just a nibble...

[wing commander]

Sod is pretty much untouchable and rightly so.However im going to commit the cardinal sin and have a bit of a nibble.Yes get the noose.lol
  Firstly before Hayters return i thought he was very slow in changing the team/formation around, teams had sussed out the only threat was Sharp and teams started to put a bloke with his arms round his shoulders and we looked toothless,i felt he could have changed things round,maybe Fairhurst to come on rather than stick to the same plan,we played great at qpr but in truth we never looked like scoring.
  That leads me on to the second nibble,substitutions.Most managers including sod just do not like making subs until late on in the game,whats wrong on 80 minutes tends to be wrong on 45 mins as well in my eyes.Against Forest we struggled first half due to the midfield,Oster,Gillette just had an off day,Woodsy was awful and only Copps was trying to get things moving.I was hoping Stock and Wilson would come on at half time and i believe if they had we would have won that game.Stock created movement and Wilson at last stopped the Forest midfielders laying out the picnik blanket and having there tea before deciding who to pass too.
  I didnt agree with Sods comments after the game,in truth i thought first half we were bloody lucky to go in level and a few were well below par,however after surviving a dodgy first ten after the restart we improved and after the changes we were well on top..
  Of course these our sound bites while there isnt much to talk about,after all crikey who are we to moan about the team when the town cant be arsed to come out and support its club.Im sure the expense argument will be thrown up again, but i dont think if it was £15 we would sell out...
  We also need to get  young Dumbayo signed up on a deal,ive been delighted with him he looks a real player and has the chance to go far in this game,a real find for us.
  And finaly just in case i havent created enought for you to throw your arms in the air and shout \"sinner\" i see Mr Woods is moaning that he hasnt made the Scotland squad and that the manager should have come to the game to watch him..Martin after that display saturday,i would thank your blessings he didnt.!!  

[Filo]

wing commander wrote:

Sod is pretty much untouchable and rightly so.However im going to commit the cardinal sin and have a bit of a nibble.Yes get the noose.lol
  Firstly before Hayters return i thought he was very slow in changing the team/formation around, teams had sussed out the only threat was Sharp and teams started to put a bloke with his arms round his shoulders and we looked toothless,i felt he could have changed things round,maybe Fairhurst to come on rather than stick to the same plan,we played great at qpr but in truth we never looked like scoring.
  That leads me on to the second nibble,substitutions.Most managers including sod just do not like making subs until late on in the game,whats wrong on 80 minutes tends to be wrong on 45 mins as well in my eyes.Against Forest we struggled first half due to the midfield,Oster,Gillette just had an off day,Woodsy was awful and only Copps was trying to get things moving.I was hoping Stock and Wilson would come on at half time and i believe if they had we would have won that game.Stock created movement and Wilson at last stopped the Forest midfielders laying out the picnik blanket and having there tea before deciding who to pass too.
  I didnt agree with Sods comments after the game,in truth i thought first half we were bloody lucky to go in level and a few were well below par,however after surviving a dodgy first ten after the restart we improved and after the changes we were well on top..
  Of course these our sound bites while there isnt much to talk about,after all crikey who are we to moan about the team when the town cant be arsed to come out and support its club.Im sure the expense argument will be thrown up again, but i dont think if it was £15 we would sell out...
  We also need to get  young Dumbayo signed up on a deal,ive been delighted with him he looks a real player and has the chance to go far in this game,a real find for us.
  And finaly just in case i havent created enought for you to throw your arms in the air and shout \"sinner\" i see Mr Woods is moaning that he hasnt made the Scotland squad and that the manager should have come to the game to watch him..Martin after that display saturday,i would thank your blessings he didnt.!!  

Put your tin hat on, the Wilson boo boys will have you for dinner!

[fudgepacker]

Wilson is a good player in my opinion, just because he doesn't score loads of goals or take players on it doesn't make him bad. He just gets on with his job which is to break up the oppositions attacks and then play the simple ball.

I think people don't like him because when he's playing well you don't notice him if that makes sense, so it looks like he never does anything to warrant praise.

