Rumour from Bury

Baboo · Post by **Baboo** » Sat Apr 30, 2011 10:29 am

Got this info from a Bury supporting mate yesterday - &quotthere’s a rumour on the Bury messageboard that Sodje is going to be offered a 2 year deal by Oxford&quot

Hope there is no substance to this - the guy is 38 years old.

theox · Post by **theox** » Mon May 02, 2011 3:26 pm

and he's a complete tit.

John Byrne's Underpants · Tue May 03, 2011 4:26 pm

Sounds about right though after Wilder stated he would sign experienced players but not those so old their 'legs were gone'.

Surprisingly perhaps, defence is the one area in particular that Wilder has struggled with in his signings. Apart from Sangare, none of the other signings have really impressed.

Radley Rambler · Post by **Radley Rambler** » Tue May 03, 2011 10:34 pm

&quotJohn Byrne's Underpants&quot wrote:Sounds about right though after Wilder stated he would sign experienced players but not those so old their 'legs were gone'.

Surprisingly perhaps, defence is the one area in particular that Wilder has struggled with in his signings. Apart from Sangare, none of the other signings have really impressed.

Don't rate Jake Wright then?

John Byrne's Underpants · Wed May 04, 2011 8:45 am

&quotRadley Rambler&quot wrote:
&quotJohn Byrne's Underpants&quot wrote:Sounds about right though after Wilder stated he would sign experienced players but not those so old their 'legs were gone'.

Surprisingly perhaps, defence is the one area in particular that Wilder has struggled with in his signings. Apart from Sangare, none of the other signings have really impressed.
Don't rate Jake Wright then?

When Wright first arrived I really did rate him. However, this season his form has dropped off considerably. Just an observation though, it was interesting that when he played with Sangare in recent matches, he looked a far better player than when he plays with Worley. Personally, I'd take Sangare over Worley, but if the rumours are true then it's not going to happen.

Baboo · Post by **Baboo** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:46 am

So how many new centre halves do we need then?

Ancient Colin · Post by **Ancient Colin** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:55 am

I'd be a bit concerned that Wright and Sangare could be a little underpowered in the air ... which is a problem we've had for much of the season against the more robust sides. I know they are both supposedly 1m85 but Wright struggles with big centre forwards in an aerial game I've only seen the one half of Sangare playing and, while he looked a decent footballer, he didn't look really dominating either.

SWA · Post by **SWA** » Wed May 04, 2011 1:16 pm

Rubbish!
Sangare was winning everything in the air up at Accrington where he was MOM...

Ancient Colin · Post by **Ancient Colin** » Wed May 04, 2011 2:01 pm

It may or may not be rubbish (as I wasn't at Accrington, I can only comment on what I have seen). But there's &quotwinning in the air&quot with the ball going up and not very far ... and there's winning in the air and the ball going a long way away from the danger area ...

SWA · Post by **SWA** » Wed May 04, 2011 2:04 pm

Fair dos Ancient Colin

John Byrne's Underpants · Thu May 05, 2011 9:44 am

&quotAncient Colin&quot wrote:It may or may not be rubbish (as I wasn't at Accrington, I can only comment on what I have seen). But there's &quotwinning in the air&quot with the ball going up and not very far ... and there's winning in the air and the ball going a long way away from the danger area ...

But distribution is also key. No point in doing what Worley tends to do more often than not, just hoof it randomly up the pitch and hope, usually giving possession straight back to the opposition. At least Sangare tries to find a pass if he can. However, yes I agree, we need more of a presence in the air.

Oufc2009 · Post by **Oufc2009** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:52 am

We Need Creighton, he was a beast and done his job with little fuss

JoeyBeauchamp · Post by **JoeyBeauchamp** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:54 am

&quotOufc2009&quot wrote:We Need Creighton, he was a beast and done his job with little fuss

No, non-league player. Big heart, fully committed, but not good enough to get us to the next level

headless_pnub · Post by **headless_pnub** » Thu May 05, 2011 10:34 am

One thing I've noticed recently is that Worley gets stick for his distribution. Now I'm not saying it's great (it's not), but there isn't a lot a centre half can do if the midfield aren't making options other than try a long diagonal ball and hope that someone will pick up the pieces.

Wright has been at least as poor as Worley this season and being the senior centre-half I think he should take more responsibility at the back than he does. Distribution from the back is almost solely done by Worley as Wright generally make the easy sideways pass (as he did with Creighton) and leaves the rest up to him.

This isn't a dig at Wright I think he's a decent centre-half, but I think Worley gets more stick than he should as he wasn't part of the Promotion squad (as highlighted by the calls for Creighton to return).

Joey's Toe · Post by **Joey's Toe** » Thu May 05, 2011 1:01 pm

Way back in August, I was questioning whether Curly Worley was really up to the job.

Whilst I'm broadly happy with how the season has panned out, and whilst I accept that Creighton wasn't exactly Paolo Maldini, I'm surely not alone in thinking that we might have finished higher if Wilder had gone with experience over youth?

haedless_pnub is correct that Wright hasn't been good either - but for me, that's to slightly miss the point. Wright was a much better player alongside Creighton than he is with Worley. A defence is all about a partnership, and Creighton gave more to the back line (in terms of leadership and decisiveness) than Worley does.

In August, I hoped that Worley would improve as time went on. Well, he's had most of the season as a first-choice centre back, and I'm still not convinced. Given our defensive record, I'd be pretty sure that Wilder will be coming to the same conclusion.

Rage Online

Rumour from Bury

Rumour from Bury

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: