|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 16:43:50 GMT
So let's get this straight. How many times have you actually seen this young player play? Not many people have seen him play that many games full stop. Since 2016, he's only made 38 appearances including internationals at U17-U20 level. 38 appearances in 4 years, and only 24 of those in full time senior football! and only 9 for Stoke
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 16:48:20 GMT
The evidence for those who choose not to ignore it is his Portugese manager praised him for his five games standing in for the local superstar and the coaches at Stoke praise him for the way he applies himself in training. We know O'Neill has stated that he was keen on seeing Josh play in the first team. We know that O'Neill wasn't planning on taking him off until Tymon himself asked for it. We don't know that he was a walking red card - that's somebody's interpretation of yesterday's game.
He hasn't played a lot for us, but we don't hold it against Verlinden, do we, that he has only made short cameos?
What I would really like is to see those two together, Thibo and Tymons, as they've played a lot together in the Academies. Although it would mean McClean was dropped.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 16:53:45 GMT
We're talking about Tymon here not Powell or other players. Whether he'll ever be good enough to become a regular we won't know unless he gets a chance.....1 game where he didn't really do much wrong and half a game in a Jones team isn't exactly long enough to make an informed decision. Plenty of others have been given a run ....even when performances haven't warranted it, I'm only suggesting Tymon is given the same opportunity The calls to give Tymon (and Edwards) game time while we're in a relegation go fight is borderline insane sentimental bollocks - it's not fair on the team, the club, the supporters or the young players. If we were safe in a dead season then fine. As it is - no way. And thankfully I don't think O'Neil looks like he has much time for sentiment. Those are the EXACT same words you used to advocate against using Tyrese Campbell...and then what happened?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Feb 2, 2020 16:56:52 GMT
The evidence for those who choose not to ignore it is his Portugese manager praised him for his five games standing in for the local superstar and the coaches at Stoke praise him for the way he applies himself in training. We know O'Neill has stated that he was keen on seeing Josh play in the first team. We know that O'Neill wasn't planning on taking him off until Tymon himself asked for it. We don't know that he was a walking red card - that's somebody's interpretation of yesterday's game. He hasn't played a lot for us, but we don't hold it against Verlinden, do we, that he has only made short cameos? What I would really like is to see those two together, Thibo and Tymons, as they've played a lot together in the Academies. Although it would mean McClean was dropped. You could move McClean to Ince's spot on the right. They are both left footers. You would possibly get fewer crosses from McClean but, possibly, more goals.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 16:57:31 GMT
The evidence for those who choose not to ignore it is his Portugese manager praised him for his five games standing in for the local superstar and the coaches at Stoke praise him for the way he applies himself in training. We know O'Neill has stated that he was keen on seeing Josh play in the first team. We know that O'Neill wasn't planning on taking him off until Tymon himself asked for it. We don't know that he was a walking red card - that's somebody's interpretation of yesterday's game. He hasn't played a lot for us, but we don't hold it against Verlinden, do we, that he has only made short cameos? What I would really like is to see those two together, Thibo and Tymons, as they've played a lot together in the Academies. Although it would mean McClean was dropped. I agree with much of that but I doubt O'Neill would play Tymon and Verlinden together on the same wing.He's quite a pragmatic manager,that would be too reckless for him in my opinion.....when the Sky commentator announced Verlinden was coming on a full 5 minutes before he actually did,my 1st thought was Tymon will be coming off.I didn't know he was injured incidentally. I can see him maybe getting more games now we've signed a quality centre half to add stability,experience and ball playing skills that the current incumbants don't possess. On the other hand O'Neill might just stick with the 'safe' option in Bruno
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 17:21:37 GMT
So let's get this straight. How many times have you actually seen this young player play? Not many people have seen him play that many games full stop. Since 2016, he's only made 38 appearances including internationals at U17-U20 level. 38 appearances in 4 years, and only 24 of those in full time senior football! That's actually not a remarkable figure in the negative for someone who's 20 years old. Harry Kane and Jesse Lingard had similar figures or less. Many other now senior players had less. Tymon's chances of getting into our first team have been disrupted by the many managerial changes we've had. His previous manager here had no idea about how to instruct his players for the left back role. They all failed in the role, including McClean.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2020 17:24:39 GMT
The evidence for those who choose not to ignore it is his Portugese manager praised him for his five games standing in for the local superstar and the coaches at Stoke praise him for the way he applies himself in training. We know O'Neill has stated that he was keen on seeing Josh play in the first team. We know that O'Neill wasn't planning on taking him off until Tymon himself asked for it. We don't know that he was a walking red card - that's somebody's interpretation of yesterday's game. He hasn't played a lot for us, but we don't hold it against Verlinden, do we, that he has only made short cameos? What I would really like is to see those two together, Thibo and Tymons, as they've played a lot together in the Academies. Although it would mean McClean was dropped. You could move McClean to Ince's spot on the right. They are both left footers. You would possibly get fewer crosses from McClean but, possibly, more goals. I'd love that very much, as would all other Ince-dislikers, but as for the T double it's one for the future. Hopefully the not too distant future.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Feb 2, 2020 18:19:17 GMT
Stoke lose 4 - 0 and Tymon is getting all the brikbats on this MB and other parts of the media.
