Dominic Samuel? (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
callumeast

callumeast

New Member
Just wondering where the rumour of him coming to the Ricoh started... All I see is 'hopefully get Dominic Samuel...' Etc. Can anyone help me?
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
callumeast said:
Just wondering where the rumour of him coming to the Ricoh started... All I see is 'hopefully get Dominic Samuel...' Etc. Can anyone help me?
Click to expand...

Think its just because we had him before. More wishful thinking than anything based in fact.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
callumeast said:
Just wondering where the rumour of him coming to the Ricoh started... All I see is 'hopefully get Dominic Samuel...' Etc. Can anyone help me?
Click to expand...

Mowbray has mentioned being interested in him as well. I'll see if I can find a link.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Here, said it to Andy Turner apparently.

Andy Turner said:
Only last week he told me that Dominic Samuel, on a month-long loan at Gillingham, could be an option but that, reassuringly: “There are loads of players I would like to go and get and that are available.

“It’s like a kid in a sweet shop and you can’t have them all. We have made some decisions, we took Armstrong, Kent and Murphy.

"I could name three more we could have taken but you have to pick the ones you want, nurture them and make them play the way you want them to play and get on with it; believe in them.”
Click to expand...

From http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/sport-opinion/tony-mowbray-plan-b-adam-10506498
 
Del Boy 82

Del Boy 82

New Member
I'd like to see him back here. I'd like to have both him and Armstrong. Problem is Mowbrays previous chats were with the royals ex manager Steve Clarke not Brian mcdermot.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
It will all depend on what happens with Armstrong. We don't play 2 up top, so one of Armstrong or Samuel would be confined to the bench. Can't see Newcastle or Reading being happy with that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors :)
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
stupot07 said:
It will all depend on what happens with Armstrong. We don't play 2 up top, so one of Armstrong or Samuel would be confined to the bench. Can't see Newcastle or Reading being happy with that.
Click to expand...

Good point, can't see either of them being happy with squad rotation either. They will want them playing as often as possible.
 
Hobo

Hobo

Well-Known Member
The two together could change the formation we play
 
H

Hadji10

Well-Known Member
Brilliant player, very very good dribbler an excellent finisher. Played some of his best games on the left for us anyway. I'd love him back.
 
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
I see there's a lot of interest in Walsall's Tom Bradshaw. Could be sold in this window. Could that hurt their campaign?

He's their top scorer, though has been out with an injury lately.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Hobo said:
The two together could change the formation we play
Click to expand...

Mowbray wouldn't change the formation and he can point to results as to why he wouldn't.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Mowbray wouldn't change the formation and he can point to results as to why he wouldn't.
Click to expand...

I really don't understand this argument (his, not yours), you hear a lot of "go 442" when we hit a rough patch as well.

Do people want to push Fleck and Vincelot further up and remove the protection for our back line? Where would you play Madders? On the wing? Would you drop one of Fleck or Vincelot?
 
S

simonregis

New Member
Reading just sold one of their forwards so I guess they'll try and sign someone or bring back Samuel. Readong fans aren't happy he isn't given a chance there.
 
Del Boy 82

Del Boy 82

New Member
shmmeee said:
I really don't understand this argument (his, not yours), you hear a lot of "go 442" when we hit a rough patch as well.

Do people want to push Fleck and Vincelot further up and remove the protection for our back line? Where would you play Madders? On the wing? Would you drop one of Fleck or Vincelot?
Click to expand...

Don't think you could really drop fleck or vincelot to be honest, both compliment each other well. One way of tweaking the formation would be to go 4141 in a diamond type formation. Still be able to accommodate Maddison then sitting in behind a lone striker. Don't think it would suit Armstrong tho. I'm happy with our 4231, works well for the players we have.
 
Hobo

Hobo

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
I really don't understand this argument (his, not yours), you hear a lot of "go 442" when we hit a rough patch as well.

Do people want to push Fleck and Vincelot further up and remove the protection for our back line? Where would you play Madders? On the wing? Would you drop one of Fleck or Vincelot?
Click to expand...

I did not put it forward as an argument, more a throw away comment. As Grendel says TM has no need to change the system especially as he seems so keen on bringing Cole in. Samuel was a main target in the summer less so now.

Also 're 4-4-2 don't bring me in on that....drives me nuts some of our fans fixation with it. However just because you play two strikers doesn't necessarily force you to play 4-4-2. There is always 4-1-3-2 or 3-3-2-2.

Our current personnel suits the current formation.
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
I really don't understand this argument (his, not yours), you hear a lot of "go 442" when we hit a rough patch as well.

Do people want to push Fleck and Vincelot further up and remove the protection for our back line? Where would you play Madders? On the wing? Would you drop one of Fleck or Vincelot?
Click to expand...

Agreed. This system is working, we don't play with an orthodox front 2 and 4 across the midfield, or particular the diamond or wingbacks. We're now assuming Armstrongs staying, reading won't allow Samuel to come and sit in the bench, likewise mcclaren won't want Armstrong to be sat on the bench. People need to drop the Samuel obsession. It's not going to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors :)
 
Last edited:
I_Saw_Shaw_Score

I_Saw_Shaw_Score

Well-Known Member
Otis said:
I see there's a lot of interest in Walsall's Tom Bradshaw. Could be sold in this window. Could that hurt their campaign?

He's their top scorer, though has been out with an injury lately.
Click to expand...


Played for their reserves today and targeting a return v us next week.
 
R

rupert_bear

Well-Known Member
What we need is an adequate replacement for Ryan Kent, good as player Kent was just imagine where we could have been had young Kent had a better final ball
 
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
I_Saw_Shaw_Score said:
Played for their reserves today and targeting a return v us next week.
Click to expand...
Bit slow on the uptake there ISSS, cos he's already returned and came on, on Saturday, playing the last 30 mins against Rochdale. ;)

Anyway, point is, a lot of interest and a possible £500,000 bid on the table? Could well be he's not even at Walsall by the time they play us.
 
Hobo

Hobo

Well-Known Member
Samuel has Extended loan at Gillingham
 
Hobo

Hobo

Well-Known Member
I think Reading want him to have a few more games and then depends whether they land their targets. I think Samuel will be up for grabs in the summer if they sign strikers in January.
 
Bugsy

Bugsy

Well-Known Member
would like this to happen but Reading sold Nick blackman to derby so I think Samuel will be back in their plans personally...PUSB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top