Search results

I shall bow out of this now, I have work to do,... but my last words on this thread are these,....... most of you pro-Barnes types often cite the fact that Barnes is selected because Gus sees his good points, because Gus cant be questioned, because Gus has played at the highest level and knows...

But they have you and Hans Kraay Darren, you two can just edit anything to suit your chosen message that Ashley Barnes is the SON OF SATAN, and the LORD JESUS CHRIST will damn him to eternal pain by making him a NSC moderator.

Sadly I think you may be correct, but dont rule Harley out, he has appeared on the bench a few times, and Gus does like to surprise.

Aahh,.. as I thought, you have no mind of your own, whatever Gus says..... thats fine, I thought it was a long shot anyway.

Wow, your powers of recall are impressive, now try, just for me, to drag out the reasons for Barnes continued appearance on the team sheet and I dont mean list the perceived deficiencies in other players.

Hatred is very strong, and blind it wouldnt be even if it was appropriate language. I look, I see, I comment..... its the nature of the beast that subjectivity creeps into forum discussions...... I missed the Wolves and Watford game, hence the missing stat in my memory banks.

For goodness sake, anything in the 80th minute onwards is a cameo..... I stand corrected that he started 3 games on the bench, I thought it was one.

Yes, subbed late on for a cameo performance by Dobbie hardly worth the effort. He was benched for that one game which breathed fresh air into the fans expectations for future seletions but no, he was back in for the rest of the games since then.

Because ALL the other players get benched or worse, Barnes remains ever present however he performs.

Sooo,.. great in training is where it matters?... disregard a poor on the pitch contribution.... ?

There you go proving my point, .... lol,.. why not just list those things that Barnes does in your eyes that justify his continued inclusion..... that would be a better approach.

I just simply have difficulty understanding why a player of limited ability and experience is given massively extended runs in the team when others are binned after one or two games ( Dobbie, Hoskins, Toby, Lopez for example)

What an incisive response.

Nope, the key difference is that CMS when he does score in most cases they have because of his own endevour rather than fortunate rebounds. I love the way Barnes supporters can do nothing to actually bolster his case for inclusion other than attempt to discredit other players in the squad.

Just how long do you think this lack of form should be allowed to continue..... these same conversations were happening last season too.... he popped in a few pens and rebounds yes, but how many did he actually craft for himself, ? Something that good attacking players actually do regularly.

Well we are the twats who pay his effing wages....

Good post OP