[Albion] Florin Andone season-long loan to Galatasaray

[symyjym]

In our first game, we managed to play Murray, Andone and Maupay. Potter showed he was happy to play Andone and Maupay together, so I'm not sure Andone would have been benched too much.

Andone was on the bench against Watford and West Ham That's only two out of three times he was on the bench so I have no idea why you think it would have been different.

If moulding were needed (and it is for some positions), I'd certainly agree with you. If we're playing 343, with one central striker whose job it is to stick it in the net, I'm not sure that much moulding is necessary. Andone looks like he could fill that role. But it's not to be, so we'll see. We're in for a real treat if Connolly is as good as Andone.

Not sure why you believe that moulding players into a way of how Potter wants his football played is non applicable

I don't stand corrected on any points.

 

[Easy 10]

So naive [MENTION=70]Easy 10[/MENTION], so naive.

Potter didn't fancy Andone nor Locadia, so he was just trying them out to make sure, leaving someone he did really fancy out of the match day 18.

It's exactly why any manager starting his first season in the Premier League would do. Points are so easy to come by, you can afford to experiment in the first few games, and then make up any shortfall in points later...

Ahh, of course ! It all becomes so clear now. And if it doesn't work out, then its only a mere 16 games to go until the transfer window opens. Assuming we have someone all lined up to join us on New Years Day (and/or Mad Florin is recalled), then these next 16 games will barely have mattered anyway.

I just wasn't looking at the wider picture was I. Think I'll go off and give my head a wobble.

 

[schmunk]

Andone was on the bench against Watford and West Ham That's only two out of three times he was on the bench so I have no idea why you think it would have been different.

In the 4 PL games so far, our "attacking 3" players played (mins):

* Trossard - 249
* Maupay - 190
* Grob - 185
* Murray - 177
* Locadia - 86
* Andone - 72 (max 240, if he'd not been sent off)
* Connolly - 23
(* Jahanbakhsh - 0, I suppose)

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/bri...ungsdaten/verein/1237/plus/1?reldata=GB1&2019

Edit: updated with the corrrect max for Andone

 

[TSB]

In the 4 PL games so far, our "attacking 3" players played (mins):

* Trossard - 249
* Maupay - 190
* Grob - 185
* Murray - 177
* Locadia - 86
* Andone - 72 (max 150, if he'd not been sent off)
* Connolly - 23
(* Jahanbakhsh - 0, I suppose)


https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/bri...ungsdaten/verein/1237/plus/1?reldata=GB1&2019

You're excluding the game he was suspended for. He may well have started if not.

Either way, our attacking situation is funny as **** again.

 

[Bold Seagull]

In the 4 PL games so far, our "attacking 3" players played (mins):

* Trossard - 249
* Maupay - 190
* Grob - 185
* Murray - 177
* Locadia - 86
* Andone - 72 (max 150, if he'd not been sent off)
* Connolly - 23
(* Jahanbakhsh - 0, I suppose)


https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/bri...ungsdaten/verein/1237/plus/1?reldata=GB1&2019

Yeah, but if Trossard, Maupay, Gross, Murray and Connolly are all on a bus on their way to a bingo night in Hastings, the bus gets a puncture, veers off the road, and all 5 of them get injured, what then? Duffy up front!?

 

[Nobby]

I am sensing the first Potter out thread post Burnley should we lose

Cool

 

[Stat Brother]

I've already drafted a series of polls to run between the Burnley and Newcastle defeats.

Ruel Fox.

 

[Megazone]

Yeah, but if Trossard, Maupay, Gross, Murray and Connolly are all on a bus on their way to a bingo night in Hastings, the bus gets a puncture, veers off the road, and all 5 of them get injured, what then? Duffy up front!?

Simple. Get Virgo out of retirement.

 

[schmunk]

Ruel Fox.

He must be a free agent? He's available for matches!

https://www.playwithalegend.com/ruel-fox

 

[Triggaaar]

Andone was on the bench against Watford and West Ham

But he came on as a sub in both of them, and scored in one, earning him a starting place in the next game. When I say 'benched', I mean that a player doesn't play, rather than someone who comes on as a sub. I guess you mean someone who is on the bench for some time, even if they then come on and play.

Not sure why you believe that moulding players into a way of how Potter wants his football played is non applicable

I explained why I think it's more of an issue in some positions and with some players. I don't think Andone needed moulding in order to perform the striker role, I think he can already do that.

I don't stand corrected on any points.

You seem to be taking this too personally.

