written off by the general support after producing more than Taylor has. I take very little pleasure in saying , after Saturday , I have never witnessed a player appear to try so hard not to be involved in a game and I doubt I will, there may be reasons , I can wait to find them out in due course, but at least 3 or 4 players deserve game time before him, from what I have seen to date. my personal opinion is we need 3 midfielders with wing men being switched out, I still would only give Taylor game time from the bench at best, until he delivers positives, starting with working to make himself available for the ball, instead of backing off and pointing at other Motherwell players. Taylor can stay for now, If Bara thinks he is part of a functional midfield two, I know where the flaw lies 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted September 14, 2015 Report Share Posted September 14, 2015 I think its safe to say, that is not a common opinion, plenty of 'our own' have had had careers written off by the general support after producing more than Taylor has. On reflection you are 100% right actually. Taylor was shite - I don't think Leitch was much better I guess is my main point. Grimshaw in for the next game. Saw enough from Bolton and his cameo to think he will do enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted September 14, 2015 Report Share Posted September 14, 2015 I don't think anyone is suggesting that Jack Leitch is a saviour. But in a 442, he has offered a lot more than Taylor thus far and therefore can feel a bit hard done by in being dropped... I don't think he has the majority of the time to be honest. Taylor isn't the answer..for me neither is Leitch yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyRoss Posted September 14, 2015 Report Share Posted September 14, 2015 I agree that Leitch isn't the finished article, but he's offered more in his showing's this season than Taylor has. To bring Taylor right back into the starting eleven after his suspension and leave Leitch out completely could be another damaging move to Jack's progress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted September 15, 2015 Report Share Posted September 15, 2015 I agree that Leitch isn't the finished article, but he's offered more in his showing's this season than Taylor has. To bring Taylor right back into the starting eleven after his suspension and leave Leitch out completely could be another damaging move to Jack's progress. I honestly think they have been much of a muchness. I would therefore prefer to see Leitch in as he is one of ours. Just dont think he has been that much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goggles & Flippers Posted September 16, 2015 Report Share Posted September 16, 2015 3 or is 4 games in now ...... deary me Hidgon was a washout until mid October. Ramsden was a rubbished in his first season, in his second he was the player of the season (granted he never regained his form after his injury). Coke, Jennings, Clancy, Gunning etc. were cited as "failures" at their previous clubs by many on here. But the point is there seems to be an expectation that players make an instant impact. Yes we got that lift from Skippy, but it's sadly been fleeting. Midfield in this team has been a problem area since the Jennings/Law times, we've tried various different solutions under different managers with mixed results. Issue is the whole team hasn't really been playing to their potential (or the potential we all optimistically assumed they would in pre-season), so the spotlight falls on him, one of the most demanding, yet under celebrated, roles in a team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted September 16, 2015 Report Share Posted September 16, 2015 Some players are a slow burner. I recall Jutkiewicz having many doubters for looking a bit awkward to begin with. Taylor is a different story. At best, he is lacking confidence but I've rarely seen a player hide from the ball so much. Connor Grant would have been a much better option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted September 16, 2015 Report Share Posted September 16, 2015 I'm reading a lot into things here and speculating fairly wildly so feel free to ignore me but I'd suggest that given there's a clause in Taylor's contract that presumably allows us to cancel it in January gives the impression that we've taken a punt on him presumably after missing out on our initial targets (Bolger and probably Irvine) and expedited by Pearson's injury. That we seem to be playing him out of position suggests that we've possibly even taken him on a recommendation rather than having properly scouted. The fact that Grimshaw has pitched up now on a short term deal looks to me as if we're trying to rectify the error until Pearson's back and match fit. As baffling as our recruitment has been since the opening day of the season I think it's fair to say that bringing in the likes of Fletcher, Moult, Chalmers & Kennedy in the early stages of the window remain solid signings and fit the specific sort of profile we're meant to be looking at. So given Taylor looks so out of place added to the 'break' clause in his deal makes me think we weren't totally sure on him in the first place. I really wouldn't be surprised to see him head back to Reading in January assuming Pearson returns to full fitness and Taylor continue in the dubious form he's shown to date. Who knows though we may work out that he's not actually a central midfielder and find that he hits form. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggischomper Posted September 16, 2015 Report Share Posted September 16, 2015 Taylor smacks of a panic buy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The African Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 The reasons for Taylor being signed and his subsequent performances, or lack of, are secondary. The fact is that he is a passenger and we are not in the position to carry anyone at present. He is hopefully only signed up until January when we can wave him a fond fair-well. Until then, let's hope he is nowhere near our starting eleven. He can try and find his form in the under twenties but it strikes me that he will not be any use to us in his stint at Fir Park. Money wasted. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 The reasons for Taylor being signed and his subsequent performances, or lack of, are secondary. The fact is that he is a passenger and we are not in the position to carry anyone at present. He is hopefully only signed up until January when we can wave him a fond fair-well. Until then, let's hope he is nowhere near our starting eleven. He can try and find his form in the under twenties but it strikes me that he will not be any use to us in his stint at Fir Park. Money wasted. I agree. There may well be a reason for Taylor's poor performances, I've laboured the point but I'll say it again, I think it's down to him being played out of position in a system he's not suited to but on a basic level that's not really the point. You're right, the bottom line is that it's Baraclough's job to get the best out the team and have the 11 players playing to the best of their ability. If the players aren't performing, as Taylor clearly isn't, then they should be dropped and another member of the squad given their shot. The manager's frame of reference this season beyond actual results should be his ability to manage the team ie: put out 11 players comfortable in their positions and functioning well in a unit, not persisting with players (especially ones on loan) in the vain hope that they turn the corner. I've tried to give as much perspective re: Baraclough as possible but I have a genuine worry that what we're seeing at the moment is a team simply treading water waiting for Pearson to come back with Taylor acting as little more than a placeholder. The idea that if you simply remove Pearson from our XI then everything about the way we play falls apart and we have no plan B system to compensate for him not being there is a concern IMO. Baraclough's already hooked both Johnson and Skippy at half time in games this season so you'd hope that he's at the very least able to see that a player's being ineffective. It's up to him whether he actually does it with Taylor and starts acting like a manager. Edit: re: the "waste of money" comment. Again, that's bang on. If it's the case that we were unsure about Taylor (and the 'break' clause is possibly the most obvious case of 'keep the receipt' I've ever seen) or at the very least if we did miss out on players we *actually* wanted then after all the rhetoric we've heard from the club and the owner why have we signed a player on loan to play him out of position when we have our own players who actually play in that area of the park? Why not just say "we missed out on our original targets but we've got confidence in our young players to step up and stake their claim"? Wasn't that one of the fundamental parts of the overall "project"? Same goes for Samson, my issue isn't whether he's a good goalkeeper or not. We could have signed Neuer or De Gea it wouldn't alter the fact that the net result is the same, we're now wasting yet another wage having an extra player who won't even get a game (Twardzik, ditto Clarkson) off the back of a summer when the manager and club were preaching about operating with a slimmed down squad. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Up For It! Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 re: the "waste of money" comment. Again, that's bang on. If it's the case that we were unsure about Taylor (and the 'break' clause is possibly the most obvious case of 'keep the receipt' I've ever seen) or at the very least if we did miss out on players we *actually* wanted then after all the rhetoric we've heard from the club and the owner why have we signed a player on loan to play him out of position when we have our own players who actually play in that area of the park? Why not just say "we missed out on our original targets but we've got confidence in our young players to step up and stake their claim"? Wasn't that one of the fundamental parts of the overall "project"? Same goes for Samson, my issue isn't whether he's a good goalkeeper or not. We could have signed Neuer or De Gea it wouldn't alter the fact that the net result is the same, we're now wasting yet another wage having an extra player who won't even get a game (Twardzik, ditto Clarkson) off the back of a summer when the manager and club were preaching about operating with a slimmed down squad. Spot on. Bizarre goings on behind the scenes and it seems abundantly clear to everyone out with the running of the club that these signings are literally pissing money against the wall. ...and adding even more to the dept the society/club owe Les! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 Spot on. Bizarre goings on behind the scenes and it seems abundantly clear to everyone out with the running of the club that these signings are literally pissing money against the wall. ...and adding even more to the dept the society/club owe Les! I've started to worry that Les Hutcheson could be another Craig Whyte! We seem to be throwing money about like its the mid 90s. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1991 Posted September 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 I've started to worry that Les Hutcheson could be another Craig Whyte! We seem to be throwing money about like its the mid 90s. I agree it appears strange with transfer dealings but we actually have a similar sized squad to last season I think the policy is highlighted due to Samson and Clarkson signings, Taylor appears a poor signing but the rest appear ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 I agree it appears strange with transfer dealings but we actually have a similar sized squad to last season I think the policy is highlighted due to Samson and Clarkson signings, Taylor appears a poor signing but the rest appear ok I think that's the thing. It's completely at odds with how the club had been saying they were going forward. I think it was the press conference before the opening game before ICT Baraclough indicated he was looking to add "a goalkeeper and a midfielder" since then we've added 2 goalkeepers, 2 midfielders and a striker. The issue isn't even whether they're good signings or not (for what it's worth I think both Robinson and Grimshaw are worthwhile additions) it's simply the conflict there now seems to be between the club's stated intention and what they're actually doing in practice. I don't expect any manager to have 100% success rate in terms of the players he brings in and anyone who does is clearly stunted but the club have been very vocal about the way they were planning to approach things going forward; smaller squad, more emphasis on youth and giving those players a chance and I think a lot of fans were actually willing to get behind that and still are to be fair. It's not like we're at the stage where we're some sort of lost cause, we just really need some indication of direction. However to see such a volte-face in policy for no apparent reason is confusing at best. Given that so many of the players we've brought in are short term deals to January or end of season at most I suppose the positive to take from things is that the guys we've brought in on longer deals and paid fees for actually look worth the investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnstone Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 I actually think that signing Craig Samson was a clever move by the club. Twardzik has not really been up to much since he signed on. Ripley could be away in january so to negate the risk of potentially having Twardzik as our only choice of keeper - we now have a decent keeper with a bit of experience who can keep these guys on their toes. Also all these people claiming we are throwing money away and we can't afford him. We know fuck all about the financial setup with regards to signings so there is no point speculating about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 He did also say he'd prefer a permanent signing to a loan, so maybe Ripley and Taylor are being punted back to their home clubs in January and we can sign another mid in the next window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuwell Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 On the Taylor/Leitch debate I think that Leitch has been the better player for us this season. Added to that, I think that over the last two games Thomas played better against Killie with Leitch than against RC with Taylor. I think that the relationship & understanding Leitch and Thomas have built up in the youth team possibly gives Thomas more confidence as both players know how each other play and as shown in the Killie game, played some neat touchs between themselves. So I believe that even if folk dont rate Leitch - and I believe he was developing well before his injury which kept him out for most of last season and has shown signs of returning to that level - then if he is no worse than Taylor but helps makes Dom Thomas a better attacking threat, he should be played before Taylor and given the chance to develop again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggischomper Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 Not sure I'd have Thomas on from the start to be honest. Maybe best being given 30 mins every week rather than heaping pressure on him to deliver from the off? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuwell Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think that against teams like Killie, Partick, Hamilton and StJohnstone he should be starting but agree that he should be used more an impact player against the likes of Celtic, Aberdeen and Hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintJohn Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 Think we can all agree that Taylor is a player who should be nowhere near our starting 11 on current showing. He's only here cos we shat it that we wouldn't get anyone else, like when you pick up the munter at 2:30am up the point on a Saturday night. But I don't agree with slagging the clubs transfer policy too much. I'm not Barras biggest fan, and I know he said he's all for youth previously, but it's clear he doesn't think any of them are ready for the first team. He's brought in some players who are short term fits, but I think that's due to the pressures on him to get results. The guys jobs on a shoogly peg so I can see why he would do that. Moult, fletcher, Kennedy, Laing, Chalmers and grimshaw all look like good signings. clarkson, Robinson, Taylor and Samson - well the jury's definitely out. They say any club only has a 50% success rate for good signings, and it seems that rings true for our summer dealings. Barras problems isn't the players he's signed though, it's the fact he's trying to shoehorn said players into a system that isn't working, and not having the flexibility or nouse to change it. The sooner he grows some balls and starts making the most of his squad then his peg might get a little less shoogly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEWELL Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 Is there a Taylor. Leitch debate going on that i've missed. Well they're both crap get Grimshaw in to help Las. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 17, 2015 Report Share Posted September 17, 2015 Is there a Taylor. Leitch debate going on that i've missed. Apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postiejim Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Is there a Taylor. Leitch debate going on that i've missed. Well they're both crap get Grimshaw in to help Las. Seemingly he's crap as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEWELL Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Yep he was against Accies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.