roversfan99

I dont think either will be needed in the run in to be honest. We already have at least 4 strikers so may aswell let Samuel and Smallwood go now and hopefully save some much needed pennies.

https://www.hullcitytigers.com/club-update-player-contracts/ Hull have lost some of their first team players ahead of the last 9 games. Lichaj, Irvine, Kingsley and Maddison all unable to agree extensions and Barnsley taking Wilks back as soon as is legally possible. I find it strange that Smallwood and Samuel are playing in the friendlies and presumably staying when youd like to think they will be off at the end of the season. Presume everyones staying but wonder if they will publically announce it.

You can tell that they are not playing at close to normal intensity, some very half arsed play which is the norm in a friendly but I wonder if they will be able to raise their game still in front of no fans but in "competitive" league games.

Cunningham played 7 x 90 minutes for us, we beat Boro, Hull, Reading and Milwall, drew with Forest and lost to West Brom and Luton. So 13 points from 7 games, at 1.86 points per game. Bell has started 19 times, in which we won 6, drew 7 and lost 6. So picking up points at 1.39 points per game In addition to this, Cunningham played about 15 minutes at QPR and went off injured, Bell came on and played the majority of that game and we lost 4-2. I have not included that in either, nor have I included Bell coming on at HT in the loss at Huddersfield, in which it was 1 all at HT.

I am a season ticket holder and get to some away games and watch the majority of others live in full, but to be honest the Sheffield Wednesday game I only saw the highlights of. A reason for my post was to perhaps prompt examples in games or bits of games that I have missed to warrant people being so defensive and being hyperbolic in the case of Buckley. Or indeed remind me of times when he did something in a game I did see. The main point that I was trying to get across is being so defensive and refusing to accept that players have had minimal involvement in games so far, or going way over the top on them being "fantastic" and totally flabbergasted as to how anyone doesnt rate them is totally needless and not a constructive attitude to take. And equally, to tell someone who has acknowledged the mitigating circumstances/difficulties and not written the player off, indeed going out of their way to say as such, to "give them a chance" is not a useful or relevant comeback. In regards to Rankin Costello, as I said I didnt see the full game but saw his assist which was perfectly timed and there was also another pass just before in the highlights where it looked like he was trying to play in Gallagher but didnt get the direction quite right and it went behind his legs but ended up going through to Armstrong. It has been touched on that it was against a 10 man team waiting for the FT whistle, but still it takes the ability to make a pass like he did and I have credited him accordingly.

After a couple of games in the Bundesliga things like celebrations seemed to return to normal. Probably a realisation that there was no point not doing when theyd for example spent time grappling at a corner.

I think everyone acknowledged the mistake, and ultimately we can never expect a player not to make mistakes. But he also was a key factor in a defensive improvement and also offered far more in terms of technical ability compared to Bell in an attacking sense.

Think it gives it away when the CEO has to beg the fans not to consider claiming a refund of 60 quid to help to save the club!

Does he impress you more going forward or defensively? For me he is so slow of mind and reluctant to run forward and I dont think hes ever assisted for us, correct me if im wrong. And defensively he lets as many crosses come in as any Rovers full back I can remember.

Its not about giving him a chance ? its the typical go to line of someone who for some reason is unwilling to accept any constructive critical judgement or skepticism. I made it quite clear that I hadnt written him off (same with Rankin Costello) and I know that he has been played out of position and its hard to break through at his age and cement a place but that doesnt warrant the description of his dribbling being "fantastic" him looking "technically fantastic" and of course "how people dont rate him is beyond me." In which first team games bar Charlton which ive praised him for can you highlight performances to warrant such hyperbolic praise? At the moment I would suggest that Buckley has had one impressive game and Rankin Costello one impressive pass. I acknowledge they are both young, the former has suffered from being played out of position and they have not had much game time at all between them and I certainly havent written them off as your petulant response suggests but what else have you seen from Buckley to warrant such praise?

