TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

Link at the bottom it is mentioned
http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/T ... story.html?

I'd be very disappointed if Damon opted to join Aldershot. I have really enjoyed watching him in a gulls shirt and IMO he is one of the best at what he does in the lower leagues. I agree to an extent that he is a bit more restricted playing in a two man midfield however I think we would have had the potential to be very strong across the middle of the park next season with him, Young and possibly another. I heard the rumours about him potentially going to Wimbledon, I could accept him moving to a league club but I find the idea of him moving to a conference rival (and one which can't exactly smash us out of the water financially) difficult to take. If it's the case that CH doesn't rate him highly enough to offer something better then I'll go with Greavsie's judgment but I will be sorry to see him go nonetheless.

Kit_robin wrote:I don't think CH wanted him that badly. Think he also got reduced terms. CH dropped him quite often last season.

The problem with Damon is his lack of flexibility. He can only play one role - the defensive anchor man in a midfield three. He plays that role excellently, even getting my player of the season vote in the ling play-off campaign, but unfortunately does not have the ability/positioning/anticipation to play in a midfield two. When he has played in a two, he's been average or poor.

I think this has meant that CH believes it's not the end of the world if he goes. I am also inclined to agree with that. Presume also we will not be playing a 4-5-1/4-3-3 this season, as I doubt there are many better player in the conference in that role. Maybe Shaun cooper...

I think you are right. I reckon CH offered players terms, that he knew they wouldn't accept but could at least say they had offered them something. Lathrope was dropped by CH a few times, loaned out by Knill. He was even dropped by Ling, before Ling went sick. I thought he was superb when we got to the play-offs under Ling and I would have liked him to have stayed but probably in the way Hargreaves would have done, but at the same time, not too bothered that he has gone.

I have a feeling Lathrope is related to Paul Buckle who is from the Aldershot area. If correct this could explain why Damon is moving to Hampshire.

I am pretty sure that he is Bucks nephew

Lathrope is indeed Buckle's nephew. However, I think he is from Stevenage. Not sure whether that is Aldershot area. I thought Buckle was from Luton.

I thought that Lathrope was getting attention from several league clubs - the reason that the best he can do is Aldershot is simple - thats probably about his standard. I am also not convinced that Hargreaves particularly wanted to keep him. He did play him in the first team but also left him out of the squad completely on a couple of occasions.
Yes he is a defensive midfielder player who breaks up the play etc etc but he is also a midfielder who has never scored a goal, never likely to and basically never creates anything. His was most effective in the Ling team but basically he didn't really have to do alot part from sit in front the back four - and he had decent players such as Mark Ellis behind him.
Really he would be no great loss - another rank average player really. If he was in the opposition team would we really be bothered about him causing us any damage? - no not at all.

Richinns wrote:
So good we offered him next to nothing and the best other option he has is Aldershot!

I trust CH's judgement on this and if he did not offer him much then he has a reason for doing so.

Would have been a useful squad player when injurys and suspensions hit but no more. Very easily replaceable in my eyes!

You know better than that. The reason we've offered him 45p/week is because that's all we can afford. It's nothing to do with his ability. We might rate him at £2000/week, but if the purse strings will only stretch to £500/week, that's all we can offer.

He's averaged over 30 appearances a season for four years. If we're allowed to suggest that Craig must be shit because four managers all didn't rate him, then we've got to accept also that DL must be a quality player by the same logic.

Matt.

ferrarilover wrote:


You know better than that. The reason we've offered him 45p/week is because that's all we can afford. It's nothing to do with his ability. We might rate him at £2000/week, but if the purse strings will only stretch to £500/week, that's all we can offer.

He's averaged over 30 appearances a season for four years. If we're allowed to suggest that Craig must be sh*t because four managers all didn't rate him, then we've got to accept also that DL must be a quality player by the same logic.

Matt.

...but the last three managers have dropped him...

Buckle played him, we made the playoff final.
Ling played him, we made the playoff semi final
Knill dropped him, we avoided the drop by a couple of points
Hargreaves dropped him, we went down.

But dat ain't none of my business doe.

Matt.

ferrarilover wrote:Buckle played him, we made the playoff final.
Ling played him, we made the playoff semi final
Knill dropped him, we avoided the drop by a couple of points
Hargreaves dropped him, we went down.

But dat ain't none of my business doe.

Matt.

Buckle only played him when he had to, I.e bits and pieces throughout the season, and then starting when Stanley was not eligible for the playoffs. As has been mentioned, his poor performance contributed to our loss in the final.

Ling played him in his best (and only) position, where he excelled. However he struggled in the next season as we changed formation following O'Kane leaving, and DL had that nasty injury at the beginning of the season.

Since then knill and CH haven't played a formation that suits his skill set. To suggest DL was the reason we made the play-offs twice in two years is folly.

He cannot create, and he can only play one (very specific) position. If were not going to use him properly we are better off spending money elsewhere.

By the same logic then if Lathrope was any good he would be staying in the football league, not going to a team that is going to struggle in the Conference.

Kit_robin wrote: Buckle only played him when he had to, I.e bits and pieces throughout the season, and then starting when Stanley was not eligible for the playoffs. As has been mentioned, his poor performance contributed to our loss in the final.

Ling played him in his best (and only) position, where he excelled. However he struggled in the next season as we changed formation following O'Kane leaving, and DL had that nasty injury at the beginning of the season.

Since then knill and CH haven't played a formation that suits his skill set. To suggest DL was the reason we made the play-offs twice in two years is folly.

He cannot create, and he can only play one (very specific) position. If were not going to use him properly we are better off spending money elsewhere.

Quite right, which is why I made no such assertion. Correlation, not causation.

Manuel Neuer can only play one (very specific) position. I don't expect him to turn out for Aldershot either.

I know an excellent barrister who is a terrible cook. You know how he makes a living? He represents clients at court and leaves the cooking to his private chef (/wife). I do take your point about spending the money elsewhere, and I'd advocate that, if I didn't think that a defensive midfielder is a bloody good thing to have and, if you're going to have one, you might as well have the best one in the division.

I can't see him being on bigger money than we can presently sustain, I can't see him being any kind of negative influence on the dressing room or the club in general and I can't see a better player in his position being available for less money. Letting him go doesn't seem to stack up, unless Chris really is going to play a traditional 4-4-2 and leave no room for him at all. However, given that Chris makes absolutely no secret about the fact that he is looking to play out from the back and allow the lads to play football, I really don't see that we would be looking to get rid of the best passer among, arguably, the whole squad.

And besides... Aldershot? I know this is going to sound a bit "Northampton Town" but... well... Alder-****-shot!?!

Matt.

Kit_robin wrote: Buckle only played him when he had to, I.e bits and pieces throughout the season, and then starting when Stanley was not eligible for the playoffs. As has been mentioned, his poor performance contributed to our loss in the final.

Ling played him in his best (and only) position, where he excelled. However he struggled in the next season as we changed formation following O'Kane leaving, and DL had that nasty injury at the beginning of the season.

Since then knill and CH haven't played a formation that suits his skill set. To suggest DL was the reason we made the play-offs twice in two years is folly.

He cannot create, and he can only play one (very specific) position. If were not going to use him properly we are better off spending money elsewhere.

Quite right, which is why I made no such assertion. Correlation, not causation.

Manuel Neuer can only play one (very specific) position. I don't expect him to turn out for Aldershot either.

I know an excellent barrister who is a terrible cook. You know how he makes a living? He represents clients at court and leaves the cooking to his private chef (/wife). I do take your point about spending the money elsewhere, and I'd advocate that, if I didn't think that a defensive midfielder is a bloody good thing to have and, if you're going to have one, you might as well have the best one in the division.

I can't see him being on bigger money than we can presently sustain, I can't see him being any kind of negative influence on the dressing room or the club in general and I can't see a better player in his position being available for less money. Letting him go doesn't seem to stack up, unless Chris really is going to play a traditional 4-4-2 and leave no room for him at all. However, given that Chris makes absolutely no secret about the fact that he is looking to play out from the back and allow the lads to play football, I really don't see that we would be looking to get rid of the best passer among, arguably, the whole squad.

And besides... Aldershot? I know this is going to sound a bit "Northampton Town" but... well... Alder-****-shot!?!

Matt.

Confirmed on Facebook, that he has signed for Aldershot Town. I am slightly disappointed but suspect the contract he was offered was designed to be turned down!