Here's a thought

[mrfrostsdad]

If Sadlier has no intentions of signing a new contract (and I have no idea if he has or not) would you play him until the end of the season?
Personally, if he has made it clear he's isn't going to sign, he wouldn't be anywhere near the match squad for me. Even as sub.

As has been mentioned on another thread, is this why DM isn't playing him? I don't know, but maybe it's a possibility. Can't think of any other reason.

This may be controversial, but hey ho. Let's see if anyone wants him when he's not played for 4 or 5 months

[Superspy]

I'd be more than happy to play him for as long as he is a contracted DRFC player. He is still paid to do a job, and it's not like he's going to under-perform given that he'll be trying to secure something elsewhere.

The idea of not playing people who don't commit their future just doesn't hold any water for me...otherwise how do you justify loan players?

Also: "Let's see if anyone wants him when he's not played for 4 or 5 months"....surely that approach helps absolutely nobody. If nobody wanted him and he was forced to sign a new contract with us, he's hardly going to be motivated to perform well afterwards. If anything it's just a spiteful attitude to take without foundation. We should be getting the most out of our assets, whilst they are our assets.

[selby]

 MFD, if somebody wants him they will have already made contact with the player and his agent, I would not bet against Hull City myself.

[mrfrostsdad]

I'd be more than happy to play him for as long as he is a contracted DRFC player. He is still paid to do a job, and it's not like he's going to under-perform given that he'll be trying to secure something elsewhere.

The idea of not playing people who don't commit their future just doesn't hold any water for me...otherwise how do you justify loan players?

Also: "Let's see if anyone wants him when he's not played for 4 or 5 months"....surely that approach helps absolutely nobody. If nobody wanted him and he was forced to sign a new contract with us, he's hardly going to be motivated to perform well afterwards. If anything it's just a spiteful attitude to take without foundation. We should be getting the most out of our assets, whilst they are our assets.

MFD, if somebody wants him they will have already made contact with the player and his agent, I would not bet against Hull City myself.

I would bet Hull as well if the snake hasn't been sacked before then.

Superspy, maybe there's just a chance he's not bothered about playing/won't give it 100% so he doesn't get injured and miss out on a big fat pay rise

[drfchound]

Well in the matches that Sads has played since the contract issue became known about he has been one of our best players so the argument about him not being bothered about performing is a non starter.
I bet he is actually seriously peed off about being left out.

[phil old leake]

If you look at things like that. Maybe you should also think about all the loan players that won’t be with us next year unless we go up
Let’s be honest about it promotion now seems highly unlikely so let’s just play contracted players

I’m now advocating this I’m just throwing it in the mix

Sadlier is quality at this level and will be playing for a move unless one is already sorted

In which case he just won’t want to get injured.  From what I read every week he doesn’t seem to under perform when he does play

[NewDonny]

I'd be more than happy to play him for as long as he is a contracted DRFC player. He is still paid to do a job, and it's not like he's going to under-perform given that he'll be trying to secure something elsewhere.

The idea of not playing people who don't commit their future just doesn't hold any water for me...otherwise how do you justify loan players?

Also: "Let's see if anyone wants him when he's not played for 4 or 5 months"....surely that approach helps absolutely nobody. If nobody wanted him and he was forced to sign a new contract with us, he's hardly going to be motivated to perform well afterwards. If anything it's just a spiteful attitude to take without foundation. We should be getting the most out of our assets, whilst they are our assets.

MFD, if somebody wants him they will have already made contact with the player and his agent, I would not bet against Hull City myself.

I would bet Hull as well if the snake hasn't been sacked before then.

Superspy, maybe there's just a chance he's not bothered about playing/won't give it 100% so he doesn't get injured and miss out on a big fat pay rise

Bet you don't win very much money with your bets lol!

[steve@dcfd]

I’d play him in every match and then he can show everybody how good he is and see if he can score 4/5 goals to help our cause.

[scawsby steve]

The last 2 matches Sads played in, he was the best player on the pitch. DM then leaves him out, and we lose the next 2.

Utterly and totally unbelievable.

[steve@dcfd]

Let’s not get carried away he’s scored 2 goals against Southend in January. But as leading goal scorer he needs to play as others have not stepped up.

[NewDonny]

Let’s not get carried away he’s scored 2 goals against Southend in January. But as leading goal scorer he needs to play as others have not stepped up.

Don't think anyone is getting carried away here atall Steve but just sighting facts. January 28th, If he's not scoring then he has assisted or has been very much involved in all our attacking plays.

[Bentley Bullet]

If Sadlier is our star player It says more about the quality of the team than the level of his quality, I'm afraid. We've lost better players in the past that were never considered as our star player.

[drfchound]

BB, I don’t think that people are saying he is the star player, just that he is a very good one and leaving him out of the team is a strange move especially when we needed to win the last two just to keep pace with the top six.

[scawsby steve]

If Sadlier is our star player It says more about the quality of the team than the level of his quality, I'm afraid. We've lost better players in the past that were never considered as our star player.

I think Hound's hit the nail on the head, BB. It's just about picking the best 11. At the moment, DM's hampered with the unavailability of Fej and James.

However, when those 2 are back, we all know who the best 11 are, and that certainly includes Sadlier.

[Bentley Bullet]

Well, he wasn't 'left out' of the last game as such, he was brought on as a sub for 20 minutes. To be honest, I thought we were worse after both him and Taylor came on.

In my opinion, Sadlier, like Copps, has a tendency to be lightweight in certain games that are dictated by pitch/weather conditions.

[foxbat]

and , unfortunately ,Taylor didn't seem to contribute anything at all

[NewDonny]

Well, he wasn't 'left out' of the last game as such, he was brought on as a sub for 20 minutes. To be honest, I thought we were worse after both him and Taylor came on.