The only game when he really had an influence on the game was that Charlton game. Obviously he scored v Wednesday with a feeble shot that took a big deflection but otherwise hes looked like a little boy lost and has had very little impact on games. Im not saying hes a lost cause or coming to any extreme conclusion myself but equally how you can justify that last sentence based on what weve seen is beyond me.

To be honest, Skys coverage of the EFL is rather standard/average. Heavily focused on the bigger clubs especially Leeds and also 95% focused on the Championship. Ultimately that is demand driven I suspect but I can still understand other teams kicking off regarding that. Coverage usually starts soon before kick off and analysis is minimal, always playing second fiddle to the Premier League but again, it is the second (and occasionally third/fourth) division so suppose again that is demand driven. The actual brief punditry like with football on Sky is standard with good pundits and some not so good pundits just like other networks ie BT, I think it is quite difficult to mess something like that up as people watch for the match itself. Not surprised to see clubs kicking off about red button which as much as it benefits me occasionally has to be scrapped for the sake of football clubs. That and the split of teams coverage as I mentioned. I am not sure how much demand there is for Championship clubs on TV because it is a good to watch league but sometimes at the absence of quality. Something will have to give at some point somewhere because having so many clubs losing money as they are is not sustainable.

You aren't the only person who I have seen say that but I certainly didnt ever see a competent left back in Bell or a noticeable improvement. Still indecisive and utterly unthreatening going forward and easy to bypass defensively.

Not that Hull side it isnt, without Bowen and Grosicki you really see how shit their squad is. But in general playing teams with nothing to play for can be better at this stage.

So does Bell.

Forest will definitely get in the play offs, on the same points as Brentford, whereas Swansea are level with us on points. Between Preston and Millwall for 6th place I think.

I think Buckley for the vast majority of time has looked as far away as you could possibly be in terms of impacting games, which I think is obviously at least partially down to his physique. I remember him coming on for the first time v Bolton last season and he looked like a little boy whereas Butterworth looked really sharp and got involved. I dont think hes been helped being played out wide, hes not particularly fast. The Charlton away game was a different story, he played as a number 10 and he looked a different player, very smooth picking the ball up on the turn and I can see technical ability there. With Rankin Costello I have not really seen what he is about in admittedly much less game time. He also came on at home as a sub I recall and again looked a little overawed. I definitely think that there is more scope for Rankin Costello in terms of the position he could play in the team compared to Buckley as we are desperately short out wide whereas Dack and Holtby are number 10s. I suspect the play offs will probably be beyond us a game or two before the end of the season so maybe additional scope to get them game time.

Think he said something very similar after leaving Coventry. Basically that it was his fault for not getting a leader who can head the ball away. He also mentions Daniel Ayala, maybe in a normal economic situation he would have tried to get him here this summer.

You might query his position etc but ultimately he made zero attacking contribution in either start which as an attacking player is ok to point out. Im sure he tried his best and worked hard but just as its right to acknowledge a good pass at Hillsbrough, its ok to acknowledge the lack of impact in his two starts without pretending otherwise and equally its not negative or not giving him a chance to do so. Hopefully he will do something when his next start comes about.

