We now have the potential to put out a really strong midfield which could neutralise most opponents and create chances of our own, as to whether we will see it !

Tarka Barton

Hendrick Defour

4 excellent players

In all fairness, you'd only pick 3 out of that 4 to start, if we went 4-5-1/ 4-4-1-1 again.

Tarks will probably not become a regular starter in midfield despite your insistence, regardless of how well he does in cameos.

Pick your best players and build the team around them. Start strong with Vokes up front and then release Barnes and Gray in the second half in a more fluid formation.

ablueclaret wrote:Pick your best players and build the team around them. Start strong with Vokes up front and then release Barnes and Gray in the second half in a more fluid formation.

You said ''pick your best players and build around them'' then said ''start Vokes, drop Barnes and Gray''
Doesn't make sense to me, Gray > Barnes > Vokes.

ablueclaret wrote:Pick your best players and build the team around them. Start strong with Vokes up front and then release Barnes and Gray in the second half in a more fluid formation.

No, you just want Tarkowski to play in midfield, that's the drum you keep banging.

He'll only play there for injuries or late on changes, he won't become a regular.

He's potentially our best midfielder, strong, good on the ball, vision and the ability to score, leaving him on the sidelines is foolhardy.

I'm all for Tarks playing - he looks great every time I see him.

Whether or not he can play in midfield for a full 90 minutes is a doubt but no reason to dismiss it as he has looked more than comfortable in the cameos we have seen.

ablueclaret wrote:He's potentially our best midfielder, strong, good on the ball, vision and the ability to score, leaving him on the sidelines is foolhardy.

Ablueclaret was doing 'alternative facts' years before they became de rigueur.

He needs to alter his daily thread by something, Martin. Otherwise he might finish up getting threads locked, for posting the same thing again and again and again and ag...

ablueclaret wrote:He's potentially our best midfielder, strong, good on the ball, vision and the ability to score, leaving him on the sidelines is foolhardy.

Ability to score?

On what basis?

do you have a tattoo with the saying - "I love defenders who play in midfield" ?

What we need in midfield is players who can take the game into the oppositions' half while retaining possession, that's not really what you could expect from a centre-back playing out of position.

Gudmundson ? Seems to have been forgotten in this ?

Personally of what I have seen of him home and away this season he would be one of my starting 4/5 midfielders depending on what formation we play. He looks solid and offers us that extra attacking dimension.

He'd be out wide.

Why is it when people suggest Tarks play infront of the back four, people argue he isn't a midfielder. That role isn't a midfielder, same as Grezza wasn't a midfielder.
It's a unique role that adds strength and numbers to the back line whilst defending, and frees the real midfield to play a higher line and stop leaving the forwards isolated in attack.

Everything about his game says he would fit that position like a hand in a glove, and we would be a better team for it.

Absolutely Colburn although he is better on the ball than some give him credit for.

That isn't the issue.

You're stating he's possibly our best midfielder and the way you try to wax lyrical about him, you'd think he was the next Xavi, or someone like that.

"He's potentially our best midfielder, strong, good on the ball, vision and the ability to score, leaving him on the sidelines is foolhardy."

You've no basis on which to claim he's got the ability to score, strong and good on the ball I'll give you from the little I've seen of him and that's probably about as much as you have seen of him, if not more.
You want to play him over proven midfielders that we have now?

Could he be a CDM?
Possibly, but until he gets regular games there we will never know, but to state he could potentially be our best midfielder is just bizarre when you look at what we've got now.

It's what I see from the evidence in front of me, much like it was evident that Mee would do well at centre back but SD couldn't see that for ages either.

We all knew Mee could play CB, that's what he was at City when he was captain of their youth team that did quite well.

How many times have you actually seen Tarkowski play in midfield that would suggest he'd be better then the 4 we currently have?
I don't mean cameo appearances here and there, I mean a full 90 mins against proper opposition.

What happens if we play him there long term and Mee or Keane get injured, meaning he has to drop back and the whole system has to change again?
Tarkowski will replace Keane as our main CB when/if Keane goes in the summer.
Will you be touting the new lad for midfield too?

