Doherty Inspires No Confidence...

[Huddy 0]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? Yes, there was a blunder in the colchester game, but that happens, that asideour defence has been solid recently, was excellent last week.

Doherty i''m afriad is clumsy, and whenever he plays theree seems to be confusion, panic and disarray at the back.

I want Shacks back!

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="HUDDY "]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? [/quote]

because he''s been rubbish for quite a while now.. Gary Doherty is a better player....

jas :)

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="HUDDY "]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? Yes, there was a blunder in the colchester game, but that happens, that asideour defence has been solid recently, was excellent last week.

Doherty i''m afriad is clumsy, and whenever he plays theree seems to be confusion, panic and disarray at the back.

I want Shacks back!

[/quote]Pathetic."I haven''t seen it, but clearly it''s Doherty''s fault."I''ll say it again.Pathetic.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="HUDDY "]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? Yes, there was a blunder in the colchester game, but that happens, that asideour defence has been solid recently, was excellent last week.

Doherty i''m afriad is clumsy, and whenever he plays theree seems to be confusion, panic and disarray at the back.

I want Shacks back!

[/quote]A more rational response which will lead to the same answer:"Now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it."So if you don''t see it, and Doc plays his heart out and wins MotM, you will still not accept this fact."Why drop Shackall? Yes, there was a blunder in the colchester game, but

that happens, that asideour defence has been solid recently, was

excellent last week."Yet Shackell can make a bad, bad mistake - not his first this season - and it''s put down to "one of those things."I can only conclude you know nothing about football, and/or you are Jason''s mum.

[Ian 1,212]

Right, so Radio Norfolk are effectively saying Pearce has had a torrid time and was at fault for both goals, yet you still seem to think it''s Doherty''s fault?You blind Doherty haters are hilarious, putting Shackell''s blunder at Colchester down to "one of those things", yet blaming Doherty for two goals which aren''t his fault. The lack of balance or reason is simply astonishing.And sad.

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="HUDDY "]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? Yes, there was a blunder in the colchester game, but that happens, that asideour defence has been solid recently, was excellent last week.

Doherty i''m afriad is clumsy, and whenever he plays theree seems to be confusion, panic and disarray at the back.

I want Shacks back!

[/quote]

Pathetic.

"I haven''t seen it, but clearly it''s Doherty''s fault."

I''ll say it again.

Pathetic.

[/quote]

ive been misinterpretted there

I''m not saying the goals are directly his fault, but listen to point....

Whenever Doherty play in my opinion we look fragile at the back, we look more secure in my opinion without him. I dont see why you would change apoartnership that has been generally solid in recent weeks.

He might look solid himself, but he seems to affect others. For example, before pearce arrived, shackall played with both Dublin and Doherty, we lookd better and more secure with DD and Shackall, and Shackall himself looked far more comfortable.

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="I. Shurmer"]Right, so Radio Norfolk are effectively saying Pearce has had a torrid time and was at fault for both goals, yet you still seem to think it''s Doherty''s fault?

You blind Doherty haters are hilarious, putting Shackell''s blunder at Colchester down to "one of those things", yet blaming Doherty for two goals which aren''t his fault. The lack of balance or reason is simply astonishing.

And sad.
[/quote]

I''m not blaming him for the goals! I can accept he''s having a solid game. No-one is really underatanding my point.

When Doherty playsCollectively as a team we seem shakier at the back, even if doherty himself is solid!

He seems to have a bad affect on shackall, and Pearce according to radio norfolk is struggling.

I repeat, please someone understand....

I am not without seeing the goals claiming they are dohertys fault

i am not without seeing the game claiming doherty is having a nightmare (though my comment about him probably not being man of the match was a bit stupid i admit)

I am claiming that as a team we seem shakier when he plays!

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="HUDDY "][quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="HUDDY "]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? Yes, there was a blunder in the colchester game, but that happens, that asideour defence has been solid recently, was excellent last week.

Doherty i''m afriad is clumsy, and whenever he plays theree seems to be confusion, panic and disarray at the back.

I want Shacks back!

[/quote]

Pathetic.

"I haven''t seen it, but clearly it''s Doherty''s fault."

I''ll say it again.

Pathetic.

[/quote]

ive been misinterpretted there

I''m not saying the goals are directly his fault, but listen to point....

Whenever Doherty play in my opinion we look fragile at the back, we look more secure in my opinion without him. I dont see why you would change apoartnership that has been generally solid in recent weeks.

He might look solid himself, but he seems to affect others. For example, before pearce arrived, shackall played with both Dublin and Doherty, we lookd better and more secure with DD and Shackall, and Shackall himself looked far more comfortable.

[/quote]

and as u say this Doherty just gets Bertrand out of trouble by tackling Haynes fvor a croner

jas :)

[Nuff Said 5,965]

[quote user="HUDDY "]

ive been misinterpretted there

I''m not saying the goals are directly his fault, but listen to point....

Whenever Doherty play in my opinion we look fragile at the back, we look more secure in my opinion without him. I dont see why you would change apoartnership that has been generally solid in recent weeks.

He might look solid himself, but he seems to affect others. For example, before pearce arrived, shackall played with both Dublin and Doherty, we lookd better and more secure with DD and Shackall, and Shackall himself looked far more comfortable.

[/quote]I think you''ll find (I love saying that, it''s so pompous!) the stats show that we''ve conceded less this season when the Doc has been playing.

[GJP 79]

Of the 3 centrebacks at the club (Doherty, Pearce and Shackell) Doherty is the one who worries me least.

[canarychris 0]

13 game unbeaten run with Doc at centre half, now lay off!!!

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="HUDDY "][quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="HUDDY "]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? Yes, there was a blunder in the colchester game, but that happens, that asideour defence has been solid recently, was excellent last week.

Doherty i''m afriad is clumsy, and whenever he plays theree seems to be confusion, panic and disarray at the back.

I want Shacks back!

[/quote]

Pathetic.

"I haven''t seen it, but clearly it''s Doherty''s fault."

I''ll say it again.

Pathetic.

[/quote]

ive been misinterpretted there

I''m not saying the goals are directly his fault, but listen to point....

Whenever Doherty play in my opinion we look fragile at the back, we look more secure in my opinion without him. I dont see why you would change apoartnership that has been generally solid in recent weeks.

He might look solid himself, but he seems to affect others. For example, before pearce arrived, shackall played with both Dublin and Doherty, we lookd better and more secure with DD and Shackall, and Shackall himself looked far more comfortable.

[/quote]

and as u say this Doherty just gets Bertrand out of trouble by tackling Haynes fvor a croner

jas :)

[/quote]

I could be annoying here, and say that is his job, but i wont or criticize him for "half clear" ing, but i wont!

I will repeat, im not criticizing him individually as such, just his affect on the team. We look shakier!

[Syteanric 1]

Docs just saved us again there! I havent heard Pearce mentioned all game apart from him sticking it in his own net!

jas :)

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="canarychris"]13 game unbeaten run with Doc at centre half, now lay off!!![/quote]

I think you''ll find that in that 13 game unbeaten run, both Shackall and Doherty played 12 times each.

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

Docs just saved us again there! I havent heard Pearce mentioned all game apart from him sticking it in his own net!

jas :)

[/quote]

or you could say doherty just blundered and let Haynes clean through. A simarly bad error to shackalls v coventry.

I am just giving a fair picture, if you are going to highlight every good moment.

[Dicky 0]

How dare anyone defend the Doc, when they know full well that he is at fault for everything. Just like Hooz was before, and Flemmo before that....  Get with it, will you?

[Mister Chops 7]

So Huddy, your argument basically boils down to:If Doherty plays badly, it''s his faultIf Shackell plays badly alongside Doherty, it''s partly Doherty''s faultIf Pearce plays badly alongside Doherty, it''s partly Doherty''s faultIf Shackell/Pearce play badly and Doc doesn''t play, it''s "one of those things".Correct?

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]So Huddy, your argument basically boils down to:

If Doherty plays badly, it''s his fault
If Shackell plays badly alongside Doherty, it''s partly Doherty''s fault
If Pearce plays badly alongside Doherty, it''s partly Doherty''s fault
If Shackell/Pearce play badly and Doc doesn''t play, it''s "one of those things".

Correct?

[/quote]

Not exactly.

But is does seem strange that, in my opinion we seem shaky when Doherty plays, and Shackall looks alot better without doherty. Then today, we change a solid defence and look shaky again, Doherty''s came back and pearce was poor. That could easily be a coincidence, but i believe we look more confident at the back without Doherty.

[ricky knight 0]

I listened on five live extra, they must be blind because it was Doc putting in the tackles, his name wa the most mentioned. Maybe you should look at the midfield which was completely over run, exposing the back four. If the midfield loses in a game the team usually lose also.

[Ivan Easter 0]

Sorry I have never been a fan of Doherty,should have gone a long time agao. Shackell is a better prospect.

[Graham Humphrey 13]

I think Doherty has been our best defender this season but Roeder definitely shouldn''t have changed it after a couple of very good performances. The last time he did that the wheels well and truly came off after 13 games unbeaten. Lesson learnt? Clearly not.