It is and theres not necessarily anything wrong with the club trying to maximise its profit. The club has gone to the trouble of outlining the various scenarios in which, within an admittedly difficuly situation for club and lets not forget fanbase alike, where they know and have acknowledged that people are not going to be remunerated for a service that they have paid for and not received. The club did a Q&A where essentially it said yeah that is the case but theres nothing we can/will do, hard luck. Youve even said "maybe they should be given an alternative deal" which is all that people are asking for. Whether we think its fair enough or whether we feel its an overreaction, we have evidence on this messageboard that the club will lose season ticket holders in the future due to this. Opinion doesnt come into it when the attendances keep falling. The paying fan holds the power. Looking from a more ethical point of view, to guilt trip working class people, many of whom will be struggling themselves at the moment, perhaps furloughed too is out of order and out of touch. Mowbray regularly references the working class people paying for a ticket and suggests he knows what they want from their football etc, but seemingly Waggott or whoever is responsible is more out of touch. Waggott and the players meanwhile have salaries which as far as I am aware may have been deferred but not in any way reduced to "save the club." Also, there is no way that the club is financially fragile to the extent that these refunds could make a major impact on the very existence of the club. 60 quid x 9000 STH's would be just over half a million pounds, baring in mind many people are happy with the ifollow option and any refund liability (deferred against a then guaranteed ST) would not be make or break to the club. The FFP line is also baseless because refunds can be deferred.

Was totally ineffective in his other start v Fulham too. Looked overawed whenever he got the ball.

I suspect that obviously the policy is financially driven, but ultimately as touched upon, it will quite possibly damage the club, even if you discount ethics/morals and focus solely on it from a business sense. I dont even think they needed to offer an option of being able to withdraw the money immediately necessarily. Or offer add ons like DVD's, because those who do get value from the ifollow option do not need to be further remunerated. I and many others am happy enough with the ifollow links, a DVD wouldn't make any difference to that. Even if you only offer a deferred discount on the next season ticket as an alternative, you are then ensuring that the person buys a season ticket in the first place and are only suffering the comparatively minor hit on a refund at that same time. Focusing solely on those who obviously arent happy with ifollow. If 1 in 6 (roughly) of those people who arent adequately remunerated decide as a result that they wont buy a season ticket next time out, any supposed saving on refunds is nil. Then of course you have the long term effect of them people not returning indefinitely.

Walton Nyambe Lenihan Adarabioyo Bell Travis Evans Downing Holtby Rothwell Armstrong ...with maybe Williams over Bell.

Very much so. One of the areas that Waggott and co are really coming up short is communication. I dont think that there is a chance that ST prices will be reduced to factor in this lack of option regarding refunds, and if they do go back on their current policy at all, I suspect it would just be reacting to bad publicity. It had to be done as an alternative option within that original statement, as per most Championship clubs, because then you have scope to use that goodwill to encourage the ifollow option as preferential to the club, but you are satisfying those that can or not get value from that option to know that they will get that refund on the purchase of their next season ticket. That way, you are also almost guaranteeing that they are going to buy a season ticket. Theres a consistent vibe of guilt tripping throughout the PR coming out of the club during Waggott's time and quite simply it will not wash and it will not yearn an increase in attendances. Sorry to keep reverting to your posts @Mattyblue but one thing you often reference is a lack of understanding in terms of the clubs fan base and how it works and that is evident here.

Ultimately the majority of Championship who of course are in the same situation have opted to give that option though. The line about having a club to support is an overdramatic simplification. I think many would have chosen the ifollow option anyway, and any potential refunds would have possibly been a small fraction of the maximum of 500k, deferred against the next season tickets to maintain cash flow to ensure that it was only felt once income was coming back in. And indeed because this hasnt been an option, it may well lead to people (including a couple on here) cutting ties with the club and not renewing. Take ethics and morals out of it and even as a business decision it makes sense to allow at least a deferred refund option. The reason it particularly rankles is because of the tone of the statement, guilt tripping working class people in situations whereby they get no value from the ifollow option, if they dont have a computer, if there is more than one person in a household, or if they have no interest in BCD, all of which situations strangely were outlined only to be dismissed in the statement, into thinking that wanting to get value from a refund would be seriously harmful to the club, considering that the person behind the statement is the main factor behind a 300k rise in director remuneration last year and the players weekly wage bill dwarves the likely liability caused by anyone claiming refunds. You can already see the dent it has had on the club and supporter relationship, the idea of cardboard cut outs may have been seen as proactive had it not come a day after being told that refunds for those not getting value from an ifollow link are off the cards.