- Print Topic - Archive

I said earlier in the week that I would reserve judgement until I had seen them play. I have read other posters views about Clay and Ironside but tried to go with and open mind. I watched them pretty carefully and tried to make allowances for the fact we were playing league 1 opposition.
Summary:
Clay, well he is taller than our other midfielders which we could do with and he won a few headers. He can pass a ball 5 to 10 yards when given time and a bit of space. He is not particularly quick and missed a good number of tackles after which he gave up each time, did not try to recover. Not sure why but he did a little better in the second half as the pace slowed. He knew he was making mistakes and it was not going for him, the head shakes told the story. He has never established himself anywhere. Verdict: I'm out

Ironside, again a tall rangy young man who I admit only played half an hour or so but did try hard to win headers, not always successful, fairly strong trying to retain possession. Had one decent effort bringing a good save from the keeper. Not particularly quick or skilful on the ball. Clearly not a finisher (he has scored 2 goals in his career so far), more a target player if anything. Think of Andy Cook on an off day. Verdict: Not going to add anything, not worth using the budget. I'm out.

General point on these two. Probably still developing these two but can we wait to see if they turn out ok? This is a vital season.

Pittman, stocky, low centre of gravity, strong, quick. Never going to win much in the air but looks like he might turn defenders in tight areas and create chances for himself. He is more likely to win the ball, keep it and create openings than Hannah, who is a different type of striker. Nothing sinister in this but he has powerful thigh muscles which no doubt gives him his pace, at the same time this sort of physique can sometimes be prone to strains. Clearly experienced playing up front and could provide goals for us if he proves his fitness and signs. Verdict: Will score more goals than Ironside ever will but then again they are different types of forward player.

I leave it to Paul to make his decision but us fans seem fairly united in our views.

Why the red ticks? That's a decent summary from what I've read and heard. I'd say Pittman will be the best bet here, and I agree about taking these other two on for development, let's start doing that when we're in the League.

Quoted from oldun

I said earlier in the week that I would reserve judgement until I had seen them play. I have read other posters views about Clay and Ironside but tried to go with and open mind. I watched them pretty carefully and tried to make allowances for the fact we were playing league 1 opposition.
Summary:
Clay, well he is taller than our other midfielders which we could do with and he won a few headers. He can pass a ball 5 to 10 yards when given time and a bit of space. He is not particularly quick and missed a good number of tackles after which he gave up each time, did not try to recover. Not sure why but he did a little better in the second half as the pace slowed. He knew he was making mistakes and it was not going for him, the head shakes told the story. He has never established himself anywhere. Verdict: I'm out

Ironside, again a tall rangy young man who I admit only played half an hour or so but did try hard to win headers, not always successful, fairly strong trying to retain possession. Had one decent effort bringing a good save from the keeper. Not particularly quick or skilful on the ball. Clearly not a finisher (he has scored 2 goals in his career so far), more a target player if anything. Think of Andy Cook on an off day. Verdict: Not going to add anything, not worth using the budget. I'm out.

General point on these two. Probably still developing these two but can we wait to see if they turn out ok? This is a vital season.

Pittman, stocky, low centre of gravity, strong, quick. Never going to win much in the air but looks like he might turn defenders in tight areas and create chances for himself. He is more likely to win the ball, keep it and create openings than Hannah, who is a different type of striker. Nothing sinister in this but he has powerful thigh muscles which no doubt gives him his pace, at the same time this sort of physique can sometimes be prone to strains. Clearly experienced playing up front and could provide goals for us if he proves his fitness and signs. Verdict: Will score more goals than Ironside ever will but then again they are different types of forward player.

I leave it to Paul to make his decision but us fans seem fairly united in our views.

I saw both before last night and last night showed me again neither will improve us to a level were we need to be at all.

in fact I would go as far to say that who ever recommended them to us should never be allowed to recommend a trialist to us ever again.

what slightly puzzles me is to why we would bother taking a look at 2 lads who have come with nothing to suggest they could improve us.

ironside was deemed not good enough at Halifax and Harrogate and clay is now at worksop town after York fans rated him as one of their worst signings ever made.

I don't mind paul looking at the lower leagues but only if its a player on the way up not clearly on the way down.

Can't disagree with any of oldun's comment. I'd be amazed if we signed either Clay or Ironside, Clay being especially poor. Pittman is a possibility for his strength and pace.

As a couple of clownshoes appear to have given you a negative mark for your post, I'll give a tick. Don't normally bother with that sort of nonsense, but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. ;)

Quoted from RoboCod

Why the red ticks? That's a decent summary from what I've read and heard. I'd say Pittman will be the best bet here, and I agree about taking these other two on for development, let's start doing that when we're in the League.

some weirdos on here just do it.

clearly cant counter the argument.

