Jump to content

Chris Samba


midian

Recommended Posts

Samba will likely be a disaster over time.

I imagine playing him will force us to play Jedinak as additional defensive cover from midfield which might be fine but it will hamper our possession and attacking.

The whole back line will probably be playing a bit further back now to counter Sambas lack of pace and mobility.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sne said:

Samba will likely be a disaster over time.

I imagine playing him will force us to play Jedinak as additional defensive cover from midfield which might be fine but it will hamper our possession and attacking.

The whole back line will probably be playing a bit further back now to counter Sambas lack of pace and mobility.

I agree completely, and I think those suggesting Jedinak instead are missing the point that he would require the same tactical adjustment. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

He grew in to the game yesterday to be fair. 

I wanted to ask how he actually played because I couldn't watch the 2nd half. I know he looks ungainly and people on VT seem to love to go on about how he's a terrible back up to Terry - but how did he actually perfom?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

He grew in to the game yesterday to be fair. 

I thought he was big enough:)

on a serious note....at least he scored.....so it can be done, despite all the reasons to say it was everything but the players.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Samba is going to be a disaster at the back. Jedinak there is a much better shout. 

But a revelation at the front:D

andy lockhead eat your heart out.....or Dave Simmons.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just love him....but i don't know why.....not for football skills

i just love a trier and i think he tries.....maybe 90 minutes might be something else.

when a player is more effective than those with twice the skill....its endearing.

fair play to him.

would i like to see him in the starting line-up every week?.....well that might be pushing it.:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he was ok once he settled into the game yesterday. He's no John Terry, but he was ok.

As usual the Holte End made their mind up early on.

The guy next to me nearly choked on his pie as he shouted "That's **** typical of that useless lump of shit!!!"
All that had happened was Samba slightly miscontrolled the ball before passing it to a teammate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, VILLAMARV said:

Im hardly overjoyed Terry is injured but people complaining about Samba as 3rd choice could choose to think about why we have Elphick and Richards sat here doing nothing. We all miss Baker a little bit at least but Bruce hardly decided having looked at them all that Baker was the one to go. He was simply the only one that was sellable. Elphick was touted around with ultimately no takers. Richards is in a whole class of his own obviously. I hope Suliman and Bedeau have a bit about them but we should hardly be relying on them at their ages.

The fact that we have 2 CB's with premier league experience picking up big money when they are not up to scratch and seemingly unsellable is the issue here and that's not on Bruce's head or Samba's. Samba may be no Terry. But he's no Richards either and I'm glad we signed him up. It's not like we had the pick of the worlds best Centre Backs and thought I know lets get Christopher Samba instead. He may well have a larger turning circle than a cross channel ferry, yet even with his limitations he's a lot more use to us than Richards and less prone to the sort of mistakes you see 2 or 3 times a game from Elphick.

I just love him for what he is, a trier......but lets make no mistake, when he was with Blackburn, he was some player.

like you say, darn sight better than some.....at least the guy has a good attitude.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TheAuthority said:

I wanted to ask how he actually played because I couldn't watch the 2nd half. I know he looks ungainly and people on VT seem to love to go on about how he's a terrible back up to Terry - but how did he actually perfom?

If I had to sum up in one word I would say 'uncomfortable'. But considering how much he is has played that is understandable. As the game went on he seemed more settled. It will probably  take him a few games to improve but I'm not sure we can afford him that time with the games we have coming up. 

Edited by Vive_La_Villa
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

If I had to sum up in one word I would say 'uncomfortable'. But considering how much he is has played that is understandable. As the game went on he seemed more settled. It will probably  take him a few games to improve but I'm not sure we can afford him that time with the games we have coming up. 

I'd agree with this.

Did he actually do anything wrong? I haven't watched the highlights and possibly he could have done better for the second goal, I'd have to watch it again.

But overall I thought he was ok.

Like I said above he's no John Terry, by a long shot. But I thought he did alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

I'd agree with this.

Did he actually do anything wrong? I haven't watched the highlights and possibly he could have done better for the second goal, I'd have to watch it again.

But overall I thought he was ok.

Like I said above he's no John Terry, by a long shot. But I thought he did alright.

It was quite poor defending for their second goal but he had literally just come on to the pitch. It's fair to say Shef Wed took good advantage of the situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â