|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Nov 25, 2009 12:43:01 GMT
Firstly I don't think he's terrible and I don't want to heap more abuse on someone who isn't getting a great reception from the fans.
However, it seems as though there is little praise for him, is anyone a fan (joking aside?)
One of our coaches (can't remember who) stated something like ''he does things that go unmissed by the fans but we (the team) see the good things he does''
Now to me that's a little patronising, but perhaps I'm missing something?
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 25, 2009 12:56:14 GMT
It is patronising because we notice the things that Diao used to that we didn't notice and the same goes for Delap. Whithead bar 3 good things in the Portsmouth game has none of that. He just sits off and jockeys. He keeps shape which maybe is the unmissed thing. But if You trained a dog, he could keep shape. So it's patronising to the extreme and an excuse for a generally poor player.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2009 12:56:24 GMT
You're not. It is patronising.
The kindest thing I can think of to say about him is that he possibly isn't the kind of midfielder that we're asking him to be, and he might be better were he allowed to play his own game.
Shouldn't be in the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by dadofsam on Nov 25, 2009 13:16:18 GMT
shouldn't have been bought , not because he's shite but because he's not what Pulis wanted
|
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Nov 25, 2009 13:20:32 GMT
Whilst he puts on the red and white of my beloved Potters I wont slag him off.
He hasn't done that bad a job to be fair considering where we are in the league. Vast improvement on what we had there before.
Anthony Pulis anyone????
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2009 13:21:57 GMT
Whilst he puts on the red and white of my beloved Potters I wont slag him off. He hasn't done that bad a job to be fair considering where we are in the league. Vast improvement on what we had there before. Anthony Pulis anyone???? Not a hugely fair comparison really, given that lil Ant never played and Whitehead cost a fair wedge and is a fixture in the side. |
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Nov 25, 2009 13:21:56 GMT
Let see how he's looking after Christmas eh? Midfielders ALWAYS take forever to settle into a Pulis side, it just comes with the territory.
|
|
|
|
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Nov 25, 2009 13:24:02 GMT
. . . . or even David Rowson.
|
|
|
|
Post by rabbigan on Nov 25, 2009 14:25:12 GMT
In fairness to Whitehead he is being asked to play a role which he has never played in his career.
He described himself when he came as abox to box player and I thought thats what we were getting.
Now he finds he is docked wages if he crosses the halfway line.
He played a nice one two with Etherington against Portsmouth and perhaps the role he has been given is totally unsuited to him.
IN THAT CASE WHY DID WE BUY HIM. THAT IS THE QUESTION.
|
|
|
|
Post by NE8Stokie on Nov 25, 2009 14:32:45 GMT
Can admin pin this to the top of the board? Then we wont have a daily Dean Whitehead thread?!
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 25, 2009 14:45:27 GMT
Whilst he puts on the red and white of my beloved Potters I wont slag him off. He hasn't done that bad a job to be fair considering where we are in the league. Vast improvement on what we had there before. Anthony Pulis anyone???? What has Anthony Pulis got to do with anything? He's not an improvement on Diao, Whelan, Delap and Amdy Faye. That's what counts. |
|
|
|
Post by steinosjockstrap on Nov 25, 2009 14:54:55 GMT
Personally,I thought Whitehead improved a lot after Diao was subbed against Portsmouth.This situatuion seem a bit similar to last season when Amdy Faye looked a lot better player after he wasn't played alongside another similar type.Let's judge him after his time here is done.
|
|
|
|
Post by jen on Nov 25, 2009 15:07:07 GMT
Personally,I thought Whitehead improved a lot after Diao was subbed against Portsmouth.This situatuion seem a bit similar to last season when Amdy Faye looked a lot better player after he wasn't played alongside another similar type.Let's judge him after his time here is done. Agreed completely. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 25, 2009 15:09:41 GMT
Personally,I thought Whitehead improved a lot after Diao was subbed against Portsmouth.This situatuion seem a bit similar to last season when Amdy Faye looked a lot better player after he wasn't played alongside another similar type.Let's judge him after his time here is done. He did look better but still he didn't look particularly good. And Diao and Whitehead aren't similar players. They're both defensive but in different ways. Salif tackles and passes more (usually), Whitehead keeps shape. If Whitehead was more like Diao I'd be well pleased. |
|
|
|
Post by mikeyb99 on Nov 25, 2009 15:30:08 GMT
Jees, its not like we've asked Kaka to play the defensive-midfield role for us is it?! If Whitehead looked any kind of player he would have showed it, at least in glimpses. As it is, he's been totally anonymous most of the time, and garbage the rest. He can't pass, shoot or tackle, nor harry the opposition, and shouldn't be in the team.
|
|
djscfc
Youth Player
Posts: 298
|
Post by djscfc on Nov 25, 2009 18:12:15 GMT
Perhaps he might get better in time but i wouldnt choose him in the starting 11
|
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Nov 25, 2009 18:32:25 GMT
"One of our coaches (can't remember who) stated something like ''he does things that go unmissed by the fans but we (the team) see the good things he does''
Yup, that pretty much reeks of a typical Pulis statement when talking of his favorites!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by kingdeano on Nov 25, 2009 18:38:53 GMT
when we signed him i thought oh fuck another piece of dead wood! im just waiting for jan when pulis can sign george mcartney or that nosworthy!! 2 more wank signings!! bit like collins and shithead! neither are a patch on delap and higgy! and thats the worrying part!
|
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Nov 25, 2009 18:45:18 GMT
Am i a fan of Whitehead? Not particularly no.
