Wallace out for 6 weeks

[Mal]

We are all Tranmere supporters , can the usual suspects please get away from the bitching?

Anyway, one positive is that 4 of the 7 below are on 6pointer games this Saturday. If we can beat Portsmouth without Wallace, that will be a plus and some results will definitely be in our favour as well.

 

[DIW]

He's a WUM. I suppose I should rise above it...

 

[amplesou]

He's a WUM. I suppose I should rise above it...

sorry

 

[amplesou]

You quite clearly implied that's what you meant. Following this comment



you said



So there was more than a strong inference that you saw Ash Taylor as a replacement for Wallace. Are you trying to deny now as you have realised what bull**** you are talking?

sorry i upset you!

 

[roverstillidie]

Would it be possible for Ampelsou to be banned from this site? His incoherent posts add nothing to the debate, make no sense and he just gets in the way of reasoned threads.

 

[Mal]

Diversity is good. There is nothing malicious in what Amplesou writes. He or she is entitled to their opinion. Bit OTT to suggest a ban!!!! That isn't to say I always understand the content but it usually makes me smile ;0)

 

[DIW]

I think he writes utter rubbish and it doesn't contribute to the debates IMO. On occasion it has made me smile but I think most of the time it is written irritate people.

That said, it is all pretty unoffensive so a ban is a bit on the harsh side.

 

[Boz]

It would be OTT to ban amplesou, puzzling though some of his postings are.

 

[amplesou]

Diversity is good. There is nothing malicious in what Amplesou writes. He or she is entitled to their opinion. Bit OTT to suggest a ban!!!! That isn't to say I always understand the content but it usually makes me smile ;0)

i,m a he thank you very much !

 

[amplesou]

I know it won't happen in a million years under Ronnie, but I was thinking about 3-5-2:

Fonners
Taylor Goodison Gibson
Holmes Harrison Palmer Robinson Zoom
Cassidy O'Halloran

Quite attacking. Just a thought.

this was the original debate ( for me) here as far as i could see,so i suggested ash Taylor centre mid holding role with Palmer ,robbo and maybe max power, the legs in there ....(please no Danny Harrison!)

yet i have been brought to book as being too controversial or what ever..

i am so sorry, i mentioned the offensive idea of ash Taylor...clearly ott !!!

p.s. ...whats not to understand ..?

:cold:

 

[amplesou]

I think he writes utter rubbish and it doesn't contribute to the debates IMO. On occasion it has made me smile but I think most of the time it is written irritate people.

That said, it is all pretty unoffensive so a ban is a bit on the harsh side.

ahh thanks ...
:-#

 

[Mal]

"i,m a he thank you very much !"

I never assume. At least you aren't an 'it' ;0)

 

[SonkORLY?]

Woulda been nice to have Baxter...

 

[Ian]

Woulda been nice to have Baxter...

That's why you should always have as strong a team as possible. All this nonsense about signing Baxter wouldn't have been good because he wouldnt be able to fit into the team. Too many other decent players in that position?!

You always fit your best players in, and most of the season there's room when injuries and suspensions hit. It would have been great to have him this season. Angered me that he went to Oldham. ](*,)

I think his contract ends in Jan. 17 apps, 8 goals.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

That's why you should always have as strong a team as possible. All this nonsense about signing Baxter wouldn't have been good because he wouldnt be able to fit into the team. Too many other decent players in that position?!

You also fit your best players in, and most of the season there's room when injuries and suspensions hit. It would have been great to have him this season. Angered me that he went to Oldham. ](*,)

I think his contract ends in Jan. 17 apps, 8 goals.

Although I originally said we did not need him, I am actually coming round to agreeing with you. Interestingly, both he and Matt Derbyshire will be available in January, and we must be a more attractive proposition than Oldham at present.

I think Jose would bite your hand off to come back here, but strangely I am not sure Ronnie actually rates him that highly.

 

[SonkORLY?]

He's not really a RM type of player but has a goal record which is difficult to argue with and at a push can play in two of the positions where we are actually most vulnerable; central midfield or as part of a front 2.

To qualify that statement, by vulnerable I mean that we are both overly reliant on loanees and lacking in class in both areas; Cassidy, O'Hallahan, Palmer on loans which are due to expire; Harrison, Power, Stockton, McGurk varying shades of unproven/not good enough. Coupled with the unavailability of JLAA and Wallace I think Baxter would be a fairly versatile one-size-almost-fits-all solution, able to play in midfield or attack depending on who is fit at the time.

He would look fantastic in this team and I'd love to see us make a big effort to sign him. I think he could very easily be the difference between us getting promoted and missing out and on that basis I think he'd justify the outlay. Beyond that, in the worst case, a player of his age and calibre would be a good investment opportunity.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

He's not really a RM type of player but has a goal record which is difficult to argue with and at a push can play in two of the positions where we are actually most vulnerable; central midfield or as part of a front 2.

To qualify that statement, by vulnerable I mean that we are both overly reliant on loanees and lacking in class in both areas; Cassidy, O'Hallahan, Palmer on loans which are due to expire; Harrison, Power, Stockton, McGurk varying shades of unproven/not good enough. Coupled with the unavailability of JLAA and Wallace I think Baxter would be a fairly versatile one-size-almost-fits-all solution, able to play in midfield or attack depending on who is fit at the time.

He would look fantastic in this team and I'd love to see his make a big effort to sign him. I think he could very easily be the difference between us getting promoted and missing out and on that basis I think he'd justify the outlay. Beyond that, in the worst case, a player of his age and calibre would be a good investment opportunity.

Agreed. You also have to ask yourself the question, what other players of his quality could we realistically attract on permanent deals in January ? Probably none.

Paradoxically, I think it is Baxter's versatility that counts against him in Ronnie's eyes; his favoured position is in the hole, whereas Ronnie always goes for more orthodox strikers and central midfielders.

 

[Boz]

Because of his age, if Oldham offer him an identical contract in January, we would have to pay to sign him, I think.

Baxter is a decent player, who I wouldn't mind seeing back at Rovers. Tackling is not his forte however and I don't think he could have compensated for the absent Wallace.

 

[DIW]

I suppose it could have been worse but that is a savage blow. Best player out until the new year.

A hell of a lot worse.