Pepple

Quoted from MuddyWaters

We’ve signed at least two strikers, maybe three, that the manager clearly doesn’t rate. I don’t see a pile on, I see it as opinion bordering on fact.

How do you know Hurst doesn't rate them? The way we are set up to play at the moment, Taylor is the best man for the job, but that doesn't mean he doesn't rate the rest of them.

Pepple is a strange one…

I can’t decide if he’s absolutely flipping useless or if he just needs some decent coaching and a goal to get some confidence.

I don’t doubt work rate, desire and so forth but what we’ve seen so far has been chaotic to some extent but in some cases, impactful.

I do feel for the lad having come from another country and then the club he thinks he’s going to sending him to another before he’s even turned up for training so to speak. That’s got to take a while to adjust to.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

We’ve signed at least two strikers, maybe three, that the manager clearly doesn’t rate. I don’t see a pile on, I see it as opinion bordering on fact.

What an overstatement. ‘Clearly doesn’t rate’ is not ‘bordering on fact’, it’s your characteristic opinion.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

We’ve signed at least two strikers, maybe three, that the manager clearly doesn’t rate. I don’t see a pile on, I see it as opinion bordering on fact.

Your opinion.

Quoted from chaos33

What an overstatement. ‘Clearly doesn’t rate’ is not ‘bordering on fact’, it’s your characteristic opinion.

Maybe. I just look at the selections and Pepple, Orsi and Simmonds have barely started a league game.

Quoted from aldi_01

Pepple is a strange one…

I can’t decide if he’s absolutely flipping useless or if he just needs some decent coaching and a goal to get some confidence.

I don’t doubt work rate, desire and so forth but what we’ve seen so far has been chaotic to some extent but in some cases, impactful.

I do feel for the lad having come from another country and then the club he thinks he’s going to sending him to another before he’s even turned up for training so to speak. That’s got to take a while to adjust to.

He looks like the abundance of strikers who are physical and cause problems but have no real footballing talent. His finishing and passing is poor. I said after the first game he played that that was what he looked like, and coming from Canada which is an incredibly low level, it's not surprising.

What he's missing is coachable, but whether he has the talent to learn it or not will only be told with time. I'd just rather we sign somebody who looks half up to the job right now, because Taylor isn't particularly effective now everybody knows how we play and we have no alternative.

Quoted from chaos33

What an overstatement. ‘Clearly doesn’t rate’ is not ‘bordering on fact’, it’s your characteristic opinion.

I think they’ve started two League games between three of them.

The facts are that Luton saw something in the lad and judging by the way that club have risen over the last few seasons, I think we have to trust their judgement. Of course he doesn't look up to the task of leading the line in League 2: he's a young pro learning his trade. He may well develop into a very useful player one day, or he may not, but to say he's out of his depth is plain stupid.

I also don't agree that PH doesn't rate any of the strikers he has signed. I am a bit baffled at the lack of game time for Orsi but am not privy to his circumstances or the reasons he isn't getting more game time. You could make the same argument for any of the players that don't get regular starts, like Amos, Cropper, Wearne etc. It's a squad game and you play your best players if available. Maher came here with a great reputation but can't break into the side because of the form of others. It's not because PH doesn't rate him.

We are clearly lacking strength in depth in the forward areas, anyone can see that, but I don't think it is for the want of trying. We have ended up weak in that area and it needs addressing, but I doubt PH set out to have 2 or 3 young pro forwards in the squad at the same time. His targets clearly went elsewhere, and he had to get what he could get.

Looks like we will have to limp on until Jan.

Quoted from BrMarin

You are 100% correct. Except most people on here believe we got a fantastic deal despite not being "privvy" to the undisclosed details. Unless an adequate replacement is found then who's to say Luton haven't had our pants down?

But the situation in terms of finding a replacement was always going to arise at some point.  There's no way McAtee was staying beyond this season.  He was either going in the summer transfer window, in Jan 23 or June 23.  

If getting a fee and getting him back on loan is having our pants down, I dread to think what a bad deal would have looked like.  His injury is what it is.  Regardless if he is in the final year of his contract, loaned back to us, just signed a five-year extension...it's a major blow.  Very few teams can cope with the loss of their best player and have an adequate replacement waiting on the sidelines to take his place.

If I'm going to be critical, the writing was on the wall for a long time and we perhaps should have lined a replacement up in the summer.  That said though, perhaps getting McAtee back on loan was always the plan and that we weren't prepared to sell without that clause inserted.  In such case are we going to sign a McAtee clone and then play both of them?  