You have to be flexible in football. If you can't see the potential of Tarka then I rather fancy you don't really appreciate the finer points of the game. Vision strength good feet confidence good passing ability, strong in the air an excellent all -round player who you can be pretty certain would excel in the holding midfield role. You don't see it as so many didn't with Mee except in retrospect.

ablueclaret wrote:It's what I see from the evidence in front of me, much like it was evident that Mee would do well at centre back but SD couldn't see that for ages either.

You mean from what you read on this board since you don't actually attend matches!!!!

ablueclaret wrote:You have to be flexible in football. If you can't see the potential of Tarka then I rather fancy you don't really appreciate the finer points of the game. Vision strength good feet confidence good passing ability, strong in the air an excellent all -round player who you can be pretty certain would excel in the holding midfield role. You don't see it as so many didn't with Mee except in retrospect.

You haven't seen enough of Tarkowski to know if he'd be anygood though have you, lets be honest?

He makes cameo appearances where it's easier to look good then it is over a sustained period of time, like match after match.

As for being flexible, you complained when Dyche didn't change anything and complained when he did, so either way Dyche won't win with you.

It takes 20 minutes to judge a talent.

ablueclaret wrote:It takes 20 minutes to judge a talent.

Sidney1st wrote:We all knew Mee could play CB, that's what he was at City when he was captain of their youth team that did quite well.

How many times have you actually seen Tarkowski play in midfield that would suggest he'd be better then the 4 we currently have?
I don't mean cameo appearances here and there, I mean a full 90 mins against proper opposition.

Oldham fan I know said that they expected him to end up as a CDM so could be argued that it's a role that he has been expected to have filled for quite some time now from fans of different clubs.

KRBFC wrote:You said ''pick your best players and build around them'' then said ''start Vokes, drop Barnes and Gray''
Doesn't make sense to me, Gray > Barnes > Vokes.

Wrong. Vokes is best of three. He wins the ball, generally keeps it too.

Against Southampton he did what Barnes could not do and won the ball in the air against Van Dyk. Yesterday our biggest problem was, that although Barnes and Gray looked mobile and occasionally threatened in the box, that the ball came back at us too quickly and the pressure was rarely taken off the defence.

For me Vokes should start either on his own in 4-5-1 or with Gray in 4-4-2. Barnes's energy is best kept for tiring defenders

ablueclaret wrote:It takes 20 minutes to judge a talent.

Makes your praise of Easton even more stupid

Down_Rover wrote:Wrong. Vokes is best of three. He wins the ball, generally keeps it too.

Against Southampton he did what Barnes could not do and won the ball in the air against Van Dyk. Yesterday our biggest problem was, that although Barnes and Gray looked mobile and occasionally threatened in the box, that the ball came back at us too quickly and the pressure was rarely taken off the defence.

For me Vokes should start either on his own in 4-5-1 or with Gray in 4-4-2. Barnes's energy is best kept for tiring defenders

HAHAHAHAH Next joke
Barnes is better than Vokes, far more effective. Vokes is your average target man, good in the air and offers a bit of a goal threat. Barnes is more mobile, stronger, better with the ball at his feet, wins cheap freekicks and is technically superior at bringing the ball down and laying it off smoother and quicker. Vokes is too weak. Gray is head and shoulders above the pair of them, of course Vokes/Barnes do have qualities better than Gray but as a PL striker, Gray is superior. When Gray leaves here we'll see just how effective he is and how we should have been using him this season (mainly away), thrives off through balls and service in the box, something he hasn't really been given this season on a consistent basis. Gray would get into a side higher in the league than us, the other two wouldn't. Gray would cost over £15M, the other two wouldn't. Gray was Championship POTY, the other two weren't.

It's a wild thought but why don't we sign midfielders for the middle and defenders for the back.

You only get 5 minutes on MOTD.
If you're lucky.

