• Further New Features Are Available - Click To Update

  • Join OxVox

    The forum would encourage all members to consider joining OxVox during this important moment in our history. See here for more information.

Current Player Thread Greg Leigh

dickwalton1964 said:
Is it that difficult to understand? Great in the air and got a goal in him - great assets for a sub whether you’re holding on or chasing the game. Should be on the bench ahead of Long or Spencer. Why have two right sided defenders on the bench when you’ve got a left sided option ?
Click to expand...

Spencer can play left or right back where Greg is just a left back.
 
  • React
Reactions: Ian
dickwalton1964 said:
Spencer is naturally a right back. Leigh is naturally a left back, surely a natural position is better than a makeshift one?
Click to expand...

You can only name 7 players on the bench with 1 of them being a keeper though. Having someone who can cover both left and right back allows you to have more attacking options on the bench.
 
It came across like Ramsey was just a bit miffed to be asked about players who weren't there after a good performance.

I thought Spencer was great when he came on.
 
HillBilly said:
It came across like Ramsey was just a bit miffed to be asked about players who weren't there after a good performance.

I thought Spencer was great when he came on.
Click to expand...
Not really when the answer is kind of obvious - though we'd expect Nathan to ask about questioned players.
 
dickwalton1964 said:
Is it that difficult to understand? Great in the air and got a goal in him - great assets for a sub whether you’re holding on or chasing the game. Should be on the bench ahead of Long or Spencer. Why have two right sided defenders on the bench when you’ve got a left sided option ?
Click to expand...

Leigh currently isn't fit to play following a dental procedure. No conspiracy here.
 
Scotchegg said:
Why?
Click to expand...
Probably reading too much into the tone of Ramsey’s response today. It sounded as if he was making BDK-style excuses for not having Greg around.
I understand that we have a limited number of spaces on the bench, but a combination of Spencer and Leigh cover the defensive positions, whilst also giving an option for a more attacking outlet.
 
Ramsey explained why Leigh was missing, it was a numbers thing, no conspiracy, just simple numbers.

He had both Long and Spencer as sub defenders, and that provided plenty of versatility along the backline. Mills, Goodrham and Missanga as midfielders, and GOD upfront. Who would you have dropped for Greg Leigh?
 
Andy Stroud said:
Probably reading too much into the tone of Ramsey’s response today. It sounded as if he was making BDK-style excuses for not having Greg around.
I understand that we have a limited number of spaces on the bench, but a combination of Spencer and Leigh cover the defensive positions, whilst also giving an option for a more attacking outlet.
Click to expand...

The problem is that people think that if someone hadn't got a broken leg then they must be playing. Greg had dental surgery, which can be painful and swollen, but is also susceptible to infection.

Giving him a while longer to fully recover whilst we have Long and Spencer available to cover is perfectly reasonable.

As for Ramsey post match, I'm glad that he wants to focus on those who played rather than those not available. Nothing has changed since the presser on Friday. BdK is in training but a few weeks off. Leigh is being managed back. Mills we saw. What more does anyone want him to say?
 
OX14 said:
You can only name 7 players on the bench with 1 of them being a keeper though. Having someone who can cover both left and right back allows you to have more attacking options on the bench.
Click to expand...
That is correct. But Greg Leigh is an attacking option.
 
I’m not trying to start the next conspiracy theory but! He probably is our 3rd or 4th choice left back..

If Greig Leigh moved on, would that allow us to ‘staff up’ to 23? If yes, then he might be a player you wouldn’t mind moving on as we have Currie, Spencer and Roosken who can play left back. It’s certainly one of the areas we have a bit of cover in. Then we could get someone in for an area we have less cover in.

I wonder if there is a bit of interest in him? Or whether we’re trying to edge him out of the door, which I think we did try to do in January?

Maybe a conspiracy theory too far!
 
Upthecowboys said:
I’m not trying to start the next conspiracy theory but! He probably is our 3rd or 4th choice left back..

If Greig Leigh moved on, would that allow us to ‘staff up’ to 23? If yes, then he might be a player you wouldn’t mind moving on as we have Currie, Spencer and Roosken who can play left back. It’s certainly one of the areas we have a bit of cover in. Then we could get someone in for an area we have less cover in.

I wonder if there is a bit of interest in him? Or whether we’re trying to edge him out of the door, which I think we did try to do in January?

Maybe a conspiracy theory too far!
Click to expand...
I can't see any reason why Aaron Ramsey would want Greg Leigh out of the door. He could still be an important player to us this season.
 
Pre-embargo I think there was a good chance that Leigh was off. One year left on his contract, and nearly 32, he'd want to be playing regularly. Currie was always likely to be the starting left back, and with Roosken, Spencer and Long able to cover, Leigh may have fancied his chances elsewhere.

But with the embargo and Roosken's injury, there's no reason why Greg can't be putting himself in contention for being a regular on the bench and getting some minutes when needed - especially when chasing a goal.
 
Upthecowboys said:
I’m not trying to start the next conspiracy theory but! He probably is our 3rd or 4th choice left back..

If Greig Leigh moved on, would that allow us to ‘staff up’ to 23? If yes, then he might be a player you wouldn’t mind moving on as we have Currie, Spencer and Roosken who can play left back. It’s certainly one of the areas we have a bit of cover in. Then we could get someone in for an area we have less cover in.

I wonder if there is a bit of interest in him? Or whether we’re trying to edge him out of the door, which I think we did try to do in January?

Maybe a conspiracy theory too far!
Click to expand...

4th choice left back? After Currie who else is ahead of him?
 
Upthecowboys said:
Spencer, Roosken?

4th is a push and not meant to be disrespectful. I’d have registered him in January and not signed Roosken..
Click to expand...

See Roosken (when he is fit) as more likely to play as a winger than a full back, he played there in pre season. Certainly seems better going forward than defending.

Don’t really like Spencer on the left, wrong side for him.

Unless Currie gets injured/leaves I can’t see anyone else actually playing left back, I suppose the argument is to have cover for him on the bench that offers you something elsewhere, just whether you want Spencer to cover other defensive positions or Leigh for his attacking threat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom