| Would you take Tammy on loan again? 08:50 - May 10 with 11351 views | omarjack |
If it's possible?
He was superb with Bristol. scoring +20 goals or so..and we assume he's grown as player since then.
It's just..he's kind of a Dwight Gayle or Vydra..Superb EFL player..sh!t PL one.
so what do you think? |  |
| |  |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 21:51 - May 10 with 1493 views | jack2jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:57 - May 10 by WarwickHunt |
Play to his strengths and he’ll score a bucket load. A lone, hold up striker he sure ain’t though. |
He's a poacher in the box, and therein lies the problem,mind you who knows what we are going to be served up next year, in the FACKIN CHAMPIONSHIP.  |  | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 21:56 - May 10 with 1484 views | builthjack |
He would be ok in the Championship.
But so would Socks. |  |
| Swansea Indepenent Poster Of The Year 2021. Dr P / Mart66 / Roathie / Parlay / E20/ Duffle was 2nd, but he is deluded and thinks in his little twisted brain that he won. Poor sod. We let him win this year, as he has cried for a whole year. His 14 usernames, bless his cotton socks.
|
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 21:57 - May 10 with 1478 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 21:51 - May 10 by jack2jack |
He's a poacher in the box, and therein lies the problem,mind you who knows what we are going to be served up next year, in the FACKIN CHAMPIONSHIP. |
Yep, it is tantamount to sticking Michael Owen in a team of 6 foot 5 giants and lumping the ball to him and saying he failed as he didn’t score as many as some wanted. His argument would of course be that he did not fail at all, what he was asked to do was not his game, the manager failed to utilise him. If he was good enough to have a higher goal to minute ratio in the team too considering the above then he most certainly did not fail. |  |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 22:53 - May 10 with 1451 views | jack247 |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 21:40 - May 10 by E20Jack |
Rubbish. So if a player is good enough then we change our whole style to accomodate him? Don’t talk wet.
I didn’t say you were misleading me. You keep repeating that he was our only striker (which he wasn’t) and barely started as if that is a measure of his ability rather than the situation we found ourselves in. It’s misleading, intentionally of course.
I am not suiting my argument, I am stating facts. To say anything else would again be misleading, don’t you think the best measure of someone’s goal scoring would be to compare it to the time actually spent on the pitch then? Makes perfect sense to me.
Why do you always want people to change their view to suit yours? It’s bizarre. When I am wrong I say I am, it doesn’t happen often but am more than happy to state it when it occurs. On this occasion I am absolutely spot on and the only reason people are falling over themselves to not want to accept it is so they can continue their recruitment bashing and try and find someone to blame.
I say it as it is, regardless of how it makes people or myself feel. Tammy was brought in as a striker, when he played he was the most effective at doing that than anyone in the side. Just the way it is. If you aren’t on the pitch then unfortunately, even as good as he is, you cannot score. |
I don’t want you to change your view, you do what you want with it. I’m just pointing out that it’s ok to get something wrong and hold your hands up to it. I’ve never seen you do that and unless you come up with some triviality here, I doubt I ever will. I think you’re close to unique here in that regard.
Of course he was our only striker. Bony was injured, McBurnie went to Barnsley, neither of the Ayews nor Dyer or Narsingh are strikers. I’d expect him to be the most effective striker in that scenario.
Whether he is able to get on the pitch or not is a pretty decent barometer of a players ability. We wouldn’t have played 2 wingers up front if we had a decent striker.
You think he did what was expected. If you expected him to struggle to get into a team that went on to get relegated, then you’re probably right. |  | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 22:59 - May 10 with 1446 views | Swansea83 |
Let's face it, he's been gash. | |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 02:39 - May 11 with 1403 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 22:53 - May 10 by jack247 |
I don’t want you to change your view, you do what you want with it. I’m just pointing out that it’s ok to get something wrong and hold your hands up to it. I’ve never seen you do that and unless you come up with some triviality here, I doubt I ever will. I think you’re close to unique here in that regard.
Of course he was our only striker. Bony was injured, McBurnie went to Barnsley, neither of the Ayews nor Dyer or Narsingh are strikers. I’d expect him to be the most effective striker in that scenario.
