Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Luke Garbutt

Try to keep him, or let him leave ?

  • Total voters
    308
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
MACCA75 said:
Moyes would have been slaughtered for playing Hibbo left back and everyone knows it. He had a solid game, as despite the skeptics, that's what Hibbert does. However, we were painfully unbalanced in an attacking sense, and it begs the question for Garbutt - if not now, when?
Click to expand...

Probably not in the foreseeable future.

When both Baines and Oviedo are fit, Garbutt is third choice left back at best.

It is only here on GOT that people would get do worked up about the omission of a third choice left back in a game which we won.

That is why I love this joint ;)
 
I think there was probably quite a few reasons Garbutt wasn't selected.
1st - No Barry to protect him.
2nd - He's just played two games for England U21s, maybe Martinez see's the Wolfsburg game as more important then West Ham (as it guarantees our progression in EL) and therefore took a risk with Hibbert in this game.
I thought I had more reasons but maybe not...these are all I can think of now.
 

Foot Long Hot Dog said:
If Garbutt had played well in the same side then why would we have lost?

Stupid argument that
Click to expand...
If Garbutt was playing instead of Hibbert, it wouldn't be the same side would it? And my argument was stupid???? I also like your little caveat about if Garbutt played well, rather than just if Garbutt played. Clever ;)

As I said, Hibbert at left back is not something I would want to see too often, but if Garbutt played instead, it would have caused the whole balance and set up of the team to be different, so it would have totally changed the way we played.
Each player has a role to play within the team. Altering one players role has an effect on the role of every other player in the team. Not sure why you can't see that?
 
WA Toffee said:
If Garbutt was playing instead of Hibbert, it wouldn't be the same side would it? And my argument was stupid???? I also like your little caveat about if Garbutt played well, rather than just if Garbutt played. Clever ;)

As I said, Hibbert at left back is not something I would want to see too often, but if Garbutt played instead, it would have caused the whole balance and set up of the team to be different, so it would have totally changed the way we played.
Each player has a role to play within the team. Altering one players role has an effect on the role of every other player in the team. Not sure why you can't see that?
Click to expand...

So is it conceivable from your argument of "it would of totally changed the way we played" that we possibly could of been a lot more comfortable than we actually were?

Everyone has an opinion, just because its been formed in your brain doesn't mean it's right.
 
SchoolOfScience said:
So is it conceivable from your argument of "it would of totally changed the way we played" that we possibly could of been a lot more comfortable than we actually were?

Everyone has an opinion, just because its been formed in your brain doesn't mean it's right.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. We could have won 4-0 with Garbutt getting a goal and man of the match. Which would have been great.
But what we do know, and all we know, is that with Hibbert in the side, we got 3 points. I don't understand why people are getting upset about that?
 
WA Toffee said:
Absolutely. We could have won 4-0 with Garbutt getting a goal and man of the match. Which would have been great.
But what we do know, and all we know, is that with Hibbert in the side, we got 3 points. I don't understand why people are getting upset about that?
Click to expand...

Crazy isn't it?

A young player with a good reputation doesn't get a start in what was a 'must win' home game.

The manager and coaching staff see him train every day, I would guess less than 10% of members of GOT have seen him play in person, yet picking Hibbert was a disgrace?

32 pages of cryarsing along the lines of "Good luck at your next club Luke mate" is cringworthy.

If he's good enough, he will get a game.
 
WA Toffee said:
Absolutely. We could have won 4-0 with Garbutt getting a goal and man of the match. Which would have been great.
But what we do know, and all we know, is that with Hibbert in the side, we got 3 points. I don't understand why people are getting upset about that?
Click to expand...

I'm certainly not getting upset, as you rightly say 3 points is all that matters and in fairness I thought Hibbo had a solid game albeit not very attacking.

I just felt sorry for Garbutt
 

Foot Long Hot Dog said:
How about I formed that opinion by watching him actually play? Novel idea I know

He's already an England U21 regular without getting a sniff of first team football with us and if you're sticking him in the same envelope as the likes of Lundstram then you can't have seen much of either of them.

I find your fan boy defence of Martinez daft to say the least, as I'm not using this as a stick to beat him with, I just think it was a crap call in isolation. It doesn't affect my view of Martinez or what he's doing in general, just on this one I think he got it wrong - the end.
Click to expand...

I've given Martinez plenty of criticism in the past mate. It's just on this occasion that I feel it's unreasonable to have a go at him

We won the match and the player he put in at left back did just fine.

Again, it's unfair to have a go at him over this one, which is why I'm defending him.
 
Khalekan said:
Probably not in the foreseeable future.

When both Baines and Oviedo are fit, Garbutt is third choice left back at best.

It is only here on GOT that people would get do worked up about the omission of a third choice left back in a game which we won.

That is why I love this joint ;)
Click to expand...

I do see the point, but this is a lad we have been developing for the last 5 years, and he seems to have made steady progress. Not
sure it's a great message to him or others to not let him on the pitch when our only other left backs are injured.

You say yourself he's third choice left back - That's all I'm asking him to be. He wasn't.
 
Are people seriously saying the reason Hibbert played was due to the overall balance of the team.

Sure playing a slow, right footed player with no left foot on the left instead of a natural left back was going to help the balance due to Osman playing.

If anything it was because he didn't trust Ross to track back and wanted someone experienced who wouldn't push on.

But the more obvious answer was he just didn't fancy Garbutt in a league game where we had to win.

Well we won so can't complain but I hope Baines is back for Wolfsburg otherwise we're going to get murdered down that side.
 
I'm thinking he'll play on Thursday

I hope he does, I like the lad

I'm still not going to critique the manager for leaving him out though. It's a result business and we got the win at the end of the day

If we'd lost and Hibbert was the reason why, I'd understand the complaints. But we didn't. In fact, it looked like a ballsy and shrewd tactical decision by Martinez that came up trumps, so fair play to him

Anyone who knows me will know that I'm not shy to have a complain if I think it's justified. Martinez is not immune from that. More than once I've taken umbridge with something he's done and voiced it on these forums. I'm not going to do that in this case though. As much as I would have liked to see Garbutt get a game, Martinez made the decision to not play him and justified that decision by bagging us three points

If Garbutt plays on Thursday, then it will lead me to believe that Martinez just didn't want to put him out there against a rough West Ham side without a Barry or a Gibson to provide him cover. That's fair enough IMO

Now, if he doesn't play him again on Thursday with both Oviedo and Baines still out, that's when I'd start questioning things. I'm sure I'll be back in this thread on Thursday night one way or the other to explore the situation further
 
MACCA75 said:
I do see the point, but this is a lad we have been developing for the last 5 years, and he seems to have made steady progress. Not
sure it's a great message to him or others to not let him on the pitch when our only other left backs are injured.

You say yourself he's third choice left back - That's all I'm asking him to be. He wasn't.
Click to expand...


I said third choice "at best".

On Saturday the manager decided there was a better option.

We won the game.

Bobby was vindicated :)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top