[Quakes Fan]

I guess everyone passed the ball with perfection except Brunt. Might as well sell him. The new Carson perhaps? I don't mind when players are critisized but sometimes it seems to go over the top. Managers past and present rate him as does his teammates but hey what do they know. He was not the Brunt we know he can be today, yes ok but the way he is treated by some it's just seems too much sometimes! Or maybe I should look at it as respect for the player that people see Brunt as one of our best players so when he has a bad game he gets it more than others, I don't know just frustrating to read so much negativity, he's rusty with his first league start and had no pre-season lets give him a few games??

He had a poor game. No-one wants to sell him; no-one is giving him the Carson treatment.

[zippyandbungle]

He had a poor game. No-one wants to sell him; no-one is giving him the Carson treatment.

Except for the mad woman at the back of the brummie
Clearly he has talent ,had a bad first half,needs to stay wide and probably should not be captain,don't write him off just yet.

[GrGr]

So Brunty blows hot and cold, what else is new? (read this thread, awful one week brilliant the next). He needs to adapt to the new team this season and he needs to stop a few bad habits holding him down.

I hope the challenge spurs him on and I look forward to seeing him when he hits form again.

I am happy we are playing well and picking up points even if one or two of our strongest players isn't on top of their games. Hopefully those struggling a bit now will hit form when current in form players tire a bit, and in that way we can stay strong throughout the season.

[graka]

i think chris brunt as a superb left foot, excellent set piece deliveries and an eye for a pass, he as also improved his defensive side. he had a poor game today end of. still part of an excellent squad.

[OldburyWBA]

The whole point of a forum like this is to discuss players, managers, performances etc and this thread is about Chris Brunt and its where people will discuss him.

That won't change, some might not like and think as soon as a bad word is said then its a case of 'Tom, he's rubbish, he's gorra gow'. You will get some ott reactions just as you get ott reactions the other way with some thinking that certain players are untouchable and above any sort of criticism. Theres a thing called 'middle ground' which is lacking on here way to often.

As long as its within our site rules then players whoever they are can be criticised, praised, whatever whether some like it or not. Outside our rules then your post will be taken off no matter what point you're trying to make or who you are.

[Londonbaggymike]

He is one of the best players in the squad. If he performed  consistently at the peak of his form he wouldn't be with us. I have so many great memories of his sublime left foot, the article in a northern Irish paper proclaiming him better than Messi (based on fact!) and him being involved in everything good that has happened at this club for a good few years now.

Give him chance to find his feet without getting on his back. Even though not at his best yesterday, he still won a header that allowed Long to pick out Dorrans in the build up to the goal.

[wbatesy]

Whenever he plays he drifts inside causing no width, clots up the midfield meaning (yesterday) gera had to go wider so no runs off lukaku and no goals until someone can run off the striker (long). As well as this, it is no surprise that we looked shaky down the left when defending because of it constantly being 2-on-1 (same when Pete plays right.)

[GrGr]

Whenever he plays he drifts inside causing no width, clots up the midfield meaning (yesterday) gera had to go wider so no runs off lukaku and no goals until someone can run off the striker (long). As well as this, it is no surprise that we looked shaky down the left when defending because of it constantly being 2-on-1 (same when Pete plays right.)

It's utterly pointless playing Brunt on the wing, as a 'traditional' winger, unless we have plenty of people in the box for him to aim crosses at. And we don't play that way at the moment. We may go 442 with Long and Lukaku in the box, in that case sure, play Brunty on the wing and make him a cross machine.

The reason Brunty comes in looking for the ball is that he is wasted on the wing since he will never beat anyone for pace and his greatest strength, his passing ability, is negated because he has so few options to pass to on the wing (unless the team goes with the option up top attacking the box in numbers).

Our problem yesterday was not Brunt coming in as much as the team being static, lacking movement, with only Lukaku moving up front and Morrison finding a bit of space. When the team overall is very mobile and dynamic, with fluid movement, Brunty's passing comes alive as he can pick out players with extreme accuracy and he can do it instinctively and instantly. When we are static and stolid like yesterday nothing works because the movement isn't there. Brunt tried too hard yesterday to make the game dynamic (increase the movement) and it didn't work at all because he ended up a square peg in a round hole with the system we were using.