Quoted from oldun

I said earlier in the week that I would reserve judgement until I had seen them play. I have read other posters views about Clay and Ironside but tried to go with and open mind. I watched them pretty carefully and tried to make allowances for the fact we were playing league 1 opposition.
Summary:
Clay, well he is taller than our other midfielders which we could do with and he won a few headers. He can pass a ball 5 to 10 yards when given time and a bit of space. He is not particularly quick and missed a good number of tackles after which he gave up each time, did not try to recover. Not sure why but he did a little better in the second half as the pace slowed. He knew he was making mistakes and it was not going for him, the head shakes told the story. He has never established himself anywhere. Verdict: I'm out

Ironside, again a tall rangy young man who I admit only played half an hour or so but did try hard to win headers, not always successful, fairly strong trying to retain possession. Had one decent effort bringing a good save from the keeper. Not particularly quick or skilful on the ball. Clearly not a finisher (he has scored 2 goals in his career so far), more a target player if anything. Think of Andy Cook on an off day. Verdict: Not going to add anything, not worth using the budget. I'm out.

General point on these two. Probably still developing these two but can we wait to see if they turn out ok? This is a vital season.

Pittman, stocky, low centre of gravity, strong, quick. Never going to win much in the air but looks like he might turn defenders in tight areas and create chances for himself. He is more likely to win the ball, keep it and create openings than Hannah, who is a different type of striker. Nothing sinister in this but he has powerful thigh muscles which no doubt gives him his pace, at the same time this sort of physique can sometimes be prone to strains. Clearly experienced playing up front and could provide goals for us if he proves his fitness and signs. Verdict: Will score more goals than Ironside ever will but then again they are different types of forward player.

I leave it to Paul to make his decision but us fans seem fairly united in our views.

wouldn't disagree too much.

think Ironside and Clay could well play in this division for a mid-table team easily, but we want promotion and the best available players.

i was impressed with Pittman, considering he hasn't been here long, which will explain why him and LJL was not on the same wave length at times, he looks impressive, strong, fast and looked very confident, BUT, can he keep fit ? worth a punt IMO

Quoted from oldun

I said earlier in the week that I would reserve judgement until I had seen them play. I have read other posters views about Clay and Ironside but tried to go with and open mind. I watched them pretty carefully and tried to make allowances for the fact we were playing league 1 opposition.
Summary:
Clay, well he is taller than our other midfielders which we could do with and he won a few headers. He can pass a ball 5 to 10 yards when given time and a bit of space. He is not particularly quick and missed a good number of tackles after which he gave up each time, did not try to recover. Not sure why but he did a little better in the second half as the pace slowed. He knew he was making mistakes and it was not going for him, the head shakes told the story. He has never established himself anywhere. Verdict: I'm out

Ironside, again a tall rangy young man who I admit only played half an hour or so but did try hard to win headers, not always successful, fairly strong trying to retain possession. Had one decent effort bringing a good save from the keeper. Not particularly quick or skilful on the ball. Clearly not a finisher (he has scored 2 goals in his career so far), more a target player if anything. Think of Andy Cook on an off day. Verdict: Not going to add anything, not worth using the budget. I'm out.

General point on these two. Probably still developing these two but can we wait to see if they turn out ok? This is a vital season.

Pittman, stocky, low centre of gravity, strong, quick. Never going to win much in the air but looks like he might turn defenders in tight areas and create chances for himself. He is more likely to win the ball, keep it and create openings than Hannah, who is a different type of striker. Nothing sinister in this but he has powerful thigh muscles which no doubt gives him his pace, at the same time this sort of physique can sometimes be prone to strains. Clearly experienced playing up front and could provide goals for us if he proves his fitness and signs. Verdict: Will score more goals than Ironside ever will but then again they are different types of forward player.

I leave it to Paul to make his decision but us fans seem fairly united in our views.

Clay is not for me but it think there is a footballer in Ironside, I don't get the comparison with Cook, Cook's link up play was poor, his strength was finishing, this lad may bring others into play.

Quoted from RoboCod

Why the red ticks? That's a decent summary from what I've read and heard. I'd say Pittman will be the best bet here, and I agree about taking these other two on for development, let's start doing that when we're in the League.

Because it doesn't matter what you say it is who is saying it.

If you are outspoken and prepared to say sh!t is sh!t then some of the w@nkers on here don't like it and will red cross you no matter what you say.

Quoted from headingly_mariner

Clay is not for me but it think there is a footballer in Ironside, I don't get the comparison with Cook, Cook's link up play was poor, his strength was finishing, this lad may bring others into play.