Pepple, Simmonds and Orsi are, at this minute in time, not working out.  In the case of the two lads on loan from higher up, that's always going to be a major risk.  If I went back through the last 15 or so years of young lads, especially strikers, who have come on loan here from a higher level and made an impact I probably wouldn't need my second hand.  Purely from memory I'm genuinely struggling to think of anyone beyond Martin Paterson.  There's a few who have had fleeting impact but none who have really made a mark.  I think that's the case for all clubs at this level, reflected by the huge drop off of young lads once they leave the safety of the Academy system.  

Orsi is a different case and arguably more disappointing.  What disappoints me the most is that it didn't work out for him at Harrogate because of the difference in system.  He's not a target man and they could only offer him that role.  Yet we're effectively doing the same thing here.  The system he needs isn't one we use or look likely to use, which makes the signing of him seem bizarre.  

Richardson is one who I think can do the McAtee role, when he's given that role (or something similar) he's looked effective.  Yet Hurst seems reluctant to deploy him on a consistent basis.  Which brings it back to this near obsession with Taylor on his own and then a packed midfield around him.  Loads of energy and running but not a lot of creativity, even the most creative midfielder we have (Hunt) is struggling to get in the side.  I completely get the need for that energetic midfield and I always think we look stronger with the extra man in the middle, but it's to the detriment of the attacking side of our game.  

3 at the back looks the logical way to solve both problems to me, but as we saw at Hartlepool you can play with 3 at the back and still be toothless and ineffective.  You've got to have the right players in that system.  To my mind we've got one guy who's capable of playing left wingback and one guy capable of playing right wingback, neither of whom were used in those roles on Saturday.  It also didn't help that we were well off the races, tactical errors later on in the game or not.  

Quoted from diehardmariner

But the situation in terms of finding a replacement was always going to arise at some point.  There's no way McAtee was staying beyond this season.  He was either going in the summer transfer window, in Jan 23 or June 23.  

If getting a fee and getting him back on loan is having our pants down, I dread to think what a bad deal would have looked like.  His injury is what it is.  Regardless if he is in the final year of his contract, loaned back to us, just signed a five-year extension...it's a major blow.  Very few teams can cope with the loss of their best player and have an adequate replacement waiting on the sidelines to take his place.

If I'm going to be critical, the writing was on the wall for a long time and we perhaps should have lined a replacement up in the summer.  That said though, perhaps getting McAtee back on loan was always the plan and that we weren't prepared to sell without that clause inserted.  In such case are we going to sign a McAtee clone and then play both of them?  

Pepple, Simmonds and Orsi are, at this minute in time, not working out.  In the case of the two lads on loan from higher up, that's always going to be a major risk.  If I went back through the last 15 or so years of young lads, especially strikers, who have come on loan here from a higher level and made an impact I probably wouldn't need my second hand.  Purely from memory I'm genuinely struggling to think of anyone beyond Martin Paterson.  There's a few who have had fleeting impact but none who have really made a mark.  I think that's the case for all clubs at this level, reflected by the huge drop off of young lads once they leave the safety of the Academy system.  

Orsi is a different case and arguably more disappointing.  What disappoints me the most is that it didn't work out for him at Harrogate because of the difference in system.  He's not a target man and they could only offer him that role.  Yet we're effectively doing the same thing here.  The system he needs isn't one we use or look likely to use, which makes the signing of him seem bizarre.  

Richardson is one who I think can do the McAtee role, when he's given that role (or something similar) he's looked effective.  Yet Hurst seems reluctant to deploy him on a consistent basis.  Which brings it back to this near obsession with Taylor on his own and then a packed midfield around him.  Loads of energy and running but not a lot of creativity, even the most creative midfielder we have (Hunt) is struggling to get in the side.  I completely get the need for that energetic midfield and I always think we look stronger with the extra man in the middle, but it's to the detriment of the attacking side of our game.  

3 at the back looks the logical way to solve both problems to me, but as we saw at Hartlepool you can play with 3 at the back and still be toothless and ineffective.  You've got to have the right players in that system.  To my mind we've got one guy who's capable of playing left wingback and one guy capable of playing right wingback, neither of whom were used in those roles on Saturday.  It also didn't help that we were well off the races, tactical errors later on in the game or not.  

Efete played well on Saturday, especially in the first 30 minutes, he was our main attacking threat. It's not his fault that when he got forwards there were loads of defenders and no attackers. It makes him look indecisive, but a L2 player isn't going to find the killer ball to one attacker very often. He's been fairly solid defensively for most of the season too. His criticism is harsh other than a couple of poor games, he's been largely more consistent than Glennon, who was been poor defensively.