Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and log in to join the CFC discussion! ×

Patrick Bamford

Kieran.

By Kieran.,
in Strikers

 Share

Recommended Posts

OneMoSalah

OneMoSalah 8,615

Posted
Posted

Who are the strikers there? On the top of my head there's Campbell and Wickham who are rubbish and Gayle who isn't very good either but has had his reputation enhanced by doing a bit of Liverpool bashing.

Have i missed anyone because honestly I'll back Bamford to get in ahead of them 3.

Campbell, Gayle and Wickham have lots of PL experience which is also Bamford's biggest issue. I doubt he'll get in ahead of them straight away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

lionsden

lionsden 4,689

Posted
Posted

If he can't force his way in ahead of Wickham and Campbell (two painfully averages strikers) then he won't make it here and won't deserve too either.

If he's a good as we hope he will be/is he will e above those clowns from minute one.

You are completely missing the point and looking at it from the wrong angle. For a striker to impress, they need genuine chances and run of games which he won't likely get at palace and even if he manages to score or impress in the extremely rare opportunity he will likely get, it won't be sufficient to help his status on the pecking order and pardew has no reason whatsoever to play him either.

The purpose of loan in this scenario is to develop a player and that can only come from constant /regular playing time. Our focus and responsibility as the parent club should have been to find him a team where his chances of getting regular playing time which is crucial for his development is maximised rather than some unicorn "displace 4 permanent competition to prove your worth" egolistical challenge.

Bottline is the club didn't have bamford's interest at heart with this loan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lionsden

lionsden 4,689

Posted
Posted

You can't really break through as loan player, though, unless there's an option to buy. Managers always prefer the players they have around for the long term.

Exactly. The only way I see him getting any meaningful game time regardless of his form is if palace find themselves in a desperate situation and have no choice but to play him like injury crisis or something. I can't remember a loan player that had toncontend with 4 or more competition for places and still managed to ammass decent gane time. I dont care what anyone says this was a dumb loan move from the start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tomo

Tomo 21,681

Posted
Posted

You are completely missing the point and looking at it from the wrong angle. For a striker to impress, they need genuine chances and run of games which he won't likely get at palace and even if he manages to score or impress in the extremely rare opportunity he will likely get, it won't be sufficient to help his status on the pecking order and pardew has no reason whatsoever to play him either.

The purpose of loan in this scenario is to develop a player and that can only come from constant /regular playing time. Our focus and responsibility as the parent club should have been to find him a team where his chances of getting regular playing time which is crucial for his development is maximised rather than some unicorn "displace 4 permanent competition to prove your worth" egolistical challenge.

Bottline is the club didn't have bamford's interest at heart with this loan.

Off the top of my head Sturridge at Bolton for in with competition from Davies, Elmander and a couple of others, you may say there average but there no worse than what Bamfords competing with. Wilshire at the Same club, Welbeck at Sunderland got significant game time despite Bent and Gyan being his competitors.

I believe Bamfords got a serious chance of being a regular there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stats

Stats 6,982

Posted
Posted

Off the top of my head Sturridge at Bolton for in with competition from Davies, Elmander and a couple of others, you may say there average but there no worse than what Bamfords competing with. Wilshire at the Same club, Welbeck at Sunderland got significant game time despite Bent and Gyan being his competitors.

I believe Bamfords got a serious chance of being a regular there.

He definitely has a serious chance of being a regular there but he will have to score. If he goes on for 2 games without scoring he might lose his place just like that. Look at Sanogo. Easy to say he is an awful striker but Wenger said last season when he loaned him out that he wants him to go a prem team. He started their first couple games I think then after when he failed to score all his appearances were off the bench. But Bamford is a natural goalscorer. This is the prem though so will be interesting to see how he develops but one thing I am sure on is that unless he is scoring on a consistent basis he will be rotated regularly. Hopefully he has enough starts and goals for the loan to prove a successful one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stats

Stats 6,982

Posted
Posted

You seriously comparing that donkey Sanogo to Bamford?

No, but the situations are similar. Sanogo was sent on loan there because Wenger thought he would be a regular. Because there other strikers were so bad before Glenn Murray returned from his loan at Reading, he was put straight in the team but then after struggling for the first couple matches he never regained his place in the team. Hopefully Bamford scores down there but this is the Prem and he is competing with several strikers there. It is easy to say he is better than all of them but he does not have prem experience and it will not be a simple case like Lukaku of being guaranteed a start in his loans. He will need to work for it and right now if Murray stays (has been linked with Bournemouth) he might start of as the no.1 striker because of his form for Palace towards the end of last season. Anyway, if Bamford is good enough to make it here he will score goals down there and then we should have nothing to worry about with how much starts he gets at Palace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Mak

The Mak 4,459

Posted
Posted

Probably should've went to Bournemouth or Norwich. It sucks, because if we have a bad time with our strikers this season and Bamford was to do really well, the natural process would be to have him in the squad next year. I don't think that will happen now, I don't think Pardew will give him a proper chance. I fucking hate it when our players are signed for squad depth and nothing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 0 members are here!

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

talk chelse forums

We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Talk Chelsea relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online because over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this website and help us by switching your ad blocker off.

KTBFFH
Thank You

Sure, let me in!
Enter