In my opinion, Sadlier, like Copps, has a tendency to be lightweight in certain games that are dictated by pitch/weather conditions.

He didn't start in either of our last 2 games so he was "left out" of the starting line up which is exactly the same thing but you know that anyway. As for being worse when he and Taylor came on, I didn't make the game but am led to believe from the feedback I have had from a good few others that did attend the game, that that's the complete opposite to what everyone else thought!

As for not performing on poor pitches or in bad weather, all I can say is he was by far our best player up at Tranmere on the night on the worst pitch we have played on this season and ran his body into the ground, often seen deep in our own half defending and recovering the ball and starting attacks - I can only assume you didn't go to that game then BB?

[RoversAlias]

We were better in terms of creating chances and getting through the attacking third once Sadlier and Taylor came on. That was down as much to a change in shape as it was personnel though, the switch to 4-2-3-1 gave us better width leading to more incisive wing play and space opening up in the middle for Ramsey and Whiteman to exploit.

I should say this is against Shrewsbury I'm referring to.

[Bentley Bullet]

Well, he wasn't 'left out' of the last game as such, he was brought on as a sub for 20 minutes. To be honest, I thought we were worse after both him and Taylor came on.

In my opinion, Sadlier, like Copps, has a tendency to be lightweight in certain games that are dictated by pitch/weather conditions.

He didn't start in either of our last 2 games so he was "left out" of the starting line up which is exactly the same thing but you know that anyway. As for being worse when he and Taylor came on, I didn't make the game but am led to believe from the feedback I have had from a good few others that did attend the game, that that's the complete opposite to what everyone else thought!

As for not performing on poor pitches or in bad weather, all I can say is he was by far our best player up at Tranmere on the night on the worst pitch we have played on this season and ran his body into the ground, often seen deep in our own half defending and recovering the ball and starting attacks - I can only assume you didn't go to that game then BB?

He wasn't 'left out' of either of the games, he featured in both! I did see the Tranmere game and Sadlier played well considering the conditions. He wasn't the best player though, Ramsey clearly was. I did say Sadlier has a tendency to be lightweight in certain conditions, that doesn't mean there is no exception to the rule. He wasn't bad at Tranmere, but the hosts were pretty garbage.

[keith79]

Maybe he is carrying a injury. He maybe able to play 15-20 mins if needed. Maybe people are looking for somthing that is not there.

[NewDonny]

Well, he wasn't 'left out' of the last game as such, he was brought on as a sub for 20 minutes. To be honest, I thought we were worse after both him and Taylor came on.

In my opinion, Sadlier, like Copps, has a tendency to be lightweight in certain games that are dictated by pitch/weather conditions.

He didn't start in either of our last 2 games so he was "left out" of the starting line up which is exactly the same thing but you know that anyway. As for being worse when he and Taylor came on, I didn't make the game but am led to believe from the feedback I have had from a good few others that did attend the game, that that's the complete opposite to what everyone else thought!

As for not performing on poor pitches or in bad weather, all I can say is he was by far our best player up at Tranmere on the night on the worst pitch we have played on this season and ran his body into the ground, often seen deep in our own half defending and recovering the ball and starting attacks - I can only assume you didn't go to that game then BB?

He wasn't 'left out' of either of the games, he featured in both! I did see the Tranmere game and Sadlier played well considering the conditions. He wasn't the best player though, Ramsey clearly was. I did say Sadlier has a tendency to be lightweight in certain conditions, that doesn't mean there is no exception to the rule. He wasn't bad at Tranmere, but the hosts were pretty garbage.

BB your splitting hairs to try and make a point here but failing miserably! Myself and everyone else would refer to a player not starting as having been "left out'" everyone I know refers to it that way, apart from you it would appear.

Ramsay scored two goals against Tranmere and played well but Sadlier was our stand out best player.

So now that you have had to acknowledge he played well on a poor pitch, you now want to extend the criteria beyond the weather and playing surface (as per your previous post) to the opposition now as well. I always take the approach that the opposition are there to be beaten irrespective of what we believe their quality to be.

Okay I get it, your not a Sadlier fan, thats fine, you are entitled to think what you want but you need to get your facts straight.

[ravenrover]

All I have to say is the Bolton left back is in therapy after the 1st half against Sadlierk

[Bentley Bullet]

You stick with everyone else then, owd lad!

There's a difference between being left out of the starting line-up, and being left out. Copps used to start games and was invariably taken off at some point under Ferguson and McCann. It was argued on here that it would provide more benefit the other way round, with him not starting but being brought on later. Either way, Copps would not have been left out!

Football is now a game that involves tactical changes. It is a squad game and players brought on as subs are not 'left out!'

[Bentley Bullet]

All I have to say is the Bolton left back is in therapy after the 1st half against Sadlierk

Sadlier played very well against the Bolton full-back. What's that got to do with anything?

[ravenrover]

Probably as much as your argument about one of our better regular starting player  being on the subs bench but not "left out"of the starting XI
I think the term for a player being left out completely is dropped
Have you an empty room you could go to and start an argument in there?

[Bentley Bullet]

What are you on about? Sadlier WAS left out of the starting X1! He wasn't left out of the game though, he appeared!

[NewDonny]

Probably as much as your argument about one of our better regular starting player  being on the subs bench but not "left out"of the starting XI
I think the term for a player being left out completely is dropped
Have you an empty room you could go to and start an argument in there?

Exactly my point, spot on RR.

[rich1471]

if he is fit play him all day long as on Saturday we lacked width and creativity until him and Taylor came on   

[Bentley Bullet]

I can't see him being left out on Saturday, he'll be on the bench at the very least.

[drfchound]

BB, in the history of football, a player not starting the game has been referred to as being left out.