By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
As posted on the now-deleted thread, I don't think I can vote on this.
We're going on very little information about what's actually happening re his form, fitness, happiness, attitude, his treatment by staff, his treatment of staff, his personal situation etc etc.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
At a guess, and judging by the fulsome praise that Willock gave Ainsworth in his piece on the offish a couple of weeks ago, its probably been more of a case of laying out what the new gameplan is in a clear way, so that Willock knows exactly what's expected of him when it comes time to slot him back in.
One thing worth highlighting, I think, which no-one's really talked about recently, is how poor Willock's finishing has been in the last half dozen or so games he's played. He's worked himself into great positions, often ignoring players who were arguably better placed to convert a chance, and then wasted the opportunity he's worked so hard to create.
If we're going to be winning matches with 35% possession like we did yesterday, we simply can't afford the luxury of that kind of profligacy, so its obvious that Willock has to be contributing positively to the team effort, or else he just becomes an irritating liability insted of the prized asset he clearly should be.
Also, who would you have played him instead of yesterday? I guess the obvious choice would have been in place of Paul Smyth, but can anyone imagine him pulling the ball back for Armstrong to score the first goal in the way that Smyth did? I'm not sure I can.
0
What would you do with Willock? on 17:54 - Aug 13 with 5169 views
Leaving on a free is not going to help us with FFP, so I'd try and avoid that whatever the situation.
Shame him, not sure that will do anything other than guarantee that he leaves on a free, see above.
Play him regardless won't work if he's not willing to put in the effort, as mentioned elsewhere. Taarabt him also won't work if he's not willing to put in the effort. May be rose tinted glasses but he's not Taarabt, he seemed to always want to show he was the best player on the pitch regardless of "buy in", plus opposition could double up on him and he'd still tear them apart, so Willock is not at that level even at his best he needed the opposition to be worrying about Chair as well to buy him space.
So I'd sell.
0
What would you do with Willock? on 18:05 - Aug 13 with 5113 views
What would you do with Willock? on 17:54 - Aug 13 by E15Hoop
At a guess, and judging by the fulsome praise that Willock gave Ainsworth in his piece on the offish a couple of weeks ago, its probably been more of a case of laying out what the new gameplan is in a clear way, so that Willock knows exactly what's expected of him when it comes time to slot him back in.
One thing worth highlighting, I think, which no-one's really talked about recently, is how poor Willock's finishing has been in the last half dozen or so games he's played. He's worked himself into great positions, often ignoring players who were arguably better placed to convert a chance, and then wasted the opportunity he's worked so hard to create.
If we're going to be winning matches with 35% possession like we did yesterday, we simply can't afford the luxury of that kind of profligacy, so its obvious that Willock has to be contributing positively to the team effort, or else he just becomes an irritating liability insted of the prized asset he clearly should be.
Also, who would you have played him instead of yesterday? I guess the obvious choice would have been in place of Paul Smyth, but can anyone imagine him pulling the ball back for Armstrong to score the first goal in the way that Smyth did? I'm not sure I can.
I couldn't imagine him sprinting back into defensive positions like Chair and Smyth did at times aswell.
I would start him against Norwich though to see if he has bought into tracking back
0
What would you do with Willock? on 18:05 - Aug 13 with 5117 views
What would you do with Willock? on 17:54 - Aug 13 by E15Hoop
At a guess, and judging by the fulsome praise that Willock gave Ainsworth in his piece on the offish a couple of weeks ago, its probably been more of a case of laying out what the new gameplan is in a clear way, so that Willock knows exactly what's expected of him when it comes time to slot him back in.
One thing worth highlighting, I think, which no-one's really talked about recently, is how poor Willock's finishing has been in the last half dozen or so games he's played. He's worked himself into great positions, often ignoring players who were arguably better placed to convert a chance, and then wasted the opportunity he's worked so hard to create.
If we're going to be winning matches with 35% possession like we did yesterday, we simply can't afford the luxury of that kind of profligacy, so its obvious that Willock has to be contributing positively to the team effort, or else he just becomes an irritating liability insted of the prized asset he clearly should be.
Also, who would you have played him instead of yesterday? I guess the obvious choice would have been in place of Paul Smyth, but can anyone imagine him pulling the ball back for Armstrong to score the first goal in the way that Smyth did? I'm not sure I can.
"If we're going to be winning matches with 35% possession like we did yesterday"
Correct, on paper,
But.. I would say that it's not as simple as that.
We started slowing the game down straight away in the second half. It didn't seem to suit us, though the desire to kill the post half-time surge was understandable. But it took away everyhing we were good at it in the first half - playing on the front foot, hassling, double-teaming, moving the ball quick etc.
