Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on January 04, 2014, 09:35:16 pm
-
He's tired and a bit disappointed at the defeat today, so he's had a little tantrum at bedtime.
But f**k me, he is less fraught and emotional than some of you so-called adults.
I've read over and over again that Dickov is shit, the Board is shit and we have been shit all season. I'm sick of hearing this mantra so I'm going to chuck some facts in, in the (probably vain) hope that one or two of you might read them and f**king well engage whatever you have for brains.
1) The Board is shit and not backing Dickov. FACTS: We won L1 last season. We kept all bar 1 of the key players from that squad and added Forrester, Duffy, Khumalo, Wellens, Robinson, Macheda, Wabara, Stevens and Turnbull. What more did people expect the Board to do in terms of backing the manager?
2) We've been shit all season, not making chances and crap at the back. FACTS: In the first 10 games this season, we played 8 sides who are currently 14th or higher. We picked up 12 points, scored 10 and conceded 12. Was that shit? Was our defence shit? We're we punch less going forward? If you answer "yes" to any of those, please explain what you consider to be an acceptable run of form.
3) FACT: As of today, SIX of the first 11 for most of that run are injured (seven if you include Brown who is nowhere near match fit) two have been recalled from loan and a tenth is hawking himself to the highest bidder.
Our entire first choice defence from earlier in the season is unavailable, as is our first choice central midfield partnership and our three first choice strikers.
Tell me exactly how we are supposed to cope with that, given that we have been unable to sign new players whilst this loss of players has been going on? We're we supposed to have another 8-9 Championship-standard players sat in reserve waiting to fill in as necessary? Eh?
We've lost today. We've played very, very poorly. It happens. But f**k me, the reaction if some of you lot! I'm embarrassed to be associated with some of the infantile tantrums going on here.
-
You seem to be as irate as anyone.
-
Pib
I'm always irate when I deal with bell ends.
-
Here here at last a bit off common sence
-
If you were that f**king 'zen' you wouldn't give a toss about getting all worked up about what folk on here were saying.
-
I think a lot of people do understand the point you have raised, BST. However, I will not make any excuses for a sheer lack of passion, work rate or desire to win a game, which was clearly evident today
-
Maybe we should change our club mascot to a sheep, as some on here expect everyone to act like sheep. After all the hard work of last season, and the high everyone was on after the Brentford game, it is not unusual to expect more from the team.
By the team, I mean the new Management team, the new players and especially the Board.
As it is we have a manager who will not accept he is wrong, we have players who have proved that when they want to, they can compete, but we have a shambles of set of owners and past Directors who have torn the heart out of Doncaster Rovers.
John Ryan for trying to bring in Sequentia behind the backs of Watson and Bramall, Bramall the going behind JR's back to try and get a better deal for himself, leading to the untimely demise of JR.
We still have Sequentia in the background wanting to buy the team, but the man with a clear vision for the future seems to be totally disinterested in talking to them. If, as looks likely at the moment we do go down, and lose the 6 million from the FL, the two owners will, I think, look to get rid to anyone who will have the team.
What we need now is for Dickov and HIS team of coaches to go and for Flynn and Jones to be asked on bended knees to take over. The present owners need to look at the possibility of a sale and make a decision which will be for the benefit of the club as well as for them.
We also need, and I am sorry to say this, we need a CEO who has the balls to point these things out to the owners. He is their representative, and as such he should be guiding them as to the running of the club.
I know many on here will disagree, but to that I say Baa, Baa.
-
Sorry, should read Bramall fFOR going not the going,.
-
BST, my thoughts entirely. I am sick and tired of reading posts on here and on fb made by people who are clearly not overly intellectual. Everything is Dickov's fault, if it isn't it is Bramalls for not spending £10m in the last 4 days. Get a grip of reality, we are a team who at the start of the season would be fighting for survival in the Championship, guess what, that appears to be the case. Today's result may have not been what we wanted, but it is amazing the difference of opinion of some posters since the QPR game where we went so close earning positive comments. If it was that easy to pick a winning team with limited resources and win games then we would be doing it. Football is about winning and losing, take it on the chin and move on.
-
Pib
Thanks. Not sure why you feel the need to raise that, but thanks anyway.
Colin C
Actually, I think a lot of people DON'T understand the points I raised. That is the reason I raised them. I've heard numerous complaints about the supposed "facts" that the Board hasn't supported the manager, the manager is out of his depth and that injuries "may have been a factor but..."
I appreciate that today was poor. I've just seen it. It was awful. Clubs do have awful performances, even when they have every player available. I saw one at the McCain in R1 of the cup in 2003 when we were in the middle of the best spell of league form in our entire history. It happens. It's the response I cannot fathom. The way in which ACTUAL facts are jettisoned and supposed "facts" dredged up to replace them.
It's a failing of mine that I get really pissed off when sentient beings park their critical faculties and give in to babbying. Which is what has been going on amongst a couple of dozen folk all season, and which now appears to have spread to ones who should know better.
So, here's my take. Given the size of our club and the crippling effect of injuries, I'd say that there have been perhaps 2-3 really, really substandard league performances. Against that, there have been several performances that were FAR better than we had a right to expect. Today's was a further very, very poor showing. But for peoe to conclude from the season to date that Dickov is incompetent and has to go is ludicrous.
Also, there is unequivocal evidence that the Board HAS supported Dickov every step of the way. And that with that support, he built a team that was looking like comfortable lower-mid table contenders. We've since had a devastating run of bad luck AT A TIME WHEN THE BOARD COULD DO NOTHING ABOUT IT! To complain about the Board in such circumstances is ludicrous.
Yet we have had weeks of complaints about the Board and now a melt-down over Dickov.
-
Wasn't anybody else concerned when we started the season with a Macaulay Culkin thin side?
Didn't anyone else think 'what happens if we get a CB injured?' or 'Who do we have at the club that can play LB again?'.
For me, we had it coming. Sure we bolstered - we've got midfielders coming out of our ears, but to think we could take a step up into a far more physically intense league with 4 defenders TOTAL on our books was frankly dim of PD.
Granted we've been unlucky with injuries but you make your own luck, some of the training or fitness techniques need looking at and the depth of our side needed looking at months ago - to think we could plug the gaps with Premiership kids has proven a fruitless endeavour.
At some point, either pre-season, or once the cracks started showing some investment (or some of the investment given) should have been assigned to bringing in experienced defensive cover!
You build from the back, sure we haven't been scoring goals of late, but thats because we've forced all of our midfield line back to help these inexperienced kids out, we've been shipping goals for fun - and this given our keepers been probably our best player - it could have been 6-0s without him!!!
A positive is that we got up... and we can allow the nature of our promotion to distract us from the fact we sighed our way over the finish line - but we absolutely haven't prepared for this season properly.
Who is to blame? Well, Paul Dickov of course.
Should we get rid of him? Absolutely not - its time for him to step up, get his reading glasses on and try to bolster properly this month and hopefully help us to 'manage' our way out of this defensive nightmare!
-
Excellent post BST
I would also add:
1) The Board is shit and not backing Dickov.
TB / DW will still be making up the 3-4m shortfall for the year. If they 'f**k off' as people are suggesting, who will cover that shortfall?
Also, SC's £10m. That will add what 2-3 decent championship players to the squad (taking both transfer fees and wages into account) does anyone seriously think that we are 2-3 players away from promotion to the premier league?
-
Pib
Thanks. Not sure why you feel the need to raise that, but thanks anyway.
You're welcome.
I raised it because you entered the thread criticising folk for being emotional, before going on a rant full of swear words and caps lock sentences.
-
Tokyo
Against my better judgement, I'm going to answer you.
Regarding our defence. Presumably you think we should have had an extra, what? 2-3 Championship standard defenders signed on at the start of the season? On what? 2 year contracts? At what? £4k per week? So that's an extra million quid committed. For reserve players. Agreed?
Or, alternatively, you can look to bring in loanees when injuries strike. Which is far more cost-effective. And which is precisely what we did.
What no club of our size can reasonably do is to plan for the loss of EVERY ONE of our first choice defence.
Or can we? Tell us how.
-
Pib
Thanks. Much appreciated.
-
Pib
Thanks. Much appreciated.
