Get your S'Wag on !

[kingfox]

My problem with Waghorn is, he hasn't played well in ages, he has only had one good season for us and that was his loan spell about 3-4 years ago now. We got him back, and that season he did nothing, looked a shadow of the player we seen in his loan spell, then in recent season's he has fell down the pecking order for a reason, plus he has had a few injury and loan spells here and there.

Yes he came on Sunday and looked pretty sharp in my opinion, but when his chance came he fluffed it when he should of scored, another missed chance in a long line of many in that game. Last night you can bring him on give him a go and see what he is capable of, yes yet again he linked up pretty well and seemed sharper unlike recent games he has played over the past couple of season's, but yet again he fluffs his best chance by falling over the ball, when clean through on goal, that was just like Beckford when he was clean through, then messed up his chance against Blackpool.

I don't think Waghorn is good enough for this football club anymore, we have much better strikers but with those strikers we just need to get the best out of them, and goals will start coming more often than one a game. Waghorn has been decent in the past, but over his last couple of games, his performances have been laughable especially last season apart from Leeds, this season so far with the chances he has had, he should of scored 2 in 2; however it's 0 in 2 because he can't hit a barn door. First few minutes when he came on against Wolves he went to make a pass, then ended up kicking the grass, and last night he is through on goal then falls flat on his face.

Just don't think he is good enough, and I don't know why Pearson loves him so much.

[Deucalion]

On Wednesday night, we didn't actually need Waghorn to score. Burnley were working up a head of steam and putting us under pressure and we needed someone to break up their possession in their own half.

On Sunday, we actually did need a goal and I don't think Waghorn was the right choice. I would've fancied Beckford to use his skill and pace to try to score.

On Futacs, I liked him for the 5 or so minutes he played. I wonder why he is not coming on earlier?

[Walker]

Thought Waghorn looked far better than Beckford did when he came on against Blackpool. Genuinely feel given 'game time' ( I know, cliche) he will get back to somewhere near the standards he set in first spell here.

[Captain...]

First thing, I don't feel sorry for Waghorn, he is a young lad playing football in the Championship and for the England U21 and getting paid well to do it, I don't feel sorry for him, I am jealous of him.

The people who I feel sorry for are the moaners and groaners who get on his back when the manager decides he is the best person to come on, against Wolves it so nearly worked, and at Burnley it did work, we won.

As for falling over his feet in the box, does anyone remember Knocky doing the same at Charlton? These things happen, it is usually a sign of lacking a bit of match fitness/sharpness, it will come.

As for Beckford, I don't want this to turn into another Beckford thread, but he hasn't taken his chances this season, and neither has Waggy, so perhaps he will get his chance against Hull, or maybe Futacs will be first reserve, I do think we have too many attacking options, and a loan deal would suit Waggy or Schlupp, but I don't see the point in loaning out Beckford, he is just getting past his peak in footballing terms and if he is 4th choice behind Waghorn and doesn't prove himself in the next few months, then it is time to get rid in January.

[Simo86]

Beckford was being allowed to go on loan by PEARSON you idiot, he was stopped by PEARSON because our target moved elsewhere.

as for waghorn he's always had the touch of a rapist and when bringing a player on to play on the wing I'd pick him over Beckford as well

Exactly this. Some people read too much into players coming on before others. Waghorn has played on the wing previously, Beckford hasn't. We were seeing a game out not looking for goals.

[Dickov22]

Thanks Jimmy. You can apologise for calling me an idiot once the truth comes out. Beckford went behind our back, that's why he's being treated this way now. Fact.

[accessory]

Beckford was being allowed to go on loan by PEARSON you idiot, he was stopped by PEARSON because our target moved elsewhere.

as for waghorn he's always had the touch of a rapist and when bringing a player on to play on the wing I'd pick him over Beckford as well

Look at Jamie Vardy's first touch. He makes Waghorn look like Lionel Messi.

[5waller5]

Personally I don't think Waghorn made one jot of difference when he came on - But i do think Lloyd Dyer did .... With them getting forward to get a goal Lloyd's pace and closing down really provided us with the opportunity to close out the game - for this I give Lloyd and NP credit. he was definitely the right sub choice - maybe a good move to hide Waghorn coming on too and alleviate a bit of pressure on the lad, who is clearly feeling it.

[Guest Col city fan]

Personally I don't think Waghorn made one jot of difference when he came on - But i do think Lloyd Dyer did .... With them getting forward to get a goal Lloyd's pace and closing down really provided us with the opportunity to close out the game - for this I give Lloyd and NP credit. he was definitely the right sub choice - maybe a good move to hide Waghorn coming on too and alleviate a bit of pressure on the lad, who is clearly feeling it.

Good post.

That's exactly how I saw it.

[marty78]

Thanks Jimmy. You can apologise for calling me an idiot once the truth comes out. Beckford went behind our back, that's why he's being treated this way now. Fact.

There is no point becoming defensive about being called an idiot when you come onto a forum and make a quite outrageous claim and offer no evidence to support it. If you aren't an idiot I am sure you will understand why people struggle to believe such a claim from a faceless forum account.

