Paddy Mcnair in front of dale fry is insanity

FabioPorkpie said:
I think it was Smith’s man and he lost him when they wrestled. McNair happened to be closest when it went in and should have done better, but I’m pretty sure it was Smith’s man initially?
Click to expand...
So who was McNair marking? From a corner.
 
There were so many errors in every goal I can't see how one player takes full blame.

I'm not mcnairs biggest fan but he was part of a whole bigger problem today.

I don't think fry would have made much difference with the types of goals we conceded.

Smith, lenihan, mcnair, howson and Hackney were all woeful and the keeper didn't get close to making a save. They are all culpable.

Mcnair has done well lately its unfair to solely blame him. Tho I would start fry every game. We have conceded soft goals with him in the team too.
 
Facefuzz said:
Paddy hasn’t played a big part of how well we done since carrick came.
Fry has.
It’s mainly because paddy is poor. Atleast he will be gone in summer
Click to expand...
But he has, that's evidently not true.

He wouldnt get picked in a very succesful team if he hadn't.

Fry is a better defender, most people agree with that, but McNair is a far better footballer and allows us to dominate posession better.

They both have strengths and weaknesses, but in reality neither are a perfect fit.
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
But he has, that's evidently not true.

He wouldnt get picked in a very succesful team if he hadn't.

Fry is a better defender, most people agree with that, but McNair is a far better footballer and allows us to dominate posession better.

They both have strengths and weaknesses, but in reality neither are a perfect fit.
Click to expand...
Who would you say was a perfect fit? What type of player. I think for a mix of mcnair and fry they would cost a bit.
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
But he has, that's evidently not true.

He wouldnt get picked in a very succesful team if he hadn't.

Fry is a better defender, most people agree with that, but McNair is a far better footballer and allows us to dominate posession better.

They both have strengths and weaknesses, but in reality neither are a perfect fit.
Click to expand...
The fact that we have won with huge scores this season and played glorious football with fry in really doesn't hold water the argument we need McNairs footballing ability. The argument is over today once and for all carrick must pick fry over McNair irrespective of opposition. The international equivalent of having McNair at cb would be picking eric dyer at cb for England
 
Last edited:
Glover_elbow said:
The fact that we have won with huge scores this season and played glorious football with fry in really doesn't hold water the argument we need McNairs footballing ability. The argument is over today once and for all carrick must pick fry over McNair irrespective of opposition. The international equivalent would be picking eric dyer at cb for England
Click to expand...
I think when fry is playing well and confident his ability on the ball gets better. He has a great knack of finding the strikers feet. Mcnair has a better long ball and probably calmer under pressure but there isn't a massive difference for me ball playing wise.

As we seen today the striker just stood on mcnair which made lenihan the ball player and that got us in trouble. I would always go with fry the better defender.
 
Another couple of underperformers mentioned, Archer who still seems to have a dodgy ankle and Hackney who has had a brilliant season, but seems jaded. Both would have benefited from a break but were not going to wimp out of an international opportunity. Time to give Barlaser a chance to show what he can do?
 
McNair is not a CH and to keep picking him ahead of Fry is bizarre. I can see Dael looking for a way out of the club at the end of this season.
 
Glover_elbow said:
The fact that we have won with huge scores this season and played glorious football with fry in really doesn't hold water the argument we need McNairs footballing ability. The argument is over today once and for all carrick must pick fry over McNair irrespective of opposition. The international equivalent of having McNair at cb would be picking eric dyer at cb for England
Click to expand...
Carrick can't settle on either, because they have different qualities.

It an obvious dilema that's not got an obvious solution.
 
I'm all for starting Fry in the remaining fixtures. However those saying they never wanna see Mcnair play for us again is just stupidity. He's a good player who's became the latest scapegoat since Tav left and Mcgree's form picked up.

It was a collectively poor performance today, never forget that a couple of weeks ago there was threads about how daft it was to drop Paddy for Fry!

Funny how things change after one bad result
 
Looked off Balance did Paddy today. Then again the whole team just looked like they lost momentum. Even Giles was poor.
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
Another Lenihan type player would be ideal, one thats can defend bit also play too.
Click to expand...
Do you think lenihan is a better defender than fry?

If you're not busy next week I could interview you😂

I think its a big ask for any 2 cbs to not make mistakes when u have Giles not great at defending and Smith so high up the pitch to always be on point. Were playing top end football with what I would say limited players. Its a difficult balancing act. I would include howson and Hackney in that. That isn't taking away from what they have done this season btw
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top