Mullers Gone To Bantams - Page 18

K-P · 28-03-2009, 08:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oldgobbin

following Macca's post, !

You may want to read that thread again .. Macca got upset at what I wrote.. so in respect of our offline relationship I stopped... But feel free to carry on sh1te stirring .. I am sure everyone appreciates it

fc:stanley · 28-03-2009, 22:40

Looks like some of the Bradford fans are not liking Mullers at the moment!
Bradford City Football Club • View topic - Barry Conlon

lancsdave · 25-04-2009, 18:07

Unused sub and no chance of Wembley, might as well come back now.

Tin Monkey · 25-04-2009, 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

Unused sub and no chance of Wembley, might as well come back now.

I have nothing against Mullin, but it's a shame the bloke has another year on his contract. I don't actually want him back now. It's time for a fresh start and going back to the 'Mullin way' would be a step backwards in my opinion.

shakermaker · 25-04-2009, 18:14

Weren't we still playing the 'Mullin way' today TM? Instead of Mullin being there to win the long ball from Kenny Arthur, the smaller players were just chasing the second ball from the opposition defenders. Lindfield understudied Mullin's role at times but for the main it looked like a Rugby Union kick off.

Tin Monkey · 25-04-2009, 18:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Weren't we still playing the 'Mullin way' today TM? Instead of Mullin being there to win the long ball from Kenny Arthur, the smaller players were just chasing the second ball from the opposition defenders. Lindfield understudied Mullin's role at times but for the main it looked like a Rugby Union kick off.

We're at the end of the season now and I was thinking about next season. We did what we had to do this term, but surely we need to be looking for some kind of advancement of tactics for next season?

shakermaker · 25-04-2009, 18:19

We do I agree, but I think Mullin will be a valuable player next season whatever tactics we employ.

I don't think Mullin's game is limited to him playing the role of the lone targetman.

cashman · 25-04-2009, 21:41

i agree with T.M. think mullen will only be any value to advancement though if played midfield,certainly not up front.

MCR ADIM · 25-04-2009, 21:54

Who do you take out of midfield for Mullin though?

shakermaker · 25-04-2009, 22:07

Mulllin isn't a midfield player. He's never played there except for being shafted to the right wing (unconvincingly so) in a few late Unibond/early Conference games. There's no logic or evidence to say he'd offer anything from midfield.

He doesn't have to adopt a new position to play a different style. He's a striker, and still a good one. With seemingly decent wide players in the promising Chris Turner and a jumpstarted John Miles we can play a wider, more clever game instead of a hopeful hail mary.

cashman · 25-04-2009, 22:15

was he originally signed as a striker?

shakermaker · 25-04-2009, 22:18

cashman · 25-04-2009, 22:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Yep.

thats funny, i don't know, but mate who has gone to all games fer donkeys years told me not so.

shakermaker · 25-04-2009, 22:32

Don't know where that comes from cashy. Always known Paul as a striker.
Rocky was signed as a midfield player (well, more 'utility' than anything, lol) about a year before Mully? Or maybe it's confusion with Paul's brother?

cashman · 25-04-2009, 22:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Don't know where that comes from cashy. Always known Paul as a striker.
Rocky was signed as a midfield player (well, more 'utility' than anything, lol) about a year before Mully? Or maybe it's confusion with Paul's brother?

nah it certainly wasn't shaker, i'll ask him to post when i see him.