Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Josh Davison - Sold to Tranmere (pg 17)

17810121317

Comments

  • LoOkOuT said:
    Davis-son or Da-vison? 

    I don't know why this should even be a question; Should be Davis-son to me, but I keep hearing Da-vison. 
    I think that’s just Adkins’ attempt to make him sound more exotic to cover up the fact we didn’t sign any decent strikers.
  • edited September 2021
    It was interesting that Stockley looked the most animated he has done for a while when he came on as a sub. It was all a bit forlorn with the scoreline as it was, but it was perhaps a sign the penny has dropped and that Davison is genuine competition for him.
    With 2 in 2 for Davison it has to be Josh's place to lose now. 

    I'm not convinced the problems with Stockley are about how we play, he has been generally poor. He's not even won many headers, it seems like opposing managers and defenders have sussed him.
  • Scoham said:
    It was interesting that Stockley looked the most animated he has done for a while when he came on as a sub. It was all a bit forlorn with the scoreline as it was, but it was perhaps a sign the penny has dropped and that Davison is genuine competition for him.
    I said elsewhere there was a clear reaction from Famewo too. He was far more composed on the ball and always looking to pass the ball out or drive up the pitch himself.

    Worth getting Kirk and/or DJ back in the squad to see if we get a similar reaction. Far too early to say any of those four are failures of recruitment, as has been suggested.
    If it were being done in smaller quantities I think we'd call this good management. We finally have a big enough squad of first team players to give players genuine competition across the season if they're not performing, and the players know they need to shape up when they get reinstated. The problem is that it's half the team getting this treatment at the moment, everyone except Lavelle and MacGillivray must have no idea if they're going to play week to week and why that is.
  • When the team is losing no player should feel secure or get all Bertie Big Bollocks, even Lavelle and MacGillivray.
  • Have been impressed by Davison this season. I like a player who busts a gut, and he clearly has the fitness to do so for much of the ninety.
    If we can start to dominate teams (??!!) can see him becoming a real goal threat.
    And as for crosses being wasted if Stockley isn't in the side, well there's no reason why Josh shouldn't score with his head too, if he gets the opportunity.
  • LoOkOuT said:
    Davis-son or Da-vison? 

    I don't know why this should even be a question; Should be Davis-son to me, but I keep hearing Da-vison. 
    It makes him sound a bit French  :D
  • Makes him sound like this:


  • seth plum said:
    When the team is losing no player should feel secure or get all Bertie Big Bollocks, even Lavelle and MacGillivray.
    Especially Lavelle - he started ropey and deteriorated rapidly throughout but with only JP as likely competition his place ain't under much threat, is it?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Give me 10 players like Davison and I will take that.....110% committed and works his balls off. 
  • He's doing well. 2 goals and hit the post twice in last few games, plus being a handful. L1 is a great platform for him and his hair.
  • PaddyP17 said:
    I live in hope


    Good call mate. Really like the look of him. Superb work rate and gets his shots away. 
  • Our 433 makes it unlikely but I'd like to see Davison play off Stockley..

    Josh's running would compliment Stockley's hold up play.

    Add Leko or one of the other wingers and that could be a potent attack
  • Our 433 makes it unlikely but I'd like to see Davison play off Stockley..

    Josh's running would compliment Stockley's hold up play.

    Add Leko or one of the other wingers and that could be a potent attack
    It was more like a 4-4-2 yesterday than 4-3-3, Lee played high up rather than close to the midfield two. Would be interesting to see them alongside each other, Lee’s a good player but it would give us a more physical front two. Could be useful in certain games.
  • seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
  • seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    Rather - had we not released him, he might have been a one man club! Being a decade at one club, as he was at Bournemouth, doesn't suggest that he has spent his career "chasing the money". In recent times, he has had a few clubs but that is because his career is now, at the age of almost 32, going the other way. And we know that we aren't the highest payers in that respect from the fact that we have been outbid by clubs for other players.
  • If only there were a Harry Arter thread?!
  • seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    I suppose what makes me say that is frustration that he is kind of blocking an opportunity for one of our home grown.
    I have been unimpressed with him so far, although I am well aware of his provenance and what he was able to do in the past, but for me Watson is bad enough in this (blocking) regard.
    I would rather play Dempsey, or Vennings or Henry, if we’re going to be crap I would rather it was our crap.
  • Sponsored links:


