James Tarkowski

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by taio » Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:04 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 2:57 pm
So if we both agree it's likely they won't, what's the disagreement about?

They'd boost his England chances, but that's it.
Playing for England is probably a significant objective for him.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Jakubclaret » Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:06 pm

FCBurnley wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 2:57 pm
Tarks and Mee could play together at Burnley for at least another 5 seasons. With Pope they are the bedrock of our team. So why not make them financially happy and then build the team round them. We already have quality players in Taylor Brownhill an McNeil. So that’s over half the team. We have 4 strikers who are normally good enough and decent midfielders when fit. So we are not far off having a very good team. Maybe a top quality rb and midfielder would do the trick. So not a massive investment required with a bit of income from a few sales.
I don’t think it’s necessarily about the money for JT he’s not got long left really to further his ambitions, some people don’t really get you could throw whatever amount of money his way he still wouldn’t stop because of the stature of the club & the limitations, the clock is ticking for him to do something sooner being more preferable whilst he’s young enough to retain the performance levels in keeping with the standards required for PL football.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:06 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 2:57 pm
So if we both agree it's likely they won't, what's the disagreement about?

They'd boost his England chances, but that's it.
We do agree that it's likely they won't, but that wasn't the question, it was are they more likely to get into the CL than we are. I said they are, you disagreed.

Pretty funny by the way that FactualFrank has me blocked but likes every post that disagrees with me :lol:
This user liked this post: FactualFrank

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:28 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:06 pm
We do agree that it's likely they won't, but that wasn't the question, it was are they more likely to get into the CL than we are. I said they are, you disagreed.

Pretty funny by the way that FactualFrank has me blocked but likes every post that disagrees with me :lol:
I'm mainly seeing your posts when people reply in the quote. What is also pretty funny is that after GodIsADeeJay81 totally put you back in your box, you decided to bring me into this. That says everything.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:53 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:28 pm
I'm mainly seeing your posts when people reply in the quote. What is also pretty funny is that after GodIsADeeJay81 totally put you back in your box, you decided to bring me into this. That says everything.
In what way did he "put me back in my box"? It's Factual, Frank that West Ham are more likely to make the CL than we are.

How did you see my post mentioning you anyway, nobody had quoted it? And what exactly does it say that I brought you into this?

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:58 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:53 pm
How did you see my post mentioning you anyway, nobody had quoted it? And what exactly does it say that I brought you into this?
1. People can quote you - I see what you've posted in their quote, in their reply.
2. Erm... is this a trick question? All I did was like a few posts and you posted: "Pretty funny by the way that FactualFrank has me blocked but likes every post that disagrees with me" - that is bringing me into it.

I don't like you. So don't bring me into any of your further posts, when it's not warranted.

chekhov
Posts: 2925
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:54 am
Been Liked: 804 times
Has Liked: 1513 times
Location: France

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by chekhov » Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:58 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 2:37 pm
Not at all, I just don't believe the hype about West Ham that's all.

I don't recall them ever doing much of note tbh.
Hardly a regular at winning trophies or finishing top 6.

Leicester would be a clear step up, like we were from Brentford.

West Ham would be a step up in wages....
I see where you’re coming from. However, it appears recently that Mr. Moyes is having a positive impact there and things are looking up for the hammers. Plus, as noted above he really will improve his chances of European football, and he’d be playing with higher calibre of player.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:01 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:58 pm
1. People can quote you - I see what you've posted in their quote, in their reply.
2. Erm... is this a trick question? All I did was like a few posts and you posted: "Pretty funny by the way that FactualFrank has me blocked but likes every post that disagrees with me" - that is bringing me into it.

I don't like you. So don't bring me into any of your further posts, when it's not warranted.
1. Nobody quoted my post that mentioned you. How did you see it if you have me blocked?

2. I didn't ask how I was bringing you into it. You said that my bringing you into it says it all. What does it say?

I'll do what I want and you can't stop me.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:05 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:01 pm
1. Nobody quoted my post that mentioned you. How did you see it if you have me blocked?

