Ashley Barnes isn't nearly good enough for us.

[stss30]

And there is the classic example of a poster using the 19 goals... he must be brilliant argument

And there is the classic example of reading one third of my post. He is 21 so is young and has great potential and Gus has faith in him- and with all due respect I think I trust him more than someone on a football forum who seems to have some sort of grudge against him

 

[Mr Burns]

I am by no means Barnes' biggest fan and think we can do better. I would be disappointed if he was starting in our first game next season.

I also don't think people should be guided solely by the number of goals someone scores. Chris Wood is clearly a bit shit, but has scored 10 (I think). If you play up front for a team which creates as much as we do, you will score. Even a blind squirrel finds the occasional nut.

BUT to dismiss Barnes out of hand is not fair. Regardless of the chances he has missed he HAS scored nearly 20 goals and these HAVE helped us to where we are. He deserves his place in the squad next season.

I think a lot of his progress has come as a direct result of Poyet noticing Barnes' perhaps lack of appetite for the physical side of things and choosing to use him more on the right or left of a forward three - taking him away from the centre backs and giving him more space to operate in.

So is Barnes brilliant because of the goals he has scored? No. But he isn't terrible either.

I think I love you Walt, because unlike most on here, you can actually make a point!!!

It is a good point about Wood, (although I'm sure Acker will come up with the stats) lots who defend Barnes thinks Wood is "shit", and probably Sandzaz even shitter, but using the fact Barnes has got 19 goals as their main argument, suggests that Wood and Sandaza are good enough too, as their ratios/stats are probably better than Barnes. So "shit" players like Wood and Sandaza can score goals in this great team and still be "shit" in this argument, Barnes scores goals so must be great!!

 

[Mr Burns]

And there is the classic example of reading one third of my post. He is 21 so is young and has great potential and Gus has faith in him- and with all due respect I think I trust him more than someone on a football forum who seems to have some sort of grudge against him

And the grudge line comes out again, despite all I've said. That does sum up your levl of debating, and probably why I ignore most you say...... because you've said it time and time before.....

 

[stss30]

Too someone as young and inexperienced as you... maybe. But no is the answer to that.

Explain yourself then, you seem to think Barnes should be beating Ward's record, but Murray shouldn't?

 

[Mr Burns]

You described him as cowardly, if you use a dictionary (and I appreciate that would be a first) your will find that cowardly is defined as 'someone exhibiting the characteristics of a coward'.

WANKER!! Whilst I'm happy to and will continue to post in this thread all the time people who are not even at the game to watch him BOUNCE it, you El Pres have proved you are a complete waste of space, and dare I say it a bully in your debating. You change things to suit you as you have proved this morning, and can never respond when you are pulled up on things.

You have proved this morning(1st May), that once again you are a complete waste of space and time, and are not worthy of any response by anyone on this thread, or board, and I can't be bothered to respond to anything you say and I'll think I'll just cut and paste this to everyone of your repsonses, becuase you aint worth the effort.


yawn: Although I never used the term coward to describe Ashley Barnes despite you trying to convince everyone for 20 pages that I did (and seemly excepted that I didn't earlier in the thread(see your use of twisting or changing words again)), I think the term could be easily applied to someones level of debating in this thread!! )

 

[stss30]

And the grudge line comes out again, despite all I've said. That does sum up your levl of debating, and probably why I ignore most you say...... because you've said it time and time before.....

Says the person who seems to need to insult people every other post to get his point across, I guess that sums up your level of maturity

 

[Mr Burns]

Explain yourself then, you seem to think Barnes should be beating Ward's record, but Murray shouldn't?

Oh f***ing hell. Do I really need to. It is not obvious that Murray is more a provider. ASk yourself how many times Barnes flicks the ball on from goal kicks/free kicks etc, and than how many times Murray does, and you start to see the answer.........

 

[Mr Burns]

Says the person who seems to need to insult people every other post to get his point across, I guess that sums up your level of maturity

I only insult those that annoy me time and time again, but making the same points that have been answered time and time again

 

[El Presidente]

Oh f***ing hell. Do I really need to. It is not obvious that Murray is more a provider. ASk yourself how many times Barnes flicks the ball on from goal kicks/free kicks etc, and than how many times Murray does, and you start to see the answer.........

Well, we could start with Tranmere away, and Exeter away.............

 

[El Presidente]

How the f*** you are a mod on this board is a complete mystery.

It's because I ignore the personal insults, but for you, perhaps I'll make an exception.

 

[Questions]

I just wish Barnes would actually try to flick on a header or even try and hold he ball up rather than doing that silly bow as if to say 'ref he`s pushing into me' every time he has his back to goal.
Done well to score 19 though.

 

[El Presidente]

I just wish Barnes would actually try to flick on a header or even try and hold he ball up rather than doing that silly bow as if to say 'ref he`s pushing into me' every time he has his back to goal.
Done well to score 19 though.

I agree, no one goes down in the box with the panache of Muzza to be honest though. He has won us countless penalties and free kicks this season.

 

[stss30]

Oh f***ing hell. Do I really need to. It is not obvious that Murray is more a provider. ASk yourself how many times Barnes flicks the ball on from goal kicks/free kicks etc, and than how many times Murray does, and you start to see the answer.........

Ashley Barnes- 5 Assists
Glenn Murray- 4 Assists
The Football League | Stats | Divisional Assists

 

[Acker79]

Well to be fair he hasn't really been a starting player most of this year (apart from Feb when we played three up top).
e been
And its not a complaint, its a discussion. And as I said before, judging by Gus' attempts to sign a striker (ie Hoskins) that would suggest Barnes would have ben pushed further down the pecking order in league one, so its good to see that Gus seems to be able to see beyond 20 goals, as maybe if he was a 30 goals plus striker, as a better than average leagie one player should be in this current Brighton side, we may have won the last couple of games he started in.

He's started 37 of 54 games this season. That's more than 2 starts out of 3, almost 7 in 10. And since you continue with the 'barnes is gus's third choice because of his starts and attempting to sign other players' argument, I'll repost this:

Since Wood has come to us on loan, Barnes and wood have started together 12 times (some of those are with murray), Wood has started ahead of Barnes 11 times, and Barnes has started ahead of Wood 7 times. Had we signed Hoskins, we may not have kept wood for the season, or signed him at all. Would he have played as much if he wasn't on loan? (A lot of the time we hear of managers being almost obligated to play loan signings).

Of course if you look at the numbers it seems to back up the whole third choice thing, by virtue of Barnes having fewer starts.

But, I would point out that it's only four games difference. I would also point out that Gus is not someone who seems to start with his number one/two in each position (outside of the back four). He changes the team depending on what he thinks will work best against a given opponent (he frequently talks about only signing players who will add something the squad doesn't already have), and also admits to being swayed by performance (he mentioned he kept 4-3-3 because barnes was performing so well he couldn't drop him, he mentioned wanting to give murray a break during march when Barnes was injured and wood had international duty, but murray was in too good form). I would point to Noone being on the bench a fair bit. I would point to Murray starting on the bench five times this season. I would point to Lualua starting on the bench in some key games (notably peterborough and charlton away), but no one is arguing that Gus sees lualua as 2nd/3rd choice behind bennett and/or sparrow (who were both picked ahead of him), or that Gus doesn't rate him.

It is a good point about Wood, (although I'm sure Acker will come up with the stats) lots who defend Barnes thinks Wood is "shit", and probably Sandzaz even shitter, but using the fact Barnes has got 19 goals as their main argument, suggests that Wood and Sandaza are good enough too, as their ratios/stats are probably better than Barnes. So "shit" players like Wood and Sandaza can score goals in this great team and still be "shit" in this argument, Barnes scores goals so must be great!!

What stats would you like me to come up with that are relevant to this?

I will simply point to your own argument that Wood is Gus's second choice and has been picked ahead of Barnes so much (23 starts in 32 games, 11 of them ahead of barnes), yet still has scored fewer goals (four of them penalties he took because barnes wasn't on the pitch - there's some stats for you).

I also think the idea that people who defend Barnes all think Barnes is shit is a sweeping, and erroneous, generalisation. I know I don't think Wood is shit. I think he's lost some form in recent games (since his international call up, I think) but I wouldn't call him shit. But then, I'm reluctant to call any of our championship winning squad shit.

 

[JBizzle]

I think this is a trend in modern football. Nobody likes somebody who is just a goalscorer, look at Bent, scored the second most goals in the Prem over the last five years but not rated by the media of by purists because he doesn't assist enough and isn't great outside the box.

Comparing Barnes to Murray is an interesting one. How good was Murray at 22? In fact, how good was Murray at 25? You can't predict how a player would turn out. Look at Michael Owen, who would have bet against him smashing Bobby Charlton's 49 goal England record? My point is that for all his faults, when a 21 year old second striker scores 19 goals in a season, this is reason to be positive.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

To all those debating with Mr Burns, don't waste your time.

La la la, can't hear you.

 

[Mr Burns]

What stats would you like me to come up with that are relevant to this?

I.

Minutes to goals ratio. But then again, I dont care about stats. I'm just trying to put across 19 goals isn't as good as it looks, and people should not use this as their argument, as nearly all on here do. Because on that basis wouldn't Sandaza be our best striker, when he clearly isn't.

 

[Mr Burns]

To all those debating with Mr Burns, don't waste your time.

La la la, can't hear you.

Shouldn't you try debating yourself before posting that. Because that post probably sums up you up

 

[Mr Burns]

Ashley Barnes- 5 Assists
Glenn Murray- 4 Assists
The Football League | Stats | Divisional Assists

Your point is?

 

[bhaexpress]

Minutes to goals ratio. But then again, I dont care about stats. I'm just trying to put across 19 goals isn't as good as it looks, and people should not use this as their argument, as nearly all on here do. Because on that basis wouldn't Sandaza be our best striker, when he clearly isn't.

Hmm, 19 goals in what is his first full season, in the same way that according to Mr Burns "19 goals isn't as good as it looks" surely the same poster isn't as daft as he looks now ?