Ba back?

Redrobo

Ba and Tex are just the sort of players everyone is looking for in January. Not played all season and nowhere near match fit.

I can't see much of a profit being made here Daisy. Undisclosed it is then.

shirty5

SurvivaloftheFittest said:

Leuth said:

KR is already making Slade look like a petty jobsworth what with this and giving Tex a game

KR has been told to use him in emergencies only, hence coming on for Konsa who had a head injury. He certainly didn't choose 'to give him a game'.

Did they make a cock up when they gave a 30 year old a 4 and half year contract last January?

He might have a few euros, but when it comes to spending it on players, the majority of the signings have been overpriced and on long contracts.

dickplumb

Ba and Texeira are both fit. I have watched U23 games where they both look able to play a whole game. Ba does not want to play for us that is why Slade made him train with the youngsters. Texeira is on a high salary and the Club are looking to offload him. I presume that nothing has changed.

ShootersHillGuru

SurvivaloftheFittest said:

Leuth said:

KR is already making Slade look like a petty jobsworth what with this and giving Tex a game

KR has been told to use him in emergencies only, hence coming on for Konsa who had a head injury. He certainly didn't choose 'to give him a game'.

Having someone on the bench and then using him is hardly use "in an emergency"

Football is a game that involves 11 players and a bench to cater for injury and tactical changes. I don't believe for one second that Texeira is only allowed off the bench to cover solely injury. It would significantly tie the managers hands. Better not have him on the bench at all.

Addick in SW16

dickplumb said:

Ba and Texeira are both fit. I have watched U23 games where they both look able to play a whole game. Ba does not want to play for us that is why Slade made him train with the youngsters. Texeira is on a high salary and the Club are looking to offload him. I presume that nothing has changed.

I think this may be a silly question, but could we just not pay players who 'don't want to play'?

dickplumb

I don't think that Ba has refused to play. He wants to leave. But if he was picked for the first team he would play. Slade wanted players who were totally committed, which is fair enough.

Oh_Yoni_Boy

How do we know Ba doesn't want to play or wants to leave? I don't doubt it, but wondered where it comes from.

Paddy7

Last night he played mostly at the back of the diamond. In a comfortable win he did ok without really standing out above the youngsters around him. From previous first team games I'd worry about his awareness and positional discipline playing there but he's skillful enough to add something further forward. That said, Aribo made much more impression this time.

Garrymanilow

Our central midfield lacks mobility. Given how strong our back four is we don't necessarily need a midfield shield in a 4-4-2 at L1 level, so having Ba who at the very least can shift around the pitch might allow Ulvestad to have a bit more space to operate in. If Ba's willing to put some work in he's most likely above the level of a lot of midfielders in L1 and definitely better than Crofts

Jack_Charlton

Ba will score the winner at then Den, You heard it here first folks.

cantersaddick

Garrymanilow said:

Our central midfield lacks mobility. Given how strong our back four is we don't necessarily need a midfield shield in a 4-4-2 at L1 level, so having Ba who at the very least can shift around the pitch might allow Ulvestad to have a bit more space to operate in. If Ba's willing to put some work in he's most likely above the level of a lot of midfielders in L1 and definitely better than Crofts

I just don't see it that way at all. Of you're gonna replace Crofts for more of a passing or forward looking CM they at least need to be a very good tackler. Ba isn't.

If you think our midfield gets overrun at the moment it'll be far worse with Ba and Freddy.

cantersaddick

cantersaddick said:

Garrymanilow said:

Our central midfield lacks mobility. Given how strong our back four is we don't necessarily need a midfield shield in a 4-4-2 at L1 level, so having Ba who at the very least can shift around the pitch might allow Ulvestad to have a bit more space to operate in. If Ba's willing to put some work in he's most likely above the level of a lot of midfielders in L1 and definitely better than Crofts

I just don't see it that way at all. Of you're gonna replace Crofts for more of a passing or forward looking CM they at least need to be a very good tackler. Ba isn't.

If you think our midfield gets overrun at the moment it'll be far worse with Ba and Freddy.

That combination might be good on the ball but there would be no one there to win the ball and no one capable of regularly breaking up opposition moves..

