Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

McPake (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter sw88
  • Start date Sep 21, 2011
Forums New posts
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

sw88

Chief Commentator!
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #1
So he's got yet another injury then! Why did SISU insist on giving him a new deal? Good defender admittidly, but we cant afford to be carrying people, not with the state our clubs in!!
 

skyblueinBaku

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #2
He's having a wretched time, isn't he? I don't understand how such a hard case in defence can be so brittle.
 
C

CCFC123

New Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #3
utter joke. another crock this club can ill afford.
 

We'll_live_and_die

Super Moderator
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #4
How many games has he played for the club? Seems a nice guy in the stands, shame he never makes it as far as the pitch.
 

Bertola

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #5
The new Mcnamee
 
O

operationprem

New Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #6
What's the injurey? He has been unlucky good defender when fit
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #7
Someone tell me why he got a new contract ? Fail to see given our finances and his injury record why he got a new deal.

35 appearances since he joined January 2009 (not sure date he started with us?)...... yet we invest more money in him. We dont have the squad or finances to be carrying crocks.

Other worrying thing is AT doesnt know if the operation is on his knee or ankle !!
 

johnniericoh

Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #8
It seems customary for most clubs to have their fair share of "sicknote" players - weve certainly had those over the years.

It may seem a tad unfair BUT it does appear to be the same players getting a variety of injuries one season after another whilst playing for CCFC.

McPake (an absolute superb defender) has only played 31 league games in 3 seasons - and what about the "Pitbull" having played just 9 games in 2 seasons !!!

Other notorious sicknotes over the years for other clubs have been:
  • Owen Hargreaves average 17 games per season
  • Johnathen Woodgate 19 gps
  • kieren Dyer 20 gps
  • Darren Anderton 26 gps
Note: The worse sicknote for us ever must be David McNamee (2006-2008) who averaged 12 games per season in his career

Not only is the frequency of injury perplexing but the actual time off for some of the injuries beggars belief with strains and twists taking months to heal instead of days or weeks.

I don't know what the answer is but it seems the better players in our squad continue to suffer this malaise which must be frustrating AT's plans.


PUSB
 

Danceswithhorses

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #9
oldskyblue58 said:
Someone tell me why he got a new contract ? Fail to see given our finances and his injury record why he got a new deal.

35 appearances since he joined January 2009 (not sure date he started with us?)...... yet we invest more money in him. We dont have the squad or finances to be carrying crocks.

Other worrying thing is AT doesnt know if the operation is on his knee or ankle !!
Click to expand...

What about Bell though ??? ...a 4 year contract....and he's a crock too...oh, and also not very good
 
C

CCFC123

New Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #10
Bell & McPake should never of been given extended contracts with there injury record. This will come back to bite Andy Thorn as the board will say you advised they have extended contracts and there's no chance of any more money for a replacement. Deegans another waste of space who's hardly set the world alight when he did play the odd game when fit. Easy money at CCFC. All we need is Eaastwood to get a contract extension now.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #11
Danceswithhorses said:
What about Bell though ??? ...a 4 year contract....and he's a crock too...oh, and also not very good
Click to expand...

I agree danceswithhorses.......... I dont see the benefit of giving either of them new contracts
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #12
Not trying to defend his injury record here but this latest injury apparently will only keep him out for 7-10 days.

Could understand the outcry a bit more if it were long term.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #13
Think it is more the accumulation of all the injuries Otis that has set it off, plus the general frustration about the place.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #14
Yes, can fully understand that. When he's fit and playing I really rate the lad, but he needs to be playing.
 

BenInTurin

Facebook User
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #15
oldskyblue58 said:
I agree danceswithhorses.......... I dont see the benefit of giving either of them new contracts
Click to expand...


Is it possible that they're on less now because they have long term contracts?
 

Walking Bird

New Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #16
Thats what all contracts will be based on.
Doesn't matter if the player is any good or not, i expect Eastwood to be offered a multi year deal based purely on the fact he may accept a reduced wage.
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #17
Eastwood should be paying us let alone be on reduced salary !

It is possible that the salaries of Bell and McPake have come down ......... the Board would be in a reasonably strong position to offer less money but a longer contract because neither have achieved much since they came to CCFC and doubt there was much interest from other clubs. Just dont think that it was the right decision to offer anything, both would struggle to find a team that is at the other end of table to us
 

ccfcway

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #18
Dunno,

pretty sure Keith O'Neil is there or there abouts
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #19
FFS the guy broke his back playing for us ,every time he's played he's totally commited,Bell on the other hand,i can count effeective performances on one hand ,the contracts however suggest to me a business plan for div3,we'd be better keeping our frustration to this topic than turning on the players.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #20
wingy said:
FFS the guy broke his back playing for us ,every time he's played he's totally commited,Bell on the other hand,i can count effeective performances on one hand ,the contracts however suggest to me a business plan for div3,we'd be better keeping our frustration to this topic than turning on the players.
Click to expand...

He didn't break his back personally for us or our club it was a freak injury. It like saying that David Busst broke his leg for us. I just find that comment ludricous. Sorry.
 