Whether he is able to get on the pitch or not is a pretty decent barometer of a players ability. We wouldn’t have played 2 wingers up front if we had a decent striker.
You think he did what was expected. If you expected him to struggle to get into a team that went on to get relegated, then you’re probably right. |
Sounds like you want me to change my view and insinuating I should otherwise why on earth would you be babbling on about ''admitting I am wrong''. I am not wrong in the slightest, Tammy Abraham did well with the limited game time he had. That is of course relative to the situation we are in and the team we had.
No need for trivialities, if I am wrong then I say so, and have done openly. This whole ''wrong'' fascination seems to be far more present in others like yourself and then by proxy projected onto me. Whether I am right or wrong is of no consequence to me. On this occasion I fully believe I am 100% right and think it is obvious too.
I didn't expect him to not get much game time no, but that is because I thought we would be signing better players more suited to a faster passing game (as also spoken openly at the start of the campaign), nothing to do with ability.
We clearly had a plan for this squad which did Kevin De Bruyne didn't play much for Chelsea, was that a barometer of his ability? No. there are external factors why some don't get game time. Spain didn't play a striker at times, that was no reflection on the ability of Fernando Torres, Fernando Llorente or Diego Costa - but their set up did not require a striker of their type.
But what I did expect is that when he was given time he would be one of the biggest direct goal threats we had - which he was, in fact THE biggest direct goal threat we had. If you want to simply judge a player on minutes on the pitch after not fitting in with a hoofball style then be my guest, but that is the stuff people usually come up with in year 7 Primary school chatter. [Post edited 11 May 2018 2:41]
| |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 06:41 - May 11 with 1377 views | Dr_Winston |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 15:56 - May 10 by jack247 |
If he was good enough, we’d have adapted our style of play to accommodate him. He was simply not physically up to scratch. Talented yes, but too weak to play without a strike partner.
I’m not sure what you think I’m misleading you on, but carry on repeating he was top scorer (based on minutes on the pitch, rather than goals scored to suit your argument), ignore the fact that it was 5 goals all season, and twist that the was often left out in favour of Dyer and occasionally Narsingh, before we signed Andre, into a positive, as it reduces his minutes on the pitch.
I admire your ability to argue on the internet, but you would have a lot more credibility if you could find the humility to admit you get things wrong every now and then. |
"If he was good enough, we’d have adapted our style of play to accommodate him"
As easy as that huh?
The only midfielder we've got even remotely capable of providing the kind of service Abraham would need is Fer, and he's been out half the season. You can't have a midfield as woeful as ours has been for most of the campaign and expect a forward line to deliver, regardless of their individual merits.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 06:42 - May 11 with 1375 views | STID2017 |
No, no and thrice no |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 06:49 - May 11 with 1369 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 06:41 - May 11 by Dr_Winston |
"If he was good enough, we’d have adapted our style of play to accommodate him"
As easy as that huh?
The only midfielder we've got even remotely capable of providing the kind of service Abraham would need is Fer, and he's been out half the season. You can't have a midfield as woeful as ours has been for most of the campaign and expect a forward line to deliver, regardless of their individual merits.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Agree.
Such a naive comment was that. Not one I think he actually held though to be fair, just saying it for the sake of arguing.
Leon Britton is a prime example, one of our greatest ever players, yet couldn't do much at Sheff United - was that because he was not good enough to get into a Championship side full of cloggers? Should Sheff United have overhauled their whole side to accommodate him? How about if he was on loan as Tammy was, change the whole side with purchases and sales to suit him?
Silly comment. | |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:14 - May 11 with 1343 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 21:57 - May 10 by E20Jack |
Yep, it is tantamount to sticking Michael Owen in a team of 6 foot 5 giants and lumping the ball to him and saying he failed as he didn’t score as many as some wanted. His argument would of course be that he did not fail at all, what he was asked to do was not his game, the manager failed to utilise him. If he was good enough to have a higher goal to minute ratio in the team too considering the above then he most certainly did not fail. |
We all knew what Tammy was going to be asked to do, to be a lone striker. Anyone who had the slightest bit of football knowledge knew how this signing was going to end up. He’s an out and out goal poacher who brings not a lot else to the party, a poor mans Crespo/Inzaghi.