Oh_Yoni_Boy

Paddy7 said:

Last night he played mostly at the back of the diamond. In a comfortable win he did ok without really standing out above the youngsters around him. From previous first team games I'd worry about his awareness and positional discipline playing there but he's skillful enough to add something further forward. That said, Aribo made much more impression this time.

I wish our first team would consider the benefits of playing "a flat 4 4 2 in defense mode which becomes a 4 1 2 1 2 offensively (the flat 4 in defence changes to a "diamond " in offensive mode)."

Glad Jason got the memo.

Paddy7

Now where have I heard that before?!

ross1

Oh_Yoni_Boy said:

Paddy7 said:

Last night he played mostly at the back of the diamond. In a comfortable win he did ok without really standing out above the youngsters around him. From previous first team games I'd worry about his awareness and positional discipline playing there but he's skillful enough to add something further forward. That said, Aribo made much more impression this time.

I wish our first team would consider the benefits of playing "a flat 4 4 2 in defense mode which becomes a 4 1 2 1 2 offensively (the flat 4 in defence changes to a "diamond " in offensive mode)."

Glad Jason got the memo.

OK RD, let's hope KR is reading this, or better still, why not send him an email?

MuttleyCAFC

I am guessing that Ba probably wants the best deal he can get when he leaves us, so he has every incentive to impress. We have a period to cover until the next window. Surely there is an arrangement that suits both parties to be had here.

AddickedAthletic

Redrobo said:

Ba and Tex are just the sort of players everyone is looking for in January. Not played all season and nowhere near match fit.

I can't see much of a profit being made here Daisy. Undisclosed it is then.

Sort of player we usually buy under this ownership!!!

Garrymanilow

cantersaddick said:

Garrymanilow said:

Our central midfield lacks mobility. Given how strong our back four is we don't necessarily need a midfield shield in a 4-4-2 at L1 level, so having Ba who at the very least can shift around the pitch might allow Ulvestad to have a bit more space to operate in. If Ba's willing to put some work in he's most likely above the level of a lot of midfielders in L1 and definitely better than Crofts

I just don't see it that way at all. Of you're gonna replace Crofts for more of a passing or forward looking CM they at least need to be a very good tackler. Ba isn't.

If you think our midfield gets overrun at the moment it'll be far worse with Ba and Freddy.

I think that Ba is capable of being a very good tackler, when he can be bothered. The question is if he can. Against Sheffield Wednesday he was haring around the place breaking up play superbly. Diarra was there to sweep up but it was Ba who disrupted the opposition's rhythm the most. He's got strength and mobility, he just needs to apply himself. Conversely, Crofts is definitely a trier, but opposition players know they can pass round him because he's just not got the pace to close them down effectively, or the explosiveness to get by a player, so they can cut off his passing options, make him play a sideways pass and increase the pressure on our backline. Just having a player devoted to defending in the middle doesn't stop you getting overrun if the opposition know they can comfortably bypass the shield with a bit of pace and precision.

I do take your point though, it's not an ideal situation. In Kashi we have a player who can both shield and play forward, but it's been so long since he played consistently I'm starting to genuinely wonder if I dreamt him

Fumbluff

Ba Back A Lula

Talal

Crusty54 said:

Ba played quite well up front at Welling pre season.

I said at the time that would be first on his end of season highlights reel. Looks like it might be the only thing on it.

Todds_right_hook

Jack Charlton said:

Ba will score the winner at then Den, You heard it here first folks.

Last minute own goal

NornIrishAddick

Todds_right_hook said:

Jack Charlton said:

Ba will score the winner at then Den, You heard it here first folks.

Last First minute own goal

Fixed that for you...

Being relentlessly positive as always.

MuttleyCAFC

I'm not saying Ba is the answer, but he might be a short term one. The first step is to put him on the bench and see if there is any mileage there surely. It may be entirely negative, but if he puts in performances I know he is capable of to impress future employers, well it won't do us any harm. If he doesn't we have tried something.

harveys_gardener

KR must be aware of the COL factor, so needs to use all his resources including kids and previous untouchables. He has seen a few games, others on video so must know JJ, Crofts and perhaps Ajose aren't up to it. If Foley and Solly are injured, I'm surprised RCC wadn't played RB for U23s where he has experience and has league experience. Why bench Aribo then not give him a chance in a game we were 2nd best?