Little gutted about Bell, I liked being slightly dangerous at set pieces when he was on

Allthough, as with many players, he seemed to get worse the more he played under Roeder.

However, there is no point being able to delvier a good ball, if you can't get yourself into a position to deliver it in the first place.

At least with Croft, although his delivery is not good (polite) he is direct and dangerous. This menas that the fullback has to be careful with him, forces our opponents a bit further back when he's playing well and gives us more space. Bell was never going to put a full back onto the back foot.

If football ever mores to a format more like the Yank girly version of Rugby he'd be a good player. We could have subbed him on during breaks between the 'downs' (is that right SiH?) to whip the ball in from the good position Crofty made for him!

Posted By: megson, Jan 30, 16:46:37