Now that isn’t his fault, it’s the fault of the absolute cretin of a DOF we have. What I find funny is you preached about it being a risk free signing, well it was risky wasn’t it. £50k plus a week, and another “sound” business decision which you heralded at the start of the season. It was an absolute disaster, much like every other prediction you have made. |  | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:20 - May 11 with 1335 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:14 - May 11 by 34dfgdf54 |
We all knew what Tammy was going to be asked to do, to be a lone striker. Anyone who had the slightest bit of football knowledge knew how this signing was going to end up. He’s an out and out goal poacher who brings not a lot else to the party, a poor mans Crespo/Inzaghi.
Now that isn’t his fault, it’s the fault of the absolute cretin of a DOF we have. What I find funny is you preached about it being a risk free signing, well it was risky wasn’t it. £50k plus a week, and another “sound” business decision which you heralded at the start of the season. It was an absolute disaster, much like every other prediction you have made. |
Don’t be so daft, that was never the plan for Tammy. We failed to get our targets and had to adapt, we then signed Bony to essentially do what Llorente did. We signed Abraham presumably to spearhead a 3 pronged attack featuring Ayew and Chadli.
My predictions and foresight have an extraordinary strike rate of accuracy and this is one of a long line of correct ones. He was clearly brought in as part of a plan to make the team a more dynamic unit. What we ended up with was a return to the dross we saw last season but without the players with the limited ability needed to pull it off.
Getting a young talented England international striker for 2m fee plus wages is absolutely a sound business decision, it is as sound now as it was then. The signature of Tammy was not the issue, the failure to connect the missing pieces to be able to put the plan in action was the issue.
If you are saying you thought he was being brought in to be a lone striker in the traditional sense you are either lying or you are an idiot. Neither would surprise me. [Post edited 11 May 2018 8:22]
| |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:26 - May 11 with 1330 views | 34dfgdf54 |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:20 - May 11 by E20Jack |
Don’t be so daft, that was never the plan for Tammy. We failed to get our targets and had to adapt, we then signed Bony to essentially do what Llorente did. We signed Abraham presumably to spearhead a 3 pronged attack featuring Ayew and Chadli.
My predictions and foresight have an extraordinary strike rate of accuracy and this is one of a long line of correct ones. He was clearly brought in as part of a plan to make the team a more dynamic unit. What we ended up with was a return to the dross we saw last season but without the players with the limited ability needed to pull it off.
Getting a young talented England international striker for 2m fee plus wages is absolutely a sound business decision, it is as sound now as it was then. The signature of Tammy was not the issue, the failure to connect the missing pieces to be able to put the plan in action was the issue.
If you are saying you thought he was being brought in to be a lone striker in the traditional sense you are either lying or you are an idiot. Neither would surprise me. [Post edited 11 May 2018 8:22]
|
Clement badly wanted to sign Chadli from West Brom and stated: "I’d be fibbing if I said I had a player forced upon me at any point. But at the same time there was one player that I really wanted.
"That player we didn’t get it over the line and if we’d got him it would have made everything so much better."
We didn’t want him as much as you say by the sounds of it. | | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:37 - May 11 with 1317 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:26 - May 11 by 34dfgdf54 |
Clement badly wanted to sign Chadli from West Brom and stated: "I’d be fibbing if I said I had a player forced upon me at any point. But at the same time there was one player that I really wanted.
"That player we didn’t get it over the line and if we’d got him it would have made everything so much better."
We didn’t want him as much as you say by the sounds of it. |
We did, we didn’t want to pay 25m for him and rightly so. But that reveals there was a plan and one which was not able to be completed, just as I said there was.
Not rocket science | |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:39 - May 11 with 1308 views | Smellyplumz |
Shut up E20 your clueless love |  |
|
""Although I cannot promise or predict the future, I can guarantee one thing - the current board of directors will always fight, as we have done over the last 12 years, to work together as one with the Supporters Trust to make 100% sure that Swansea City football club remains the number one priority in all our thoughts and in every decision we make." | | Poll: | Huw Jenkins |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:45 - May 11 with 1301 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 08:39 - May 11 by Smellyplumz |
Shut up E20 your clueless love |
If you are going to make pointless contributions, then at least spell them properly. | |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:25 - May 11 with 1266 views | jack247 |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 06:41 - May 11 by Dr_Winston |
"If he was good enough, we’d have adapted our style of play to accommodate him"
As easy as that huh?