  • seth plum said:
    seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    I suppose what makes me say that is frustration that he is kind of blocking an opportunity for one of our home grown.
    I have been unimpressed with him so far, although I am well aware of his provenance and what he was able to do in the past, but for me Watson is bad enough in this (blocking) regard.
    I would rather play Dempsey, or Vennings or Henry, if we’re going to be crap I would rather it was our crap.
    He's better than all those you've listed and brings experience of being promoted at this level and the one above.
  • seth plum said:
    seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    I suppose what makes me say that is frustration that he is kind of blocking an opportunity for one of our home grown.
    I have been unimpressed with him so far, although I am well aware of his provenance and what he was able to do in the past, but for me Watson is bad enough in this (blocking) regard.
    I would rather play Dempsey, or Vennings or Henry, if we’re going to be crap I would rather it was our crap.
    Although you could equally argue that if the youngsters were good enough and ready, they would be playing already?
    Besides that, however good the young prospect, is it what the team needs right now?

    Just my IMO of course ...... but since the introduction of U23 development leagues at the expense of the old reserve team leagues, something has been lost in preparing youngsters to be ready for League games.

    The old reserve team could be pretty competitive. 
    Led by a couple of old Pros, the fringe squad players all got competitive games, keeping them more or less match fit.
    And the cream of the kids got a game too, toughening them up both physically and mentally.

    It was a good stepping stone between youth teams and the league team.
    Okay, older prospects get the chance now to go out on loan and gain competitive experience elsewhere. 
    But that doesn't keep your squad players match fit and doesn't help your teenage prospects.








  • edited October 2021
    seth plum said:
    seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    I suppose what makes me say that is frustration that he is kind of blocking an opportunity for one of our home grown.
    I have been unimpressed with him so far, although I am well aware of his provenance and what he was able to do in the past, but for me Watson is bad enough in this (blocking) regard.
    I would rather play Dempsey, or Vennings or Henry, if we’re going to be crap I would rather it was our crap.
    We’re aiming to improve and he’s a better player than all of them. If any of them were ready they’d be involved, we shouldn’t be playing them because the owner wants to use the academy (as we saw under RD). It’s not too late to make the playoffs.
  • seth plum said:
    seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    I suppose what makes me say that is frustration that he is kind of blocking an opportunity for one of our home grown.
    I have been unimpressed with him so far, although I am well aware of his provenance and what he was able to do in the past, but for me Watson is bad enough in this (blocking) regard.
    I would rather play Dempsey, or Vennings or Henry, if we’re going to be crap I would rather it was our crap.
    None of which are ready to be playing regularly yet, and throwing them in too soon (especially in a struggling team) could well set them back not bring them on. 
  • I take on board all the points made above.
    I want the team to accumulate points too, if that happens with Arter then great, but if we're destined to struggle against relegation all season not so great.
    Another point occurs to me about whether players are ready or not, I have been secretly thinking that if Elewere were minded to sign a good contract then he plays in the first team immediately. Bosh.
  • I want him to play well and we win points.
  • Scoham said:
    seth plum said:
    seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    I suppose what makes me say that is frustration that he is kind of blocking an opportunity for one of our home grown.
    I have been unimpressed with him so far, although I am well aware of his provenance and what he was able to do in the past, but for me Watson is bad enough in this (blocking) regard.
    I would rather play Dempsey, or Vennings or Henry, if we’re going to be crap I would rather it was our crap.
    We’re aiming to improve and he’s a better player than all of them. If any of them were ready they’d be involved, we shouldn’t be playing them because the owner wants to use the academy (as we saw under RD). It’s not too late to make the playoffs.
    Wanna bet ?
    Bet what, that we make the playoffs? I’m not saying we will, I’m saying there’s enough points to play for to make it possible.
  • Scoham said:
    seth plum said:
    seth plum said:
    Yeah I know Arter started here, but he is still an expensive mercenary.
    A bit harsh?
    I suppose what makes me say that is frustration that he is kind of blocking an opportunity for one of our home grown.
    I have been unimpressed with him so far, although I am well aware of his provenance and what he was able to do in the past, but for me Watson is bad enough in this (blocking) regard.
    I would rather play Dempsey, or Vennings or Henry, if we’re going to be crap I would rather it was our crap.
    We’re aiming to improve and he’s a better player than all of them. If any of them were ready they’d be involved, we shouldn’t be playing them because the owner wants to use the academy (as we saw under RD). It’s not too late to make the playoffs.
    Wanna bet ?
    What odds are you giving ?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!