OK he was very raw thrown in at the last minute. OK he was over zealous in some of his tackles. OK MON had to sub him before he got another yellow and sent off.
But there is no way he was at fault for out defeat, nor was he responsible for any of the goals, unless you want to blame him for the third, because he was pulled off and there wasn't effectively a proper LB.
He's had very little competitive football and people should cut him some slack. As a 20 year old he has his career ahead of him. Supporters should be patient and support him as though he were their son.
|
|
|
Post by sufolkstokie on Feb 2, 2020 18:23:21 GMT
Stoke lose 4 - 0 and Tymon is getting all the brikbats on this MB and other parts of the media. OK he was very raw thrown in at the last minute. OK he was over zealous in some of his tackles. OK MON had to sub him before he got another yellow and sent off. But there is no way he was at fault for out defeat, nor was he responsible for any of the goals, unless you want to blame him for the third, because he was pulled off and there wasn't effectively a proper LB. He's had very little competitive football and people should cut him some slack. As a 20 year old he has his career ahead of him. Supporters should be patient and support him as though he were their son. 100% He may be good, he may be bad, but the whole team did not turn up at Derby It was a very poor performance from all. You can not judge a newbie on that performance (same as our youthful sub winger).
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Feb 2, 2020 23:07:46 GMT
Actually I thought he was better than Bruno going forwards albeit I acknowledge first thing. We need at the Moment is clean sheets so it would still be Bruno for me bit certainly haven’t written Tymon off
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 3, 2020 8:18:09 GMT
The evidence for those who choose not to ignore it is his Portugese manager praised him for his five games standing in for the local superstar and the coaches at Stoke praise him for the way he applies himself in training. We know O'Neill has stated that he was keen on seeing Josh play in the first team. We know that O'Neill wasn't planning on taking him off until Tymon himself asked for it. We don't know that he was a walking red card - that's somebody's interpretation of yesterday's game. He hasn't played a lot for us, but we don't hold it against Verlinden, do we, that he has only made short cameos? What I would really like is to see those two together, Thibo and Tymons, as they've played a lot together in the Academies. Although it would mean McClean was dropped. The difference is that Verlinden has looked good when he’s played and done well out on loan.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Feb 3, 2020 8:53:30 GMT
Stoke lose 4 - 0 and Tymon is getting all the brikbats on this MB and other parts of the media. OK he was very raw thrown in at the last minute. OK he was over zealous in some of his tackles. OK MON had to sub him before he got another yellow and sent off. But there is no way he was at fault for out defeat, nor was he responsible for any of the goals, unless you want to blame him for the third, because he was pulled off and there wasn't effectively a proper LB. He's had very little competitive football and people should cut him some slack. As a 20 year old he has his career ahead of him. Supporters should be patient and support him as though he were their son. Some supporters are supporting him (and our other academy players) as if they were their son - and that's a problem. It's exactly what Kevin Campbell is doing and he (rightly) gets criticised for it. Why is it ok for supporters to do the same? I actually thought Tymon did ok and was only at fault for the third goal - and you could argue he took one for the team and we got unlucky because Derby happened to have one of the best free kick takers England have ever had on their books. However we didn't look as solid as a defensive unit and I'd have BMI back the next game if he's ok. I'd love to see some of our youngsters come through but it has to be on merit - not as a matter of policy or to satisfy the yearnings of a bunch of dewy eyed surrogate fathers mouthing "that's my boy" from the sidelines.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 8:54:07 GMT
The evidence for those who choose not to ignore it is his Portugese manager praised him for his five games standing in for the local superstar and the coaches at Stoke praise him for the way he applies himself in training. We know O'Neill has stated that he was keen on seeing Josh play in the first team. We know that O'Neill wasn't planning on taking him off until Tymon himself asked for it. We don't know that he was a walking red card - that's somebody's interpretation of yesterday's game. He hasn't played a lot for us, but we don't hold it against Verlinden, do we, that he has only made short cameos? What I would really like is to see those two together, Thibo and Tymons, as they've played a lot together in the Academies. Although it would mean McClean was dropped. The difference is that Verlinden has looked good when he’s played and done well out on loan. You're still ignoring the evidence. Tymon did well out on loan; it's not his fault that he was signed to cover for an international player, who of course won his place back when he returned from injury.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 9:00:36 GMT
