New left back coming in

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Or maybe he just thinks he isn't good enough and could cost us vital points.

Has Crane ever been close to any national team call up, how did he do at the clubs he has been on loan at and does he tear up the left wing and stand out at 20's.

Do you get points in the challenge cup?

[indiejak1413]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Or maybe he just thinks he isn't good enough and could cost us vital points.

Has Crane ever been close to any national team call up, how did he do at the clubs he has been on loan at and does he tear up the left wing and stand out at 20's.

I've seen him play for the 20s and he's a good player and I think some of the guys on here that go to the 20s games would probably agree. He plays with his head up , he's quick and efficient with his passing. He can also whip in a cross.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[StevieCowan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you get points in the challenge cup?

Yawn.

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yawn.

Tired? I was questioning why he didn't start in the challenge cup ahead of moving Hanlon to left back. Ideal opportunity IMO. No points st stake. Cranes bound to be demotivated.

[B.H.F.C]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Tired? I was questioning why he didn't start in the challenge cup ahead of moving Hanlon to left back. Ideal opportunity IMO. No points st stake. Cranes bound to be demotivated.

Maybe Lennon just doesn't think he's good enough or wasn't training well at the time. I'm sure someone said that he alluded to that at the AGM.

Should he have played him just to cheer the laddie up?

[Marco G]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Tired? I was questioning why he didn't start in the challenge cup ahead of moving Hanlon to left back. Ideal opportunity IMO. No points st stake. Cranes bound to be demotivated.

He didnt start him imo because on the day he felt he was not good enough, no matter what is at stake. Should not demotivate Crane. Am sure with our management team everyone knows why they are playing or not. Its up to players, young or old, to force their way into the team.

Why do you think it is the manager's fault rather than the player's?

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Maybe Lennon just doesn't think he's good enough or wasn't training well at the time. I'm sure someone said that he alluded to that at the AGM.

Should he have played him just to cheer the laddie up?

I think the training issue may have been after being overlooked. He asked to go on loan in the summer and was told he was left back cover and part of the first team squad. The first time an opportunity when Stevenson is rested in a game of the least importance he doesn't even make the bench.
I don't see him train but I've seen him plenty in the 20s and also against Birmingham pre season. He should have had the chance IMO.
Squad rotation when there is an opportunity is good man management so yes to keeping him happy.
I understand Lennon maybe not fancying him in a defensive sense when we really need to be promoted but not involving him that day is a shocker IMO.

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think the training issue may have been after being overlooked. He asked to go on loan in the summer and was told he was left back cover and part of the first team squad. The first time an opportunity when Stevenson is rested in a game of the least importance he doesn't even make the bench.
I don't see him train but I've seen him plenty in the 20s and also against Birmingham pre season. He should have had the chance IMO.
Squad rotation when there is an opportunity is good man management so yes to keeping him happy.
I understand Lennon maybe not fancying him in a defensive sense when we really need to be promoted but not involving him that day is a shocker IMO.

You aren't serious with that comment surely?

[B.H.F.C]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think the training issue may have been after being overlooked. He asked to go on loan in the summer and was told he was left back cover and part of the first team squad. The first time an opportunity when Stevenson is rested in a game of the least importance he doesn't even make the bench.
I don't see him train but I've seen him plenty in the 20s and also against Birmingham pre season. He should have had the chance IMO.
Squad rotation when there is an opportunity is good man management so yes to keeping him happy.
I understand Lennon maybe not fancying him in a defensive sense when we really need to be promoted but not involving him that day is a shocker IMO.

As it goes I thought he should have started that day. What I disagree with is that it becomes poor man management from Lennon when he doesn't. Like you say, you don't see him train. Lennon does and said he wasn't training well. I'm all for giving young players a chance but they need to earn it. You can't just play him to keep him happy.

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You aren't serious with that comment surely?

Yes. He's a better left back than Hanlon. Stevenson was on the bench for whatever reason. We were playing St Mirren at home in the Chalkenge Cup. The laddies champing at the bit. He should have been involved even from the bench. To be told you're part of the plans then overlooked in those circumstances it's no wonder the boys hacked off. A bit if an OG from Lennon IMO. Laugh all you like buddy.

[Marco G]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes. He's a better left back than Hanlon. Stevenson was on the bench for whatever reason. We were playing St Mirren at home in the Chalkenge Cup. The laddies champing at the bit. He should have been involved even from the bench. To be told you're part of the plans then overlooked in those circumstances it's no wonder the boys hacked off. A bit if an OG from Lennon IMO. Laugh all you like buddy.

Sorry, but how do you know the boy is hacked off?

[The Leith Dutch]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes. He's a better left back than Hanlon. Stevenson was on the bench for whatever reason. We were playing St Mirren at home in the Chalkenge Cup. The laddies champing at the bit. He should have been involved even from the bench. To be told you're part of the plans then overlooked in those circumstances it's no wonder the boys hacked off. A bit if an OG from Lennon IMO. Laugh all you like buddy.

I find it very bizarre that in our current position we're concerned with whether a youth player who the manager clearly doesn't think is up to the task is happy or not.

As for being a better left back than Hanlon - Lennon clearly thought Hanlon would do the better job in that position regardless of Crane being an actual left back as I understand it. As Lennon is the guy who sees him play week in week out and is also the guy with his balls on the line for the results - he gets to make that call.

If Crane was showing something I don't doubt Lennon would play him and if he's not showing something I want a manager who doesn't play him.

[Dashing Bob S]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I find it very bizarre that in our current position we're concerned with whether a youth player who the manager clearly doesn't think is up to the task is happy or not.

As for being a better left back than Hanlon - Lennon clearly thought Hanlon would do the better job in that position regardless of Crane being an actual left back as I understand it. As Lennon is the guy who sees him play week in week out and is also the guy with his balls on the line for the results - he gets to make that call.

If Crane was showing something I don't doubt Lennon would play him and if he's not showing something I want a manager who doesn't play him.

Agreed. It's nice that people want our young players to do well, but just fantasizing that they are world beaters doesn't necessarily make it so. It's Lennon's call, and he's always going to pick the best teams as he sees it. If Crane was ready, he'd be handed the jersey.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I feel sorry for stevenson (and gray).

They are being asked to be wingers and neither is , and it is hanging them out to dry a wee bit.

Both are good full backs. Neither are good wingers (if they were, they would never have been full backs).

Agree what others say about Crane - we arr not some sporting chance charity, if he isnt showing it, tough luck. Being young doesnt mean he is automatically good.

[BSEJVT]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I find it very bizarre that in our current position we're concerned with whether a youth player who the manager clearly doesn't think is up to the task is happy or not.

As for being a better left back than Hanlon - Lennon clearly thought Hanlon would do the better job in that position regardless of Crane being an actual left back as I understand it. As Lennon is the guy who sees him play week in week out and is also the guy with his balls on the line for the results - he gets to make that call.

If Crane was showing something I don't doubt Lennon would play him and if he's not showing something I want a manager who doesn't play him.

Agree 100%

Crane appears to be the latest in a long line of development full backs lauded by many who fail to break through.

With the possible exception of Booth, the others have gone on to achieve nothing.