2. I didn't ask how I was bringing you into it. You said that my bringing you into it says it all. What does it say?

I'll do what I want and you can't stop me.
Your brain isn't getting this, is it?

When somebody quotes you - I see their post. In their post I see your post as they have quoted it. So I see your post that they have replied to. It's really not difficult to grasp.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:08 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:05 pm
Your brain isn't getting this, is it?

When somebody quotes you - I see their post. In their post I see your post as they have quoted it. So I see your post that they have replied to. It's really not difficult to grasp.
Show me where anyone (not yourself) quoted my post that mentioned you.

Then "get back in your box".

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:12 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:08 pm
Show me where anyone (not yourself) quoted my post that mentioned you.

Then "get back in your box".
Oh my word. I've just explained it to you. There's thick and then there's you.

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:14 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:12 pm
Oh my word. I've just explained it to you. There's thick and then there's you.
Only one person being thick here.

I'll try again. You have me blocked and said that only see my posts when somebody quotes them. How did you see my post that mentioned you when NOBODY QUOTED IT.
Last edited by Tall Paul on Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:15 pm

Ok... we'll leave it at that. Enjoy the rest of your day :-)
This user liked this post: Raggus

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:19 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:15 pm
Ok... we'll leave it at that. Enjoy the rest of your day :-)
Well done, I know it can be hard to admit that you were wrong.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Jakubclaret » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:20 pm

chekhov wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 3:58 pm
I see where you’re coming from. However, it appears recently that Mr. Moyes is having a positive impact there and things are looking up for the hammers. Plus, as noted above he really will improve his chances of European football, and he’d be playing with higher calibre of player.
How long West Ham continue to do well for is debatable but as things currently stand they are doing something right, it’s an anomaly of a season for them so far as usually there are perennial strugglers near the bottom but are always too good to go. It don’t think the recent form will kickstart into a continuing trend for them, it won’t be sustainable season after season without serious investment.
Last edited by Jakubclaret on Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:20 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:19 pm
Well done, I know it can be hard to admit that you were wrong.
Have a nice evening :)

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Tall Paul » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:28 pm

I will. You can go back to ignoring me and your weird obsession of liking every post disagreeing with me now.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:30 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:28 pm
I will. You can go back to ignoring me and your weird obsession of liking every post disagreeing with me now.
Ok, cheers.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14562
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:41 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:20 pm
How long West Ham continue to do well for is debatable but as things currently stand they are doing something right, it’s an anomaly of a season for them so far as usually there are perennial strugglers near the bottom but are always too good to go. It don’t think the recent form will kickstart into a continuing trend for them, it won’t be sustainable season after season without serious investment.
Exactly this.

Taffy on the wing
Posts: 4600
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
Been Liked: 1020 times
Has Liked: 3162 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Taffy on the wing » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:50 pm

DEPRESSING!....... the bickering ruins every topic on here.

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by KRBFC » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:54 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:15 am
This.

Sell for £35m, get £25m (spread over many years and likely linked to all sorts out of our control). Don’t sell, protect £260m over the next two years, given he’s a key player in retaining PL status. Absolute no brainer in my opinion.
Nobody would pay that much in the summer window for him so they definitely wont when he has less than a year remaining on his contract

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:56 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:54 pm
Nobody would pay that much in the summer window for him so they definitely wont when he has less than a year remaining on his contract
What's your thoughts though - get £20-25 million (after the amount we pay for Brentford) now - or let him help us stay in the Premier League this season and next, but walk away for free.

I guess it's down to who we can bring in. We're knackered if Tarky leaves and we don't replace him.