The only midfielder we've got even remotely capable of providing the kind of service Abraham would need is Fer, and he's been out half the season. You can't have a midfield as woeful as ours has been for most of the campaign and expect a forward line to deliver, regardless of their individual merits.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Of course we would have. To use E20s example from yesterday, if we had a prime Adebayor in the squad, do you think we’d have been starting Dyer ahead of him? | | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:38 - May 11 with 1255 views | Jacket |
Don't think it's fair to judge any striker on what they've done at Swansea, the service simply isn't there. We've brought in one striker after the other and made them all to look like fools. | | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:50 - May 11 with 1240 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:25 - May 11 by jack247 |
Of course we would have. To use E20s example from yesterday, if we had a prime Adebayor in the squad, do you think we’d have been starting Dyer ahead of him? |
Like Spain not using a prime Costa you mean? And instead opting for a midfielder? Costa must be rubbish.
Sorry but you lost this debate pages ago, this latest twist is making it worse.
Dyer never played as a striker for us, he played as a wide forward in a support role. So you are making a point that Dyer was picked ahead of Tammy in a wide role, aye great. He’d be picked ahead of a prime Adebayor for that role too I would hope as he equally is not suited to such a role.
Are you the type that would pick Messi as CB instead of Fernandez just because it is Messi? Players have positions, this really is a year 7 debate.
That isn’t even getting to the point that you are spectacularly missing that we did indeed try to build the squad with Tammy in mind. Bids for Chadli and others failed leaving us with no option than a last ditch attempt to repeat last years dross by bringing in Bony and resorting to lumping things forward.
I fear you are just being argumentative for the sake of it now. Which is a shame. [Post edited 11 May 2018 11:57]
| |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:58 - May 11 with 1231 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:50 - May 11 by E20Jack |
Like Spain not using a prime Costa you mean? And instead opting for a midfielder? Costa must be rubbish.
Sorry but you lost this debate pages ago, this latest twist is making it worse.
Dyer never played as a striker for us, he played as a wide forward in a support role. So you are making a point that Dyer was picked ahead of Tammy in a wide role, aye great. He’d be picked ahead of a prime Adebayor for that role too I would hope as he equally is not suited to such a role.
Are you the type that would pick Messi as CB instead of Fernandez just because it is Messi? Players have positions, this really is a year 7 debate.
That isn’t even getting to the point that you are spectacularly missing that we did indeed try to build the squad with Tammy in mind. Bids for Chadli and others failed leaving us with no option than a last ditch attempt to repeat last years dross by bringing in Bony and resorting to lumping things forward.
I fear you are just being argumentative for the sake of it now. Which is a shame. [Post edited 11 May 2018 11:57]
|
I have no idea which way this conversation has turned, as I haven't followed it, but Tammy Abraham was a terrible signing for us this year.
Full stop.
Nothing to do with his ability. All to do with signing the wrong players for our needs. Again it comes from buying or loaning players and then wondering what to do with them rather than the way it should work, the way it used to work.
We paid £50k a week plus for a striker that couldn't get in our pitiful team, even though we were desperate for goals. A bad deal. One of many bad deals. End of story. | | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:05 - May 11 with 1216 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:58 - May 11 by londonlisa2001 |
I have no idea which way this conversation has turned, as I haven't followed it, but Tammy Abraham was a terrible signing for us this year.
Full stop.
Nothing to do with his ability. All to do with signing the wrong players for our needs. Again it comes from buying or loaning players and then wondering what to do with them rather than the way it should work, the way it used to work.
We paid £50k a week plus for a striker that couldn't get in our pitiful team, even though we were desperate for goals. A bad deal. One of many bad deals. End of story. |
He wasn’t a terrible signing at all.