Pleasure.
-
Tokyo
Against my better judgement, I'm going to answer you.
Regarding our defence. Presumably you think we should have had an extra, what? 2-3 Championship standard defenders signed on at the start of the season? On what? 2 year contracts? At what? £4k per week? So that's an extra million quid committed. For reserve players. Agreed?
Or, alternatively, you can look to bring in loanees when injuries strike. Which is far more cost-effective. And which is precisely what we did.
What no club of our size can reasonably do is to plan for the loss of EVERY ONE of our first choice defence.
Or can we? Tell us how.
I am honoured you answered BST.
Thats exactly what i'd have asked, yes. Loanees are for the crisis situation - which we have hit, but you surely have to have a team-worthy back-up for every position at all times, and we didn't. We've been incredibly fortunate to have found a decent team-worthy youth in McCullough, we'd have been even more stumped without that stroke of luck.
Is it worth that extra million to keep us in the Championship? Well, i don't know the financial gains, but i'd presume so.
Football is all a game of financial risks, and we haven't even rolled the dice! Wether thats because PD didn't ask for that sort of investment or it just wasn't available is a different debate.
As i've said in another post, we've blagged ourselves onto the poker table with some very rich and experienced players with much bigger piles of chips than ours and we haven't even played a hand - we're just happy to enjoy sitting at the big boys table for once.
At least when we went down under 'The Experiment' we had a go and played a bluff!!! (turned out we we're holding a joker!)
-
Tokyo
He did try to bring in an experienced CB, Mvoto. Wabarra was touted as being able to cover left & right back.
It is reported that he spent the whole of the available budget, (infact it was extended to £7m to bring in extra loans, Yun & Stevens). Of the permanent transfers he brought in, Furman, Turnbull, Duffy, Forrester, Robinson, Wellens (brought in when De Val got injured so thats two wages), which two would you not have taken to recruit a CB & LB cover?
-
BST,
I go along with everything you said but what I find hard to accept is the poor communication from the board. We are going through a period where we need to know what they intend to do, it is a crisis and the knockers will highlight everything that is negative to bring the regime down. That is their intention.
-
I actually credit PD for his recruiting - he's brought in the clubs current best players... but he just didn't focus on the area that matters the most when you're facing a relegation battle - the defence!!
The Mvoto failing (for better or worse) - thats a PD criticism point then yeah?
We needed Turnbull.
We needed Robinson, and Wellens has changed everything.
Did we need Forrester, Duffy and De Val? They were certainly exciting signings and haven't proven too shoddy so far but would i lose Forrester and De Vals contributions this season for a few more clean sheets? Absolutely!!
-
How about these stats then? 2nd least amount of shots a game, 2nd least amount of goals, 2nd most amount of goals conceded in the league. Good enough? No however you look at it
-
Tokyo
Sorry, you dont get to loose De Val without loosing Wellens. If we didnt need De Val, then we didnt need Wellens who was brought in as cover when he got injured. We only had three central midfielders (Furman, Keegan, Wellens/De Val) so you are saying we should have gone with two?
-
And he spent the budget so easily... but still has names on the books that aren't ever going to be Rovers players again.
You sell Harper, Bennett and Paynter and you've got yourself the budget for a solid defender there!!
Nobody is perfect, and while our team was completely fit and ready PD got the plaudits for building a more than capable side, but unfortunately he didn't consider the longevity and depth of that side - and he deserves the criticism for it!!
-
Tokyo
At the start of the season, we had Quinn, Jones, McCombe (expected to be fit by October), Husband, McCullogh (convenient that you put his stepping up the mark to "luck"...) signed on. We added to them two premiership long-term loan signings.
So, the extra million quid that you would have spent would have gone on two defenders who would have been 8th and 9th choice defenders. Correct?
-
Were YOU going to buy Harper and Bennett? If not, maybe you could suggest who was?
-
Donnybax, have you read Billy's OP? Points 2 and 3? Do you dispute them or just ignore them?
-
Not even seen Harpers big bugger off car near the KMS recently at all, even if he wasn't playing it used to be there before the game (not always after the kick off though) :blink:
-
Sell Paynter and buy a defender, I can see that going down well!
