We do miss him
Clarke can score bit we play be better and more confident with MCG
We can still get promoted tho
"Clarke can score but we play a lot better and more confidently with MCG"
Sorry had to correct that so as to understand it
And yes I agree with you. We had a lot more confidence in Goldies ability to find the net and be in the right positions to accept the ball.
I think the team isn't as confident with Clarke because Clarke expects everyone to make the chances for him while Goldie made his own chances and also accepted the chances that were made for him!
That's why I don't like Clarke. He just doesn't work hard enough to deserve a position in the starting line up!
Clarke is too lazy. Reminds me a lot of when Jay Bothroyd played for us.
Hard work? So you'd rather have a hardworking o Donovan rather than a 20 goal a season striker? Wonderful.
Best would never come back here after the way he was treated by the boo-boys.
So, we have the 'lazy' Leon Best, Jay Bothroyd, Stern John and now Leon Clarke. Interesting....
Pffft you don't know your born,we had John GayleBest would never come back here after the way he was treated by the boo-boys.
So, we have the 'lazy' Leon Best, Jay Bothroyd, Stern John and now Leon Clarke. Interesting....
Hard work? So you'd rather have a hardworking o Donovan rather than a 20 goal a season striker? Wonderful.
lets put it another way .Clarke may get 20 goals ,but when the rest of your team aren't scoring because hes not pulling his weight and not pulling defenders away to create space or coming out wide like goaldie did and don't get me started on the fact he cannot hold a ball up for squat.
when we had mcgoaldrick we were also scoring a lot of goals from our midfielders baker especially.he pulled defenders away went out wide ,had genuine ability to create goals for others aswell,and held the ball up well.
Clarke is not a good enough replacement if we are serious about promotion be it this season or next
I think that McG has gone to Ipswich on loan "with a view to a permanent", is that correct? If that is so, I can see Ipswich not signing him come the end of the season and MR getting him for free in the summer......a cunning plan?????
But it would not be £10,000 per week would it? He would have by then realised that he had had his best time with Cov. under Mark Robins and will be prepared to compromise his weekly wage. It will be down to MR's powers on persuasion and in that I trust.If we can afford £10,000 a week yes.
lets put it another way .Clarke may get 20 goals ,but when the rest of your team aren't scoring because hes not pulling his weight and not pulling defenders away to create space or coming out wide like goaldie did and don't get me started on the fact he cannot hold a ball up for squat.
when we had mcgoaldrick we were also scoring a lot of goals from our midfielders baker especially.he pulled defenders away went out wide ,had genuine ability to create goals for others aswell,and held the ball up well.
Clarke is not a good enough replacement if we are serious about promotion be it this season or next
Couldn't agree with you more EVO! That's exactly how I would have described the difference between Clarke and Goldie.
He just isn't as good, nor as productive as Goldie was.
But it would not be £10,000 per week would it? He would have by then realised that he had had his best time with Cov. under Mark Robins and will be prepared to compromise his weekly wage. It will be down to MR's powers on persuasion and in that I trust.
But it would not be £10,000 per week would it? He would have by then realised that he had had his best time with Cov. under Mark Robins and will be prepared to compromise his weekly wage. It will be down to MR's powers on persuasion and in that I trust.
How charmingly naive. Mcgoldrick will go to whoever pays the most even if it means never playing a game.
I don't want to disagree with you ,but I think this argument is best left for the end of the season,personally,there is a reason hes had 4000 clubs prior to ccfc
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?