Why can't we have Duffy like??

I will be very disappointed if Monkhouse isnt a pools player shortly.
_________________
so! what's new?

I will be very disappointed if Monkhouse isnt a pools player shortly.

If Will Monkhouse be very disappointed shortly, I isn't a pools player.

He played loads of games in the league above for Rotherham, also quite a few more in the league above that!

I think he is very good player, he is a very important physical presence at this level he wins loads of flick ons and headers, he gets on the end of things in our box as well. He has scored 3 winning goals in his loan spell! He rarely gives the ball away but he isn't the quickest he makes for that by being a good footballer. We look a far more balanced team now with him in it.

We have got to sign the lad! I can't belive anyone would say otherwise, you'll be telling us you don't rate Sir Willie Boland next

He's benefited from having a nose for goals too. 3 in 8 from a winger, two of them crucial, ain't to be sneezed at.
No Monkhouse, no 9-win run.

Are you Dibbles brother?

Sure a lot of what you say is for effect/reaction

It must be noted that his previous highest goals tally for a season is 3.....from 27 games, 3 in 8 is a good record for a striker never mind a midfielder.

He has made a big difference to us, and is clearly loving it here, ill be gutted if we dont sign him.

I like the way that every time that he has been interviewed he has refered to the team as we, whereas loan players normally say they

Ok fair points

I agree he does little spectacular, but to be fair I don't think that his role, he is a holding midfielder in the way Mark Tinkler used to be, a steadying influence if you will, plus he can get forwatd & score goals, 3 in 8 games is good for a midfielder. Also he does very little wrong - I can think of very few unforced errors in the games I have seen him play

Interesting point - in the current 9 game winning run we have scored something like 12 goals (or 11?) Of those 5 have been from Duffy (agree if given the choice between Duffy & Barker I would take Duffy EVERY time for the reasons you gve, if we CAN'T get Duffy however we need someone who can score so Barker may have to do - we don't seem to have anyone currently in the team that can do it REGULARLY) 3 from Monkhouse, 1 from Sweeney, 1 from Daly & 1 (I think?) from Williams

Ok, sack that one, get rid of Monkhouse and replace him with a half decent left-winger who can score goals, link up with defence and attack easily, tackle, pass coherently and WANT to play for us desperately

Monkhouse it is then

Ok then

and he kept his eye on the ball when Daly failed to

i suspect my learned friend is on the wind up
all those hours riding shot gun on the central have fuddled his brain

The team Turner built that finally got us promoted in 2003 was not made up of players we all thought would do well in a higher division.
But they did do well in a higher division, didn't they.
Nobody thought Sweeney would become a first team regular never mind one of our stars. Nobody dreamed that Jim Provett would have an outstanding season.
We had Marcus Richardson, Kevin Henderson, and Mark Robinson. Tinks, Trigger, and even Matty Robson were in there too. The only money signing we made was Nelson but that was more of a replacement than a first step in improving the team.

And I'll tell you what, that nucleus of a team did a sight better than the one containing the supposed higher-level signings we made later.
When you consider Cooper signed the likes of Andy Jordan and Ryan McCann to start building his squad, I don't think you can have any qualms about signing Monkhouse permanently.