SydneySkyBlue

Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #21
The only reason Bell and McPake have had their contracts extended is that they're decent players. So far Bell's kept fit this season (touch wood) and, as Otis said, this new setback for McPake only sets him back 7-10 days so we'll see how he progresses.

To be honest, I thought it was just nice to see the club keep good players!
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #22
The problem is gennettas is that he continually has injury setbacks, I'd expect him to have another one after this op.
 

SkyBlue_Bear83

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #23
I am happy Mcpake was offered a new deal, if he can get fit he is a good defender. Can't say I was thrilled about David Bell though.
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #24
Think he, along with Deegan and previously Turner, deliberately injure themselves to increase their value and quality.

They all get better and better the longer they're out injured.

Deegan will emerge chrysalis-like from his shell as Zidane, whilst McPake will be Beckenbauer(Turner has already emerged from his as Baresi)
 

ashbyjan

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #25
No Turner has left so naturally for many has immediately become the worst player we have ever had, just as Westwood is now a shockingly poor keeper and Gunnarson isn't good enough to play for Beduff.
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #26
ashbyjan said:
No Turner has left so naturally for many has immediately become the worst player we have ever had, just as Westwood is now a shockingly poor keeper and Gunnarson isn't good enough to play for Beduff.
Click to expand...

Depends though if you can use a player leaving to beat Sisu over the head with, in which case they are £3million players being sold for a fraction of their worth.

The Dann is shit anyway and McPake a much better player comments from a couple of years ago still make me laugh.

Does seem to many though that we've never signed a bad player, or sold a good one.
 

Nonleagueherewecome

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #27
When fit McPake was absolutely superb. I'm not saying he was better than Dann, nor did I ever, but he was certainly a top Championship defender. Players usually pick up slight knocks during the recovery process from such long lay-offs. It's a blow, as I desperately want to see him in the side-we need an aggressive centre back. Instead it will probably be Cameron. Not exactly "awash with centre backs" now, are we? Oh how I wish we had Turner now!
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #28
Nonleagueherewecome said:
When fit McPake was absolutely superb. I'm not saying he was better than Dann, nor did I ever, but he was certainly a top Championship defender. Players usually pick up slight knocks during the recovery process from such long lay-offs. It's a blow, as I desperately want to see him in the side-we need an aggressive centre back. Instead it will probably be Cameron. Not exactly "awash with centre backs" now, are we? Oh how I wish we had Turner now!
Click to expand...


Turner injured isn't he? So wouldn't be making that much of a difference would he?
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #29
Unfortunately for Ben he,s picked up a groin injury after three friendlies ,so won't make his Cardiff debut as hoped against the scum tonight ,cue the "thank god we got £750,000 for the useless crock brigade",ce--le --vie
 

lordsummerisle

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #30
wingy said:
Unfortunately for Ben he,s picked up a groin injury after three friendlies ,so won't make his Cardiff debut as hoped against the scum tonight ,cue the "thank god we got £750,000 for the useless crock brigade",ce--le --vie
Click to expand...

£750,000 not a bad price for a reasonable, though injury prone Championship defender, never useless(even when everybody seemed to think he was), but not the greatest either(which he seemed to become the longer he was out injured)
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #31
johnniericoh said:
It seems customary for most clubs to have their fair share of "sicknote" players - weve certainly had those over the years.

It may seem a tad unfair BUT it does appear to be the same players getting a variety of injuries one season after another whilst playing for CCFC.

McPake (an absolute superb defender) has only played 31 league games in 3 seasons - and what about the "Pitbull" having played just 9 games in 2 seasons !!!

Other notorious sicknotes over the years for other clubs have been:
  • Owen Hargreaves average 17 games per season
  • Johnathen Woodgate 19 gps
  • kieren Dyer 20 gps
  • Darren Anderton 26 gps
Note: The worse sicknote for us ever must be David McNamee (2006-2008) who averaged 12 games per season in his career

Not only is the frequency of injury perplexing but the actual time off for some of the injuries beggars belief with strains and twists taking months to heal instead of days or weeks.

I don't know what the answer is but it seems the better players in our squad continue to suffer this malaise which must be frustrating AT's plans.


PUSB
Click to expand...

Difference between Deegan and McPake is that McPake has had injuries whereever he goes in a fairly long career, I seem to remember him being injured when he joined.

Deegan has had exactly one injury his entire career and has been averaging over 30 games a season since he was 19.
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #32
lordsummerisle said:
£750,000 not a bad price for a reasonable, though injury prone Championship defender, never useless(even when everybody seemed to think he was), but not the greatest either(which he seemed to become the longer he was out injured)
Click to expand...
Yes thats the beauty of the game ,that he made it in spite of the endless knocking,and in that brought in a fee that keeps us going to january
 

SydneySkyBlue

Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #33
Turner was rated highly by a lot of City fans before he left because he had finally showed that potential some of us saw in him a long time ago. I think it was more a case of that than people rating him higher the longer he was out injured.
 

skyblueinBaku

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #34
Does anyone know anything about McPake's injury record when he was at Livingstone?
 

Nonleagueherewecome

Well-Known Member
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • #35
He was fine until we were about to sign him. Midas touch, us.
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?