Reflections on Cookie's Departure

Neither can Humphrys.

 

Would say Immaterial rather than stupid
Are you saying that if he was still here he wouldn't start ahead of the likes of Wheatley Mullins (jury still out on Jackson) and Humph who openly admits he isn't a centre forward
I guess if we had upgraded on his replacement this discussion wouldn't exist
Good luck to Cookie he deserves to get the game time he wanted just a shame it's not with us

 

It was madness he wasn't involved in the month before he came to the manager and asked for the move.

Being left to rot whilst we had none scoring strikers in the squad was almost an insult to him.

I've no doubt he would have happy to stay given a role on the bench, but he wasn't even being offered that opportunity.

We had humphrys walking around aimlessly , failing to challenge for headers, failing to hold the ball up and failing to score. He'd then be replaced at half time by the ineffective swann ad infimum.

He couldn't wait to have him back originally, nothing will convince me a little something else hadn't gone on behind the scenes

 

We're 3rd in the league.

 

You've absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever. Not once has Andy Cook offered that reasoning or even actually said that he wanted to leave.

This has come about because people pushed a false narrative that he can't play in a team that presses and how he'd be inferior in this set up, even to players like Kavanagh.

It's also the reason we now claim that he'd never have started, despite the central striker being constantly rotated because we are struggling to find someone who can perform the role consistently enough.

 

He wanted a move because he wasn’t getting game time as he wasn’t fit and recovering from injury and as a result of no minor games wasn’t going to get any. This you seem to be forgetting, is the reason HE wanted a move .
If you look at his move to Grimsby , hardly playing many minutes after his move .

Hes not done anything in L1, so would a recovering player do anything , no, so it was best all round for all parties.

A silly straw clutching debate after one defeat , sorry.

I don’t participate in conspiracy stories re the reason , only facts as stated by the manager.

 

Hindsight is indeed a wonderfull thing but unless the club was bringing in better signing than Cook then he should never been allowed to leave

 

Imagine where we may have been with a goalscoring forward

 

At last

 

Less goals for other attacking players probably. It'd totally change our brand of football and result in less goals scored across the team.

 

Are we going to bring Cook up every time we lose? Nobody mentioned him when he had a poor game and missed another penalty against Harrogate last Friday or the period not long ago he wasn't getting regular starts for Grimsby.

The fact is that since Cook has got injured we've got promoted finishing 3rd and currently sat 3rd in league 1 with play offs almost secured. This proves we can play without him and be very successful.
Alexander has got us playing in a way that works very well and Andy Cook didn't fit into that, there's a reason all of the strikers Alexander has brought in have had the same type of profile which Cook doesn't fit into

 

Does Paul Mullin have the same profile as Wheatley? Does Humphrys have the same profile as Swan or any of the others?

Yet another false narrative.

 

Because 30 goals in 30 games is a wonderful amount

 

No they are all largely ineffective .

 

Virtually all the top teams have had a fox in the box
When the ball comes into the penalty area that’s where you find the fox,
The fox will go for the ball or drag the center half’s out of position

 

I wish we had given him more of a go before letting him move on, but it's also true he didn't score any in League 1 when he was given a chance and he isn't the profile of forward player the manager wants. Good luck to him. I don't see why we have to bring this up every time we lose a game.

 

I'm happy to concede a bit on this one. I definitely think he'd have been our top scorer this season but I think it's far too simplistic to say that if Cook had started every game we'd have scored the same amount that we have plus Cook's goals output on top. We'd lose some elements of our play that Humphrys contributes but gain more in terms of goals for Cook. I'm fairly sure though that the net outcome would not be greater than what we currently have.

 

It's not great granted but if you think Cook would just add 20 onto that number I don't think it would play out like that. More likely you'd lose a chunk of the 30 off other players replaced by Cook scoring them with the same net result.

 

I genuinely believe it would have been at least exactly the same. Humphrys would still have started the majority with Swan and Cook getting the odd start and minutes from the bench.

Then, post Christmas, the same players, plus Humphrys would be mopping up the minutes we've wasted on the ineffective Wheatley and Mullin.