Current Player #23 Josh Murphy

I've heard that argument plenty, but I still haven't seen the evidence to actually back it up. How many of these 'calculated risks' actually pay off?

I don't believe that quality and reliability are on competing sliding scales either. You really can have both.

As you say, it could be those on the way up. Who's to say Goodrham, Rodrigues and Dale are not more naturally gifted than Murphy, Edwards and Browne? It feels like there's always the assumption that because a player has played at a higher level already that they are inherently more gifted and therefore some sort of luxury. There was nothing luxurious about Jamie Hanson, or about Yanic Wildschut.

It could also still be those on the way down too - we have a perfect case in point in James Henry. However, the crucial difference with his signing is that he had been historically reliable and a regular throughout his career. No gamble. A sensible signing of quality.

And I know it was in jest, but a policy of making signings based on appearance records is no bad idea.The evidence is almost always there.

It's why I'll continue to be sceptical whenever we sign a Tyler Burey, and why I'll always be reassured when we sign an Owen Dale.
Interesting point, but on that basis you could argue you’d be reassured if we signed a Sam Long but sceptical about a Greg Leigh?

It is about getting the right fit and balance and only having a minimal number of risks, rather than a minimal number of safe bets which is the way we’ve unfortunately gone for too many years.
 
Thierry Henry was a risky winger who wasn't fulfilling his potential and wasn't getting on with his manager when he signed for Arsenal
 
Interesting point, but on that basis you could argue you’d be reassured if we signed a Sam Long but sceptical about a Greg Leigh?

Greg Leigh has made more than 200 League One appearances across multiple clubs? One season as a bit-part player at Ipswich (behind the best LB outside the top flight) wouldn't undo that. An absolute sure thing at this level, for my money.

And, yeah, I don't want to get into a Sam Long debate but I probably would be pleased if we signed a RB who had played that many games at this level for a (typically) top half side.

Besides, my point wasn't that we should use appearances as a way to categorically rule any signing 'in' - more that if a player has only a handful appearances to their name, across 2 or 3 seasons, it should be enough to rule them out.
 
I want both
You need to read my question to Barry’s comments in context. For example, if you only had one place left to fill (squad/budget wise) which one would you choose, Murphy or Dale?

Just for the record, on his day/moments in games I’d say that Murphy edges it for me based upon pace/technique etc, but I’m asking based upon overall contribution.

So having said that, if I had to base it on overall contribution to the squad, then I’d choose Dale based upon his potential reliability/consistency.

I think most people now think if we did extend Murphy’s contract it would have to be based upon an ‘incentivised’ contract e.g. significantly reduced terms, but based upon a number of appearances which could then equate to an additional bonus etc. Once bitten, twice shy and all that!!
 
If Murphy continues the form he is in, he deserves a new contract.
It would also be insulting to offer him a new contract on half his current wages, which aren’t as eye watering as some seem to think.
Murphy fits into how Des wants to play and considering Des will still be here at the start of the season (rightly or wrongly) then it would make sense to keep a player that Des can clearly get a tune out of.
 
Murphy has been good since Des came in but this isn't the case, he smashed it towards the keeper who didn't do all that well with it, palming it straight to Rodrigues. The fact it ended up at his feet was fortune more than great play from Murphy and he certainly didn't pick him out. That's not to say he's not been good but (although I hugely dispute egg's claim that he was really good at the end of last season) but as a rule of thumb making things up is never a great argument.
Ok so instead of saying ‘puts a great ball in straight to RR’ I should have said ‘puts a great, dangerous ball in which ends up going straight to RR’.

Wow, what a huge lie. As a rule of thumb, being a pretentious pedantic ass is never a great argument either…
 
Ok so instead of saying ‘puts a great ball in straight to RR’ I should have said ‘puts a great, dangerous ball in which ends up going straight to RR’.

Wow, what a huge lie. As a rule of thumb, being a pretentious pedantic ass is never a great argument either…
Love 15, 15 all. We wait for the next pointless point but not with baited breath. You two need to get a private chat room.
 
Absolutely excellent again today, particularly impressive was his composure to hold onto the ball waiting for Bennett for our third. If we're backing Des then we need to do it properly and that likely means getting Murphy signed up. No point doing neither like we did last January when we didn't sack Robinson not back him.
 
Only thing that's missing is being on the same wavelength with others up front on occasion. Once that's there, possibly up there with the best in the league in his position.

We've had the discussion Murphy, Browne or Edwards before, but he's far off in the distance between the three of them IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom