RyanioBirdio
Well-known member
- Joined
- 1 May 2018
- Messages
- 8,763
This is what I’ve never understood. People started calling for Dan Agyei to get minutes back in January when it became clear that Mackie could barely even run anymore, yet was starting every other game while Agyei couldn’t get off the bench, or sometimes even get on it. That’s because he is a striker, which is the position Mackie was occupying. He was signed and announced as a striker, he got a few appearances for Burnley (who wanted to keep him) as a striker, he has always played as a striker before coming here... he is a striker. That is where he plays. It’s all been a bit Jamie “he’s a right back, please believe me” Hanson with him ever since. Agyei is visibly uncomfortable every time he’s shoved out wide and that clearly affects his confidence and in turn his performance, and often makes us worse because he can’t track wide areas defensively and gets the ball in much tighter areas than he would prefer. Yet on the rare occasions he gets a go in the middle he presses centre backs, scraps for the ball and likes to try to turn into open spaces and get a run on, which also gives us the ability to switch things up and not just go like for like. Which is what a squad is supposed to offer you, right? Multiple options to play in different ways if need be? It’s almost like centre forward is where he’s most familiar with playing and is most comfortable being. So why is getting him even a handful of cameos in that position so difficult after an entire year?We have a striker in Dan Agyei who performed well against Portsmouth and also looked good in the few desultory minutes he got against Ipswich. Maybe give him more of a chance? I’m not saying start him, just give him 20-30 mins at the end of a game!
It’s fascinating how a few people going, “Why don’t we give that striker a few minutes since Mackie is clearly knackered - the one we signed from a Premier League club on a three year contract?” has led to such a bizarre saga. Plus it’s weird that a few people seem so offended by him, purely because he’s a source of questioning. I’ve never seen that before - it’s like some people want him to fail because they’d rather back the manager than see the team succeed with Agyei contributing positively. Nobody thinks the guy is the next Pele, they just want to see if he’s any good playing in his actual position. Imagine if when we’d signed Lundstram, Ledson, Rothwell and the like - young players on permanent deals from Premiership clubs - we’d done this with them. Just refused to play them for more than a few minutes here and there, and whenever they got on they were chucked at left back before having to listen to their manager saying that bringing them on made the team play worse. Perhaps someone else is the issue there? Someone who insists on constantly playing somebody out of position to make some kind of weird point, or possibly even to stitch him up so they can move him on without anybody caring. How about even if he only plays 15 minutes every other game, he gets those 15 minutes in his best position and in a role which doesn’t actively risk making the team play worse? Because how could intentionally playing somebody somewhere you know they can’t play, and which puts the team at risk for good measure, possibly be a good idea? At what point does the person choosing to make changes they know don’t benefit the team have to take responsibility for that? It’s like watching somebody constantly hitting a wall with a hammer and going, “Look at that. Shocking. Every time it gets a whack a couple of bricks come off.” Well stop bloody hitting it then! Stop blaming the hammer - it doesn’t swing itself!
I’m off for a pint. Think I’ll pass on the scotch egg, mind.