Guest Posted December 27, 2016 Apart from the team at the top of the Championship table.And if you don''t believe me, look on the Seagulls offical website. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted December 27, 2016 Why aren''t we Brighton? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray 111 Posted December 27, 2016 We were once Morty, well we had their manager anyway! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Move Klose 303 Posted December 27, 2016 Why aren''t we Brighton? Well let''s face it we would all rather be in there position than ours. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,023 Posted December 27, 2016 Why aren''t we Norwich, you know the Norwich that more often than not play decent football and have recently done OK in the Championship....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 3,297 Posted December 27, 2016 Why aren''t we being sold, why aren''t they sacking AN and why do they clap a shite performance? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shaunieboy77 73 Posted December 27, 2016 What happened to the Sweeper ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Making Plans 936 Posted December 27, 2016 [quote user="morty"]Why aren''t we Brighton?[/quote]Simply because we''ve chucked it all away through poor decision after poor decision.Only 12 months ago we were what Brighton were, and still are, aspiring to be but we have consistantly failed to make the right decisions at the right time.While other Clubs act we dither - transfer windows, board appointments, manager sackings, tactics and even substitutions - we are being left behind and we will probably never catch up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted December 27, 2016 It''s always possible we could be Brighton if we hadn''t sacked the manger they now have. It''s a funny old game... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 3,297 Posted December 27, 2016 That''s way off Nutty, only if our owner would sell, new owner injected 80 million cash and our happy fans were prepared to move to a new 30k stadium, then we might be like Brighton!Sorry but that club is bigger than we are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted December 27, 2016 Managers don''t matter then Indy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 3,297 Posted December 27, 2016 Not when you compare to a club! They don''t! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Move Klose 303 Posted December 27, 2016 "Bloom’s exact wealth is unknown but he has already invested approximately £200m in Brighton" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted December 27, 2016 [quote user="nutty nigel"]Managers don''t matter then Indy.[/quote]Not one who refuses to see what might be achievable if he changed his tactics.I find it incredible that a team who chooses to play with two up front has conceded 23 goals less than us.No, it isn''t incredible, it is making the best use of the players they have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted December 27, 2016 [quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"]Managers don''t matter then Indy.[/quote]Not one who refuses to see what might be achievable if he changed his tactics.I find it incredible that a team who chooses to play with two up front has conceded 23 goals less than us.No, it isn''t incredible, it is making the best use of the players they have.[/quote]But we had him first Pops. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted December 27, 2016 [quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"]Managers don''t matter then Indy.[/quote]Not one who refuses to see what might be achievable if he changed his tactics.I find it incredible that a team who chooses to play with two up front has conceded 23 goals less than us.No, it isn''t incredible, it is making the best use of the players they have.[/quote]But we had him first Pops.[/quote]Do I detect a hint of pathos there Double N? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted December 27, 2016 [quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"]Managers don''t matter then Indy.[/quote]Not one who refuses to see what might be achievable if he changed his tactics.I find it incredible that a team who chooses to play with two up front has conceded 23 goals less than us.No, it isn''t incredible, it is making the best use of the players they have.[/quote]But we had him first Pops.[/quote]Do I detect a hint of pathos there Double N?[/quote]Seems I''m having trouble with some little words now. I thought pathos was the newsreel of our ''59 cup run....Anyway, it''s just a case of what I said a couple of posts back. It''s a funny ol'' game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted December 27, 2016 [quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"]Managers don''t matter then Indy.[/quote]Not one who refuses to see what might be achievable if he changed his tactics.I find it incredible that a team who chooses to play with two up front has conceded 23 goals less than us.No, it isn''t incredible, it is making the best use of the players they have.[/quote]But we had him first Pops.[/quote]Do I detect a hint of pathos there Double N?[/quote]Seems I''m having trouble with some little words now. I thought pathos was the newsreel of our ''59 cup run....Anyway, it''s just a case of what I said a couple of posts back. It''s a funny ol'' game.[/quote]Of course 59 was pathos. We played brilliantly but terrybly! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheManWhoSoldDerveld 0 Posted December 27, 2016 In light of Brighton''s success we should probably reappraise Hughton''s time in charge. It appears he was only playing that dire, 10 men behind the ball, no attacking movement philosophy as a means of covering for our defence/dm/goalkeeper''s catastrophic errors, something that our subsequent managers have also been struggling with.On the other hand Hughton was the one who brought in the majority of those players in the first place so swings and roundabouts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AJ 1,218 Posted December 28, 2016 Leicester didn''t play 4-4-fookin-2 last year either Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted December 28, 2016 [quote user="AJ"]Leicester didn''t play 4-4-fookin-2 last year either[/quote]I think you are mistaken there. I thought it was acknowledged they did but the jury was out to see if it worked this season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,528 Posted December 28, 2016 442 has so many variations though. These old classifications are pretty much irrelevant now. The new "systems" have fluidity. The same system can be 433, 424, 451, 4231.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted December 28, 2016 [quote user="nutty nigel"]442 has so many variations though. These old classifications are pretty much irrelevant now. The new "systems" have fluidity. The same system can be 433, 424, 451, 4231....[/quote]But if you start with two out and out strikers, one of them isn''t going to have to come off, particularly after scoring, because he has done the work of two.Why can''t the bloke just flippin try it!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AJ 1,218 Posted December 28, 2016 My comment was in jest Keelansgrandad. Any side should field a team that plays to their strengths, not necessarily to stop the opposition. That''s the issue with our tactics, it''s so based around being defensive once we conceded we''re fooked! Obviously this year is a little different as we''re supposedly a stronger force, but the tactics didn''t work last year and they aren''t that great this year either... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted December 28, 2016 [quote user="AJ"]My comment was in jest Keelansgrandad. Any side should field a team that plays to their strengths, not necessarily to stop the opposition. That''s the issue with our tactics, it''s so based around being defensive once we conceded we''re fooked! Obviously this year is a little different as we''re supposedly a stronger force, but the tactics didn''t work last year and they aren''t that great this year either...[/quote]Apologies my friend. pathos not jesting is more my speciality. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr Apples 1,320 Posted December 28, 2016 We could always try the Tom Cavendish formation from a while back...was it 4-4-3 or 5-3-3?Apples Share this post Link to post Share on other sites