An interesting one this for me, the facts are no clean sheets for 21 games Mattock doesnt play and we get 2. He was good last year better than the year before the manager loves him. As I understand it he has refused to sign a new contract and is therefore likely to leave in Jan for a small fee or next summer for nothing. He does tend to leave gaps between him and the oppositions wide players and lets in a lot of crosses (worth counting how many he blocks compared to not blocking in the next game). I know I am slightly biased as I think Purrington was the better long term option, proven at league 1 and wanted for money in the championship, he was also a lot younger. For me the contract situation was the key factor, we should have started with Purrington made robertson captain and made mattock fight for his place. That would also mean he is less visible and unlikely to be bought in Jan. At the moment Mattock cannot start for me
Purrington wasn't going to stop with us so we've got Mattock for this season. If he his fit he's got to start. It would help him if he had a wide man in front of him. Robertson he's not a left back waisted there. Clarke we've signed looks about as tall as Taylor, disadvantage for a defender too me.
I liked purrington. Thought he was the more gifted and thought he made much more of the position than Mattock. I would have liked to have seen the management team recognise that and get him in the team to give him more time to impress.
On the other hand Mattock has had a couple good seasons with us and as said is not helped by not having a player directly in front of him. Similar to Smith, he is essentially not being played in his best scenario and thus both of their weaknesses and not strengths are on show.
Ive always been amazed in modern football at pro levels how often the backs get done on simple crosses. It perhaps should be the pride and joy of any defender to stop a cross yet they often seem to sacrifice that priority for some idea about being directly beaten or perhaps being told to steer the attack in a certain way and leaving space and thus loosing the emphasis on just hitting that ball and man hard or forcing him very tight and wide until the ball is lost to the momentum of the attack.
Well, we lost purrington and thats that and if Mattock wont sign then we obviously should be planning to take account of this. Perhaps Mattock thought, ****! PW isnt going to get any wide man to do all the running and cover for me and no way to get past the half way line without looking like im stuck on a railway track...im outta here.
I know PW has some good qualities but his management of the Purrington situation for me is not good. Lad is starting every week for the 3rd placed championship team, he was the future not Mattock. Mattock will only get worse very poor management for me but I will get slaughtered for not praying at the PW church. I hope we complete the 3 signings I get the feeling that they will fall through but let us hope not
Derby - being a warden at the church of PW, can I assure you that slaughtering is not on the menu but you may be required to undertake some form of penance! I wasn't impressed with Purrington during his time with us. In his first appearance, I was astounded by his lack of pace for a 21 year old. So I can understand why the management might have had reservations about him - you can improve your fitness but speed is something you either have or don't. Having said that, at Charlton he appears to play in a very attacking formation - his goal record of late is amazing for a full back. So they have obviously found a way of making the most of his abilities and mitigating for his lack of pace. You win some, you lose some, and in this instance, maybe we lost someone who had more to offer but was restricted by the way we play?
I was pleased when we signed Purrington. I thought Mattock was prone to lapses of concentration. I wanted Purrington to do well but to me he looked like a rabbit in the headlights. His apparent lack of pace was also quite alarming. Whether he was fully fit or not I'm not sure. The word I got from people behind the scenes was that the lad didnt exactly throw himself into life at at RUFC and was destined almost from day one to return to the south. That may or may not be true, but it chimes with what I saw. I think however much you want a player to do well, if he isn't settled and if his heart and soul isn't in it, it isn't going to work out. Perhaps that was the case here.
Charlton obviously suits him for whatever reason and certain players suit certain clubs. He seems to be doing well there and good luck to him. That doesn't necessarily mean we were wrong to let him go though. You can't hang on to players who dont really want to play for you. it was pretty obvious that although Warne said the right things to force a modest fee out of Charlton, he was inevitably going to go to a club nearer his home, in a higher division and a club he had got to know. For what it's worth my personal opinion is that Mattock has been excellent in the last 12 months and for me he is the better player of the two. I respect your view to the contrary though Derby.
I'm on the fence with mattock to many times gets caught out of position and for me his performance v Lincoln apart from one cross was diabolical even more so as a captain. His reaction for his pathetic corners and when he lost the ball in 2nd half he strolled back. Maybe be dropped to bench may kick his ego in touch for a bit
Thing is with Mattock shouldn't be taking corners. Shouldn't be our left side. Blame manager for that. He's a full back, if you get someone to link with him he can put a good cross in.
Just want to add a little more opinion about Purrington.
It is true he didnt always impress but I have to agree with Derby that for me it looks like one of the many glaring mistakes PW has made. PWs good qualities are somewhat in equal quantity to his limits. It may be heavily influenced by his personality of openness that we can form so many opinions about him with reasonable evidence unlike the (super) steve evans era when you couldnt tell a pig from a poke such was the incredible turnover.
When you think you see something in a player who then goes on (very quickly) to do much better than he had done at our place one is bound to be irked and so it was with Purrington. Clearly cultured and positionally astute, and a decent passer of the ball. The one thing missing was game time at this club and more permission to be attack-minded. That last item was never going to happen given PWs assessment of our strengths and his set up. Admittedly, many players leave clubs because of the culture and personal differences. Still, it was one that got away and Im not sure that the suggestions why he went so easily are strong enough to convince me we couldnt have kept hold of him.
Fair enough Ian, but John Breckin (who was involved at the club day to day at the time) went public during our last league one campaign to say that if Purrington wanted to get in the side he had to train harder, commit more and get stuck in. It was more than the usual bland gubbins interview. The very clear message was that he was coasting. It struck a chord with similar I had heard from elsewhere and also what I thought I saw on the pitch. I saw him at Charlton (ironically) on a bank holiday Monday towards the end of the season when he was given a chance. We lost 3-1 if memory serves, and Purrington looked to me like a full back borrowed at short notice from Maltby or Parkgate (no disrespect intended). If (and it is an if) the player regretted moving up north and never gave it a good go, that wouldn't be the managers fault. It wouldn't necessarily be the players fault either. It happens sometimes. We are guessing a bit here, but to me it carries all those hallmarks.
Ps I dont really agree that he wasnt allowed to attack. During the back half of the disastrous 24 point season maybe, but he had a full season with us in league one in which we got promoted and scored a sackful of goals. Emmanuel was certainly given licence to get forwards which he did to good effect, and I'm sure Purringtons brief wouldn't have been any different.
Just want to add a little more opinion about Purrington.
It is true he didnt always impress but I have to agree with Derby that for me it looks like one of the many glaring mistakes PW has made.
Ian - not sure you can claim a glaring error whilst stating your opinion that Purrington didn't always impress? I suggest that Purrington's departure was a management call based not only his on-field performances for us, but on other issues that have been alluded to by other posters. He's one that got away for whatever reason, but I personally don't feel we are worse off without him.
The thread got me thinking about players who we have had and let go (without a decent fee) who we might have been better keeping hold of. There are none that immediately spring to mind but others may have examples?
A couple more suggestions. Paul Stancliffe who I thought was a fantastic player. We let him go to the Blades for peanuts after an injury hit season on the basis that he was crocked, and he went on to have about eight very successful further seasons at The Lane. He was a bit like Paul McGrath - he always looked injured but could walk through games and get the job done. Also Shaun Barker who we got nothing for because his contract ran out. He went to Blackpool on that free and then on to Derby for about £1m.
firstly a bid of 200k rejected only to let him go for 100k a bit later. Though some time ago I remember thinking that this was a shoddy amount of money. And so it proved.
oh, and Shaun Barker. Left on a free to Blackpool who then sold him for 900k to Derby
-- Edited by ian on Friday 23rd of August 2019 01:35:49 PM