stanners

[shrimper]

stanners may have been top of the player ratings before his injury, but it doesen't meen the players were playing well as a team?

Absolutely. They weren't.

All I was saying was that our place in the league wasn't necessarily because Stanners was playing and that the fact we moved up the league wasn't necessarily because Stanners wasn't playing.

Sammy's job is all about getting the right blend and occasionally that will mean leaving out good players.

[The Fury]

Probably the most talent member of our squad with the ball, but for me Stanners is not strong enough without it. He was terribly exposed against Burton and in general I think he is a bit of a luxury player. Craney offers us many of the attributes that Stanners does, with the adage of a decent return in terms of goals. With the options now available at Sammy's disposal we might see Stanners struggle for starts this season.

Absolutely. Stanners just isn't cut out to play centre midfield I don't think. If we take most of the great centre midfield partnerships (playing in a two in midfield system, you understand) you generally have a combination of one player who can win the ball and sit in front of the defence playing with another who will predominately look to move the ball forwards and create opportunities for wide players and strikers.

Stanners simply doesn't have the attributes to do either of these things, in my views. He can't tackle to save his life, meaning both Garry Hunter and Fraser McLachlan are more valuable than him in terms of playing that role and, simply, Craney and Drummond are far better creative midfielders. From what I have seen of Panther so far he seems very much in the Stanners mould, but better at it.

Stanners has wonderful technique on the ball and can spray some beautiful sideways passes. Whilst that is aesthetically pleasing and will generally draw an instinctive clap from the crowd, having a midfielder who can tackle and a midfielder who can play an incisive forward pass are much more essential attributes for a successful midfield, I reckon. Sad, but that is the reality; Glenn Hoddle should have had the England team of the eighties built around him, but instead it was built around Bryan Robson.

I think it is possible to accommodate a player of Stanners’ type in a three in midfield system but, as mentioned, I’d rather Panther do it.

I think it is interesting to note that when Stanners was on the transfer list last season there wasn't one hint of interest in him (as far as we, the public, were aware of). I think that speaks volumes.

As for somebody mentioning that Stanners was crucial in getting us to the Football League, I would vehemently refute this! He was an absolute liability in our final year in the Conference. I remember an ironic chant of “get Stanners on” at Burton when he had, finally, been dropped, which drew much mirth from those in attendance. That said, I thought he was much more suited to the Football League and, in our first season, was deservedly one of the first names on the team sheet. Things change, however.

[Weetabix Kid]

Could Stanners do a job as a right wing back ??

Moss isn't a wing back, he's more of a steady right back when in a back 4

[yozzer]

Ditto on the Fury's analysis.

[Little Shrimp]

For me, too many of his passes go to the side than forward.

Which gives us width which we've been finding hard to get lately.

[Christies Child]

For me, too many of his passes go to the side than forward.

Which gives us width which we've been finding hard to get lately.

..all well and good, but it's the forward defence splitting pass that we need and Stanners doesn't have that in his locker or if he does, all too infrequently.