Am i a big fan of ANY of our central midfielders? Not particularly no.
The worst criticism i could label at Whitehead this early isn't that he's shit but that i'm not sure we really needed him.
If we shift some deadwood in January though and he flits between 1st team starter and the bench then i've got no problem with the lad. He's settling in and slowly but surely he's improving.
|
|
|
|
Post by bogus on Nov 25, 2009 18:50:14 GMT
Am i a fan of Whitehead? Not particularly no. Am i particularly a fan of ANY of our central midfielders? Not particularly no. The worst criticism i could label at Whitehead this early isn't that he's shit but that i'm not sure we really needed him. If we shift some deadwood in January though and he flits between 1st team starter and the bench then i've got no problem with the lad. He's settling in and slowly but surely he's improving. I'd go along with that. It's any 2 from the four for me, given the roles we're asking them to perform. Like most people on here, I'd really prefer to just see two of the four, and they all might show a little better with two wide men. |
|
|
|
Post by nottinghamstokie on Nov 25, 2009 18:52:26 GMT
shouldn't have been bought , not because he's shite but because he's not what Pulis wanted How on earth do you know he's not what Pulis "wanted" ?? You mean that TP didn't sanction the signing or that he didn't do his "research" ( which would be truly unbelieveable ) ?? Or do you mean that TP thinks Richardson is spelt "Whitehead" ? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by fortressbrit on Nov 25, 2009 18:54:48 GMT
hes no worse than the other central midfielders,he works his socks off in a defensive role which is what the manager tells him to do,if your boss tells you to do your job the way he wants it done then you do it. we havent seen the complete whitehead cuz his boss only wants to the defensive one.
|
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Nov 25, 2009 18:57:18 GMT
He anonymous in midfield and he struggles to make an impact.
I want him to suceed but I can't see it happening.
|
|
|
|
Post by Miles Offside on Nov 25, 2009 19:06:13 GMT
In fairness to Whitehead he is being asked to play a role which he has never played in his career. He described himself when he came as abox to box player and I thought thats what we were getting. Now he finds he is docked wages if he crosses the halfway line. He played a nice one two with Etherington against Portsmouth and perhaps the role he has been given is totally unsuited to him. IN THAT CASE WHY DID WE BUY HIM. THAT IS THE QUESTION. The answer to that question, I think, is that Pulis couldn't get better players to come to the club so settled for Whitehead as an experienced pro of the right age. |
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 25, 2009 19:19:41 GMT
Whitehead was a panic buy. Beardy-You're saying he's improving for a 20 minute spell where he did a few good things. Barring that all season he's been woeful. I think it's that blind optomism again!  |
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Nov 25, 2009 19:35:41 GMT
Whitehead was a panic buy. Beardy - You're saying he's improving for a 20 minute spell where he did a few good things. Barring that all season he's been woeful. I think it's that blind optomism again! No that's what you're saying. You're the one who gives him 4 or 5 every week if he's lucky. I've seen a little more than that but i'm not blaming Whitehead for the fact that Lawrence isn't playing and judging him accordingly. As i keep saying, i don't think he's been brilliant but i don't think he's been that bad either. None of our central midfielders are great but the idea that swapping Whitehead for Delap/Whelan is suddenly going to turn us into a different team is laughable in my opinion. As i've relentlessly said, the fact that Whitehead's inclusion by default seems to have pushed Lenny out is not Whitehead's fault and it doesn't change my view of him or his performances (i'm not so sure others can separate the two). The team is a lot harder to watch because of Rory on the wing not because of Whitehead in the middle or Whelan being missing. There's only 3 things i REALLY want and that's Ethers and Lenny on the wings and Ric up front. After that it all gets pretty cloudy for me and Pulis can do what he likes to be honest. If that means Whitehead in the middle over Delap and Whelan then it's certainly no biggy to me. |
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Nov 25, 2009 19:39:01 GMT
"The Dean Whitehead Situation"? Is that a successor to The Mary Whitehouse Experience?
See that useless central midfielder, that's your dad that is! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by MrMagic on Nov 25, 2009 19:44:47 GMT
Saying that he does a lot of work that goes un-noticed is similar to when we were told that Cressy did a lot of hard work off the ball. It's basically saying "you fans know nothing so shut up".
I've been wondering about the question that keeps being asked around why Pulis bought Whitehead (or a number of other players) when he doesn't fit into the system, or isn't really what we wanted.
Is the answer that very few other sides play a style similar to Pulis' and because of that he is shopping in a very limited pool. In order to get value for money he has to buy players that don't quite fit the profile that he really wants?
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 25, 2009 19:44:58 GMT
I wish it was as simple as I didn't want him here therefore I think he's crap. Sadly it isn't. He is the definition of anonymity. He does absolutely bugger all and he has been worse than I thought he would be. And the inclusion of Whitehead has pushed Delap on the wing, granted that is not Whitehead's fault but maybe it is why people are getting frustrated with TP. And he gets such low marks because he does nothing to warrant more. At most he gets a sore arse from sitting that deep and feel the wrath of Abdy's of sword. Maybe I'm missing the unseen things he does. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Nov 25, 2009 19:50:10 GMT
Whitehead has perfected the art of invisibility.
|
|
