Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
JB

Reminds me of an unwanted cup game

Recommended Posts

We all hear and see how clubs of late treat cup games as a chance to put out a weakened team to preserve the better players for the more high profile games, and this is how it feels today. This game should never have been treated with such disregard. Burton are in the same league as us, and on merit, and we shouldn''t have seen this as a chance to effectively rest players, which is what seems to be the idea here.

Why should we treat Burton any differently to Millwall after all? This league is cutthroat, and this is surely a well known fact of The Championship. Should never have taken anything for granted in thinking we have a "super strength" squash with the capability of rotating as such.

I was there at the Brum game, and we were decent. To make those changes is wrong, one such a vast level at least. Please learn: NOT A CUP GAME, and THREE POINTS at stake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can’t understand why the Millwall game holds significance over this one. We’ve come off the back of 3 points against another of the bottom 3 teams, so another 3 points here would have extended the gap and built some momentum going into Monday. I can only conclude that after the toxic atmosphere of the last home game, they are targeting Millwall as a higher priority to avoid that scenario again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="JF"]I can’t understand why the Millwall game holds significance over this one. We’ve come off the back of 3 points against another of the bottom 3 teams, so another 3 points here would have extended the gap and built some momentum going into Monday. I can only conclude that after the toxic atmosphere of the last home game, they are targeting Millwall as a higher priority to avoid that scenario again.[/quote]The truth is that we are simply not good enough to be trying to pick which games we want to win. If Farke, Webber etc think you can do that just to stop a few protests should we lose to Millwall then we are really in trouble.Surely you pick you best team and go out with the intention of winning every game you can but clearly that didn''t happen today.We hoped we would win it instead of going out with the intention of winning it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After seeing the team announced I said the exact same thing to my son! I still can''t work out why he dropped six first choice players when only three can be used as sub''s. Three changes, with three first team as cover works for me but that team was unbelievable.

The performance also begs the same question, we were terrible and thank goodness Burton were also Shite! Must win on Monday for me otherwise it will prove to be a massive mistake. Surely a settled team winning two on the bounce would give us a better chance of a result on Monday!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]....if I was less cynical and didn’t know better I might think that there were elements of ‘this is what we look like without Maddison, Klose and Pritchard’ about it.....

Parma[/quote]Hmmmm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
‘...poor pitch, they play long ball, disruptive tactics, lots of games, technical players not suited...’...

..just before January transfer window though..rare momentum..6 changes after important win after 10 games without..investment issues...booing at home games...senior players ending contracts...uncertainty surrounding who is to be sold...others being ‘protected’ ahead of sale....

Not a classic scenario for stability on and off the field..so was that really the time for 6 changes? Did the Sporting Director have any input in such a dramatic decision? If so, what did he say and why?

Parma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the sporting director is having input on team selection then we''ve got proper issues.

The only possible reason for that would be we''ve got one lined up to be sold- Jerome or Wildschut seem the obvious ones but neither were dropped from the starting xi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...but equally King it would be foolish not to liaise pragmatically between Sporting Director and Head Coach regarding who is a key asset, who is to be sold, who must be protected from injury, who is a key part of the future, what the situation was like at the last home game....

....given such liaison is logical, necessary and advantageous, it must then stand to reason that protecting the philosophy, the model and even sending the occasional upwards message might be discussed. It need only be a passing consideration to have some influence...

Given that we must expect key assets to be sold - and this game appears to have rather disrespectfully been treated as a free hit - a line up of Gunn(loan), Pinto, Zimmerman, Hanley, Husband, Trybull, Reed (loan), Watkins, Vrancic, Hoolahan, Oliveira (no substitute) does look rather like a post-cuts type of side....(then less Oliveira and Hoolahan note). Perhaps this was an experiment/message/glimpse into the reality of the future (as well as all of Farke’s points being true (though perhaps unlikely to be the full picture).....

I genuinely find myself at a loss to explain the logic of the huge changes at such a juncture....just thinking out loud mind....

Parma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×