Harvey Knibbs

[Sutekh]

This will be a great signing.

Not on today's showing it won't, barely noticed him and didn't seem to really contribute anything even when you did notice him. But then 1 game in a squad with naff all depth under a head coach who has only been able to work with the squad for 72 hours would possibly give Eusebio problems with "shining".

[Snowflake Royal]

Got to remember that he's used to a team that tries to play good football and there's oxf*rd all in our midfield and attack for him to link up with yet.

[AthleticoSpizz]

Piece #1 in our jigsaw Ian

Got to start somewhere.

[Snowflake Royal]

That was kinda the point I was making.

[PieEater]

This will be a great signing.

Not on today's showing it won't, barely noticed him and didn't seem to really contribute anything even when you did notice him. But then 1 game in a squad with naff all depth under a head coach who has only been able to work with the squad for 72 hours would possibly give Eusebio problems with "shining".

Was he number 9?

I thought he looked ok - defensively at least.

[Sutekh]

This will be a great signing.

Not on today's showing it won't, barely noticed him and didn't seem to really contribute anything even when you did notice him. But then 1 game in a squad with naff all depth under a head coach who has only been able to work with the squad for 72 hours would possibly give Eusebio problems with "shining".

Was he number 9?

I thought he looked ok - defensively at least.

Despite what Tim and Adie keep saying he is NOT a striker. The shirts used yesterday had no numbers on them and he certainly wasn't playing as a no. 9, more a 8 or a 10.

[PieEater]

Not on today's showing it won't, barely noticed him and didn't seem to really contribute anything even when you did notice him. But then 1 game in a squad with naff all depth under a head coach who has only been able to work with the squad for 72 hours would possibly give Eusebio problems with "shining".

Was he number 9?

I thought he looked ok - defensively at least.

Despite what Tim and Adie keep saying he is NOT a striker. The shirts used yesterday had no numbers on them and he certainly wasn't playing as a no. 9, more a 8 or a 10.

er.. the guy who was playing yesterday with number 9 on his shorts.

I didn't recognise him - so was just asking if that was him

[Sutekh]

Was he number 9?

I thought he looked ok - defensively at least.

Despite what Tim and Adie keep saying he is NOT a striker. The shirts used yesterday had no numbers on them and he certainly wasn't playing as a no. 9, more a 8 or a 10.

er.. the guy who was playing yesterday with number 9 on his shorts.

No idea, couldn't see the nos on the players shorts on the far side from where I was (he mainly was in the middle or to the right) and I'm not actually too interested in staring at players shorts to try and make them out. Anyway the numbers being worn on a player's kit these days doesn't necessarily have any relationship to the actual position that player is playing on the pitch.

[Royal Ginger]

Was he number 9?

I thought he looked ok - defensively at least.

Despite what Tim and Adie keep saying he is NOT a striker. The shirts used yesterday had no numbers on them and he certainly wasn't playing as a no. 9, more a 8 or a 10.

er.. the guy who was playing yesterday with number 9 on his shorts.

I didn't recognise him - so was just asking if that was him

He was wearing number 10