Gary Cahill

Topfarrier said:
lol why bother answering if you have nothing to contribute?...no one on here agrees with me but at least they are willing to debate the point.....just banding around words like 'clueless' just shows you up tbh.
Some people have forgotten what this forum is about....it's not a Scotty parker fan club .
Click to expand...
This forum is not about you making up stats or fees to suit your argument against Parker
 
Topfarrier said:
I don't know what job you do but mine is quite physical.....and yet a few cracked ribs was nothing a few paracetamol and a nurofen didn't sort out......i did have to take a week off with the coller bone though!:)
Click to expand...
I've had broken ribs , and broken collarbone.....give me a broken collar bone anytime against broken ribs.....absolute agony 2 days in hospital 5 weeks off work
 
tedisking said:
I've had broken ribs , and broken collarbone.....give me a broken collar bone anytime against broken ribs.....absolute agony 2 days in hospital 5 weeks off work
Click to expand...
Nah not for me ....collar bone was by far the worst injury I've had.....broken ribs are a lot different to fractured ones though i suppose.
 
CherryBare said:
This forum is not about you making up stats or fees to suit your argument against Parker
Click to expand...
Lol some of you are frightened by any hint of Parker criticism that you fail to see when i'm paying him a compliment.......i have literally said that he made the right call regarding Cahill.....and that's still considered a criticism!
 
Topfarrier said:
Lol some of you are frightened by any hint of Parker criticism that you fail to see when i'm paying him a compliment.......i have literally said that he made the right call regarding Cahill.....and that's still considered a criticism!
Click to expand...
You said it was strange cahill never made the squad, which wasn't true, not sure how that's a compliment for Parker. I've no issue with genuine criticism of him, but you have to get the facts right
 
KingKieffer said:
With Cahill I think it was quite possibly a number of factors that contributed to him not playing much in the second half of the season. The injury, the intensity of the fixture schedule and perhaps age catching up with him a bit could all have played a part. In his limited appearances post the Millwall away game he didn’t look the same player. In his appearances against Hull and Barnsley he looked a little out of his depth.
Click to expand...

All of that is part of it, but surely the biggest part is…we couldn’t wait for his return when chasing promotion and didn’t want to rely on Chris Mepham so we signed Nat Phillips.

Once we did that Cahill was surplus to requirements.
 
DJ said:
All of that is part of it, but surely the biggest part is…we couldn’t wait for his return when chasing promotion and didn’t want to rely on Chris Mepham so we signed Nat Phillips.

Once we did that Cahill was surplus to requirements.
Click to expand...
Cahill returned quite a while before Nat Phillips signed.
 
DJ said:
All of that is part of it, but surely the biggest part is…we couldn’t wait for his return when chasing promotion and didn’t want to rely on Chris Mepham so we signed Nat Phillips.

Once we did that Cahill was surplus to requirements.
Click to expand...
Who would have thought at the start of this thread that Mepham would ever be considered a better option off the bench than Cahill.....quite incredible really.
 
DJ said:
Well he played and clearly wasn’t fit, so we have a hint…
Click to expand...
But why was this clear? Just because he didn’t play well it doesn’t necessarily mean that he wasn’t fit. He wasn’t exactly hobbling about and didn’t look any slower than before.
 
Kieffer Moore only made 4 substitute appearances, but scored 4 important goals.

The squad all contributed one way or another to our club being promoted.

So basically if Cahill didn’t feature in the later games doesn’t really matter or if he was carrying an injury.
 
KingKieffer said:
But why was this clear? Just because he didn’t play well it doesn’t necessarily mean that he wasn’t fit. He wasn’t exactly hobbling about and didn’t look any slower than before.
Click to expand...

Erm, yes he did. He looked more wooden than Pinocchio.
 
Topfarrier said:
Who would have thought at the start of this thread that Mepham would ever be considered a better option off the bench than Cahill.....quite incredible really.
Click to expand...


As someone else mentioned, could have been an accumulation of several things.

I just think a combination of the injury, intensity of matches and him hitting a substantial physical 'wall' caused a sharp drop off in certain attributes and effectiveness. Its not like he's 23, then I guess more questions may be asked around it. Can only imagine its that, as I doubt Parker would have dropped a key component from what was an incredibly resolute back 4 until the time he got injured.

Also, if they had fallen out, I very much doubt Parker would have been naming him on the bench.

Mephams a decent squad player for usand would play in most Championship starting 11's.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter, Parker got us over the line in 2nd. What would you have preferred, he persisted with playing Cahill, even if likely he was in steep decline? Could have cost us promotion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;