Marvin Armstrong

Anything and everything related to Barnet FC
User avatar
ninestein
Posts: 7010
Joined: 03 Aug 2011, 20:00

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371257Post ninestein »

Marvin seems like a rough diamond. Great engine, athletic, but he always looked a bit uneasy on the ball when turning defence into attack. Fingers crossed we've done the right thing and looking to better what we have. Hope Marvin does well for himself. Good, honest hard working player.
Barnet showing all the flair of Rupert-the-Bears trousers, but lots more style!
WhetstoneBee
Posts: 720
Joined: 04 Feb 2011, 14:37

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371263Post WhetstoneBee »

WillesdenBee wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 12:22
#Beebot wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 12:14 Seems like a bit of a harsh summation of his time here. He's easily good enough for this level just not a starter for a top 3 team. I'd rather have him as an option than Senior tbh
Maybe a little harsh but that is football for you I guess! My pet hate in football is players getting praised for running about a lot. That should be the minimum, especially if you are limited in other aspects, which I, and I suspect the MT, believe Marv is. He has the physical capacity to go places but is just not technically gifted enough. Credit to him for always giving 100% but relegation scrap/league below is more his level.

I'd rather Senior (only marginally) as at least he can create something out of nowhere with some trickery or flair, albeit not very often. There is a reason neither get anywhere near our best 11 and there was more chance of cashing in on Marv than Senior, who will be most likely not be here next season anyway.
Senior is truly dreadful I’m afraid. Armstrong’s pace, tenacity, dynamism and ball-carrying were very effective at times. He’s exactly the sort of player I’d have liked to see us develop but if the offer was good enough then I guess it makes sense for all involved.
letchbee94
Posts: 8104
Joined: 21 Jan 2011, 20:59

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371264Post letchbee94 »

Good luck to him, scored some crucial goals for us in past.
becbee
Posts: 11908
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 11:43

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371272Post becbee »

I feel he's been given less opportunity than has been afforded to some other players but it's clear that DB doesn't rate him sp it's best for all parties that he moved on.
Whether he really wants to be playing NLN football next season is another point. I'd have thought he'd have preferred NLS but then, presumably money talks.
Ajtheone04
Posts: 924
Joined: 05 May 2019, 12:51

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371276Post Ajtheone04 »

WillesdenBee wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 12:22
#Beebot wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 12:14 Seems like a bit of a harsh summation of his time here. He's easily good enough for this level just not a starter for a top 3 team. I'd rather have him as an option than Senior tbh
Maybe a little harsh but that is football for you I guess! My pet hate in football is players getting praised for running about a lot. That should be the minimum, especially if you are limited in other aspects, which I, and I suspect the MT, believe Marv is. He has the physical capacity to go places but is just not technically gifted enough. Credit to him for always giving 100% but relegation scrap/league below is more his level.

I'd rather Senior (only marginally) as at least he can create something out of nowhere with some trickery or flair, albeit not very often. There is a reason neither get anywhere near our best 11 and there was more chance of cashing in on Marv than Senior, who will be most likely not be here next season anyway.
Hahaha Senior, who wasn't even a regular in the league below in his month at Yeovil, over Armstrong who has been a decisive player in multiple games over the last two years.

I do see why people on Twitter criticise this forum so much.

Marv was simply another victim of our change in style. He should be playing at this level next season but at least he might get consistent minutes with an ambitious York side in the league below next year.
ETBee
Posts: 3003
Joined: 16 Mar 2013, 10:16

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371277Post ETBee »

"Marv was simply another victim of our change in style."

What is our style? I'd be interested to hear what fans think it is.
User avatar
rudebwoyben
Posts: 9067
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 18:53
Location: Seven Sisters, London N15

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371280Post rudebwoyben »

Our style seems to be mainly possession-based and using the flanks effectively to deliver telling crosses. When it works well we create lots of chances but it can be stodgy when it doesn’t and I think that those were the occasions when using Marvin more would have helped us.
Ajtheone04
Posts: 924
Joined: 05 May 2019, 12:51

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371281Post Ajtheone04 »

ETBee wrote: 16 Mar 2024, 08:35 "Marv was simply another victim of our change in style."

What is our style? I'd be interested to hear what fans think it is.
I've seen a lot more emphasis on keeping the ball and controlling games, probably Armstrong's weakest area, and a lot less emphasis on breaking with pace and running in behind, the strong-point in Armstrong's game.
BeeArmy22
Posts: 212
Joined: 14 Aug 2018, 15:10

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371288Post BeeArmy22 »

ETBee wrote: 16 Mar 2024, 08:35 "Marv was simply another victim of our change in style."

What is our style? I'd be interested to hear what fans think it is.
Last season we very much played transitional football. The ball was in the air and went long 80% of the time to Nicke and then we tried to win the second balls and play off him. Majority of this season we’ve played through the thirds and there’s been a much bigger emphasis on keeping the ball (think our possession stats for this season are around 60% on average). Led to us creating a lot more chances (we massively overperformed xG last season and Dean clearly knew it wasn’t sustainable hence the change in style) and conceding much fewer. Bringing in Keeley to replace Laurie shows that Dean is serious about keeping the ball on the floor.
jonbonbaby
Posts: 1682
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 14:37

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371294Post jonbonbaby »

Mem Beespod wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 13:29
jonbonbaby wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 12:41 Very harsh , came with a rep as a defensive midfielder ( I think ) then played as an attacker because he’s quick
We played him as a high presser because his technique was poor and he wasn’t secure enough on the ball.
Hartigan or Armstrong? No contest
So out of position then ? Wasn’t questioning if Hartigan was better or not he’s clearly a better ball player than Armstrong
hoppy
Posts: 5119
Joined: 15 Mar 2012, 09:43

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371398Post hoppy »

Armstrong played the full 90 minutes for York in their win against Aldershot.
Itsmeerc
Posts: 676
Joined: 08 Jan 2013, 17:56

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371406Post Itsmeerc »

York fans raving about his performance too.
FredBee
Posts: 42
Joined: 24 Mar 2023, 18:33

Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371407Post FredBee »

Itsmeerc wrote:York fans raving about his performance too.
That’s good to know. Based on the clear out DB had to do when he arrived, even if Marvin didn’t quite hit the levels hoped for, you know Marvin was someone who will always give 100%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11bee717
Posts: 1134
Joined: 02 May 2022, 15:07

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371411Post 11bee717 »

Itsmeerc wrote: 16 Mar 2024, 20:17 York fans raving about his performance too.
Delighted for him! His style means he needs to play with a little less possession and more pace in attack, he should hit the heights now.
tonbridgebee
Posts: 1024
Joined: 18 Jan 2014, 23:26

Re: Marvin Armstrong

Post: # 371449Post tonbridgebee »

becbee wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 13:33
rudebwoyben wrote: 15 Mar 2024, 12:39 Regardless of his football ability, I think it’s a terrible decision for him to join York. The club is a complete shitshow at the moment and they’re going to get relegated. Just watch the highlights of their 6-1 defeat at Altrincham on Tuesday.
Agree but there again, it was a terrible decision by their manager to leave Worthing to join York.
Not given the money they're paying him......
Post Reply