He was signed with a plan in mind. Which was the right plan of course, which is why it was not a mistake. We sold Llorente and Gylfi to try and regenerate as a side and move away from the stifling relegationball we were morphing into deeper every year.
Tammy was sourced and signed early on and was a significant piece of that plan. However other key targets clearly failed to materialise and we ended up panicking and going back to the tried and tested relegationball, then came the last gasp signing of Bony.
Tammy was the victim of that, not a victim of his own ability (which is what this ridiculous debate is surrounding). When he came on he showed in the right situations what he can do. Just like against Southampton last week immediately got in on the action flashing a shot in at their goal. Let’s also not forget that it is a fact that he produced more direct goals per minute than anyone else in the side (stat accurate up to a few weeks ago, not checked since).
It is a case of what could have been with Tammy. But his signature was not the mistake, the mistake was not complimenting it with others. [Post edited 11 May 2018 12:08]
| |
| |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:10 - May 11 with 1200 views | majorraglan |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:05 - May 11 by E20Jack |
He wasn’t a terrible signing at all.
He was signed with a plan in mind. Which was the right plan of course, which is why it was not a mistake. We sold Llorente and Gylfi to try and regenerate as a side and move away from the stifling relegationball we were morphing into deeper every year.
Tammy was sourced and signed early on and was a significant piece of that plan. However other key targets clearly failed to materialise and we ended up panicking and going back to the tried and tested relegationball, then came the last gasp signing of Bony.
Tammy was the victim of that, not a victim of his own ability (which is what this ridiculous debate is surrounding). When he came on he showed in the right situations what he can do. Just like against Southampton last week immediately got in on the action flashing a shot in at their goal. Let’s also not forget that it is a fact that he produced more direct goals per minute than anyone else in the side (stat accurate up to a few weeks ago, not checked since).
It is a case of what could have been with Tammy. But his signature was not the mistake, the mistake was not complimenting it with others. [Post edited 11 May 2018 12:08]
|
Not arguing with most of what you are saying. The boy is talented and in the right team he will be very successful, but when you balance it all up because everything else didn’t fit in to place it was a poor signing. That’s not the lads fault, it’s the club’s fault. | | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:16 - May 11 with 1183 views | A_Fans_Dad |
For a goal poacher he managed to miss quite a few opportunities in the Penalty Area, he was able to poach goals in the Chamionship because he had more time to do so.
As we have found, very few strikers from various leagues have successfully made the step up to Prem level. | | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:17 - May 11 with 1183 views | jack247 |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 11:58 - May 11 by londonlisa2001 |
I have no idea which way this conversation has turned, as I haven't followed it, but Tammy Abraham was a terrible signing for us this year.
Full stop.
Nothing to do with his ability. All to do with signing the wrong players for our needs. Again it comes from buying or loaning players and then wondering what to do with them rather than the way it should work, the way it used to work.
We paid £50k a week plus for a striker that couldn't get in our pitiful team, even though we were desperate for goals. A bad deal. One of many bad deals. End of story. |
Absolutely. E20 knows that full well, but his ego is preventing him from admitting it | | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:18 - May 11 with 1181 views | KGriz16 |
Watched a tactical video on Graham Potter last night on YouTube. He explained his tactics against Galatasaray in the Europa League. It was exciting to see he plays a more refreshing style and explains those tactics well... If, and a big if, Tammy was willing to come back, I think GP would get him playing big time. However, both are if's |  | | |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:24 - May 11 with 1177 views | E20Jack |
| Would you take Tammy on loan again? on 12:17 - May 11 by jack247 |
Absolutely. E20 knows that full well, but his ego is preventing him from admitting it |
You can keep saying that until you are blue in the face - still doesn’t make a blind bit of difference to reality though.
This is not a computer game. You can’t make all your signings at once, it is a long process needing to be done piece by piece. When we signed Tammy it was absolutely the right signing.
Unfortuntely since we failed to build around him as you suggested he no longer fitted into the relegationball style we had to resort to. Yet when given the chance in a side that did not suit him he was still factually our biggest direct goal threat.
You can argue, you can pontificate, you can change your argument, you can ask silly misleading and loaded questions... but this is how it is and how it will remain.
You will just have to accept it. Although that seems difficult for you to do. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