Offensively Gera was a bit of the same problem for us, we needed a player with speed/movement playing in that position.

When we do have a highly mobile team, Brunt becomes extremely difficult to defend against because the defenders have so many threats to protect against that Brunty can pick out the little gap they will inevitable leave open.

[Political Cake]

I personally think his lack of performance yesterday was due to the way Reading played more so than how he himself played. When people try to defend like that and do nothing else, it suddenly becomes very hard to play in a way that will suit him. Because of this, it probably would have suited him more if we attempted to cross towards goal more often, but with only Lukaku there it would never really have come off, so he's left in a rather less effective role. However, when Long came on did anyone notice that we suddenly had more crosses into him from both Brunt and Dorrans? It's also interesting that the goal came from a knock down by Long, also.

[GrGr]

And Brunt was so close to getting another assist when Olsson headed against the post!

[dantics_wba]

His corners and set pieces are 9 times out of 10 spot on, as they were yesterday. Gave the ball away way too much though imo.
I felt once the ball got into midfield if Lukaku couldn't be spotted they didn't really know what to do, would panic and turn back, a few times giving the ball away. The most obvious example yesterday was when Lukaku went down in the centre circle, Brunt paced down the wing only to whip a decent ball into the empty box 

[wbarich]

Whenever he plays he drifts inside causing no width, clots up the midfield meaning (yesterday) gera had to go wider so no runs off lukaku and no goals until someone can run off the striker (long). As well as this, it is no surprise that we looked shaky down the left when defending because of it constantly being 2-on-1 (same when Pete plays right.)

what game were you watching? when was Gera ever wide? He was drifting inside as well! And as for him making no runs off Lukaku he didn't run at all he looks gone! Gera should have been wide as he was playing as our right winger but wasn't!

As for Brunt he has always drifted in and floated around which costs us but as well as that yesterday his passing and crossing was appauling.

[Hulsey74]

I am not going to get into the debate whether i think Brunty is good enough or not, some weeks he is class, others not........same as 99% of most footballers.

The one thing that i cannot understand, and that is, why is he captain?
My opinion of a captain, is that he should be a leader, encourage, push your team mates, represent the club etc etc. Every game i see him, his body language comes across very poor, he looks like he is doing a sketch for Harry Enfield...Perry!

However i understand that he may be an excellent off field ambassador, and if this is the case, i apologise for sounding harsh.

[Hull Baggie]

It's utterly pointless playing Brunt on the wing, as a 'traditional' winger, unless we have plenty of people in the box for him to aim crosses at. And we don't play that way at the moment. We may go 442 with Long and Lukaku in the box, in that case sure, play Brunty on the wing and make him a cross machine.

The reason Brunty comes in looking for the ball is that he is wasted on the wing since he will never beat anyone for pace and his greatest strength, his passing ability, is negated because he has so few options to pass to on the wing (unless the team goes with the option up top attacking the box in numbers).

He might be "wasted on the wing" as you say however that was where he was asked to play, yet he spent most of the 1st half coming inside and leaving Ridgewell exposed when defending and with no out ball when trying to attack. I imagine SC had words at half time as he appeared to stay out wide in the 2nd half.
His passing was lacking a little too, he always seems to want to play a killer ball which doesn't often come off rather than doing the simple 10 yard pass and allowing us to keep possession.

[Adder]

He might be "wasted on the wing" as you say however that was where he was asked to play, yet he spent most of the 1st half coming inside and leaving Ridgewell exposed when defending and with no out ball when trying to attack. I imagine SC had words at half time as he appeared to stay out wide in the 2nd half.
His passing was lacking a little too, he always seems to want to play a killer ball which doesn't often come off rather than doing the simple 10 yard pass and allowing us to keep possession.

That's my main gripe with Brunt - he seems to look for the wonder strike whether its a shot or cross. If he took 5% off the fizz and added 5% to the accuracy he'd be so much more effective.