-
I read them and got the opinion it was saying it wasn't as bad as it looks I'm saying it is ever since those first few games we've been awful
Regarding Bennett who gave him a new contract?
-
Your suggesting that with 500k each i couldn't find a better RB than Paul Quinn, and a better LB than James Husband?
Quinn wasn't good enough at League 1 level, never mind Championship, and Husband was relatively untested!
How can you argue that to have 1 registered RB and 1 LB wasn't ludicrous?
So no - i'd have spent it on 1st and 2nd choice full-backs.
-
Donnybax
Give me strength...
-
Top post BST.
-
Regarding Bennett who gave him a new contract?
That would have been Flynn.
-
Flogging these players off isn't my headache to have, thats why he's the manager!!!
We could have replaced Harper by doing an auction for his place in the squad - a 'be a footballer' experience, you get to train, go to the matches and sit in the dug-outs and park in a premium spot. Selling out a squad number could be a good cash generator.... oh wait...
]http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/aug/01/one-direction-louis-tomlinson-doncaster] (http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/aug/01/one-direction-louis-tomlinson-doncaster)
-
Your suggesting that with 500k each i couldn't find a better RB than Paul Quinn, and a better LB than James Husband?
Quinn wasn't good enough at League 1 level, never mind Championship, and Husband was relatively untested!
How can you argue that to have 1 registered RB and 1 LB wasn't ludicrous?
So no - i'd have spent it on 1st and 2nd choice full-backs.
This'll be the same Paul Quinn who was part of a League One winning defence will it?
-
Your suggesting that with 500k each i couldn't find a better RB than Paul Quinn, and a better LB than James Husband?
Quinn wasn't good enough at League 1 level, never mind Championship, and Husband was relatively untested!
How can you argue that to have 1 registered RB and 1 LB wasn't ludicrous?
So no - i'd have spent it on 1st and 2nd choice full-backs.
So you would have gone into the season with two central midfielders and Paynter and Brown as our only forwards - but with four fullbacks? I think its best I stop here.
-
Oh come on, don't flatter to deceive.
Ronnie Wallwork won a premier league winners title at Manchester United once. Remember him? No, neither does anybody else.
-
Regarding Bennett who gave him a new contract?
That would have been Flynn.
Regarding Bennett who gave him a new contract?
That would have been Flynn.
he must be really good in training or something all managers say how much potential he has yet nobody gets anything out of him. Can only remember starting 1 game for Flynn and 0 for dickov. Unless we only gave him a contract to sell him
-
Oh come on, don't flatter to deceive.
Ronnie Wallwork won a premier league winners title at Manchester United once. Remember him? No, neither does anybody else.
Ronnie Wallwork didn't play 30-odd times in a Manchester United title winning side.
-
Your suggesting that with 500k each i couldn't find a better RB than Paul Quinn, and a better LB than James Husband?
Quinn wasn't good enough at League 1 level, never mind Championship, and Husband was relatively untested!
How can you argue that to have 1 registered RB and 1 LB wasn't ludicrous?
So no - i'd have spent it on 1st and 2nd choice full-backs.
So you would have gone into the season with two central midfielders and Paynter and Brown as our only forwards - but with four fullbacks? I think its best I stop here.
An attack and midfield is a much more flexible area to play with in terms of formation and structure than a defence is. Its always terrifying when you start to see midfielders playing in defence - it takes a totally different kind of player!!!
So yeah, id sooner see us thin up front and be forced to play a front line with wingers flanking (Copps, Duffy, Forrester, Hell even Bennett could have a stab at these jobs) than literally not have any fit defenders ready to start big games - games we'd be pleased to take a point from - points that you take from keeping goals out of the onion bag!!!
-
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
It's a game and we are only happy if everyone has his or her say . 7 to 70 we are all just playing the game . Happy new-year
what about anyone over 70.
-
Regarding Bennett who gave him a new contract?
That would have been Flynn.
Regarding Bennett who gave him a new contract?
That would have been Flynn.
he must be really good in training or something all managers say how much potential he has yet nobody gets anything out of him. Can only remember starting 1 game for Flynn and 0 for dickov. Unless we only gave him a contract to sell him
That can't be the reason, cos we'd have gotten compensation from whoever signed him anyway with him being under 24. Plus he's shite so I don't know who'd want him.
