Gallagher

[Edmund]

when he finally gets to play upfront we'll see what he can do

Exactly. So why sign and spend the vast amount of the transfer budget on a player who will play out of position during the majority of his appearances.

[Guest Mee-9]

Exactly. So why sign and spend the vast amount of the transfer budget on a player who will play out of position during the majority of his appearances.

Vast amount? We spent 1m on Wellens who was shite today, and were willing to offer 30k a week for Edgar Davids. It's not really the Vast amount. And you weren't calling him pointless when he scored them 2 goals against palace.

Gallagher cost 600k didn't he ?

[Samilktray]

Id bet my bottom dollar hes better than Howard.

[Jimmy]

Exactly. So why sign and spend the vast amount of the transfer budget on a player who will play out of position during the majority of his appearances.

because NOBODY would of expected Fryatt to score as many goals as he has, when Gallagher was bought Fryatt had about 2 or 3 and it looked a good signing to add much needed competition to the squad as well as providing cover at a couple of other positions. Fryatt's goals have made him undropable, Gallagher and Fryatt are very similar in style so playing them together wouldn't work

[Bert]

because NOBODY would of expected Fryatt to score as many goals as he has, when Gallagher was bought Fryatt had about 2 or 3 and it looked a good signing to add much needed competition to the squad as well as providing cover at a couple of other positions. Fryatt's goals have made him undropable, Gallagher and Fryatt are very similar in style so playing them together wouldn't work

You mean you didn't. I fully expected him to have a decent season and he's doing so. Still think we should sell him though.

[Edmund]

because NOBODY would of expected Fryatt to score as many goals as he has, when Gallagher was bought Fryatt had about 2 or 3 and it looked a good signing to add much needed competition to the squad as well as providing cover at a couple of other positions. Fryatt's goals have made him undropable, Gallagher and Fryatt are very similar in style so playing them together wouldn't work

It did look a good signing and I agree with what your saying to the reasons why he's been kept out the squad but that doesn't warrant an explanation why he's playing on the wing.

As you say he was brought in as cover for example on the wing but that's it the clue is in the name, he's cover and that's it. We had Adams and N'Guessan on the bench today who play in those positions naturally and Gallagher should be third in the pecking order.

I can't help but think he gets played just to give him game time and justify his signing even if it means other players who should get a look in don't.

[Captain...]

At the moment he's an expensive bench warmer, I think Pearson thought we would struggle scoring this season, understandably so given the performances of Fryatt anf Howard last time the played in this division, hence the arrival of Gallagher, Waghorn and DNG (a striker for Lincoln I believe) and later on Yann.

I agree that I would rather have a £1m RB than Gallagher in the squad right now, but I believe he will prove his worth, the problem is how is he going to force his way in to the team when we play hardly any reserve team fixtures, the same for Adams and others.

[l444ry]

Thought he might be a good signing when he arrived but he doesn't do himself any favours by not pulling his weight. Teams like City can't carry passengers. It's bad enough with Fryatt going missing in tough games.

[Koke]

I thought he only cost us £600,000? I know we don't have a bottomless pit, but 600k is hardly a fortune - decent money in today's market, where players like Gareth McAuley are sold for £1.5m.

[Bert]

I thought he only cost us £600,000? I know we don't have a bottomless pit, but 600k is hardly a fortune - decent money in today's market, where players like Gareth McAuley are sold for £1.5m.

£1.1m

[Jimmy]

wasn't Stearman £1.5m at the same time as McAuley

[Sparky]

I remember reading it was around the 900k mark but every site i looked at says Undisclosed

[Edmund]

Undisclosed fee but I'm sure it was near the million mark.

[lildave3]

I'm fairly sure it's around a million pound. Far too much.

EDIT - Seeing as Bert says 1.1 million i'm even more sure

[Jimmy]

I'm fairly sure it's around a million pound. Far too much.

EDIT - Seeing as Bert says 1.1 million i'm even more sure

think bert was referring to the McAuley fee Kareem was talking about

[The Doctor]

He has got ability but really with fryatt being on form he's not going to get to prove it. Him and fryatt are too similar to work well together IMO and so long as fryatt continues scoring on a regular basis gallagher will just be moved around the side.

Thing is though he's not a left winger, he might be better on the right but his attack-mindedness will just put more pressure on neilson because he'll end up being double teamed.

[Jimmy]

Neilson already gets double teamed as Oakley doesn't stay wide

[The Doctor]

Neilson already gets double teamed as Oakley doesn't stay wide

true but who do you put in his place without the same thing happening?

[Edmund]

Just out of interest Jimmy who would you have starting on the right wing if you had a choice?

[Tony Pine]

not jimmy

but i'd have dany

[Jimmy]

Just out of interest Jimmy who would you have starting on the right wing if you had a choice?

Nicky Adams

[Tony Pine]

nicky adams can't cross

[Guest Basildon Fox]

nicky adams can't cross

It doesn't appear anyone else can either so he would fit right in.

[dandannieldanok]

As I've just said in the other thread, technically I think he's one of our best players. I'd find a place for him in my starting eleven.

Quicker than he seems, confindent, intelligent on the ball. I don't really see what there is to criticize? Whether or not he's a pointless signing depends on your interpretation of the phrase, I suppose. Given that Pearson seems to have no interest in starting him then, yes, I suppose he is.

Lack of impact is the major thing. I don't disagree that he's got quality on the ball but when have we seen it put to good use on a consistent basis? Apart from a cameo display against Crystal Palace, Gallagher has made very little impact in changing a game. Yes Pearson must take some of the blame for not giving him a run in the team in his preferred position, but ultimately the responsibility for his own performances should lie with him. You would say he's got more technique than a Howard or a Waghorn but most would have Gallagher 3rd in that pecking order because he's not used his skill to any effect really.

He's not been a disaster by any means, but he's been very very mediocre which is all the more disappointing for me because I was delighted when signed for us.

[Simo86]

nicky adams can't cross

How can you make that judgement when we have hardly ever seen him play