If Milwall had been broadcasting his availability hope that the reason we couldn't get him back here is wages, as opposed to being asleep at the wheel and missing out.
Would love to have had him back. He's bound to score next week now!
1)Could be that GA feels we dont really need a right sided midfielder
2)Could be that GA having watched him felt he wasnt physically fit/on form enough to add to the team.
3)Could be that the player didnt want to go back to a former club
4)Or I suppose could be that for once the manager was asleep on the job and couldnt be arsed to follow it up.
Which of those feels the most unlikely?.
Actually I think 3 is least likely - PCH has regularly expressed an affinity for WW on social media since leaving. Why do you think he would never want to come back, with the same manager who revitalised him and got him playing the best football of his career still in charge?
Others on here have recently cited the need for a more creativity and goals from midfield, and a fit PCH would definitely be a good addition to our squad in this regard, especially with so many games coming up next month.
Instead that awful club from the West have swooped for him. Given the 2 points above, the cynic in me says yes, we may have missed out on a great loan signing here. Unless we couldn't afford him.
I've no idea whether he would want to come back. General rule in life is never go back. It nearly always ends up in disappointment. Maybe he feels the same.
Far more likely for me is a combination of 1 and 2. He has started ONE game since his move from here to Millwall. In that game he apparently was so bad he was hoiked off after 45mins. He then hasnt featured even from the bench in either the next league game or more significasntly perhaps even an LDV game.
If he came back he would be competing with Harriman for a place on the right wing - arguably a strong part of our team, or to play out of position as CF when he has hardly played for a year.
Could be in theory that GA wasnt aware of the possibility or couldnt be arsed to investigate it. More likely I think that he was, did and concluded that PCH in his current condition would not improve the team and that other options would be more likely to.
Which seems fair enough to me.
It would surprise me if we hadn't looked into this as an option. It would also surprise me if it were our choice not to bring him back in on loan. Which leads me to suspect either we weren't in position to pay his wages (given that as Dev says RW isn't a priority, with Harriman doing a great job), or he chose Bristol Rovers rather than to return here - both of which seem reasonable possibilities.
I know it's the fashionable thing to automatically bash @DevC posts but I don't actually see anything wrong with what he said above.
Just because an ex-player becomes available doesn't mean we should instantly snap him up.
Why would we want to tie up obviously limited resources on a player who; a) would be competing with Harriman, probably one of the first names on the team sheet at the moment; and b) is as fragile as an already cracked plate in a china shop overrun with bulls; when we currently have a couple of medium-term injuries to cover for that any spare money would be much better spent on?
Wages and Injury woes. As much as I liked PCH, don't think he will add to our team. Our midfielders bust their nuts in the combat areas, PCH wouldn't match our guys who are on the bench nevermind starting 11.
We have no pace, we have no width, we have no goalscorers, we don't pass the ball to each other, so I can see why we wouldn't want him. And Cider, don't tell me he isn't better than Banton, Ogwu or McGinn, all three of which won't get into the Beaconsfield Utd team.
Nice one RITM, that sums DevC up perfectly. I did chuckle last week when he had the temerity to lambast someone for speculating about how likely or otherwise it would be that the training ground would end up with houses on it on the basis that they had no evidence. The irony was so delicious.
@Blue_since_1990 said:
We have no pace, we have no width, we have no goalscorers, we don't pass the ball to each other,
And given that what attack minded player WOULD want to come to us on loan. Defenders and defensive midfielders must be straining at the leash to come to us...
I agree Ed and his never go back comment is a real joke when we have Hayes, Harriman, Stewart and Rowe in our squad, who have all come back for a second stint.
Further to DevC, "General rule in life is never go back. It nearly always ends up in disappointment."
Was he not the gentlemen who started supporting Wycombe, then drifted off to watch Watford in their glory years, before returning to jump on Saint Martin's bandwagon ?
perhaps 3 Wembley appearences in four years was a disappointment to Mr DevC
I REALLY hope that Banton has come back with a revised outlook and we can see some of the lad's potential over the next few weeks. The squad is so thin now he has to be given a chance and when he does I hope he seizes it. Otherwise I can see him off for good in January.
@Blue_since_1990 I beg to differ, way we play even PCH would struggle to score consistently in our team and I can't see PCH matching our guys dogging up and down the pitch.
Wish PCH all the best but ofc a terrible game versus us.
I read @Ciderk1d 's comment as a dig too but to be fair to him it was just reporting the facts. 66 mins for a guy returning from injury is a decent stint and is pretty normal.
They had some callers on BBC Somerset yesterday really having a go at Paris after his debut. Even though he provided a 'fantastic' assist for their solitary goal.
Comments
If Milwall had been broadcasting his availability hope that the reason we couldn't get him back here is wages, as opposed to being asleep at the wheel and missing out.
Would love to have had him back. He's bound to score next week now!
I doubt it he'll probably be injured.
1)Could be that GA feels we dont really need a right sided midfielder
2)Could be that GA having watched him felt he wasnt physically fit/on form enough to add to the team.
3)Could be that the player didnt want to go back to a former club
4)Or I suppose could be that for once the manager was asleep on the job and couldnt be arsed to follow it up.