-
Err, Sean O'Driscoll did!
I seem to remember quite a few people on here saying at the start of last season how he would soon be worth a million pounds and playing in the PL. Funny how his form dropped off after that isn't it.
-
Tokyo
So let's get this straight. You start off by complaining that no-one at the club thought what would happen if we get A (emphasis pib...) centre-half injured. Then when it's pointed out to you that we had four centre-backs on the books at the start of the season plus Paul Quinn able to stand in in extremis, you say that we should have invested in two full backs.
You ignore the fact that we brought in three additional full-backs during the first 3 months of the season.
You say that the Boarc should have spent extra money to bring in better players than a defence that was one of the best in the division for the first 10 matches.
You say that to make the money to do this we should have sold players that no-one wants to buy.
I should have listened to my better judgement. Now, off with you and wind up someone else because if this is the best you can do, you are boring me.
-
Don't you think, Billy, that this inability to construct a logical and factual argument is a sign of vast change in society? Those on here who can and do put forwards reasoned arguments are, I believe, in the main 40 +. Those who can't are, in the main, under 40. Now what does that tell us about the impact of change? Economic, political, technological and social change I might add.
If the utter tripe on here tonight is any evidence it's pretty scary isn't it? As I said t'other night, these people could be sitting on a jury near you one day soon.
BobG
-
Eeee back in my day lad, we had respect for us elders.... you see, during the war... :suicide:
You don't like being proven wrong do you darling?
Guess who's still here 'WUM'ming his opinions about months after upsetting the political masterclass that is the VSC Forum regulars! Oh please.
Every pub needs a moaning old albert i suppose.
-
Err, Sean O'Driscoll did!
He's on about the summer just gone wilts.
-
Tokyo
I'm at a loss to follow who you are talking to, or what you have "proven".
-
BobG, did you actually go to the game today?
-
That the defensive and recruitment failings fall on PDs head, that the budget wasnt used too effectively.
Sometimes people can disagree with your points, highlight a few of our weaknesses and argue whos to blame - its a football forum, it would be a barren and dull place to be if it didnt have people airing their complaints, moans and gripes.
So you've made your first ever positive post BST, and your playground goons might laugh at your condescending snipes, but theres no harm in disagreeing and my points have been clear as day.
Must be your old age that confused you Bob :whistle:
-
BST, I bet your 7 year old has got up this morning after his little tantrum last night, full of beans and optimism unlike some of the manic depressives on here
-
That the defensive and recruitment failings fall on PDs head, that the budget wasnt used too effectively.
Sometimes people can disagree with your points, highlight a few of our weaknesses and argue whos to blame - its a football forum, it would be a barren and dull place to be if it didnt have people airing their complaints, moans and gripes.
So you've made your first ever positive post BST, and your playground goons might laugh at your condescending snipes, but theres no harm in disagreeing and my points have been clear as day.
Must be your old age that confused you Bob :whistle:
So clear that none of us can recognise them you mean? Enlighten us, make them again please, for us (30 year) old gits
-
BST Top opening post
BobG .. Yes it is symptomatic but sadly more of 'defeatism' than lack of education.Society now has several generation layers that don't know about the courage and fight that brought the country from the jaw of defeat to victory.Not only does the fight seem to have gone but defeatism and negative non participative criticism is the order of the day for many .
-
He's tired and a bit disappointed at the defeat today, so he's had a little tantrum at bedtime.
But f*** me, he is less fraught and emotional than some of you so-called adults.
I've read over and over again that Dickov is shit, the Board is shit and we have been shit all season. I'm sick of hearing this mantra so I'm going to chuck some facts in, in the (probably vain) hope that one or two of you might read them and f***ing well engage whatever you have for brains.
1) The Board is shit and not backing Dickov. FACTS: We won L1 last season. We kept all bar 1 of the key players from that squad and added Forrester, Duffy, Khumalo, Wellens, Robinson, Macheda, Wabara, Stevens and Turnbull. What more did people expect the Board to do in terms of backing the manager?
