Craig Stanley

[SuperNickyWroe]

you are right dave, i didnt word it very well did I? :Oops:

and if i was stuck on the bench or in the reserves i wouldnt be happy with our mr buckle either....


buckle out! =D

[Bigman]

Regarding Stanley, he'll be a big miss, been very impressed by him in the games I've seen, and echoing other posters he'd be my number one choice of loan players to sign up permanently.

For matches without him, it depends how offensive Bucks wants to go. I would replace him with Oastler and have him sit with Lathrope, with O'Kane coming in for Murray for a bit of creativity and forward drive. Jake and Zebs to attack from wide areas to feed off Tomlin.

This is partly based on being unsure of how Murray is being used and how well he's doing, but I think it gives our most dangerous attacking players the chance to do what they do best.

As for Ellis, the fact that he has come on as a sub regularly suggests to me that there's no underlying problem and he's just being kept out of the team by others playing well together. I've always been a fan of Robertson at right back, thus giving us a long thrower on either side of the pitch, plus an extra aerial presence at both ends of the pitch, so in theory wouldn't be opposed to Ellis coming in and Manse going into midfield. However, I think Robertson prefers central defence and would personally prefer we stick with a backline that's working well.

[CP Gull]

A great shame that Staners will miss the next two games BUT it could have been a lot worse it seems. It appears that Sammy McIlroy asked him to come back (before the weekend) to Morecambe and help them in their relegation struggle. Fortunately, for us, Staners turned him down and said he would prefer to stay with us. I suppose if they had have been bloody minded enough they (Morecambe) could have insisted that he come back (under their right of recall clause) but if the player really doesn't want to, then I guess there really is little point in "forcing" him to.

I guess the fact that Morecambe got a very good win on Saturday (well done to them!) at Rotherham has eased their relegation fears considerably and so hopefully there won't be a further request - obviously the fact that he (Stanley) is now suspended for the next couple of games also means that we are only talking about being able to play in 3 more games for us (4 if he were to go back to Morecambe) anyway.

Personally I am hoping that this may be a positive sign that perhaps he sees his future with us, certainly can't see him returning to Morecambe now - other than perhaps to bid them farewell on the last game of the season. Although in all honesty I half expect him to want to be in the stands at the Don Valley Stadium cheering our boys on, especially if there is something riding on the game as he certainly seems to have settled in well with the rest of the squad and seems very much a part of all the good things that have happened to us over the last couple of months.

Nice one, Staners :~D

[Fonda]

I just answered your post, I didn't accuse you of saying he wasn't being used properly and neither did I say he was the best player in the division.

Has it occurred to you that as he is so young it isn't really established by anyone yet, even himself, as to what is his best role within a starting eleven?

Um, yes it has Dave. I'm not really sure what argument it is you're trying to have here? Just to confirm, I'm quite happy with the way Eunan is developing and being developed. At no stage have i suggested otherwise. I merely commented on the suggestion made earlier (and i didn't suggest it was one you had made) that he is the best player in the division might be a slight exaggeration. Really, nothing to see here.

[Trojan 67]

We will miss Stanner's presence for the next two matches of that there is no doubt.

Who comes in to do what and where and for how long, in Paul Buckle I trust.

Since Saturday, all the planning/tactics/formation for Bradford has/is being honed on the training ground to adjust for the loss of Stanners and to come away from Valley Parade with maximum points.

[Southampton Gull]

Um, yes it has Dave. I'm not really sure what argument it is you're trying to have here? Just to confirm, I'm quite happy with the way Eunan is developing and being developed. At no stage have i suggested otherwise. I merely commented on the suggestion made earlier (and i didn't suggest it was one you had made) that he is the best player in the division might be a slight exaggeration. Really, nothing to see here.

I think you're being a touch paranoid, Shane. If you read through my replies there's no hint of me trying to have an argument, I've merely given my opinion. Isn't that what it's all about?

[Fonda]

Or it could be that Eunan is just being used sensibly after his first real full season of English professional football, which he's found hard going unsurprisingly.

I'm not being 'paranoid' at all Dave. I've just tried, on a couple of seperate occasions to clarify my point, which you evidently misunderstood when you first quoated me.

[Southampton Gull]

I misunderstood nothing, you seemingly did as you thought I was arguing with you when just expressing my own views on the subject, views which I still state as the reasons for the way the Manager has utilised him.

Back on topic, I think Oastler will come back as a straight swap for Stanley.

[Fonda]

It's ok to misunderstand Dave. You directly quoted me - the insinuation being you were disagreeing with something i said. Your comment 'or could it be that Eunan is just being used sensibly' suggests that somewhere i gave you the impression i believed otherwise.

And i agree, Oastler will come into the side.

[Southampton Gull]

Shane, I quoted your whole post as it was YOU I was referring to directly with my reply. You take the "insinuation" that I was in disagreement with you, nothing of the sort, I gave what I saw as valid reasons for his deployment or lack of. Stop being so sensitive and looking for things that really aren't there, it makes you appear paranoid.

Just to make it transparent even for you I'll highlight the relevant part

Or it could be that Eunan is just being used sensibly after his first real full season of English professional football, which he's found hard going unsurprisingly.

Is that really me looking for an argument, or is it a perfectly reasonable reply to your post?

[Trojan 67]

I misunderstood nothing, you seemingly did as you thought I was arguing with you when just expressing my own views on the subject, views which I still state as the reasons for the way the Manager has utilised him.

Back on topic, I think Oastler will come back as a straight swap for Stanley.

I'm not sure it will be a like for like swap, as Oastler in my opinion is better at sitting in front of the back four breaking up opponent attacks, than coming forward out of defence to play killer through balls.

PB has all week to fine tune who does what, when and where and if spot on and with his jammy luck and proficient officials in charge, we'll come home with 3 points.

[Fonda]

Cheers for the clarification Dave. I'm out.

[Southampton Gull]

If I'm honest Troj, my own preference would be to have Mansell in there. Being away I feel his added bite in there is what's needed but I'm not sure Ellis can be risked at this stage.

[Southampton Gull]

Cheers for the clarification Dave. I'm out.

I'm not sure why you appear to assume I was attacking you. We're both fans of his, both seemingly happy with how he's being used and both capable of making a point without getting upset over it. I was simply offering, or at least trying to offer, explanations as to why he was being wrapped in cotton wool of late. I was told, reliably, that he was exhausted, running on empty and that's all. I'm certain he still has a huge part to play in our season although I'm of the opinion that Bradford away is not the time to use him in a central midfield role, pretty sure you'd agree with me there?

[basil75]

Out of interest, is there actually a recall clause in the Stanley loan deal?

I ask because it was explicitly stated that there was a recall clause when the Tomlin deal was announced with Dagenham, but nothing was mentioned with regards to Stanley.

Could the clause actually involve Stanley agreeing to go back? Hence why he was asked rather than told - he did leave Morecambe on a sour note afterall and may have requested that himself.