[NigelJ]

wing commander wrote:

Sod is pretty much untouchable and rightly so.However im going to commit the cardinal sin and have a bit of a nibble.Yes get the noose.lol
  Firstly before Hayters return i thought he was very slow in changing the team/formation around, teams had sussed out the only threat was Sharp and teams started to put a bloke with his arms round his shoulders and we looked toothless,i felt he could have changed things round,maybe Fairhurst to come on rather than stick to the same plan,we played great at qpr but in truth we never looked like scoring.
  That leads me on to the second nibble,substitutions.Most managers including sod just do not like making subs until late on in the game,whats wrong on 80 minutes tends to be wrong on 45 mins as well in my eyes.Against Forest we struggled first half due to the midfield,Oster,Gillette just had an off day,Woodsy was awful and only Copps was trying to get things moving.I was hoping Stock and Wilson would come on at half time and i believe if they had we would have won that game.Stock created movement and Wilson at last stopped the Forest midfielders laying out the picnik blanket and having there tea before deciding who to pass too.
  I didnt agree with Sods comments after the game,in truth i thought first half we were bloody lucky to go in level and a few were well below par,however after surviving a dodgy first ten after the restart we improved and after the changes we were well on top..
  Of course these our sound bites while there isnt much to talk about,after all crikey who are we to moan about the team when the town cant be arsed to come out and support its club.Im sure the expense argument will be thrown up again, but i dont think if it was £15 we would sell out...
  We also need to get  young Dumbayo signed up on a deal,ive been delighted with him he looks a real player and has the chance to go far in this game,a real find for us.
  And finaly just in case i havent created enought for you to throw your arms in the air and shout \"sinner\" i see Mr Woods is moaning that he hasnt made the Scotland squad and that the manager should have come to the game to watch him..Martin after that display saturday,i would thank your blessings he didnt.!!  

You must have a very short memory. We hit the post in the first half, and hit the bar in the second half. Their second goal should not have stood, due to the blatant handball in midfield. At that point, the game could still have gone either way.

[RoversDave]

wing commander wrote:

Firstly before Hayters return i thought he was very slow in changing the team/formation around, teams had sussed out the only threat was Sharp and teams started to put a bloke with his arms round his shoulders and we looked toothless :

and some like to fondle Billy's bi-ceps.  

[bobjimwilly]

Unbelieveable init that defenders still get away with this, aswell as keepers smacking other players round the head a la saturday  :S

[wing commander]

Nigel j,
        Funny but i cant remember even mentioning what qpr did so my memory seems fine..lol Ok we hit the post from a set piece and a lash that either goes in or rowz..I was talking about our passing incisive play,last year we pulled teams around with quick passing,i think we are playing much slower this year and just not hurting teams as much...just my opinion.
   I thought the debate on Arsenal v Chelski was very interesting on MOTD and 606.Basically the ex Gunners pro's and pundits all said the same thing.The football Arsenal play looks lovely and has done for a few years but they dont have no attacking threat,they pass it round the box looking for another pass which means there are no real attacking players in the game but midfielders trying to be.Arsenal are not as good as they look because the good teams are happy to let them play ..Those were pretty much the thoughts of them all,however on Chelsea they said the exact opposite,dont look to them for 50 passes but when it goes forward they have one thing on there minds and its go for goal,the are incisive and clinical.
  Of course they are at a different level but for me the principal remains the same. We are often called the Arsenal of the north and in truth i can understand why, as we are set up to play the game in a similar fashion.Hopefully Hayter can provide a better link from attack to midfield for us because i think we have missed Hayter much more than we thought we would.
  As for Wilson,he would start most away games for me as he is a proper defensive midfielder, however i think at home when it is down to us to force the game we need a bit more vision.That said i personally believe a good defensive midfielder can change  a game just as much as an attacking midfielder but like i said its a game of opinions.Some on here think Wilson is rubbish and some think Friend will make a footballer i cant agree with them but i wont fall out with anybody who does.
 

[hoolahoop]

Willo is a damn good footballer but like you i am yet to be convinced about Friend.

[DadsleyRover]

About Saturdays performance I would like to remind you that there was another team on the pitch and they pressed us well and did not allow us as much time on the ball. This was why the midfield did not look as good.
On Saturday though I would have liked to see Fairhurst come on for 25 minutes and spice it up. I thought Oster had a an off day and Friend needs some help as he seemed to be left out of the passing.
Overall though considering the depth of their squad and the injuries we have I think a useful point. Well Done the Lads.

[CusworthRovers]

DadsleyRover wrote:

About Saturdays performance I would like to remind you that there was another team on the pitch and they pressed us well and did not allow us as much time on the ball. This was why the midfield did not look as good.
On Saturday though I would have liked to see Fairhurst come on for 25 minutes and spice it up. I thought Oster had a an off day and Friend needs some help as he seemed to be left out of the passing.
Overall though considering the depth of their squad and the injuries we have I think a useful point. Well Done the Lads.

Nice short summary and fully agree. I'm not sure Fairhust would have made that much difference other than a fresh pair of legs for Hayts or Billy, but who knows. In reality and it couldn't be done due to injuries you state, but if we are going for a plan b ball over the top or in the air (as they forced us to play like that, along with our 2 up front), then we really need a Brooker or Martis (after his Watford cameo) there to make them have it.

[billywhitehurst]

Mark Wilson is not good enough to play for a top half championship team.