A player trying to force a move without the knowledge of his current club just doesn't stack up for me. If Andrew Melville knew then Beckford and his agent were not acting against the wishes of the club were they?

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Because, you know who, has done **** all when given the same chances this season. At least Waghorn has gotten himself into good positions and got himself chances against Wolves and Burnley, haven't seen a lot of that from he who shall not be named this season.

Waghorn got himself through on goal yeah, but he missed. If the panto vilan missed that chance there would be a bloody riot.

[kingfox]

As for falling over his feet in the box, does anyone remember Knocky doing the same at Charlton? These things happen, it is usually a sign of lacking a bit of match fitness/sharpness, it will come.

Was Knockaert really in a goalscoring position?

Knockaert was falling over all the time on Wednesday all over the pitch, that's the only thing he did wrong.

Waghorn was clean through on goal, with yet another goalscoring opportunity to his name but he messed up...again. We could of done with killing off that game, and yet again if Vokes managed to score at the end, we would be sat here looking at Waghorn's opportunity when clean through on goal, then falling flat on his face and calling him a joke and it's time for him to leave the club.

Just because we won, it doesn't hide the fact, that Waghorn had yet another chance, in which he failed to take, like I said in a previous post he should of scored 2 in 2, yet it still remains at 0 in 2. We have much better strikers on our books than him, and like in some other positions defence and central midfield, we can find much better players than De Laet, James, Drinkwater and Waghorn, all those players are too hit and miss and never do a consistent job. Frailties will appear in De Laet's game sooner or later, James isn't the type of midfielder we should of gone for, Drinkwater has improved but has gone walkabouts in the last two games, showing inconsistent signs yet again like last season, and Waghorn hasn't been good for a while now.

[Dickov22]

That I can't answer, I have no idea why he even started him at the start of the season either when he's been trying to sell him since May.

How can I provide the evidence on a public forum? I'm not stupid.

[marty78]

That I can't answer, I have no idea why he even started him at the start of the season either when he's been trying to sell him since May.

How can I provide the evidence on a public forum? I'm not stupid.

Then you shouldn't claim something to be a fact. Fact.

[Babylon]

Personally I don't think Waghorn made one jot of difference when he came on

The only difference he made was at one point all of our players seemed to attempt to smack the ball away from our area and seemingly only managed to kick it straight back to one of their players. The ball came to him finally and he fooking smashed it away. Other than that, not a lot.

I would still like him to get a run of games either somewhere else or here. Just to see if the old Waghorn is lurking behind the rusty, no confidence player we've seen for the last year or so.

[Dickov22]

Ok. Looking forward to being proven right- either when Beckford goes or Pearson does!

[Guest Col city fan]

Ok. Looking forward to being proven right- either when Beckford goes or Pearson does!

All people are asking is how do you know this?

[JoeyB]

people say this that and the other and 90% of it turns out to be bullshit, the only person who can say this stuff and get it taken on board is Bert as he has been a credible and reliable source.

As for Beckford, he is being frozen out, if what this bloke is saying is true, the only reason he started this season so that pearson could but him in the shop window.

as for waghorn, he's uselss!

[Dickov22]

Also I'm a big Pearson fan and I'm sick of clueless fans criticising his supposed poor treatment of a player. I hope he takes himself out the firing line soon and lets everyone know what happened with beckford.

[Dickov22]

Ask Bert then- I've already told him the info and my source on twitter.

[Babylon]

Ask Bert then- I've already told him the info and my source on twitter.

I can only presume you are suggesting the club lined up the deal behind Pearsons back. Because players and agents don't just rock up at other clubs hoping to get a transfer, someone will have sanctioned it, because they would have to. If Pearson didn't know, that's hardly JB's fault.

[Mark_w]

Waghorn got himself through on goal yeah, but he missed. If the panto vilan missed that chance there would be a bloody riot.

I doubt the 'panto villain' would get that chance. (You know, because when he plays, the service is never right.)

[Happy Fox]

I can only presume you are suggesting the club lined up the deal behind Pearsons back. Because players and agents don't just rock up at other clubs hoping to get a transfer, someone will have sanctioned it, because they would have to. If Pearson didn't know, that's hardly JB's fault.

Unless after all NP wanted to keep JB? which seems a bit strange, all in all the situation seems confusing us refusing to do the deal everything seemed to be onboard that is the impression I had unless of course we couldn't bring in any of our targets so we kept JB.

[MooseBreath]

Whatever has happened behind the scenes, it's a real shame we've ended up with a mis-firing Nugent and two unproven players who both look they belong in the lower leagues as our only playable strikers. It could cost us.

As for JB, it was obvious from the beginning that him and Pearson would have a falling out at some stage. The only surprise is that he is still at the club. I wouldn't be surprised if Pearson is treating him like shit due to yet another bust up between him and one of his players. This too could cost us.

[Mark_w]

Whatever has happened behind the scenes, it's a real shame we've ended up with a mis-firing Nugent and two unproven players who both look they belong in the lower leagues as our only playable strikers. It could cost us.

Yeah, we'd be much better off with a mis-firing player, who's unproven at this level.