I think that yesterdays performance proves that Chris Wood is our new #1 striker. So where does this leave Sam Vokes? I don't see him being comfortable in the role of late substitute only. Besides, he lacks the pace of either Barnes or Wood. Could he be a transfer target before Thursday?

Southampton?

In our next starting line-up?

Wood as an inverted winger?

[quote="ontario claret"]I think that yesterdays performance proves that Chris Wood is our new #1 striker. So where does this leave Sam Vokes? I don't see him being comfortable in the role of late substitute only. Besides, he lacks the pace of either Barnes or Wood. Could he be a transfer target before Thursday? [/quote

Selling Vokes would be an act of absolute madness.

Wait a minute.
Are you suggesting that because Chris Wood came on as a sub and scored, that Sam Voke's Burnley career is now in jeopardy?

Yes.

Sam Vokes is now 2 league games without a goal, whereas Wood has scored in every half he's played this season. He should probably be released just to get him off the wage bill.

I'm just saying, Barnes and Wood make a better combination, and I'm not sure Sam would be 100% comfortable in a reduced role.

Not saying released, but if somebody is willing to overpay for him, just like Gray, well.........

ontario claret wrote:Yes.

Do you have sunstroke ?

Sunstroke, no. But I AM a realist. Tell me exactly where Sam fits in now.

What time is it over there? Have you been on the sauce for a while??

ontario claret wrote:Sunstroke, no. But I AM a realist. Tell me exactly where Sam fits in now.

Upfront - you know that position he played a few days ago when he got 2 goals and man of the match against the champions.

Any more silly questions ?

Crazy thread.

Wood wasn't with the club when he scored those 2 goals. I'm not saying to get rid of him, but how willing is he to stay?

I presume this is a wind-up attempt?
We accommodated Vokes, Gray & Barnes in our squad last season (Vokes being the top scorer). Why would we not be able to accommodate Vokes, Wood & Barnes this season?
Sam started the game yesterday and did a pretty good job in the first half whilst isolated most of the time - Wood was the sub (who did very well in that role when we attacked more in the later stages). How does that "prove" that Wood is now number 1?

Ontario is usually fairly sensible, I think he's just having one of those Canadian moments.

At ant rate, I don't think it'll leave big Sam crying in his car any time soon.

Even with Gray on the club, Sam was still #1. That's now in doubt, at least. Just see where this goes.

Like I say, it will be entirely up to Sam. We'll see.

So Sam was first choice alongside gray ..gray goes to Watford,so Sam is first choice alongside Barnes.then wood arrives and loses out to woods and Barnes ??? It was only last week on here Barnes was going to Newcastle! Were obviously going to use all three.and who plays depends on who we play.

"Canadian Moment". At the hockey rink, or my favourite Tim Horton's? Not this time.

LeadBelly wrote:I presume this is a wind-up attempt?
We accommodated Vokes, Gray & Barnes in our squad last season (Vokes being the top scorer). Why would we not be able to accommodate Vokes, Wood & Barnes this season?
Sam started the game yesterday and did a pretty good job in the first half whilst isolated most of the time - Wood was the sub (who did very well in that role when we attacked more in the later stages). How does that "prove" that Wood is now number 1?

What about Walters?

Alanstevensonsgloves wrote:What about Walters?

He's surplus to requirements now.

tim_noone wrote:He's surplus to requirements now.

Behave Timothy!

Alanstevensonsgloves wrote:What about Walters?

Looking a bit of a strange signing at present.
But Sean has been looking for more strength in depth, and I guess Walters provides that.

I've heard that Walters has been agitating for a move since Dyche hauled him off in the first half of the derby.

Alanstevensonsgloves wrote:Behave Timothy!

Was joking...it's great we have grown as a team and now have a big squad leading to competition for places that's how the games played,not one in one out....

ontario claret wrote:I think that yesterdays performance proves that Chris Wood is our new #1 striker. So where does this leave Sam Vokes? I don't see him being comfortable in the role of late substitute only. Besides, he lacks the pace of either Barnes or Wood. Could he be a transfer target before Thursday?

Didnt Vokes make more sub appearances than any other player in the Prem last season? Also he made less starts than Gray and only one more then Barnes with Gray getting his homophobic tweet ban and Barnes starting the season injured so Im sure he must reasonably comfortable that he is not Burnleys outright #1 striker

Drugs must be pretty potent in Canada at the moment......

ontario claret wrote:Wood wasn't with the club when he scored those 2 goals. I'm not saying to get rid of him, but how willing is he to stay?

So if Vokes scores two when Wood is here but Wood only scored one and Vokes none at all with them both here then surely the common sense solution is to get rid of Wood! No?

ontario claret wrote:I think that yesterdays performance proves that Chris Wood is our new #1 striker. So where does this leave Sam Vokes? I don't see him being comfortable in the role of late substitute only. Besides, he lacks the pace of either Barnes or Wood. Could he be a transfer target before Thursday?

Stupid boy OC...now go and stand in the corner

And we can only name 18 in a match day squad anyway. That being the case it's always been a bit of a mystery to me why we need any more than 18 players.

I've got a stonkin' headache now.
Thanks very much martin_p.

Now we have a squad full of PL players we can do that rotation thingy that Fergie invented.

Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't Vokes got seven goals in his last nine Premier league games?

And he's now finished at Burnley?

ontario claret wrote:I think that yesterdays performance proves that Chris Wood is our new #1 striker. So where does this leave Sam Vokes? I don't see him being comfortable in the role of late substitute only. Besides, he lacks the pace of either Barnes or Wood. Could he be a transfer target before Thursday?

Just curious who would you replace them with ?

Braindead wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't Vokes got seven goals in his last nine Premier league games?

And he's now finished at Burnley?

Yeah but Vokes can't score now Wood is here. Incontrovertible fact backed by the stats.

ontario claret = agent for blackburn rovers

Why is Barnes being mentioned? I thought I read somewhere last week that we are ready to listen to offers for him.... I would have thought if anyone is surplus to requirements now, it's Barnes......

Woods did nowt till his goal.
Was offside more than he touched ball.

Great finish saved him a proper slagging off on here.

Always good to see the old drugs or alcohol response when something that might upset the old apple cart is posted. I expect something a little more imaginative than that. Listen, the only real question I'm asking is is Vokes willing to accept a reduced role? If he is, great. It's perfect. But if he isn't (and I believe he has 2 years left on his contract), then what? Give him an extension, like Gray was offered, and if he turns it down, try to move him before Thursday, or just let him play out his existing deal. Not the ideal situation if, indeed, he is unhappy.

His dad seemed rather happy on Sunday talking to burnley fans..after he'd been subbed if that's owt to go by.....

After Sam had been subbed that is!!

What position does his dad play?

In reference to your "if Sam is unhappy" his father seemed happy. Why should Sam be unhappy? Enlighten me.

Simple. Less playing time.

ontario claret wrote:Simple. Less playing time.

That's part and parcel of the game..anyway he's currently a burnley player.I can't speculate as to his unhappiness.utc!

I can't speculate either. But I can still ask the question.