[Chris]

billywhitehurst wrote:

Mark Wilson is not good enough to play for a top half championship team.

Ok we get it, you don't rate Mark Wilson.  :byebye

[roversam]

Chris wrote:

billywhitehurst wrote:

Mark Wilson is not good enough to play for a top half championship team.

Ok we get it, you don't rate Mark Wilson.  :byebye

Whats wrong with him not rating Wilson, i dont either, along with about a dozen other mates/ rovers fans, it only seems to be a certain few on this forum who rate him.

[i_ateallthepies]

roversam wrote:

Chris wrote:

billywhitehurst wrote:

Mark Wilson is not good enough to play for a top half championship team.

Ok we get it, you don't rate Mark Wilson.  :byebye

Whats wrong with him not rating Wilson, i dont either, along with about a dozen other mates/ rovers fans, it only seems to be a certain few on this forum who rate him.

We don't hold it against you for being clueless  

[Filo]

roversam wrote:

Whats wrong with him not rating Wilson, i dont either, along with about a dozen other mates/ rovers fans, it only seems to be a certain few on this forum who rate him.

And a management team that has masterminded our highest league position for over 50 years, so you and your dozen mates might just be a tad wrong eh?  

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

billywhitehurst wrote:

Mark Wilson is not good enough to play for a top half championship team.

Yes he is.

[Savvy]

Filo wrote:

roversam wrote:

Whats wrong with him not rating Wilson, i dont either, along with about a dozen other mates/ rovers fans, it only seems to be a certain few on this forum who rate him.

And a management team that has masterminded our highest league position for over 50 years, so you and your dozen mates might just be a tad wrong eh?  

Is this the same management team that allowed Paul Green to leave for f**k all?  Clearly their not always right then!

[Wellred]

Filo wrote:

roversam wrote:

Whats wrong with him not rating Wilson, i dont either, along with about a dozen other mates/ rovers fans, it only seems to be a certain few on this forum who rate him.

And a management team that has masterminded our highest league position for over 50 years, so you and your dozen mates might just be a tad wrong eh?  

All about opinions eh?
Ask the ones who don't rate Woods and Martis eh

[Wellred]

Filo wrote:

roversam wrote:

Whats wrong with him not rating Wilson, i dont either, along with about a dozen other mates/ rovers fans, it only seems to be a certain few on this forum who rate him.

And a management team that has masterminded our highest league position for over 50 years, so you and your dozen mates might just be a tad wrong eh?  

All about opinions eh?
Ask the ones who don't rate Woods and Martis eh

[VikingJames]

Filo wrote:

roversam wrote:

Whats wrong with him not rating Wilson, i dont either, along with about a dozen other mates/ rovers fans, it only seems to be a certain few on this forum who rate him.

And a management team that has masterminded our highest league position for over 50 years, so you and your dozen mates might just be a tad wrong eh?  

If they rated him as highly as some on here do, then why has he been sat on the bench ever since Gillett walked through the door?

[DonnyNoel]

billywhitehurst wrote:

Mark Wilson is not good enough to play for a top half championship team.

That's funny - I'm sure he did for most of last season. And I'm pretty sure we had as good a record with him than without him.

(That said I am of the opinion that he will have to go some to surpass Gillett in the starting XI).

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Every club needs what I describe of squad players. Players who will not always be first on the teamsheet and perhaps for long periods have to be patient and wait their chance.

These players are reliable, loyal and generally know their place. How they are managed is very important as many footballers say the old 'I want first team football' and be off.

The strength with us is that we are fortunate to have players like Mark Wilson, Adam Lockwood etc. who have stuck with us without moaning and get on with it.

Replacing players like these on modest wages is quite difficult so, I'm happy their still here for now.

Time will tell whether the next generation, Josh Payne, Byron Webster will prove to be equally or more valuable to the squad.

[VikingJames]

DonnyBazR0ver wrote:

Every club needs what I describe of squad players. Players who will not always be first on the teamsheet and perhaps for long periods have to be patient and wait their chance.

These players are reliable, loyal and generally know their place. How they are managed is very important as many footballers say the old 'I want first team football' and be off.

The strength with us is that we are fortunate to have players like Mark Wilson, Adam Lockwood etc. who have stuck with us without moaning and get on with it.

Replacing players like these on modest wages is quite difficult so, I'm happy their still here for now.

Time will tell whether the next generation, Josh Payne, Byron Webster will prove to be equally or more valuable to the squad.

What you mean is, every squad has to have a few players who wouldn't get into any other teams at this level, so they either have to like it (a place on the bench at this level), or lump it and get first team football at a lower level.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Unless you are Paul Green who the club did not recognise his value to us.

Sam Hird is another 'utility' player who may not command a first team berth at this level and SOD recognises his value as he's trying to sort out a new contract.