I wouldn’t say we had no issues - we botched getting an immediate replacement thanks to Brexit rules and didn’t bring in an extra CB until the end of January!
Hyam (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Skybluebeliever
- Start date
I’d argue that while McFadzean was obviously immense, it wasn’t until we actually replaced Hyam with McNally that our defence became one of the league’s best.
Kilclines curly mullet
Well-Known Member
Would we be in line for a small payment from Rovers due to his full Scotland debut ?
blunted
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure read that it was part of the deal.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
If there was a clause it would usually be first start not appearance
I think what I’m trying to say is that any defence that fell to pieces whenever its (35 year-old) main man got injured couldn’t really be considered to be one of the league’s best. His return from injury coincided with McNally signing and I think our defensive record after that was our best of the year. But yes, whenever McFadzean was playing, our defence was great, for sure. I didn’t realise quite how good until I looked back at the stats just now!
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Would have been nice to have Hyam to step in then, wouldn't it! Not as simple as 'McFadzean a loss' but 'bugger all players to play' being the issue.
Plus part of the reason we had a good defence early season at least (and arguably through the season) was we played quite a negative system that relied on Gyokeres terrorising the entire country, while we concentrated on keeping it tight - we weren't overly progressive, especially before Christmas!
Yeah the whole ‘addition via subtraction’ argument that we got better for selling Hyam doesn’t really work for me, for those reasons.
Legia Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
If you didn't rate Hyam then fair enough, you weren't alone. Using those stats though don't really show anything as these were the games where Moore was playing in goal, making countless errors.
To my mind Hyam was a good player for us with a lot of scope to get even better, and was probably cut out to eventually occupy Fadz role in the centre of the defence. Of course we did well getting McNally and Doyle in on loan last season but they were not our players, and we are now in a position where we only have an ageing Fadz as a central defender in the squad, even though we play with 3 of them. In these circumstances it would be nice to still have Hyam here.
Evo1883
Well-Known Member
I haven't at all said hyam was a bad player , I liked hyam .. the point I made is we were fine without him , probably better in all reality as we were rock solid .. you can argue many things but stats are there In black and white , we conceded 11 goals in 16 games until the WC break without him
The point I made was we didn't struggle without him , it was when fadz became injured we started to ship goals
Mcnally ofcourse made us better , but mcnally is far better than hyam
Legia Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Stats can be made to suit any argument and they are not black and white and always require context - otherwise everyone could just use FM ratings to rate players as fact (I know some do!!). The context of those 3 games at the start of the season was that our keeper made about 4 howlers & Fadz got uncharacteristically bullied by the Hull centre forward at their place. Hyam was not the root cause of our problems at that point, which you seem to be saying these stats show that he was.
While of couse McNally & Doyle helped make us a stronger defensive unit, that was only limited to when Fadz was also in the team, as they weren't so good without him, and neither were their stats! Perhaps, the question ought to be are we better off now without him given we only have Fadz to play at the back right now, and McNally & Doyle have left? We might not get so lucky next time round as we did with McNally & Doyle! Time will tell, but I think we all know it wasn't part of MR's plan to sell Hyam, and that he saw him as part of his long term planning, most likely as the long term replacement for Fadz in the centre of the back 3.
Skybluebeliever
Well-Known Member
Cheers
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Real, or double bluff?