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 9585
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 3146 times
Has Liked: 10202 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by evensteadiereddie » Sat Jan 23, 2021 5:00 pm

Not every topic, Taffy, but the bickering, along with the odd sly political dig, is starting to creep in again.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Jakubclaret » Sat Jan 23, 2021 5:03 pm

Just after both posters had agreed on a truce, somebody else pops along to reignite something which had disappeared.

chekhov
Posts: 2925
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:54 am
Been Liked: 804 times
Has Liked: 1513 times
Location: France

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by chekhov » Sat Jan 23, 2021 5:05 pm

Hey folks, it’s not important to be right. It doesn’t matter, nobody cares.
Try this:
Respect the person who disagrees with you.
If they are disrespectful they may be feeling threatened or vulnerable. Therefore, show compassion, don’t respond in kind. Rather show them some love, you can even like their post.
You might be surprised that your interactions will improve and you and your views will be more respected. And you’ll feel better. Honest.
This user liked this post: Jakubclaret

NRC
Posts: 4288
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:58 pm
Been Liked: 908 times
Has Liked: 107 times
Location: Containment Area for Relocated Yankees, NC

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by NRC » Sat Jan 23, 2021 6:35 pm

you all seem to be missing some out-of-the-box thinking.

He can choose to move abroad to a club almost guaranteed to see CL football, as well as do his England chances no harm.... it needn't be the PL Top Six Society

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by KRBFC » Sat Jan 23, 2021 8:53 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 4:56 pm
What's your thoughts though - get £20-25 million (after the amount we pay for Brentford) now - or let him help us stay in the Premier League this season and next, but walk away for free.

I guess it's down to who we can bring in. We're knackered if Tarky leaves and we don't replace him.
How much of that money will be reinvested and on who I’d absolutely take Phil Jones as his replacement
This user liked this post: BurnleyFC

BurnleyFC
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:51 am
Been Liked: 1596 times
Has Liked: 888 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by BurnleyFC » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:01 pm

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - Phil Jones would be a great fit for us. I hope it happens in this transfer window.

Craig Dawson has also looked quality at West Ham so it’s no surprise we chased him for so long.
Last edited by BurnleyFC on Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Targetman
Posts: 1641
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:43 pm
Been Liked: 502 times
Has Liked: 46 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Targetman » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:02 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 8:53 pm
How much of that money will be reinvested and on who I’d absolutely take Phil Jones as his replacement

According to DJW the deal has already been done to bring in Jones.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:07 pm

Targetman wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:02 pm
According to DJW the deal has already been done to bring in Jones.
Which means the club haven't yet decided on whether to go for him or not.

TsarBomba
Posts: 1619
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 4:51 pm
Been Liked: 1138 times
Has Liked: 288 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by TsarBomba » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:08 pm

You don’t keep a player against their will. Certainly not one that has been so immense.

In recent years we have developed lots of talent, and as a club, we’re probably seen as a good stepping stone. It’s a win win when we sell for a profit, which then funds the next acquisition.

If we suddenly stand in the way of players from progressing, it all comes crashing down.

If and when Tarks goes, there shouldn’t be any hard feelings. It’s his career and his perogative.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by FactualFrank » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:11 pm

TsarBomba wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:08 pm
You don’t keep a player against their will. Certainly not one that has been so immense.

In recent years we have developed lots of talent, and as a club, we’re probably seen as a good stepping stone. It’s a win win when we sell for a profit, which then funds the next acquisition.

If we suddenly stand in the way of players from progressing, it all comes crashing down.

If and when Tarks goes, there shouldn’t be any hard feelings. It’s his career and his perogative.
Back on subject, as it's drifted a lot throughout, like you say, if somebody doesn't want to be here - they go. It's as simple as that. But that of course depends on a lot of factors. It sounds like Tarky likes playing for Dyche and just wants to move for a better deal whenever the opportunity arises.

boatshed bill
Posts: 15107
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3137 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by boatshed bill » Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:43 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:11 pm
Back on subject, as it's drifted a lot throughout, like you say, if somebody doesn't want to be here - they go. It's as simple as that. But that of course depends on a lot of factors. It sounds like Tarky likes playing for Dyche and just wants to move for a better deal whenever the opportunity arises.
Quite right< Frank.
I'd say it's not so much that he doesn't want to be here, more like he'd like to be somewhere else.
Quite where that might be remains to be seen, perhaps abroad?

summitclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 826 times
Has Liked: 1307 times
Location: burnley

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by summitclaret » Sat Jan 23, 2021 10:25 pm

BurnleyFC wrote:
Sat Jan 23, 2021 9:01 pm
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - Phil Jones would be a great fit for us. I hope it happens in this transfer window.

