Chapman Baxter

I don''t know, I haven''t seen it (not that that will stop most people forming a knee-jerk opinion). Adams seemed to think he had a good game other than that.

Agree with pretty much everything Forbes17 says, although I thought Etuhu did pretty well. Worst thing for me was Shackell''s distribution - astonishingly poor.

I''ve been waiting VERY patiently for Thorne to produce something to justify his place in the squad, but he just doesn''t seen capable of it. He may have been a good striker one day, but we can surely do better, even as back-up.

Why would it be interesting? Presumably she had another commitment. Any excuse for a dig. [S]

Comments from some Hibs fans I know.... however it''s more to do with the fact that he''s a silly boy when he is out on the town. Basically a little ned and trouble maker who will end up getting a severe hammering one day. He also managed his move to Celtic in a disastrous manner alienating him with the supporters of the club he left, and the one he was about to join almost simultaneously. Still I suppose you want someone with the potential to score you goals and not to do a lot of charitable work and appear on Mastermind ... so he''ll do the job.  DR is a very very talented boy, but as Middy states, a NED and in my phrase, a Knob Jockey, he has it all, pace, skill, Good with both feet, finishing but sadly his biggest attribute is his attitude, which basically stinks He''ll score you goals but comes with baggage, one hell of a player with the ability to be one of the best strikers in UK but needs to sort himself out first, maybe the wasted year at Celtic and a move down south, not London might do him the power of good [:|]

I''m sure you''ll bring out plenty of responses with that post. I agree to a certain extent that people to tend to focus on the negatives, and it''s true that we did keep a clean sheet and get the points. However, it''s more about looking at the future, and performances like that don''t bode well. I don''t think anyone could honestly say that we deserved to win the game, and a defeat wouldn''t have been a surprise. It was only Sunderland''s lack of quality that stopped them winning, rather than anything positive that we did. BUT, getting points out of games like this is invaluable, and Grant obviously needs time to sort out his best team and shape it with his own platers if he feels it''s necessary. Positives: All of the defence did well, especially Dublin. Much as I like the Doc, it''s nice to see that you can play centre-half without constantly wrapping your arms around attackers. Earnshaw did well to maintain his concentration enough to get in position to score and to finish, after what must have been an intensely frustrating first half for him. Etuhu had a good first half I thought. Negatives: Huckerby didn''t look fit - not sure why he wasn''t taken off towards the end, as he was clearly knackered. Midfield didn''t hold or pass the ball well, and the formation denied them any forward options. Two shots, one on target. At home. Anyway, that''s how I saw it all.

[quote user="winchmorehill canary"]he does despite some bad times have a good track record . [/quote] He is an awful, awful manager. I would be devastated if we appointed him. The same goes for Robson and Megson. http://www.soccerbase.com/managers2.sd?managerid=550 I think we are going to have to gamble on a young unproven manager rather than going for someone whose proven to be useless.

Do you think that people should have booed Henderson when he was being stretchered off, just to be consistent? Interesting argument.

We scored from a corner! What''s that all about then?! Is it worth putting Eagle in the team if he can actually put a corner in the box, unlike everyone else in the team?

Genius, let''s spend £1.5m on two bench players. Also, if you mean Zat Knight, he''s crap.

[quote user="UEA Canary"][quote]I''d prefer to to have sponsors of morally questionable status[/quote] I dont think its possible to find a corporation that dosnt have some bad moral implications, how else would they make money? [/quote] I''m sure there are a few out there that don''t exploit child labour, knowingly pollute, or advocate unfair business practice. Anyway, I''m not boycotting FlyBe, I''m just saying, like.

Given that we really only need it once a season, why don''t the lads just all bring a blue top from home in case there''s a clash. That''s what we do at the Powerleague.

What kind of a world are we living in where the majority prevail? Shocking.

I don''t think most people really care who the sponsor is as long as it''s a good source of income for the club, and doesn''t look too shabby on the kit. Personally I would add the proviso that I''d prefer to to have sponsors of morally questionable status. If I were to boycot Flybe, it would be because the proliferation of cheap air travel is having an extremely damaging effect on the environment.  

Agreed Rossi, given that none of us actually has any real influence over the decision about Worthington''s future, why not just make the best of a bad situation (if that''s how you perceive it), rather than harming the club by abusing the players. I would be happy to see him go personally, as I hate the style of football we play, but I''m humble enough to accept that as an individual supporter I don''t have any sway over the future of an institution which has been going for over a hundred years.