USA Canary 7 Posted September 13, 2005 Shackell off and Fleming stays on... Am I having a bad dream...if so, somebody please wake me up quickly... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USA Canary 7 Posted September 13, 2005 ... and also Brennan taken off at halftime...wouldn''t surprise me if this is so Worthy can justify replacing him with Huckerby for the next match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brum Uni Canary 0 Posted September 13, 2005 I can believe it. I was talking to someone earlier, who agreed that Davenport will mainly replace Shackell. Worthy loves Fleming too much, and he is captain which probably makes his position even safer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baldyboy 1 Posted September 13, 2005 as i have said on a previous post shackell has already asked for a transfer which was rejected is it any wonder with treatment like this? fleming should be man enough to admit he is useless and hang up his boots! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mark boughen 0 Posted September 13, 2005 Shackell off; so what.Did none of you guys notice his inept display against the big centre foward @ Stoke.He was outclassed by a donkey. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canarychick 0 Posted September 13, 2005 Absolutely agree. Why take Shacks off and leave Fleming on? Fleming was to blame for the first goal I believe??? Worthy WILL NOT sub Fleming Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
my_left_foot 0 Posted September 13, 2005 Why all the surprise? It appears that F-F-Fleming was caught out for pace for the first goal, by Marlon King, so isn''t it logical to replace Shackell with the faster, more mobile Davenport? Yes, this is the sort of madness we now have to put up with - it is clear that F-F-Fleming is Worthy''s adopted son. I swear that if Fleming stuck in a hat-trick of own goals it wouldn''t make any difference at all - he would probably replace Green! Mid-table mediocrity beckons at best (and that is being hopeful) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mark King 0 Posted September 13, 2005 Was I the only one listening to Radio Norfolk tonight? Fleming didn''t put a foot wrong from what I''ve heard (neither did Malky!)Worthy was quite right in bringing Davenport on for Shackell. It''s not that I don''t like Shackell, but when you''re trying out a new centre-half partnership, you want your most experienced man in there.I''m as disappointed as anyone about our start to the season, however I believe the trouble is with our midfield, not our defence. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AJ 1,359 Posted September 13, 2005 [quote]Absolutely agree. Why take Shacks off and leave Fleming on? Fleming was to blame for the first goal I believe??? Worthy WILL NOT sub Fleming[/quote] i wonder what they get up to behind the scenes on topic, i couldnt believe it, brennan who had played so well in our last few run of games, and shackell, who when flemming was at major fault, did ok out there. Flemming was to blame for the goal..... and hes ment to be the captain..... WAKE UP WORTHY!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smudge 0 Posted September 14, 2005 Yep, as Shackell was shocking in the first half and has been all season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dean Coneys boots 1,531 Posted September 14, 2005 Brennan had a stinker first half. Worthy was spot on on that one Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzathegreat 0 Posted September 14, 2005 with regards to the subs last night, fleming was at fault for the first goal and shackell for the second. It happened (sadly) right in front of us at our end and was plain to see - we were lucky they didn''t have morethe defence were shocking, particularly the first half hour, total lack of communication between all of them, including greeno, then arguing amongst themselves, it was clear someone would be going. The second half was better, and davenport looked assured and confident, but by then it was too late Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ealing Canary 0 Posted September 14, 2005 Worthy''s substitution of Brennan was spot on, he was running around like a headless chicken during the first half. How he could go from looking so good to look so bad in such a short space of time is beyond me.As for Shackell coming off, him and Drury did not gel at all, you would''ve thought that they''d never played together before.I must admit I nearly left at half time it was that bad and probably would''ve done had the shot that cannoned off the inside of the post gone in as well!That said the 2nd half was much, much better and the response from the fans was amazing. The 12th man almost did it again!However, I''m starting to wonder what the hell is going on behind the scenes, my faith in Worthy is the lowest that it''s ever been. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NavMan 0 Posted September 14, 2005 I heard the commentary on Radio Norfolk and listened to Neil Adams summary as well and from what i heard Fleming and Davenport both played a blinder in the second with Green not having a save to make and the runs of the quick front three just did not materialise. So seems to me that the correct substitution was made. Or should Watford have scored another two goals to justify the crusifiction of Fleming. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZLF 335 Posted September 14, 2005 [quote]with regards to the subs last night, fleming was at fault for the first goal and shackell for the second. It happened (sadly) right in front of us at our end and was plain to see - we were lucky they...[/quote] I can see flems fingers jabbing at shacks, colin and drur as you type! OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Smith 2,610 Posted September 14, 2005 As much as Worthington got wrong last night (Again!) he got the substitutions spot on. Flem was at fault for the first goal (along with Greeno who should have saved both of them!) but Shackell had a nightmare as he has done in my opinion for the last 3 or 4 games. The difference with Davenport at the back was massive and if last night is anything to go by he will be a very important players for us over the next 3 months. His presence also seemed to have a good effect on the rest of the defence.Brennan was abysmal in the first half and taking him off was also the correct decision. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whoareyou? 0 Posted September 14, 2005 Shackell still looks very raw to me at times. He still has a lot to learn and is only young so time is on his side. We have got to stop conceding goals like we are if we want to challenge for promotion.It amazes me tho that a defender of Worthy''s character who played a big part in a Leeds team that didnt concede much, finds it difficult to organise the defence. If we stop letting silly goals in we will win games cos we have players who will score. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted September 14, 2005 the Reason flemmo and Davenport "played a blinder" last night isa because they had nothing to do in the 2nd half. Watford are a decent team and were 2-0 up at half time... they knew we were chasign the game, needed 2 to draw and 3 to win, so they eased off and although they conceded a somehwat fortuitous goal knew that they werent in any danger of losing the game... sendinbg everyone up for a corner in the dying seconds is ok but what other saves did the watford keeper make during the game 0! and no disrespect to plymouth on saturday but the way we played a better side would of had us beat by half time jas Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