But we never took the game to them again. We just sat back. And either the sideline instructed that, or they tolerated that. We dropped deep way, way before we took off Armstrong and Smyth. And then the problems came. A team that had hardly concerned us started dominating us. And only a crossbar and tired bodies carried us home.
So, we didn't win the game with 35% possession, I would argue. We nearly lost it woth 19% possesion in the last half-hour.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
If he’s downed tools, which looks likely given the drop off and timeline, if we could afford it I’d drop him from the squad, make him train on his own, not with the development squad. I’d tell the rest of the squad that’s what happens to anyone who’s contracted to the club and disrespects the club and the other players by downing tools.
As we’re skint I guess we’d have to take whatever we can get for him and just accept he’s gotten what he wants. He and whoever advises him should be ashamed of themselves.
Imagine standing on the terraces in the fifties. The bloke next to you says “ ‘ere, 'ow come George Petchey's not playin' ? “ And you say “ well, he's feeling a bit fragile “.
1
What would you do with Willock? on 19:08 - Aug 13 with 4778 views
What would you do with Willock? on 18:05 - Aug 13 by Rangersw12
I couldn't imagine him sprinting back into defensive positions like Chair and Smyth did at times aswell.
I would start him against Norwich though to see if he has bought into tracking back
He wasnt able/bothered during the preseason game against Wimbledon. He was right in front of my son and I and his body language was off, no tracking back, players running off him.
I think his head and heart have already left us, just a matter of how much we can get for him.
0
What would you do with Willock? on 19:08 - Aug 13 with 4775 views
What would you do with Willock? on 15:17 - Aug 13 by BrianMcCarthy
As posted on the now-deleted thread, I don't think I can vote on this.
We're going on very little information about what's actually happening re his form, fitness, happiness, attitude, his treatment by staff, his treatment of staff, his personal situation etc etc.
Absolutely this.
It's all guesswork, and gossip with a dash of Chinese whispers.
1
What would you do with Willock? on 19:56 - Aug 13 with 4577 views
What would you do with Willock? on 18:34 - Aug 13 by BrianMcCarthy
"If we're going to be winning matches with 35% possession like we did yesterday"
Correct, on paper,
But.. I would say that it's not as simple as that.
We started slowing the game down straight away in the second half. It didn't seem to suit us, though the desire to kill the post half-time surge was understandable. But it took away everyhing we were good at it in the first half - playing on the front foot, hassling, double-teaming, moving the ball quick etc.
But we never took the game to them again. We just sat back. And either the sideline instructed that, or they tolerated that. We dropped deep way, way before we took off Armstrong and Smyth. And then the problems came. A team that had hardly concerned us started dominating us. And only a crossbar and tired bodies carried us home.
So, we didn't win the game with 35% possession, I would argue. We nearly lost it woth 19% possesion in the last half-hour.
I hear you Brian, but the question is then how would bringing Willock on have avoided that happening? We'll obviously never know the answer to that, due to this alleged "slight knock" picked up in training, but I guess you would argue that he would have come on and dragged us by the scruff of the neck much further forward. Could be, but couldn't it equally be the case that he would have been doubled up on Cardiff, lost the ball and we would have been broken on and in a potentially worse situation than we were at that point, with however many committed further up the pitch trying to catch up with Willock?
0
What would you do with Willock? on 20:10 - Aug 13 with 4500 views
What would you do with Willock? on 19:56 - Aug 13 by E15Hoop
I hear you Brian, but the question is then how would bringing Willock on have avoided that happening? We'll obviously never know the answer to that, due to this alleged "slight knock" picked up in training, but I guess you would argue that he would have come on and dragged us by the scruff of the neck much further forward. Could be, but couldn't it equally be the case that he would have been doubled up on Cardiff, lost the ball and we would have been broken on and in a potentially worse situation than we were at that point, with however many committed further up the pitch trying to catch up with Willock?
I wasn't chatting about Willock, E15. I have no idea what's going on there.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
I think Willock has suffered more than most with the managerial merry-go-round and it will be no fault of Ainsworth if he is sold. 12 months ago, I would have built a team around him, but since the injuries under Beale/Critchley he seems to be running at 70%.
QPR resurrected his career, hopefully we can get some much needed cash.
0
What would you do with Willock? on 20:57 - Aug 13 with 4306 views
What would you do with Willock? on 16:25 - Aug 13 by Northernr
This. Ainsworth is massive on 'tracking back'. It's why he dropped Laird after Cov at home last year.
Dozzell is fairly hopeless at tracking back and every attempted tackle invariably ends with a free kick to the opposition. Never see him on the naughty step. Seems undroppable for some inexplicable reason ( and there are other options on the bench).
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