With you on Ironside, i dont think he is the answer we are looking for however...but on last nights viewing he was certainly an improvement on LJL's offerings. Definatley sees what is going on around him, nice dummy that let Aswad through for a one on one, good position for his saved close range attempt and within two minutes him and Hannah had completed more link ups than LJL and Pitmann managed in 60.
I think Hurst may well have another look at him, perhaps paired up with Pittman.

What's all this tick lark. I never look and don't bother about it. People are free to disagree, I merely put together my considered view after watching them all play. I cannot agree Ironside is better than LJL but I appreciate there are some who cannot see any good in LJL anyway.

Having seen Ironside now involved in 4 pre season Friendlies I would expect him to be offered a contract be it a month to month or 6 month, not saying I think this is right or not. Clay I believe we will not pursue as for start of season without anymore signings we have 3 centre midfield to fit in two spots

Quoted from RoboCod

Why the red ticks? That's a decent summary from what I've read and heard. I'd say Pittman will be the best bet here, and I agree about taking these other two on for development, let's start doing that when we're in the League.

Maybe the two ticks are from Clay and Ironside(s) ;)

Oldun, it wasn't me. I agree with your views here even though some might consider me a rose tinted spectacle wearing t0sser :-)

Quoted from headingly_mariner

Clay is not for me but it think there is a footballer in Ironside, I don't get the comparison with Cook, Cook's link up play was poor, his strength was finishing, this lad may bring others into play.

I agree with this.

Ironside is the kind of striker Buckley would love in a side of his. Back to goal, play it in to him, control, hold, lay off to advancing winger or midfield runner. Looks to have a football brain, and can control the ball and link it better than Cook and LJL.

If the budget allows, I would sign Pittman (who can also play wide), Ironside (to compete with LJL as hold-up man) and still another striker. The other striker being someone likely to get 25 goals.

Quoted from LongEatonMariner

Oldun, it wasn't me. I agree with your views here even though some might consider me a rose tinted spectacle wearing t0sser :-)

You must have been in the "Woods will keep us up" brigade.

Quoted from Tommy

I agree with this.

Ironside is the kind of striker Buckley would love in a side of his. Back to goal, play it in to him, control, hold, lay off to advancing winger or midfield runner. Looks to have a football brain, and can control the ball and link it better than Cook and LJL.

If the budget allows, I would sign Pittman (who can also play wide), Ironside (to compete with LJL as hold-up man) and still another striker. The other striker being someone likely to get 25 goals.

Excellent opinions on Ironside (what is there to lose) - not seen Pitman but trust the views of the astute fans who have.

Quoted from LongEatonMariner

Oldun, it wasn't me. I agree with your views here even though some might consider me a rose tinted spectacle wearing t0sser :-)

Cheers Longeaton, but it really does not matter at all

Quoted from Tommy

I agree with this.

Ironside is the kind of striker Buckley would love in a side of his. Back to goal, play it in to him, control, hold, lay off to advancing winger or midfield runner. Looks to have a football brain, and can control the ball and link it better than Cook and LJL.

If the budget allows, I would sign Pittman (who can also play wide), Ironside (to compete with LJL as hold-up man) and still another striker. The other striker being someone likely to get 25 goals.

I agree with all of that

Quoted from Garth

I agree with all of that

I have a feeling you might get your wish with Ironside but I for one will be disappointed. Pitman could be different class and keep Hannah out of the team if fit.

Couple of newbies maybe???? Or same old same old for tomorrow night?

[quote=297

I have a feeling you might get your wish with Ironside but I for one will be disappointed. Pitman could be different class and keep Hannah out of the team if fit.[/quote]

Pig sick if we don`t sign Pittman or his equivalent

as much as many may not agree with it, i have a suspicion oaul will sign all 3, pitmann i would be very pleased with, ironside ( although i havent been impressed, lets remember he is young and COULD turn out a decent forward) clay ive been dissapointed with but again he is still young

Hagrid watch out with comments like that the Red Crosses will start as it's a worthwhile response ;)

Excellent thread oldun.Great post

Well having seen clay and ironside in three friendlies I think I can say I don't think I have seen two worse trialists at grimsby ?

Pittman was subbed at half time but he was playing quite well...

I would sign him, he is decent at our level as for the the other two I can't believe Paul has taken 4 games to see they are both excrement.

If he signs them two up I will give him til christmas .

*five games (which is even worse)

The thing is with signing Ironside, is that I don't trust Hurst to go out and get a goalscorer if we do sign him. I've a horrible feeling he'll say 'that'll do' and look for goals across the team. As has been demonstrated tonight, it's not going to work like that. Wingers cant create chances that they finish themselves, we need a marquee top drawer out and out goalscorer and we need one pretty damn quickly.

Just pay the fee for Bogle for god sake.

People keep banging on about Bogle but how many have actually seen him play?

On this forum? Probably nobody.

There is also the possibility that he doesn't want to come here anyway, don't forget!

Quoted from Chrisblor

*five games (which is even worse)

Well that should be considered a criminal offence for Paul.

The thing is I am quite happy at the players Paul has bought in but then it concerns me we still haven't got a striker in...

Our main downfall last year was we didn't score enough and was crying out for a goal scorer but Paul doesn't share the same concern as us, strikers are more expensive wages wise I suppose but when you bring a lad in who clearly looked out of his depth in his first game on trial then you give him the benefit of the doubt and give him another chance but it is plain clear to see to any football fan never alone a manager he is just not good enough then that slightly concerns me.

5 matches he has put the two trialists in and it is just a waste of time, they are not gonna cut it.

Paul needs to decide what he is doing and quick, Lenny and Ross need decent competition and we need goals.

My honest opinion of the 3 is that I would sign Pittman in a heartbeat. He's strong, expect to find the goal and would suit a front two of him and LJL. both robust and expect big things from both this season.

For me especially, why is Clay still here. Showed nothing at Harrogate (should know I went), so why would he be sooo much better vs Waltham etc.

My guess is that Paul hoped he would be able to get Connor Jennings and when this eventually fell through, he had to start again plus not being able to attract Bogle has created a bit of a problem.

Quoted from Tommy

I agree with this.

Ironside is the kind of striker Buckley would love in a side of his. Back to goal, play it in to him, control, hold, lay off to advancing winger or midfield runner. Looks to have a football brain, and can control the ball and link it better than Cook and LJL.

If the budget allows, I would sign Pittman (who can also play wide), Ironside (to compete with LJL as hold-up man) and still another striker. The other striker being someone likely to get 25 goals.

Isn't this what The Shop does?

I wonder if the GET could go beyond their Fishy-nabbing news coverage and get word on how Bogle/other possible Town targets feel about being sounded out as potential Town signings. A little cynical, but no better way to get moves going with a good bit of old fashioned 'unsettling' of players, not like we haven't fallen victim to it.
Pre-season, after a great and very positive start has fallen flat due to the striker uncertainty. No other set of fans have endured so much misery and frustration due to chances not being taken/games not being won as Town fans....an experienced striker signing would see a spike in ST sales as well as showing a 'sign of intent', but I'm just seeing the clock running down now...

I thought ironside did ok last night, but Pittman is a better choice

Hurst says in today's telegraph he has spoke to two of the trialists and they certainly know what his thoughts are and is talking to the other over the weekend.

I hope that's clay and ironside told not come within one mile of blundell park again and Pittman will be offered something.

Quoted from Jarmo.Is.God

I thought ironside did ok last night, but Pittman is a better choice

Really? I thought that Ironside was hopeless for most of the first half. He did a little better in the last 10 minutes or so but at one point, I'd forgotten he was even on the pitch for a 15 minute period as I don't think he got close to touching the ball! Another 'targetman' striker with pipe-cleaner arms who seems to be badly lacking in upper body strength. If we can't do better than him, I think we're struggling.

Clay was a bit better last night than against Donny (not difficult), but I didn't see anything in either performance to make me think he would turn out to be a good signing.

Pittman didn't really get involved enough for me last night though the forwards were winning pretty much none of the ball in the first half. However, of all the triallists, I think he'd be the one we might sign.

Ironside was naff last night. Far too slow and on his heels all the time. He's not a patch on Cook or Southwell tbh. Desperate if we sign him.

Surely we can't sign clay and ironside surely not??????

Like Johnny boy said. The players he has signed are promising why ruin it and sign these two drips?

Quoted from Mariner21

Surely we can't sign clay and ironside surely not??????

Like Johnny boy said. The players he has signed are promising why ruin it and sign these two drips?

Drips ;D

I think that most of eight hundred or so who went last night and to the previous  games would fairly sum up the trialists as:

Ironside--Slow not very good in the air but holds the ball up OK l, no  improvement on Cook and no threat to LJL, may improve but think we can do better.

Clay--Better than the games before but not Conference standard, suprised he`s still here.

Pittman--Shows talent on the ball  has pace and a power, lost out last night in first half due mainly to having no service (as Hearn found when he came on for them) why only one half injury? has to be favourite to sign if possible.

Friendly`s are all about finding where the wrinkles are and ironing them out, IMO we have seen enough now of the above three to yay or nay, in Ironside and Clay we are wasting valuable pre season playing time for others