[beechyboy90]

hes a winger, they are notorious for being inconsistant, class one week, awful the next.
it applies to the other wingers at our club: Gera, Thomas

past examples koumas, kamara, kilbane.

the bloke is a vital member of our squad there is no one with a passing abilty anywhere near to his.

[Greenock Baggie]

hes a winger, they are notorious for being inconsistant, class one week, awful the next.
it applies to the other wingers at our club: Gera, Thomas

past examples koumas, kamara, kilbane.

the bloke is a vital member of our squad there is no one with a passing abilty anywhere near to his.

I agree with him blowing hot and cold, saturday he couldnt pass wind !

[rubyruby]

Not one of Bruntys best games but it was his first start of the season unlike the rest who had played a few already. But the great thing about CB is he never stops trying to create something even when its not quite coming off. Our most creative passer alongside Dozza.

[richjonawba]

He shouldnt be in the team. The only reason i can see for him being selected is that he is (wrongly) Captain.

The formation Clarke has us set up in, effectively 4-3-3, does not suit Chris Brunt in the slightest.

All Brunt has to his game for me is a final ball, he is by far the best crosser we have in the squad, and when he whips it in from the left 9 times out of 10 its going to be a very good ball. The problem with Brunt though is that he appears to think that hes too good to be stuck out on the left and he wanders inside and stays there to get himself into the game more, all this does though is congest the middle suffocating our better central players like Morrison and Mulumbu.

Brunt is very ineffective playing from the middle, hes not combative enough, not fast enough and cant tackle, and if he sees himself as a CM he shouldnt even be on our bench let alone in our starting 11, what he is though is a very good winger, similar to Beckham in that he wont beat a man but can always create something. And if he is willing to stay in his best position he would be more deserving of a place in the side.

Ridgewell played both LM and LB on saturday because Brunt was never available down that wing.

For me Brunt is never going to accept staying out on the left, and for that reason he should be nothing more than a bench man for us in my opinion, as we have enough players (Thomas, Rosenberg, Odemwingie, Fortune, Gera, El-G) who will actually stay in position on the wing, do a good job, and help out the full back.

[rubyruby]

He shouldnt be in the team. The only reason i can see for him being selected is that he is (wrongly) Captain.

The formation Clarke has us set up in, effectively 4-3-3, does not suit Chris Brunt in the slightest.

All Brunt has to his game for me is a final ball, he is by far the best crosser we have in the squad, and when he whips it in from the left 9 times out of 10 its going to be a very good ball. The problem with Brunt though is that he appears to think that hes too good to be stuck out on the left and he wanders inside and stays there to get himself into the game more, all this does though is congest the middle suffocating our better central players like Morrison and Mulumbu.

Brunt is very ineffective playing from the middle, hes not combative enough, not fast enough and cant tackle, and if he sees himself as a CM he shouldnt even be on our bench let alone in our starting 11, what he is though is a very good winger, similar to Beckham in that he wont beat a man but can always create something. And if he is willing to stay in his best position he would be more deserving of a place in the side.

Ridgewell played both LM and LB on saturday because Brunt was never available down that wing.

For me Brunt is never going to accept staying out on the left, and for that reason he should be nothing more than a bench man for us in my opinion, as we have enough players (Thomas, Rosenberg, Odemwingie, Fortune, Gera, El-G) who will actually stay in position on the wing, do a good job, and help out the full back.

Disagree completely. Personally I think we are always a better team when Brunt plays. I have no problem with him playing more centrally if it gets him on the ball because he is one of the few players we have who creates offensively on a consistent basis. I actually think sometimes he is a bit wasted out on the wing but because we are top heavy on midfielders and tend to play with a single man up front and two defensive players he really has to occupy a wider position. He doesnt drift in because he just fancies it. Professional football doesnt work like that. He will have discussed that with the coaching staff and they must endorse that tactic. To say he gets out of position and fails to support the full back just isnt the case imo. His workrate is generally excellent and when possession turns over he is always one of the first to drop back into a covering role. A quality PL player now, one that a fair few clubs would be interested in should he come onto the market.

