Jump to content

Rudy Gestede


midian

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, useless said:

Changing our style of play just to suit Gestede would be foolish. It might help him to get a few more goals, but it would be detrimental to the overall good of the team.

our style of play is pass the ball sideways/backwards a few times before giving it away....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not against changing our style of play altogether, just not in order to suit Gestede's modus operandi, as that would consist of playing hopeful balls to his head. Some might say if it gets us promoted then there's nothing wrong with it, but I say that it wouldn't get us promoted, look how Blackburn did when they played to suit Gestede. Getting promoted is about more than just having a striker who can score circa twenty goals.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, a m ole said:

when designing a layout for a publication you would use a placeholder image to signify where an image would be in the page before the final image is chosen. Or there is a Latin passage called 'Lorem Ipsum' known as 'placeholder text' which is used so you can design the overall look and feel of the page without having the actual content at hand.

Gestede is being used in lieu of the striker we want to sign. Why not Ayew up top? Because we want to use Ayew as a wide forward primarily, and he can learn his role in the system without having to be shoehorned into CF just so we have a better chance at winning a game that doesn't matter.

If Gestede is our number one striker after the window closes, I will be just as worried as you.

and I would point the same argument back at you - sometimes people are so desperate to be critical they will turn logic inside out and upside down rather than say something positive.

And you would be entitled to say it about me if it were true.  However if you read a selection of my Posts you will see that whilst I have concerns, that's all they are, and that I have repeatedly said people should be patient and see how things have developed once the window has closed.

I didn't mean I don't know what a placeholder is, I meant in the context of a football Team - particularly one with a week to go.  I'm sorry I think your reasoning makes no sense on any level.

You don't want him in the Team (at least we all agree on that) yet see sense in him taking a place - with a week to go - even though the chances of us buying a striker of his type are low, even though we have other players who need game time, even though  - despite him playing - we didn't do anything to utilise his only strength, even though by his very presence he slowed and warped the few bits of play we had that were decent, even though, whether he stays and plays or not, or whether a new striker is similar, we still need alternative formations, we still may need Ayew to play there.  And he's there so Ayew can 'learn' his role ?  As if Ayew wasn't the guy who suffered most from clearly visiblre annoyance at playing with a statue, and as if Ayew hasn't played that role enough before.

As they say, we really will have to agree to disagree on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

our style of play is pass the ball sideways/backwards a few times before giving it away....

In my view we actually played a reasonable combination of possession based/counter attacking/ football for an hour.  We certainly made Boro pass pointlessly, which was good to see, I thought some of ours was quite constructive stuff. It was hard to fault the Team for that period, they were handicapped by the selection of Gestede.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, terrytini said:

And you would be entitled to say it about me if it were true.

well yes, that's the point, why are you entitled imply I'm so desperate to be positive I'm ignoring logic, when I could so easily level the opposite claim to you?

Quote

 I didn't mean I don't know what a placeholder is, I meant in the context of a football Team - particularly one with a week to go.  I'm sorry I think your reasoning makes no sense on any level.

In the context of a preseason game where the manager is aiming to get a full squad of players to suit a system he wants to play - why would he disrupt that by asking midfielders to get on the chalk and hit big crosses into Gestede just because that's the only style that suits him, when the manager is intending to replace Gestede before the window closes? My reasoning makes perfect sense on absolutely every level if you realise that preseason matches are about preparing for the coming season, not beating what's in front of you. I'm glad the manager isn't being as short sighted to think we should set up in preseason for what might be a handful of games using Gestede before we get a good striker in.

Quote

we still may need Ayew to play there.  And he's there so Ayew can 'learn' his role ?  As if Ayew wasn't the guy who suffered most from clearly visiblre annoyance at playing with a statue, and as if Ayew hasn't played that role enough before.

has Ayew ever played for RDM before? does he know what the manager wants him to do on the pitch? Where he wants him to be in certain phases of play? Does he want him to do exactly what the previous managers asked if him? Or would he like to give him time to adapt in the position he is going to play in for most of the season?

Big tip here: RDM is a professional manager. He probably knows a little bit about what he is doing. As you said above you thought we played well and were handicapped by the selection of Gestede. If we sign a striker before the end of the window and Gestede isn't picked as our number 1, will you take back all the above?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, a m ole said:

well yes, that's the point, why are you entitled imply I'm so desperate to be positive I'm ignoring logic, when I could so easily level the opposite claim to you?

In the context of a preseason game where the manager is aiming to get a full squad of players to suit a system he wants to play - why would he disrupt that by asking midfielders to get on the chalk and hit big crosses into Gestede just because that's the only style that suits him, when the manager is intending to replace Gestede before the window closes? My reasoning makes perfect sense on absolutely every level if you realise that preseason matches are about preparing for the coming season, not beating what's in front of you. I'm glad the manager isn't being as short sighted to think we should set up in preseason for what might be a handful of games using Gestede before we get a good striker in.

has Ayew ever played for RDM before? does he know what the manager wants him to do on the pitch? Where he wants him to be in certain phases of play? Does he want him to do exactly what the previous managers asked if him? Or would he like to give him time to adapt in the position he is going to play in for most of the season?

Big tip here: RDM is a professional manager. He probably knows a little bit about what he is doing. As you said above you thought we played well and were handicapped by the selection of Gestede. If we sign a striker before the end of the window and Gestede isn't picked as our number 1, will you take back all the above?

 

Well because every Post I have seen from you is completely uncritical.  If that's not the case, apologies.

As for the rest, I have said why I think your view is rubbish so wont repeat it.

And really lets do without the childish sarcasm, it was a reasonable debate until the opening of your last line "big tip for you ".

"Big tip for you", according to Tony , RDM, and a host of fans on here, neither Black, nor his 2,3, or 4 predecessors "didn't know what they were doing".  Managers don't get everything right.  Are you seriously suggesting that every decision RDM makes will be correct ?

And I don't follow the last bit - I did indeed say I thought for an hour we did some good things  and credit to the Manager for that - - but Gestede spoilt them - so my point about him not playing Gestede stands.  And if Gestede leaves it reinforces my point that yesterdays selection was a mistake.

If we sign a striker (as I am sure we will) and Gestede isn't picked as our number one (as I'm sure he wont be) I will have nothing to take back, it will be even more apparent that there was no need for him to play yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, terrytini said:

 

Well because every Post I have seen from you is completely uncritical.  If that's not the case, apologies.

As for the rest, I have said why I think your view is rubbish so wont repeat it.

And really lets do without the childish sarcasm, it was a reasonable debate until the opening of your last line "big tip for you ".

"Big tip for you", according to Tony , RDM, and a host of fans on here, neither Black, nor his 2,3, or 4 predecessors "didn't know what they were doing".  Managers don't get everything right.  Are you seriously suggesting that every decision RDM makes will be correct ?

And I don't follow the last bit - I did indeed say I thought for an hour we did some good things  and credit to the Manager for that - - but Gestede spoilt them - so my point about him not playing Gestede stands.  And if Gestede leaves it reinforces my point that yesterdays selection was a mistake.

If we sign a striker (as I am sure we will) and Gestede isn't picked as our number one (as I'm sure he wont be) I will have nothing to take back, it will be even more apparent that there was no need for him to play yesterday.

That is absolutely not what I am suggesting. But you seem to be massively missing the point and I don't really feel like explaining it again.

All I will say is it was a preseason game. It doesn't matter. At all. We will sign another striker. There were actually much bigger causes for concern yesterday than Gestede being used, as it's unclear whether the manager wants to replace Hutton, sign another centre back, or a centre midfielder. But I'm willing to wait and see what comes next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â