Actually I thought he was better than Bruno going forwards albeit I acknowledge first thing. We need at the Moment is clean sheets so it would still be Bruno for me bit certainly haven’t written Tymon off It will be Bruno for O'Neill if he is fit. However Bruno has again had to be talked into taking up the position; he does not see himself as a fullback, nor does he see himself a Stoke player for long. Ward's contract is up in the summer and is very unlikely to be renewed. O'Neill didn't buy a left back in the transfer window; there haven't been serious rumours connecting us to any. So it looks like Tymon is considered our long term left back. Would it not be better then to groom him with the occasional games this season when needs be?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 3, 2020 9:05:30 GMT
The difference is that Verlinden has looked good when he’s played and done well out on loan. You're still ignoring the evidence. Tymon did well out on loan; it's not his fault that he was signed to cover for an international player, who of course won his place back when he returned from injury. So why is he back here if he did well? It was a season-long loan? All parties have to agree for a loan to be terminated, so obviously they didn't fight too hard to keep him... Talk me through what he's good at? What are his strengths and in which games you've seen has he displayed them?
|
|
|
Post by blackpoolred on Feb 3, 2020 9:10:40 GMT
He worries me on the few occasions I have seen him. Not sure he is quite at championship standard if I am honest. Needs game time though and can we risk him at this moment in time in the hope he finds his feet.
We were right to bring him back and give him a go as we have lack of numbers/quality defensively.
Not sure we will see much more of him this season unless injuries force our hand though
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Feb 3, 2020 9:16:49 GMT
Actually I thought he was better than Bruno going forwards albeit I acknowledge first thing. We need at the Moment is clean sheets so it would still be Bruno for me bit certainly haven’t written Tymon off It will be Bruno for O'Neill if he is fit. However Bruno has again had to be talked into taking up the position; he does not see himself as a fullback, nor does he see himself a Stoke player for long. Ward's contract is up in the summer and is very unlikely to be renewed. O'Neill didn't buy a left back in the transfer window; there haven't been serious rumours connecting us to any. So it looks like Tymon is considered our long term left back. Would it not be better then to groom him with the occasional games this season when needs be? W think it all depends on if we ever get safe , but injuries and form might dictate it
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 9:59:31 GMT
Stoke lose 4 - 0 and Tymon is getting all the brikbats on this MB and other parts of the media. OK he was very raw thrown in at the last minute. OK he was over zealous in some of his tackles. OK MON had to sub him before he got another yellow and sent off. But there is no way he was at fault for out defeat, nor was he responsible for any of the goals, unless you want to blame him for the third, because he was pulled off and there wasn't effectively a proper LB. He's had very little competitive football and people should cut him some slack. As a 20 year old he has his career ahead of him. Supporters should be patient and support him as though he were their son. Some supporters are supporting him (and our other academy players) as if they were their son - and that's a problem. It's exactly what Kevin Campbell is doing and he (rightly) gets criticised for it. Why is it ok for supporters to do the same? I actually thought Tymon did ok and was only at fault for the third goal - and you could argue he took one for the team and we got unlucky because Derby happened to have one of the best free kick takers England have ever had on their books. However we didn't look as solid as a defensive unit and I'd have BMI back the next game if he's ok. I'd love to see some of our youngsters come through but it has to be on merit - not as a matter of policy or to satisfy the yearnings of a bunch of dewy eyed surrogate fathers mouthing "that's my boy" from the sidelines. How was he at fault for the 3rd goal. He was 1st to the ball,the Derby player kicked him,they both went down and the referee mistakenly gave a foul
|
|
|
Post by jimmygscfc1234 on Feb 3, 2020 10:35:49 GMT
I thought he looked good going forward and eager to attack. He's comfortable with the ball. More of a wing back probably but unless we start playing that way (unlikely you would think), he's going to be cover for poor old Bruno who should really be playing at left centre back instead of Lindsay and alongside Chester when he's ready as Batth is a pub footballer!
