Chaplin to Salford? (1 Viewer)

Grendel

Well-Known Member
To be fair to Culpin, he was being asked to step up to the top flight. I'm pretty sure he would have scored plenty in the league we are in now.

He played in the lower leagues for a bit and his record was ok I suppose but never the same as Boro where his strike rate was ridiculous
 

Esoterica

Well-Known Member
I believe the formation will stay the same but the way we play it will improve - that the 4-2-3-1 will be a lot tighter next season. Last year the defence was deep for most of it so the formation was stretched and the consequence was that the striker was isolated with too high a proportion of ball going to Baka's head not his feet. So much of our ground play was forced down the wings too before Bright arrived as, Kelly and Hyam aside, we weren't comfortable enough in possession so the easy outlet to the full backs/wing was chosen.
With a ball playing keeper and both centre backs comfortable in possession this year, I hope the striker is used less as an outlet and won't actually be a 'lone' striker and that we'll become less counter attacking with better build up play. In that case Chaplin may turn out to be a viable option as the '1' as he won't need target man attributes.
 
Last edited:

Fergusons_Beard

Well-Known Member
No mention of Little Sheff or Adam Armstrong
In the ‘midgets can’t score’ debate.

If the Chaplin bashers had been to the Bradford game they would have changed their mind about his ability and his potential.

He just doesn’t fit in the system Robins plays-towards the latter end of the season coming on as a winger (not quick enough) or as the main striker (not a target man) and he’s not really a number 10 either!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

Garryb80

Well-Known Member
No mention of Little Sheff or Adam Armstrong
In the ‘midgets can’t score’ debate.

If the Chaplin bashers had been to the Bradford game they would have changed their mind about his ability and his potential.

He just doesn’t fit in the system Robins plays-towards the latter end of the season coming on as a winger (not quick enough) or as the main striker (not a target man) and he’s not really a number 10 either!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I was at bradford and havent changed my mind
 

Garryb80

Well-Known Member
Nice lad? Who’s said that? I actually think Chaplins movement is good, not just a hard worker. He’s not really played in his position because, like a lot have said, he didn’t suit the system last year. However, he was obviously bought for a reason and we didn’t really settle on that system for a couple months. So, I wouldn’t be surprised if Robins goes for what he was planning originally.
Great expectations said the nice lad comment for reference
 

Great_Expectations

Well-Known Member
Chaplins movement is excellent and his runs are very intelligent, he's always finding space in the box, it's the likes of Luke Thomas whose final ball/decision making was poor.

I have to disagree I’m afraid. It was always obvious McNulty would come good despite the dry patch, as his movement was impressive, hence he was often in goal scoring positions. His pace helped with that too.

Chaplin seems unsure what to do or what space to move into when we’re attacking. Again though I appreciate an element of that can be linked to our system and where he’s been asked to play.

Based on last season, he doesn’t have any particularly impressive redeeming attributes. However, I’d like to see him up front with a link player (Biamou is the only one we have) and see if that opinion changes.
 

Great_Expectations

Well-Known Member
Great expectations said the nice lad comment for reference

Sooooo, one comment.

Ah the old nice lad and hard worker. All the comments here are describing an expensive Ponticelli. Chaplin isn't suited to the system or style we play and, like Portsmouth, I don't feel is good enough for the league we are in either.

Garry, did you read all of my post? My point was clearly not suggesting he should be excused because he’s a nice lad.
 

Gibbo

Well-Known Member
I think Chaplin has always fancied himself as a Paul Scholes type player in the pocket. he seemed to play that way, rather than a striker like McNulty. Paul Scholes being part of Salford iirc
 

Greggs

Well-Known Member
I think Chaplin has always fancied himself as a Paul Scholes type player in the pocket. he seemed to play that way, rather than a striker like McNulty. Paul Scholes being part of Salford iirc
hahahahah you're bananas
 

sw88

Chief Commentator!
Not sure if it’s been mentioned (can’t be bothered to read through 3 pages!!)

Bit of a shite rumour to start, so could be something in it?

I think he will come good with a good pre season, but at the same time, if the offer was good enough, why not?

We need goals, time will tell if he can bring them, struck me as though robins didn’t really know where to play him. when he first signed he was described as being one of the best poachers about (was it Baker who said that?) yet we played him very deep for a poacher?
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Not trying to make a comparison, but Paul Culpin also knew where the net was.

True. Wasn't he scoring 40 odd a season before we signed him? Never got a chance here.
 

the rumpo kid

Well-Known Member
My lad reckons this is about to be announced by Salford , he's been right before says one of his mates is in the know, £300k
 

skybluegod

Well-Known Member
And we lose 200,000 not worth it , think we should keep him as he needs to be given time

Nobody actually knows if we paid 500k I seriously doubt it. Even if we did I would bet my life it was mainly based on incentives and performance based add ons not a bulk fee. So if we get 300k (which I also doubt) then we won't have made a loss.
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
I'd snap their hand off at 300k
But I'd be very surprised if they have that kind of budget for a player who ended up on the bench at a league 1 club.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
Culpin 272 goals in 423 games. Numerous reserve goals at City too but unfortunate to be behind good strikers at City. I wanted him given a run alongside Cyrille but I'm glad he didn't or Houchen 87 may not have happened. Sliding doors perhaps.

Still a decent low level career that some of our lads would snap your hand off for.
 

higgs

Well-Known Member
He would be no loss to us can't see him fitting in

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

Adge

Well-Known Member
Not sure if it’s been mentioned (can’t be bothered to read through 3 pages!!)

Bit of a shite rumour to start, so could be something in it?

I think he will come good with a good pre season, but at the same time, if the offer was good enough, why not?

We need goals, time will tell if he can bring them, struck me as though robins didn’t really know where to play him. when he first signed he was described as being one of the best poachers about (was it Baker who said that?) yet we played him very deep for a poacher?
Maybe they were talking about salmon or pheasants?:emoji_thinking:
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
And we lose 200,000 not worth it , think we should keep him as he needs to be given time
We've actually already lost 500k (if you believe the reports)
This transfer would give us the opportunity to recoup 300k, and offload another unsuccessful signing from last season.
 

SkyBlueCRJ

Well-Known Member
We've actually already lost 500k (if you believe the reports)
This transfer would give us the opportunity to recoup 300k, and offload another unsuccessful signing from last season.

We obviously didn’t pay anywhere near £500K up front
 

ccfcway

Well-Known Member
We've actually already lost 500k (if you believe the reports)
This transfer would give us the opportunity to recoup 300k, and offload another unsuccessful signing from last season.

Have we. We paid £500k up front ?, that seems excessive ?
 

SkyBlueCRJ

Well-Known Member
If we sold him would we still have to pay pompey when he plays 100 games etc for Salford for the add on s?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

We still wouldn’t have paid £500K as we would’ve received a transfer fee though? Regardless of the upfront fee and subsequent add-ons, if Salford purchase Chaplin, a proportion of the overall sale has been covered?
 

SBAndy

Well-Known Member
I suppose as a side-question, if we were to break even in terms of transfer fee, would you be happy to see him leave?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top