 

[Pavilionaire]

For those that like an ironic anagram:

Florin Andone = NNNOO! RED FAIL.

 

[Easy 10]

Well, I suppose France won a World Cup without having a proper striker.

 

[schmunk]

Well, I suppose France won a World Cup without having a proper striker.

That's a bit harsh on Giroud (albeit he didn't score...)

 

[symyjym]

But he came on as a sub in both of them, and scored in one, earning him a starting place in the next game. When I say 'benched', I mean that a player doesn't play, rather than someone who comes on as a sub. I guess you mean someone who is on the bench for some time, even if they then come on and play.

I explained why I think it's more of an issue in some positions and with some players. I don't think Andone needed moulding in order to perform the striker role, I think he can already do that.

You seem to be taking this too personally.

No, I sense you trying to comb through my comment trying to find something wrong, which there wasn't.

We all know that being on the bench means being a usable substitute. Even if "Benched" did mean a player who is not used, I never said "Benched". I said "...............Andone doesn't like sitting on the bench"

Where did I say Andone needs moulding? I didn't.

I said Potter can work with an up and coming youngster and mould him to his style of football.

So no I'm not taking it too personally. I am just questioning your reason for questioning my comment which required a response and wasted my time, just like your last comment which I am replying to you now is wasting my time.

You just need to spend less time being contrary and trying to find fault in my casual comments because it is too time consuming for me to address once you get your teeth stuck into it. I know with you it can last for days if I am not straight and to the point.

 

[Triggaaar]

No, I sense you trying to comb through my comment trying to find something wrong

You're mistaken.

We all know that being on the bench means being a usable substitute. Even if "Benched" did mean a player who is not used, I never said "Benched". I said "...............Andone doesn't like sitting on the bench"

I was simply saying that I think he'd have had plenty of game time.

Where did I say Andone needs moulding? I didn't.

Where you said 'Connolly is of an age where he will be easier to mold into Potters ways and be more patient than Andone would'. When you say 'easier to mould', that would mean 'easier' than Andone, which suggests Andone could benefit from some moulding.

So no I'm not taking it too personally. I am just questioning your reason for questioning my comment which required a response and wasted my time, just like your last comment which I am replying to you now is wasting my time.

If it's wasting your time, just don't bother replying. You do seem to take it personally and get upset.

You just need to spend less time being contrary and trying to find fault in my casual comments

This is why I say you're taking it personally - the fact that you think I'm trying to find fault in your comments, which I'm not. Like you say, they're just casual comments, so if someone disagrees with a small aspect of one of them, there's not need to defend them as though your honour has been attacked. It hasn't.

 

[Bozza]

Well, I suppose France won a World Cup without having a proper striker.

Palace have stayed up the last few seasons despite not having a striker.

 

[symyjym]

You're mistaken.

I was simply saying that I think he'd have had plenty of game time.

Where you said 'Connolly is of an age where he will be easier to mold into Potters ways and be more patient than Andone would'. When you say 'easier to mould', that would mean 'easier' than Andone, which suggests Andone could benefit from some moulding.

If it's wasting your time, just don't bother replying. You do seem to take it personally and get upset.

This is why I say you're taking it personally - the fact that you think I'm trying to find fault in your comments, which I'm not. Like you say, they're just casual comments, so if someone disagrees with a small aspect of one of them, there's not need to defend them as though your honour has been attacked. It hasn't.

Getting upset I'm pissing myself at how predictable you are by now going through splitting my last comment into 5, which if I could be bothered to address you will next split into 10 etc etc etc

I stand by everything I said in my original comment.

 

[Easy 10]

That's a bit harsh on Giroud (albeit he didn't score...)

I was talking more 1998

Guivarc'h
Dugarry
Trezeguet
Henry

Henry was a winger as this was pre-Arsenal / Wenger conversion. Dugarry was more of a Trossard-type drifting playmaker. Guivarc'h was gash, only Trezeguet was more of an out-and-out. He was alright, to be fair.

 

[Easy 10]

Palace have stayed up the last few seasons despite not having a striker.

A fair point. Makes me feel slightly better about our situation.

 

[Machiavelli]

I was talking more 1998

Guivarc'h
Dugarry
Trezeguet
Henry

Henry was a winger as this was pre-Arsenal / Wenger conversion. Dugarry was more of a Trossard-type drifting playmaker. Guivarc'h was gash, only Trezeguet was more of an out-and-out. He was alright, to be fair.

Agreed but, like Henry, he was very young then.