TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

Southampton Gull wrote:never saw him "win" a header

Dont think the ball was usually passed that low :B

back to train with us ive heard?

ROADRUNNER wrote:back to train with us ive heard?

To be honest, i always liked Danny Stevens and always will, he was good on the wing, could wip it in nicely, good scoring ability never stopped trying!
Look at benyon he was so good for us and this season he's not having the best season, but everyone just gives him credit for trying hard and not stopping. (not slating him, love him, just staying.) Thats exactly what danny was like.

I'd like to see danny stevens back in a torquay shirt, but i dont think it will happen, because no one has taken a liking to him, and we have too many midfielders on the team.

I dont think we can slate him because he was good for us, but if he was released on the first season under ling, he would of got a club without a doubt.
But becuase he was released on the second season under ling, he was injured for the majority and didnt play much, he was therefore undesirable.

Danny is an excellent footballer who would shine in the right team under the right manager but whose lack of height has obviously limited his opportunities. His inability to automatically fit into the teams of previous managers was due to their approach to team formation and strategy as much as anything, and this reflects the approach to the game generally seen in British football today which favours height, speed, and power, over agility and ball control, whereas the contribution of physically small players with top footballing skills has always been welcomed in the best teams worldwide. He may be unlikely to play with the Gulls again, but it's surprising that he hasn't found at least a good non-league club as a shop window for his abilities.

Danny is not an excellent footballer. He's a lad with a bit of skill who has never made a starting place his own wherever he's been. He had one bright spell under Ling and that remains the finest spell of his career to date. He's lightweight, anonymous most of the time and couldn't tackle a virgin.

He was excellent in the same way that spiders are frightening. For the first 10 seconds, highly effective, but once the opposition realise that the best way to deal with a spider is simply to whack it with a shoe, the game is up. DS was the same, he'd come on and run at the full-back once and the defender would shit himself. Next time, he'd simply knock Stevens off the ball and the referee would allow it because the latter was so small.

If he'd had dancing feet and could have played through the middle (Zola-esque) then he'd have been an excellent addition to the side, but his whole game was predicated on knock and run, which he can't manage because he's too small.

Playing in a side with Nico doesn't help him either, because when he plays, we bypass Central midfield in favour of that massive diagonal which Kev loves to hit. It's a great pass and works really well, but it's nullified by Danny because it gets picked off easier than Aaron Rodgers.

Nice lad, but he needs to be working in Sports Direct and playing Sunday League.

Matt.

He played best during Buckle's managership.

Imagine he was good for morale in the club
Struck me as a cheeky chappy like Arthur Askey or Norman wisdom
Think he shinned in his final goal for tufc with his middle wicket :aww:

I'm sure all these glowing references for Danny Stevens will do his confidence the world of good in his search for another club.

KentGull wrote:I'm sure all these glowing references for Danny Stevens will do his confidence the world of good in his search for another club.

Yep, he's looking for a Championship club now..

We all know his limitations but it is funny (in a perverse sort of way) to see a player who was a big part of promotion-chasing sides so thoroughly derided while the team's been completely awful ever since he left. Maybe we could use a few more players as useless as him.

This is another prime example of correlation differing from causation in an enormously significant way.

Matt.

ferrarilover wrote:This is another prime example of correlation differing from causation in an enormously significant way.
Matt.

Err.. Matt, don't you mean 'insignificant' or perhaps 'irrelevant', given that njgull's comment was a rhetorical one, so your 'example' would be significantly less than 'prime'..?? :~D

Gullscorer wrote:Err.. Matt, don't you mean 'insignificant' or perhaps 'irrelevant', given that njgull's comment was a rhetorical one, so your 'example' would be significantly less than 'prime'..?? :~D

There are so many big words in there that I , as a product of the American education system, will never be able to understand.