Hinckley Squad - Fryatt not in it !
- Thread starter Outfox the Fox
- Start date
- Status
Jeff, gotta disagree sorry... there is room for all the players deemed to be our best players. Read the mercury story carefully and I believe there was a coded, but clear message nonetheless in it:
OPENING PARAGRAPH: "...the squad to Hinckley tonight <has> more than a few pointers towards his <MA> eventual starting line up"
The coded message... PARAGRAPH 5:
"The writing is on the wall for anyone not featuring strongly"
Bill Anderson is an experienced journo and despite his many faults, I believe those words were well chosen and he has clearly been tipped off what the club is about to do and MA has probably told him outright that his plans do not and cannot include Matty Fryatt.
M17TT C
Well-Known Member
True Jeff, but you would think that Fryatt would be chosen ahead of Elvis and MDV, which could mean that he is busy talking to another club or two, or it could mean that Martin Allen is using this match as the last chance for Elvis and MDV. No one knows, but TBH it doesn't look good IMO. 
The article in the Mockery is bollocks.
The idea of matches against teams like Hinckley is to get players match fit, and to test different combinations of players.
We won't see anything that resembles the real first choice line up until nearer the start of the season. The whole squad has to get fit, not just the best 16.
Last edited:
Yorkshire Vixen
Active Member
Durham Fox
El Dude Brother.
You would have to say though Jeff thats the majority of the first team squad minus those who have been listed or told can go (and Fryatt)
You would have to say though Jeff thats the majority of the first team squad minus those who have been listed or told can go (and Fryatt)
Durham's on the money here. Among the senior players, only the listed players are not at Hinckely tonight. Matty Fryatt's days at the club are well and truely numbered. Get used to it everyone.
I have only just seen the squad for Hinckley - and it's a stronger squad than I would have expected.
But I still don't think the team chosen for a match like this has any real meaning.
People said de Vries and Hammond were crap on Saturday, but they're in the squad tonight. Does this mean MA now wants to keep them?
But I still don't think the team chosen for a match like this has any real meaning.
People said de Vries and Hammond were crap on Saturday, but they're in the squad tonight. Does this mean MA now wants to keep them?
can see your point Jeff, but I think the significance is mostly to do with who is excluded from the squad. Also the Bill Anderson's write up says - and this is the coded message as I said "the writing is on the wall for those not featuring strongly.." What therefore can we conclude is on the wall for anyone who is not even going (i.e Matty) - and thus will feature 0% in the game?
I take your point that MDV & Hammond are going but imagine that the "featuring strongly" remark will result in us seeing Hume & Cort up front for most of the game whilst MDV & Hammond get a few minutes.
Last edited:
What's the point of taking Hammond and de Vries then, if they're also on the 'not wanted' list?
Wouldn't it be better to take Odhiambo and Chambers instead?
18 players have been named for tonight's match. We'll need a lot more than 18 players over the course of the season, so if tonight's squad is a 'first choice' squad, a lot of the players not in it will still have a part to play as squad players. It doesn't necessarily mean the likes of Maybury, Hughes, Kenton, Henderson etc are leaving, just that they're not in the first 18.
My response was more aimed at those people who seem to think the missing players are missing because they're about to leave for another club.
If the thunderstorm in Hinckley continues much longer the pitch might not be playable anyway!
Last edited:
"
Something I'd totally not noticed even though I got soaked nipping out of my office for 2 minutes today!!... I can't imagine the game being played or meaningful performances happening at this rate... A real shame.
(BTW, Chambers is in the squad, but you're right that the other young forward isn't)
Ashley Chambers isn't in the squad, James Chambers is.
Backdoor Ad
New Member
Could it just be that Fryatt has a bit of an injury and thats why he's been left out??
The rain and hail has stopped, the sun is shining now.
Durham Fox
El Dude Brother.
I dont think those omitted are leaving for other clubs necessarily but it seems clear they are the surplus ones. It seems MdV and Elvis are the ones that may have earned a second chance. Incidentally some of the press listed Hammond as MoTM on Saturday.
Im not in Hinckley currently so cant comment but what I can say is that the Marstons pitch doesnt have the greatest drainage in the world so it could well be in danger.
drummindefender
Active Member
er thats what he said
No it's not. Read what he wrote in context.
drummindefender
Active Member
he said your right james chambers is in the squad but your right the other young forward (obviously referring to ashley) isn't
seems pretty clear cut to me
seems pretty clear cut to me
- Status
Championship
| P | Pld | Pts | |
| 1 | Bournemouth | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | Arsenal | 0 | 0 |
| 3 | Aston Villa | 0 | 0 |
| 4 | Brentford | 0 | 0 |
| 5 | Brighton | 0 | 0 |
| 6 | Chelsea | 0 | 0 |
| 7 | Palace | 0 | 0 |
| 8 | Everton | 0 | 0 |
| 9 | Fulham | 0 | 0 |
| 10 | Ipswich | 0 | 0 |
| 11 | Leicester | 0 | 0 |
| 12 | Liverpool | 0 | 0 |
| 13 | Manchester C | 0 | 0 |
| 14 | Manchester U | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | Newcastle | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | Nottm F | 0 | 0 |
| 17 | Southampton | 0 | 0 |
| 18 | Tottenham | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | West Ham | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | Wolves | 0 | 0 |
