Jump to content

danielsroundabout

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    391

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by danielsroundabout

  1. danielsroundabout
    Quite right JF and maybe if AN had addressed such an obvious weakness, he may well have avoided the sack.
  2. danielsroundabout
    Branston has not seen a poll of 35k supporters, the majority of whom would wish to see the back of Martin. Well you obviously will never get an opinion from that number of people. The nearest you are likely to get is this week''s response in the EDP to their question "Which 15 players would you keep next season?" Players like Pritchard and the Murphys had a percentage in the high 90''s. Martin was about 45% and not in the top 15. Scalewise, that''s as big a poll as you are likely to get and obviously gives the answer you were saying you had not seen.
  3. danielsroundabout
    He could have meant "no, Wagner is not coming" just like "no we are not having a snap general election."
  4. danielsroundabout
    Would that be the same international manager who selects Naismith and on occasion Whittaker? Guess I should re-evaluate Martin in that case, Lafferty also, he''s another top international.
  5. danielsroundabout
    Likewise Hoola, just hope we can have a different subject next season.
  6. danielsroundabout
    Apology totally accepted Hoola. I can understand you thinking I, and many like me are obsessed with highlighting Martin''s weaknesses whilst ignoring others but no other player has consistently "talked" their way into the team when their performances have not merited selection. Some have never rated him, my personal criticism stems from the time he was played at centre back as injury cover and then went on a publicity crusade, informing everybody that he was a central defender and that was his best position. Successive managers have bought into this idea and still he is there. Of course our defensive problems are not solely down to him but he is pretty much the only CD fixture in these past couple of seasons. He simply does not have the necessary attributes to play in that position and that is why I and many others keep harping on about him.
  7. danielsroundabout
    I too have a point Hogesar and mine applies to you more than anyone on here.
  8. danielsroundabout
    One day Hoolahan, you might come to realise (although probably not), that personally abusing anybody who holds a different view to yours, says far more about you than it says about those you attack. I am referring to the moron reference.
  9. danielsroundabout
    Why allow his clear deficiencies to be brushed under the carpet because we managed a win? He''ll be in front of the press ahead of Friday''s game, claiming credit for today''s victory.
  10. danielsroundabout
    DJC you''ve not mentioned his wild slice which could have gone anywhere and did. Landed on the roof of Ruddy''s goal. Captain Calamity at his best.
  11. danielsroundabout
    The OP''s question did not really need to be asked. Not on here. There is and has always been a contingent who are prepared to look straight past Martin''s unsuitability as a CB. Instead, they listen to his self-acclaim and his constant spouting to the media and absorb every word of it. I do not doubt the excellent work he does for worthy causes, his attendance at supporter evenings etc. but the fact remains that he is little short of a joke as a CB at this level. This is never better demonstrated than when we win a corner. Every time, he runs the length of the pitch to compete for a header. He never gets near winning one because he doesn''t compete in the air (in either penalty area). As a captain, he''s beaten before he starts because leading by example is just not his thing. Let''s just hope the new guy will not be swayed by his rhetoric in the way recent managers have.
  12. danielsroundabout
    Just to say to you Keelansgrandad, I hope all goes well for you on Monday. You''ll be in good hands, well the robot will and I am sure all will be well. I had a session with the same robot (same procedure) at the end of last year and the outcome has been really good. I''d be interested to hear if you have the same consultant as I had, what''s his surname begin with? Very best wishes.
  13. danielsroundabout
    Have to agree that Bennett was at fault for both goals today but he didn''t hog all the responsibility in either case. First goal, Martin was his usual, in the vicinity but not part of the action. For the second, Bennett ushered the ball back to McGovern, keeping Kodja well out of playing distance. Clearly could not believe the keeper was not there to take the ball and froze at that point instead of hoisting it to the stand. As poor as those two contributions were, I wish people wouldn''t say he made Martin look good, it''s hard to imagine anything that would succeed there.
  14. danielsroundabout