KRBFC wrote:HAHAHAHAH Next joke
Barnes is better than Vokes, far more effective. Vokes is your average target man, good in the air and offers a bit of a goal threat. Barnes is more mobile, stronger, better with the ball at his feet, wins cheap freekicks and is technically superior at bringing the ball down and laying it off smoother and quicker. Vokes is too weak. Gray is head and shoulders above the pair of them, of course Vokes/Barnes do have qualities better than Gray but as a PL striker, Gray is superior. When Gray leaves here we'll see just how effective he is and how we should have been using him this season (mainly away), thrives off through balls and service in the box, something he hasn't really been given this season on a consistent basis. Gray would get into a side higher in the league than us, the other two wouldn't. Gray would cost over £15M, the other two wouldn't. Gray was Championship POTY, the other two weren't.

so pleased you don't pick the team.

Barnes is the equivalent of a pinchhitter in cricket. He is unpredictable and may upset the opposition. Once he becomes an exposed player he will be less effective. Far better coming on as sub. Could not find a way thru v Southampton and Vokes was far more effective

Vokes is the best of the three at bringing others into play, and that is not just a strike partner. He has played well supported by Arfield in one game and Hendrick later. He is the only choice if the team plays 4-5-1, and it seems our manager agrees.

Gray does very well for a player who finds it hard to control; a ball and harder to pass it. I agree his main asset is raw speed and aggression and he still needs to learn how to use these to his best advantage

The game is all about teamwork not who scores the most goals. Though as a follower of Burnley ( Are you?) you might have worked that one out

Down_Rover wrote:so pleased you don't pick the team.

Barnes is the equivalent of a pinchhitter in cricket. He is unpredictable and may upset the opposition. Once he becomes an exposed player he will be less effective. Far better coming on as sub. Could not find a way thru v Southampton and Vokes was far more effective

Vokes is the best of the three at bringing others into play, and that is not just a strike partner. He has played well supported by Arfield in one game and Hendrick later. He is the only choice if the team plays 4-5-1, and it seems our manager agrees.

Gray does very well for a player who finds it hard to control; a ball and harder to pass it. I agree his main asset is raw speed and aggression and he still needs to learn how to use these to his best advantage

The game is all about teamwork not who scores the most goals. Though as a follower of Burnley ( Are you?) you might have worked that one out

Goals win games, being a Burnley fan I know we wouldn't have been promoted without the goals from Paterson Ings and Gray on the 3 occasions.
You're so pleased I don't pick the team well I guess you're unhappy Dyche picks the team too considering he doesn't start Vokes over either of the other two. Vokes is a limited striker, a Burnley legend for his part in the two promotions and I don't want to sit and slag him off, but to say he's a better striker than Gray is OTT.

Sidney1st wrote:

You're playing Chess with a Pidgeon here, Sydney.

What I said about Easton Edgar and Eckersley was that they deserved a chance. Eckersley went backwards as with time did Edgar, Easton was probably the oddest footballer ever, looked completely out of place on the pitch but obviously had more skill than he ever showed for us, I think he just didn't have the self belief or fitness to compete at the level we were at.

None of them were ever going to be world beaters or showed sufficient class to suggest a Premiership career beckoned, but like MacDonald they could,except perhaps Easton,with careful handling,have become better players,in fact they all regressed.

Vokes is the striker of choice in a 4-5-1 set-up, but in a 4-4-2 Gray and Barnes.

I have to say Ablue you are a bit like Marmite!

ablueclaret wrote:What I said about Easton Edgar and Eckersley was that they deserved a chance. Eckersley went backwards as with time did Edgar, Easton was probably the oddest footballer ever, looked completely out of place on the pitch but obviously had more skill than he ever showed for us, I think he just didn't have the self belief or fitness to compete at the level we were at.

None of them were ever going to be world beaters or showed sufficient class to suggest a Premiership career beckoned, but like MacDonald they could,except perhaps Easton,with careful handling,have become better players,in fact they all regressed.

Could it be that, despite all the 'careful handling' by a succession of managers at a variety of different clubs, all three players are actually shite and THAT'S why none of them have played at a higher level?

CnBtruntru wrote:I have to say Ablue you are a bit like Marmite!

What? A byproduct of the Brewing Industry?

Edgar went backwards?

Still waiting for this midfield

Why do people always suggest Tarks in front of the defence? He's a decent passer sure but it's easy to pass when everything is in front of you.

Juan Tanamera wrote:You only get 5 minutes on MOTD.
If you're lucky.

even when you are the only match played that day - more time given to a interview with the foreign manager