2) We've been shit all season, not making chances and crap at the back. FACTS: In the first 10 games this season, we played 8 sides who are currently 14th or higher. We picked up 12 points, scored 10 and conceded 12. Was that shit? Was our defence shit? We're we punch less going forward? If you answer "yes" to any of those, please explain what you consider to be an acceptable run of form.
3) FACT: As of today, SIX of the first 11 for most of that run are injured (seven if you include Brown who is nowhere near match fit) two have been recalled from loan and a tenth is hawking himself to the highest bidder.
Our entire first choice defence from earlier in the season is unavailable, as is our first choice central midfield partnership and our three first choice strikers.
Tell me exactly how we are supposed to cope with that, given that we have been unable to sign new players whilst this loss of players has been going on? We're we supposed to have another 8-9 Championship-standard players sat in reserve waiting to fill in as necessary? Eh?
We've lost today. We've played very, very poorly. It happens. But f*** me, the reaction if some of you lot! I'm embarrassed to be associated with some of the infantile tantrums going on here.
BST. I agree with a lot of your points about the Board, the football we played earlier this season and the injury list. Until yesterday I've been happy to defend Dickov, but I can't any longer. Your seven year old could have come up with a more convincing tactical plan to beat a Stevenage side who, lest we forget, are bottom of League One.
The cold facts are these. Since we beat QPR our record is as follows: DLLLLDLL. Even allowing for the injuries, you can't begin to defend a record like that and it is worth pointing out that Millwall recently fired their manager after only three successive losses.
In any case, I think the injuries are a bit of a smokescreen. I'm much more concerned by the way we play. We operate at too slow a tempo, we play too narrow (even with two wingers in the side) and there is far too much reliance on hoofing the ball up to a lone striker. If they do practice defending and taking set-pieces in training then they obviously don't do them very well.
I think he's probably aware that he's in trouble because of his scathing attack on the players after the game. Not that they don't deserve it, but when a manager does this IN PUBLIC it is usually to switch attention away from his shortcomings. And anyway, haven't we heard it all before after Middlesbrough, Ipswich etc, when the performances were equally dire to that served up yesterday?
IMHO Dickov is fortunate to be working for owners who are not by nature trigger-happy because at nearly any other club he'd be down the road by now. The question for the owners is this- do they entrust any funds earmarked for January to a manager with the tactical awareness of a corner flag and questionable powers of motivation, or do they get rid and give someone else the opportunity to rescue us from what looks like almost certain relegation at the moment?
-
TRB
Certainly we played at far too slow a pace yesterday. I've supported Woods, but I thought he was dreadful yesterday. He demanded everything in midfield but then sucked any tempo out if every move. It was reminiscent of the very worst performances under O'Driscoll, where it was all about control and safety, with no-one taking a risk.
That said, I really do not believe that that is Dickov's policy. Prior to the injury apocalypse, we were extremely dynamic going forward. Quite the opposite. We were wonderfully up tempo in some of the early matches (Blackburn, Wigan, Huddersfield) and even as recently as last weekend against QPR we played at a superb pace. Dickov has shown a preference for the modern style of full-back who is more of an attacker than a defender (Wabara and Young for example, reminded me of poor-man's versions of Glenn Johnson and Kyle Walker).
And I simply can't buy the easy line that "injuries have had an influence but..." The injuries and loan recalls plus Wellens's situation are devastating. We have six guaranteed starters out injured, including the entire physical presence in the side (Jones, Husband, Keegan, Brown). The three first choice strikers and leading scorers are all out. The entire first choice defence from the (successful) start of the season is unavailable. The first choice central midfield pairing are both unavailable.
This season, finishing 21st was always going to be counted as a success. We have been lower than that just once. Given the current circumstances, it baffles me that you conclude that Divkov is lucky to still be in a job.
-
The Board had plenty of time to "do something about it", in putting together a squad with enough depth to compete at this level.
-
The Board had plenty of time to "do something about it", in putting together a squad with enough depth to compete at this level.
Well yes but even JR said at the start of the season that he thought we had put a squad together that was good enough to keep us in this league.
-
Stan me old spadger.