    Etc. in itself represents a pretty long list in your examples Horse R. but can we be sure they were the result of just one persons view? We''ve always had a Head of Recruitment which is part of the brief of the yet to be appointed Director of Football (or whatever). The relationship/chain of command between the two positions is interesting. In these clubs which are said to successfully have the two positions i.e. coach and director, does the coach actually report to the DoF or simply work with him? And who does the main board take action against if things go horribly wrong. I guess there will always be plenty of takers for a managers job in the Championship but the thought of not being your own man would certainly deter some of the stronger characters.
  15. danielsroundabout
    When you have a majority shareholding, I don''t think having board members in your pocket is too relevant. Were that the case, I think you could add Phillips to Balls and Tom. Whilst he was appointed as an Archant representative, he cut ties with them a year or two back to work for Delia setting up an online business I believe.
  16. danielsroundabout
    Am I understanding the structure correctly when I think that there is not a single executive director on it?
  17. danielsroundabout
    Yes Tim, we are entitled to our respective views but don''t you think it rather strange that so many on here concede that Hooper got it spot on when he is despised by just about all of us?
  18. danielsroundabout
    Yes Greavsy, I agree that there were add-ons other than the Dijks incident, I was just saying to the OP that actual hurt had been sustained and it was not a case of play-acting. Indeed, if it was the case, the player would have recovered pretty much as soon as Dijks was dismissed.
  19. danielsroundabout
    Tim, you talk of him sprinting off "seconds later". I seem to recall five minutes being added to the first half, most of which would have been down to that stoppage. I suppose you could convert that to seconds.
  20. danielsroundabout
    The OP and those supporting his view are quite clueless. Their opinion is based on one of two possible views of the incident. Either, they have seen it clearly, in which case there are no grounds whatsoever for questioning the red. Or, they have not been in a position to see it, in which case why come out with statement such as the thread title. These people must be the contingent within the ground who proceeded to boo the victim for the remainder of the game. The fact that Dijks, the other players and the acting manager all saw it the same way as Hooper doesn''t seem to register with some.
  21. danielsroundabout
    Murphy and the Bricks saw him (see page 1 of this thread). I was being facetious in making reference to Ricky''s illustrious playing career in the professional game, experience on which he can now draw in his positions of Technical Director and Head of Recruitment.
  22. danielsroundabout
    Murphy saw some fans giving Ricky a bit of stick when he arrived today. That''s hardly likely to unnerve him that much. In his playing days he would have endured that sort of thing from 40 or 50,000 opposition fans every other week.
  23. danielsroundabout
    Man who has been there, done it and got the T shirt, called in as a counsellor for Alex Neil.
  24. danielsroundabout
    I really do not know how pathetically some of our team have to play before the hopelessly deluded band of happy clappers are prepared to concede on the issue. Russell Martin stands out as the biggest disaster area for a number of reasons. Firstly, he is not a central defender, never has been and never will be. Also, given his playing shortcomings, he is hopelessly ill-equipped for the role of captain, his is not an example you want your team to follow. Those who are able to turn a blind eye to all his failings deflect attention from him by immediately attacking those who criticise. This thread is a perfect example of this behaviour. When the subject appeared, it was the credentials of the OP that immediately became the subject matter, not Captain Calamity. Another response from the Clappers is the accusation that his critics only surface after a poor performance. The fact is, his ability, in the central defender role is simply not good enough - ever. Yes, there will be the odd game when he will "get away with it," baled out by another defender or by his keeper (first 15 mins. v. Newcastle) or poor finishing by the opposition but don''t suggest that we have to wait for an opportune moment to raise the subject. It''s just that after playing such a part in all three of Sheffield Wednesday''s first half goals, I thought even the happiest Clapper might have noted the inherent weakness in his play.
  25. danielsroundabout
    Jerome is what he is, a wholehearted lone front man who puts himself about and unsettles defences. What you also get with him is a striker who will work a good number of clear chances. Unfortunately, only around 20% of these will be converted. Naismith also is what he is - a complete waste of space (and money).
×
×
  • Create New...