[Ivana_rubyatitz 6]

[quote user="ricky knight"]I listened on five live extra, they must be blind because it was Doc putting in the tackles, his name wa the most mentioned. Maybe you should look at the midfield which was completely over run, exposing the back four. [/quote]

Agree 100% Ricky, we never sounded like we were able to retain possession and as a result the ball kept coming back at us with no respite from the pressure.  I also watched the goals on Sky and Doc was not the one at fault but then the facts seldom stand in the way of his detractors unfortunately.

[Branston Pickle 4,150]

[quote user="ricky knight"]I listened on five live extra, they must be blind because it was Doc putting in the tackles, his name wa the most mentioned. Maybe you should look at the midfield which was completely over run, exposing the back four. If the midfield loses in a game the team usually lose also.[/quote]

Has to be said that the side picked today was a little strange, but then we''d have been laughing had it all worked out - it was an attacking formation, but surely rather naive given we were playing one of the best home sides in the division.  

For me the correct defence was chosen - as far as I''m concerned Shacks has been pretty poor recently and it was fortune as much as anything that we kept a clean sheet against Burnley. 

In this instance it was the midfield that was strangest choice.   That area is one of the Binner''s strengths and there were very good reasons for possibly flooding m/f and playing 4-5-1, but certainly not good reasons for starting with only 2 proper m/f''s! IMO at the very least Croft or Gibbs should have started for Cureton.

 

[First Wizard 0]

Subscribe to Canaries World, then watch all the match highlights from this season''s games featuring Donkerty, in fact, re-run them several times.

Then make a long, long list, of how many times this bumbling so called defender gets pulled out of position, ball watches and gives away needless freekicks which lead to us conceeding goals.

Its an education and an eye opener!.[:|]

[Mr.Carrow 394]

I`d just like to add that if Doherty really is our best central defender it goes a long way to explaining why we have had such a terrible season......

[Buncey 1]

Doc''s not good enough, but then again the rest of the team aren''t either. I hope for two new centre backs next season.

[NCFC_Shaun 0]

the doc wasnt brilliant, but he was far from the worse player.

Pearce was an absolute shambles at the back. I''ve never noticed how slow he is. shefki kuqi had him for pace every time. far to much space through the back line. it was easy for them to get through. All though he showed he had a ice finish on him, howe he managed to do that I dont know...

I didnt notice cureton once apart from one air shot and he played the full 90 minutes.

Bertrand started off well, but second half was a different story...

Otsemobor had a good game, one of the few reasons we didnt lose by more. As did Evans (good goal aswell), and russell worked hard in the middle.

Pattison had a decent game, and Huckerby wasn''t terrible, but didn''t do much.

When Croft came on he looked like the only way we were gonna get something out of the game, until he got injured.

Mo Camara didn''t have enough time to be any good or any bad. All though Gibbs who only played a few minutes I was impressed with how he was really battling to win the ball in the air to try and regain possesion and hope we can nick something from the game.

And Dublin was the same as huckerby. Not bad, but nothing special...

[arrdee 2]

[quote user="HUDDY "]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]So Huddy, your argument basically boils down to:

If Doherty plays badly, it''s his fault
If Shackell plays badly alongside Doherty, it''s partly Doherty''s fault
If Pearce plays badly alongside Doherty, it''s partly Doherty''s fault
If Shackell/Pearce play badly and Doc doesn''t play, it''s "one of those things".

Correct?

[/quote]

Not exactly.

But is does seem strange that, in my opinion we seem shaky when Doherty plays, and Shackall looks alot better without doherty. Then today, we change a solid defence and look shaky again, Doherty''s came back and pearce was poor. That could easily be a coincidence, but i believe we look more confident at the back without Doherty.

[/quote]

Now Matt you lovely old boy , you have been spending too long in the Lifeboat Inn .

[ellis206 0]

Why anyone would chose Shackell over Doherty is beyond me, the Doc has been an absolute rock this season, and i`ll think you`ll find that Shackell has been at fault for a hell of a lot more goals this season than the Doc has, Shackell is a total liability! before the game at Burnley, I think Shackell was at fault for us conceeding in the previous 5 or 6 games, Admittedly the Doc has a bad season last year, but this season he has been an absolute rock, and i`m hoping to see a defensive partnership of Doc and Taylor next year, with Shackell being sold to Lowestoft Town or someone!

[Boyo 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="HUDDY "]

...Now, i dont think Dohertys presence in the side today is the sole reason for us being overrun but it realy hasnt helped. You can rue fotheringhams abscence, call it a bad day at the office or question cureton on the right wing. But Doherty at hte back is a major problem, now i havent seen the game obvisously, i might be told later he was man of the match, but i do doubt it. Why drop Shackall? [/quote]

because he''s been rubbish for quite a while now.. Gary Doherty is a better player....

jas :)

[/quote]

Jas, were you at the game because Doherty had a shocker!