Craig Dawson has also looked quality at West Ham so it’s no surprise we chased him for so long.
Dawson was a no brainer last window.

dougcollins
Posts: 6586
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:23 am
Been Liked: 1778 times
Has Liked: 1773 times
Location: Yarkshire

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by dougcollins » Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:53 am

Actually, probably our worst player last night.

Not at his best.
This user liked this post: Frenchclaret

DomBFC1882
Posts: 1682
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:21 pm
Been Liked: 462 times
Has Liked: 2398 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by DomBFC1882 » Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:55 am

I'd give my right bo***ck for Tarks to stay

RalphCoatesComb
Posts: 8049
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:38 pm
Been Liked: 2415 times
Has Liked: 2115 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by RalphCoatesComb » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:06 am

dougcollins wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:53 am
Actually, probably our worst player last night.

Not at his best.
Are you sure? You do know Brady and Brownhill were on the pitch, don't you? Apart from which, Tarks made some important challenges in and around our box, whilst on a yellow card.

Jakubs Tash
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 pm
Been Liked: 672 times
Has Liked: 244 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Jakubs Tash » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:10 am

He was certainly below par but played much better once we got our noses in front. Everyone is allowed an indifferent game after so many big performances.

vinrogue
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:26 am
Been Liked: 318 times
Has Liked: 184 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by vinrogue » Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:15 am

With Stones finding form and playing for City, Tarks drops further in the England thinking, no idea how Mings is ahead of him, however, if that is the case the only reasons to leave are for European football, better team and more money. Who knows, win the FA Cup and tick Europa League, Alan buys 3 decent players tick and then Alan says how about this as a new contract James and tick, Tarks stays, Ben is happy and we all live happily ever after.

NewClaret
Posts: 13222
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 3037 times
Has Liked: 3759 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by NewClaret » Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:14 pm

vinrogue wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 11:15 am
With Stones finding form and playing for City, Tarks drops further in the England thinking, no idea how Mings is ahead of him, however, if that is the case the only reasons to leave are for European football, better team and more money. Who knows, win the FA Cup and tick Europa League, Alan buys 3 decent players tick and then Alan says how about this as a new contract James and tick, Tarks stays, Ben is happy and we all live happily ever after.
No idea how Mings is ahead of him either. Whenever Dyche is questioned, he's always very respectful about it being Southgate's decision, etc - wish he'd be a bit more vocal and apply some pressure.

SouthLondonexile
Posts: 562
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:35 pm
Been Liked: 84 times
Has Liked: 247 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by SouthLondonexile » Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:22 pm

JT is utterly fearless, timing good rarely makes a mistake.
Probably my favourite centre half of all time @ BFCand that includes chopper Waldron and Ben Mee.
I am content to value what he is doing now. I believe he has been nurtured well, and will be an asset to any club in Europe or the UK. Although I would prefer him to stay.
A note of caution for James is: be careful which club you go to - if you decide to Leave. Tell your agent to get stuffed and listen to SD, OGS , JM or the excellent City manager.

Frenchclaret
Posts: 545
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:42 am
Been Liked: 184 times
Has Liked: 601 times
Location: Dordogne/Fenland

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Frenchclaret » Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:23 pm

dougcollins wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:53 am
Actually, probably our worst player last night.

Not at his best.
Probably feeling the effects from his appearance on Sunday. Remember, only 3players played both full games. He has had a concentrated few weeks of games. My worry is next Sunday!

Top Claret
Posts: 5125
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:50 am
Been Liked: 1127 times
Has Liked: 1238 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by Top Claret » Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:24 pm

dougcollins wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:53 am
Actually, probably our worst player last night.

Not at his best.
Rubbish.. Tarkowski was the only player we had who could live with Grealish.

Brownhill, Brady, Westwood, Rodriguez and Lowton all had lower marks

SouthLondonexile
Posts: 562
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:35 pm
Been Liked: 84 times
Has Liked: 247 times

Re: James Tarkowski

Post by SouthLondonexile » Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:25 pm

dougcollins wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 10:53 am
Actually, probably our worst player last night.

Not at his best.
Which game were you watching last night?

Post Reply