Jump to content

Rushian Hepburn-Murphy


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

This is nonsense to be perfectly honest.

stating something as fact without anything to back it up... what a valuable insight and swaying argument...

However, i can show you how the first teams focus is getting the ball out of defence quickly either going to a central striker to hold it up or to the wing to cross it - neither of these things play to rhms strengths.

We can also see from the u23 teams that we have a much higher emphasis on passing and creating space along with much higher instances of playing the ball in behind the defence as well as a greater focus on keeping the ball on the ground.

its no surprise that rhm stands out in the u23s and struggles to get involved in the first team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, flashingqwerty said:

stating something as fact without anything to back it up... what a valuable insight and swaying argument...

However, i can show you how the first teams focus is getting the ball out of defence quickly either going to a central striker to hold it up or to the wing to cross it - neither of these things play to rhms strengths.

We can also see from the u23 teams that we have a much higher emphasis on passing and creating space along with much higher instances of playing the ball in behind the defence as well as a greater focus on keeping the ball on the ground.

its no surprise that rhm stands out in the u23s and struggles to get involved in the first team.

I'm referring to the last bit of your post here, RHM hasn't had many opportunities in our first team. He hasn't even started a first team game for us yet despite making his debut 3 years ago now, largely due to his injury problems. If he stays fit, he should get an opportunity in our first team, he is good enough, of that I have little doubt, he's too good for u23 football now, a loan could be an option 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, flashingqwerty said:

stating something as fact without anything to back it up... what a valuable insight and swaying argument...

 

36 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Two reasons to be honest.

Firstly, the type of football we play is vastly underrated by those on here who decided long ago that bruce doesn't play good football. Yes we sometimes play some shit stuff, but on the whole our football is decent for this level, and better than the majority of teams in this league.

Secondly, a good player will make the most of what he has to work with. We have plenty of footballers who do just fine with our style of football. Hogan looks lost in our team because he is shit. He's had plenty of opportunities in our team and if he was any good he'd have done well. But he's not. Yes he has played in games where he's had no chance because we've played poorly. But he's also played in plenty of games where he's had plenty of the ball and good chances and he's largely blown it.

 

If RHM is good enough then he'll make it here under Bruce, or under the next guy.

Those still blaming style of play for Hogan's ineptness are either making excuses for a poor player, or grasping onto a stick to bash the manager with.

 

Hogan is shit. If RHM isn't shit, then he'll do just fine here.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you say his first name? It's an unusual one. 

My natural inclination is "Rush-ee-an" but I've heard it pronounced "Rush-arn". 

He looks a good prospect to me, I should imagine his future depends on how we get on in the playoffs. I think a season on loan lower down in the championship or league 1 next season would do him the world of good. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

 

 

your making wild leaps about the motives behind my post without offering any evidence to support your claim.  you also continue to assert your opinion as fact - which it isnt.

the basis of my post is that when you look at hogan at his previous clyb, his success came from the way the midfield moved the defence around, harried them and by playing balls in behind - note i am not saying this is where his goals came from.

By and large we do not play that style of football and the few games where we have hogan has scored.

im not claing he is world class - he's a limited striker not worth what we payed for him.  However, he is far from 'shit' and the way we play means that his involvement and impact is far less than it could be.

You mention Grabban - yes, he is a better all round player than Hogan and suits our style better. but if we were playing passes in behind the back 4 as often as brentford did when hogan was there, i would back hogan to perform better in that scenario than grabban.

horses for courses and all that.

the short version is- hogan should never have been signed as other than he scored goals he isnt the player we needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, flashingqwerty said:

your making wild leaps about the motives behind my post without offering any evidence to support your claim.  you also continue to assert your opinion as fact - which it isnt.

the basis of my post is that when you look at hogan at his previous clyb, his success came from the way the midfield moved the defence around, harried them and by playing balls in behind - note i am not saying this is where his goals came from.

By and large we do not play that style of football and the few games where we have hogan has scored.

im not claing he is world class - he's a limited striker not worth what we payed for him.  However, he is far from 'shit' and the way we play means that his involvement and impact is far less than it could be.

You mention Grabban - yes, he is a better all round player than Hogan and suits our style better. but if we were playing passes in behind the back 4 as often as brentford did when hogan was there, i would back hogan to perform better in that scenario than grabban.

horses for courses and all that.

the short version is- hogan should never have been signed as other than he scored goals he isnt the player we needed.

I'm not stating it as fact. I'm stating it as my opinion. Sorry i didn't write "in my opinion" after it.

Hogan IS shit (IN MY OPINION).

Our style of play is excusing a shit player for being shit (IN MY OPINION).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, flashingqwerty said:

stating something as fact without anything to back it up... what a valuable insight and swaying argument...

However, i can show you how the first teams focus is getting the ball out of defence quickly either going to a central striker to hold it up or to the wing to cross it - neither of these things play to rhms strengths.

We can also see from the u23 teams that we have a much higher emphasis on passing and creating space along with much higher instances of playing the ball in behind the defence as well as a greater focus on keeping the ball on the ground.

its no surprise that rhm stands out in the u23s and struggles to get involved in the first team.

To claim this is down to the style of play is nonsense IMO. 

He stands out at u23 because he is physically and technically better than the majority of young kids who play at that level. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think he's much like Hogan. I think he's quite suited to our first team - there are times when we rely on people being able to do a little bit of something on their own and he's very much that type - he can run with the ball and make himself half a yard - if anything he's more Kodjia than Hogan, but the player he most reminds me of is Vassell.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

I don't think he's much like Hogan. I think he's quite suited to our first team - there are times when we rely on people being able to do a little bit of something on their own and he's very much that type - he can run with the ball and make himself half a yard - if anything he's more Kodjia than Hogan, but the player he most reminds me of is Vassell.

 

i see where you are coming from with the vassell comparison, but i think he is more gifted than Vassell (i never really rated Vassell tbh)

But im not sure about the kodjia comparison as kodjia can play as a lone striker as he has ( or perhaps had - we shall see) great strength and is pretty good in the air without being a beast.

Im not sure rhm has that yet, not to say he wont, but i dont see him as good in the air personally and dont think he could play as a lone striker at the moment.

Yes he has more skill than hogan, but the reason i compare them is because i dont see either as good hold up players or good in the air which is what our brand of football at the moment needs - hence why Grabban is doing well.

Edited by flashingqwerty
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

While that is nice to see I'm not sure it warrants an official statement from the club.

But I guess they are desperate for anything that might be conceived as positive considering everything else.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, sne said:

While that is nice to see I'm not sure it warrants an official statement from the club.

But I guess they are desperate for anything that might be conceived as positive considering everything else.

 

The one above isn’t an official club statement 

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â