|
|
|
Post by lifelong on Feb 3, 2020 11:13:21 GMT
"How was he at fault for the 3rd goal? He was 1st to the ball,the Derby player kicked him,they both went down and the referee mistakenly gave a foul"
Spot on, was a game changing decision.
He had a good game after being thrown in and is definitely looking good for the future.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 3, 2020 12:45:01 GMT
You're still ignoring the evidence. Tymon did well out on loan; it's not his fault that he was signed to cover for an international player, who of course won his place back when he returned from injury. So why is he back here if he did well? It was a season-long loan? All parties have to agree for a loan to be terminated, so obviously they didn't fight too hard to keep him... Talk me through what he's good at? What are his strengths and in which games you've seen has he displayed them? He was allowed back because he was initially signed to cover an injured international defender who is now fit. No doubt the club felt that it was in the player's interests to develop his career at his parent club rather than in their reserves. At 20 he was probably glad to get the opportunity to come home. As for his strengths they are definitely going forward but he hasn't been given any continuous playing time to show us yet what he can do. To blame him for a pathetic showing by our more experienced defence is in itself pathetic. I can't believe the Sentinel giving him that amount of blame. Yes another ref might have sent him off but this one chose not to probably thinking like me that the challenge was over enthusiasm, not malicious. To blame him for the foul leading to the free kick is totally out of order. He had been on the pitch injured waiting to be subbed for 5 minutes but had not used the injury as an excuse to chicken out of the game. I would argue that that shows some naivity but plenty of guts and the right attitude which you can add to his strengths. I am not sure it was even that much of a foul - it was one of those where a player runs at speed into a defender who has nowhere to go. Did the attacker actually have control of the ball? I would argue not although I wouldn't argue against the free kick as I think it was Bahht who also came in and blocked him off which everyone seems to ignore. In fact I would argue Bahht was our worst defender on Friday. He just panics under pressure against speed.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 3, 2020 12:46:40 GMT
So why is he back here if he did well? It was a season-long loan? All parties have to agree for a loan to be terminated, so obviously they didn't fight too hard to keep him... Talk me through what he's good at? What are his strengths and in which games you've seen has he displayed them? He was allowed back because he was initially signed to cover an injured international defender who is now fit. No doubt the club felt that it was in the player's interests to develop his career at his parent club rather than in their reserves. At 20 he was probably glad to get the opportunity to come home. As for his strengths they are definitely going forward but he hasn't been given any continuous playing time to show us yet what he can do. To blame him for a pathetic showing by our more experienced defence is in itself pathetic. I can't believe the Sentinel giving him that amount of blame. Yes another ref might have sent him off but this one chose not to probably thinking like me that the challenge was over enthusiasm, not malicious. To blame him for the foeul leading to the free kick is totally out of order. He had been on the pitch injured waiting to be subbed for 5 minutes but had not used the injury as an excuse to chicken out of the game. I would argue that that shows some niaivity but plenty of guts and the right attitude which you can add to his strengths. I am not sure it was even that much of a foul - it was one of those where a player runs at speed into a defender who has nowhere to go. Did the attacker actually have control of the ball? I would argue not although I wouldn't argue against the free kick as I think it was Bahht who also came in and blocked him off which everyone seems to ignore. In fact I would argue Bahht was our worst defender on Friday. He just panics under pressure against speed. I haven't blamed him for anything. My point is that there's a reason he hasn't been getting game time. He's rarely shown anything to suggest he'll make it and hasn't even been raved about during his u23 games where the likes of Edwards and Campbell and even less heralded players who've left were.