The evidence suggests that the Board and manager DID put a squad together that had enough depth to compete at this level.
What they didn't do was to put a squad together that had enough depth to compete at this level when almost all the first choice XI were missing.
Do you reckon they should have covered that possibility?
-
TRB
Certainly we played at far too slow a pace yesterday. I've supported Woods, but I thought he was dreadful yesterday. He demanded everything in midfield but then sucked any tempo out if every move. It was reminiscent of the very worst performances under O'Driscoll, where it was all about control and safety, with no-one taking a risk.
That said, I really do not believe that that is Dickov's policy. Prior to the injury apocalypse, we were extremely dynamic going forward. Quite the opposite. We were wonderfully up tempo in some of the early matches (Blackburn, Wigan, Huddersfield) and even as recently as last weekend against QPR we played at a superb pace. Dickov has shown a preference for the modern style of full-back who is more of an attacker than a defender (Wabara and Young for example, reminded me of poor-man's versions of Glenn Johnson and Kyle Walker).
And I simply can't buy the easy line that "injuries have had an influence but..." The injuries and loan recalls plus Wellens's situation are devastating. We have six guaranteed starters out injured, including the entire physical presence in the side (Jones, Husband, Keegan, Brown). The three first choice strikers and leading scorers are all out. The entire first choice defence from the (successful) start of the season is unavailable. The first choice central midfield pairing are both unavailable.
This season, finishing 21st was always going to be counted as a success. We have been lower than that just once. Given the current circumstances, it baffles me that you conclude that Divkov is lucky to still be in a job.
BST
You seem to be implying that due to the injury/ availability situation we were incapable of putting out a team that could compete with the bottom side in League One yesterday. I find that worrying, but when I consider again that the team we fielded included Turnbull, Quinn, Stevens, Furman, Duffy and Cotterill, plus a less than 100% fit Brown, I have to disagree with that analysis.
What did it for me was that after a first half in which our play was listless, to put it politely, there was no attempt by the manager to change personnel, tactics or formation. If anything, we were even more limp during the first ten minutes of the second. Then, after we'd gone behind, he finally made changes, though somehow he decided to leave Woods on the field. I've criticised SO'D, Saunders and Flynn in the past for waiting too long to change things, and in fact I was pleased when at Reading Dickov made an early change to address a serious problem. Yesterday cried out for a similar approach, but when it came it was too little, too late.
I accept that Dickov was let down badly by his players yesterday. Several of them carried on as though the game was a particularly low-key pre-season friendly. But you have to ask this: where was the fighting spirit that carried us through last season? Take that away and we were an average League One side. On yesterday's evidence, we were a bottom of the table League One side.
It makes me think that what some of those Oldham fans said about Dickov was right.
-
TRB
I'm implying nothing of the sort. I have already said that I thought yesterday's performance was dreadful. The circumstances do not make yesterday acceptable or excusable.
My issue is in drawing general conclusions from that particular match.
So yes, yesterday was awful and unacceptable. But I do not belief that, on balance, we have under performed in general this season.
Anyway, we agree about Woods yesterday, I too was stunned that he stayed on. That said, Furman seemed to have the red mist descending again, and it may well be that Dickov removed him to prevent him being f**king daft again.
-
Point taken on Furman. Although the booking he picked up was very soft, he'd been arguing with the ref throughout and I think the card was payback for that. At the risk of going off topic, I still don't understand why Dickov won't play De Val. Then again, I would play the groundsman's dog in centre mid ahead of Woods.
-
I
Stan me old spadger.
The evidence suggests that the Board and manager DID put a squad together that had enough depth to compete at this level.
What they didn't do was to put a squad together that had enough depth to compete at this level when almost all the first choice XI were missing.
Do you reckon they should have covered that possibility?
I'll keep this brief seeing as how others haven't.
Yes.
-
IStan me old spadger.
The evidence suggests that the Board and manager DID put a squad together that had enough depth to compete at this level.
What they didn't do was to put a squad together that had enough depth to compete at this level when almost all the first choice XI were missing.
Do you reckon they should have covered that possibility?
I'll keep this brief seeing as how others haven't.
Yes.
Your a doncaster rovers supporter not a man city supporter