Which of those feels the most unlikely?.
Actually I think 3 is least likely - PCH has regularly expressed an affinity for WW on social media since leaving. Why do you think he would never want to come back, with the same manager who revitalised him and got him playing the best football of his career still in charge?
Others on here have recently cited the need for a more creativity and goals from midfield, and a fit PCH would definitely be a good addition to our squad in this regard, especially with so many games coming up next month.
Instead that awful club from the West have swooped for him. Given the 2 points above, the cynic in me says yes, we may have missed out on a great loan signing here. Unless we couldn't afford him.
I've no idea whether he would want to come back. General rule in life is never go back. It nearly always ends up in disappointment. Maybe he feels the same.
Far more likely for me is a combination of 1 and 2. He has started ONE game since his move from here to Millwall. In that game he apparently was so bad he was hoiked off after 45mins. He then hasnt featured even from the bench in either the next league game or more significasntly perhaps even an LDV game.
If he came back he would be competing with Harriman for a place on the right wing - arguably a strong part of our team, or to play out of position as CF when he has hardly played for a year.
Could be in theory that GA wasnt aware of the possibility or couldnt be arsed to investigate it. More likely I think that he was, did and concluded that PCH in his current condition would not improve the team and that other options would be more likely to.
Which seems fair enough to me.
It would surprise me if we hadn't looked into this as an option. It would also surprise me if it were our choice not to bring him back in on loan. Which leads me to suspect either we weren't in position to pay his wages (given that as Dev says RW isn't a priority, with Harriman doing a great job), or he chose Bristol Rovers rather than to return here - both of which seem reasonable possibilities.
Nothing like a good piece of factless speculation to get the DevC word count up.
Good luck to Paris. Hope he regains some fitness and form and maybe even scores the odd goal in some heavy defeats for his temporary team.
I know it's the fashionable thing to automatically bash @DevC posts but I don't actually see anything wrong with what he said above.
Just because an ex-player becomes available doesn't mean we should instantly snap him up.
Why would we want to tie up obviously limited resources on a player who; a) would be competing with Harriman, probably one of the first names on the team sheet at the moment; and b) is as fragile as an already cracked plate in a china shop overrun with bulls; when we currently have a couple of medium-term injuries to cover for that any spare money would be much better spent on?
Wages and Injury woes. As much as I liked PCH, don't think he will add to our team. Our midfielders bust their nuts in the combat areas, PCH wouldn't match our guys who are on the bench nevermind starting 11.
We have no pace, we have no width, we have no goalscorers, we don't pass the ball to each other, so I can see why we wouldn't want him. And Cider, don't tell me he isn't better than Banton, Ogwu or McGinn, all three of which won't get into the Beaconsfield Utd team.
SYCOB even
Nice one RITM, that sums DevC up perfectly. I did chuckle last week when he had the temerity to lambast someone for speculating about how likely or otherwise it would be that the training ground would end up with houses on it on the basis that they had no evidence. The irony was so delicious.
And given that what attack minded player WOULD want to come to us on loan. Defenders and defensive midfielders must be straining at the leash to come to us...
I agree Ed and his never go back comment is a real joke when we have Hayes, Harriman, Stewart and Rowe in our squad, who have all come back for a second stint.
Further to DevC, "General rule in life is never go back. It nearly always ends up in disappointment."
Was he not the gentlemen who started supporting Wycombe, then drifted off to watch Watford in their glory years, before returning to jump on Saint Martin's bandwagon ?
perhaps 3 Wembley appearences in four years was a disappointment to Mr DevC
I REALLY hope that Banton has come back with a revised outlook and we can see some of the lad's potential over the next few weeks. The squad is so thin now he has to be given a chance and when he does I hope he seizes it. Otherwise I can see him off for good in January.
@Blue_since_1990 I beg to differ, way we play even PCH would struggle to score consistently in our team and I can't see PCH matching our guys dogging up and down the pitch.
Wish PCH all the best but ofc a terrible game versus us.
I suggest we bring in Stan Collymore then Mr @Ciderk1d !!
Hahaha!
@Ciderk1d Paris was one of 'our guys doggin up and down the pitch' And he scored a few goals too.
PCH was subbed after 66 minutes in their lose to Stevenage - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34840260
To be fair to the lad he hasn't played much football over the last few months. 66 mins is a decent outing.
He also got an assist so I'm not sure what your point is really, Ciderkid!
A few more games under his belt and he will be able to go dogging for the whole 90 minutes.
I read @Ciderk1d 's comment as a dig too but to be fair to him it was just reporting the facts. 66 mins for a guy returning from injury is a decent stint and is pretty normal.
Was it a dig Cider1d?
No it wasn't a dig. Just reporting...
They had some callers on BBC Somerset yesterday really having a go at Paris after his debut. Even though he provided a 'fantastic' assist for their solitary goal.
As an aside, no idea why BBC Somerset cover Bristol Rovers as they have their own BBC local radio coverage.
On the post-Portsmouth interview on Player, Gareth said that we did try and get PCH back on loan but we couldn't afford to do so.