|
|
|
Post by crowey on Feb 3, 2020 12:53:04 GMT
He was allowed back because he was initially signed to cover an injured international defender who is now fit. No doubt the club felt that it was in the player's interests to develop his career at his parent club rather than in their reserves. At 20 he was probably glad to get the opportunity to come home. As for his strengths they are definitely going forward but he hasn't been given any continuous playing time to show us yet what he can do. To blame him for a pathetic showing by our more experienced defence is in itself pathetic. I can't believe the Sentinel giving him that amount of blame. Yes another ref might have sent him off but this one chose not to probably thinking like me that the challenge was over enthusiasm, not malicious. To blame him for the foeul leading to the free kick is totally out of order. He had been on the pitch injured waiting to be subbed for 5 minutes but had not used the injury as an excuse to chicken out of the game. I would argue that that shows some niaivity but plenty of guts and the right attitude which you can add to his strengths. I am not sure it was even that much of a foul - it was one of those where a player runs at speed into a defender who has nowhere to go. Did the attacker actually have control of the ball? I would argue not although I wouldn't argue against the free kick as I think it was Bahht who also came in and blocked him off which everyone seems to ignore. In fact I would argue Bahht was our worst defender on Friday. He just panics under pressure against speed. I haven't blamed him for anything. My point is that there's a reason he hasn't been getting game time. He's rarely shown anything to suggest he'll make it and hasn't even been raved about during his u23 games where the likes of Edwards and Campbell and even less heralded players who've left were. .... that is agenda driven drivel
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Feb 3, 2020 12:53:37 GMT
I haven't blamed him for anything. My point is that there's a reason he hasn't been getting game time. He's rarely shown anything to suggest he'll make it and hasn't even been raved about during his u23 games where the likes of Edwards and Campbell and even less heralded players who've left were. .... that is agenda driven drivel In what way? Which bit of that isn’t true?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 3, 2020 12:54:27 GMT
So getting rave reviews from Portugal initially is nothing? The first few matches Campbell started didn't look too promising. Verlindern hasn't shown a tremendous amount apart from trickery and determination but no end product. I know you haven't blamed him but he has received plenty from people on here and in the Sentinel which really annoys me when a young lad is making his first appearance in 12 months only finding out a short time before kick off. He showed more guts than BMI who couldn't play because his mind was in the wrong place because a transfer fell through! Apart from adding height I fail to see what BMI actually brings to the team.
|
|
|
Post by crowey on Feb 3, 2020 13:02:39 GMT
.... that is agenda driven drivel In what way? Which bit of that isn’t true? ... I thought he was probably one of our best performers v The Sheepshaggers
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 13:33:18 GMT
You're still ignoring the evidence. Tymon did well out on loan; it's not his fault that he was signed to cover for an international player, who of course won his place back when he returned from injury. So why is he back here if he did well? It was a season-long loan? All parties have to agree for a loan to be terminated, so obviously they didn't fight too hard to keep him... Talk me through what he's good at? What are his strengths and in which games you've seen has he displayed them? Because Michael O'Neill decided he served SCFC better by being here and so recalled him. His boss in Portugal, who was also his coach at Hull, didn't want to stand in his way.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 13:40:08 GMT
It’s blatantly obvious to anyone with a bit of football knowledge that this lad just isn’t good enough, hopefully a lower league club takes him in the summer.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2020 14:03:57 GMT
Simon Lowe was a disgrace in the Sentinel,the way he ripped into Tymon
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Feb 3, 2020 15:01:32 GMT
|
|