[Hull Baggie]

Disagree completely. Personally I think we are always a better team when Brunt plays. I have no problem with him playing more centrally if it gets him on the ball because he is one of the few players we have who creates offensively on a consistent basis.

if he was supposed to be playing centrally then I would agree with your point but he is being asked to play out wide so why doesn't he? he comes inside an unbalances the team.

[rubyruby]

if he was supposed to be playing centrally then I would agree with your point but he is being asked to play out wide so why doesn't he? he comes inside an unbalances the team.

How do you know he is being asked to stay out wide? I would suggest the coaching staff ask him to play in a flexible way ie when in possession do what ever is necessary to get on the ball and in the game and when we lose the ball drop back in to a wider covering position. On the contrary you could say he doesnt unbalance the team he influences it when he drops inside a bit more. I except what you say that sometimes we lack width on the right hand side if he is in the middle but any professional coach would probably say its all about getting your best players on the pitch. And Brunty is easily one of our best players.

[Hull Baggie]

How do you know he is being asked to stay out wide? I would suggest the coaching staff ask him to play in a flexible way ie when in possession do what ever is necessary to get on the ball and in the game and when we lose the ball drop back in to a wider covering position. On the contrary you could say he doesnt unbalance the team he influences it when he drops inside a bit more. I except what you say that sometimes we lack width on the right hand side if he is in the middle but any professional coach would probably say its all about getting your best players on the pitch. And Brunty is easily one of our best players.

because that's where he lined up at the start of the match! If he was supposed to have a free role or a more central role then surely SC would have put someone else out wide to counter Brunt;s tendency to come inside meaning that Ridgewell would have had some cover. Also in the 2nd half he pretty much stayed out wide...which I'm assuming was after having a talking to from SC, but whatever the reason he stayed out wide and was much more effective..leading me to believe that where he was supposed to be playing.

[rubyruby]

because that's where he lined up at the start of the match! If he was supposed to have a free role or a more central role then surely SC would have put someone else out wide to counter Brunt;s tendency to come inside meaning that Ridgewell would have had some cover. Also in the 2nd half he pretty much stayed out wide...which I'm assuming was after having a talking to from SC, but whatever the reason he stayed out wide and was much more effective..leading me to believe that where he was supposed to be playing.

So your saying that a players starting position when the ball is kicked off is a rigid position that the player has to stick to for the duration of the game? We lined up with three advanced midfielders and no wingers. Brunt is a midfielder not a winger so he covered the ground in the wide midfield area both offensively and defensively. SC may well have asked him to try and exploit the wider area in the second half as the game got a bit more stretched when in possession but to assume that he bo......kd him at half time for not sticking rigidly to a wide area is a bit niave imo. Since we were dominating the game I would have thought he would just ask his players to carry on as they were be patient with the final ball
and a goal will come. Thats what actually happened. Just my opinion but I think Brunty is completely wasted out on the touchline...he isnt even close to being a winger

[Hull Baggie]

So your saying that a players starting position when the ball is kicked off is a rigid position that the player has to stick to for the duration of the game? We lined up with three advanced midfielders and no wingers. Brunt is a midfielder not a winger so he covered the ground in the wide midfield area both offensively and defensively. SC may well have asked him to try and exploit the wider area in the second half as the game got a bit more stretched when in possession but to assume that he bo......kd him at half time for not sticking rigidly to a wide area is a bit niave imo. Since we were dominating the game I would have thought he would just ask his players to carry on as they were be patient with the final ball
and a goal will come. Thats what actually happened. Just my opinion but I think Brunty is completely wasted out on the touchline...he isnt even close to being a winger

I never said he had to stick to his position rigidly. however i feel that a manager picks a player to play in a position that he feels will suit his game plan and the players abilities....and asks him to play that position.  now do you really think that SC would have wanted ridgewell to be left on his own for most of the first half with no cover and no out ball....because that's exactly what he had because of Brunt. if SC didn't expect him to play as a winger I would expect that he asked him to play a left sided midfield role....which he didn't do for the first half as he was often bunched up with Mulumbu and Morrison in the centre.

The one thing we can definitley agree on is that Brunt is not a winger.