Parallel universes

[Beauseant 0]

Even by this forum''s standards last night was a bumper session for the pot stirrers and terminally delusional. In the game I watched we played some great passing football until our playmaker was crocked, closely followed by our most experienced defender. For good measure, we also lost our more experienced centre back shortly after the break, so losing the chance of making even one tactical substitution, while the opposition had the luxury of three. Despite all this, and some pretty unhelpful officiating, we dug in against a side that everyone on here has been talking up and were beaten by one of the best free kicks you''ll see in this division this season and a harsh penalty. At no point did our heads go down, despite having three teenagers in midfield, and we continued to battle to the end.To a neutral  a comparison with the Colchester game would have looked like two completely different teams. Yes, we ended up having to go long on occasions simply to give the defence a breather, but we also continued to try to pass the ball.

However, I now find that in a parallel universe we were playing hoofball all game and our keeper should have saved the free kick, while Grant Holt, who in my world worked his nuts off, should have had a penalty and never gave the centre backs a moment''s rest was, in this other reality, a worthless donkey.Weird.

There has also been much hand wringing about how far off the top we are. Let''s just address that rationally for a moment.Due to our board''s failings we changed manager (quite rightly) after one game. The new man had to work with the existing squad, which was disorganised (to say the least!) defensively and lacking confidence.No time or money was available to make any signings of his own and there were obviously undercurrents in the dressing room following Gunn''s sacking. Despite that, four League games later we look motivated, much tighter at the back and appear to have the semblance of a pattern of play, something unheard of under Gunn. Nevertheless, we have a number of highly inexperienced players, a problem with the second striker, a loanee in goal and issues in most of the defensive positions. Oh, and now our playmaker is injured. Wake up people, winning the league is not realistic, nor, probably, automatic promotion, although there is a long way to go. That is not a realistic yardstick to judge Lambert by,although it does reflect the blind "we are a big club" rhetoric that gets trotted out on here so often. The reality is that we are a hard up third tier club which is at risk of administration and has been too nice for it''s own good, but which is rather belately finding some balls. McNally has been like a breath of fresh air and Lambert and Culverhouse are making things happen, but they won''t get there overnight. Smudger is right to say that the board should back Lambert, and so should we, by showing a little patience and being realistic. The playoffs are not the ideal way to go up, but they are a way, and one which is quite realistic for us. The world won''t end if we don''t get one of the automatic spots, and by the end of the season we should be much stronger, as long as Lambert is backed in January.

For the first time in some time I have real hope that we are starting to bounce back, but setting realistic goals is important both for Lambert and for us as fans.

[macdougalls perm 0]

Very well said Mr B - a bit of rational perspective is always welcome in this nuthouse [:)]

[Scooby 0]

Be careful Beau.  Too much sanity and a dose of reality thrown in for good measure will not go down well with some on here.  You little Percy Positive you[;)]

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Scooby"]Be careful Beau.  Too much sanity and a dose of reality thrown in for good measure will not go down well with some on here.  You little Percy Positive you[;)][/quote]

 

Baaah![:D]

[ron obvious 1,505]

Excellent post Mr. B, as always.Did you think fitness had anything to do with the performance? It just struck me that the early pressure seemed to tail off, even before the (unfortunately crucial) subs. Or could this be a problem with having too many youngsters in, who can''t pace themselves / get into positions where they don''t have to exhaust themselves? It seems to me that Grant Holt isn''t the fittest player, but he knows when & where to make his contribution most effectively.

[Paul Lamberts Disciple 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"]For the first time in some time I have real hope that we are starting to bounce back, but setting realistic goals is important both for Lambert and for us as fans.[/quote]The hand-wringing you talk of is fuelled by the well-founded belief that we hover close to financial ruin, and automatic promotion is the the only solution, the only way of containing that dread. The play offs simply won''t do. Leeds have tried and failed twice already. The chances of our thin and inexperienced squad enduring that many tough, late season games, let alone to emerge victorious, are virtually zero. The painful reality is that if we miss out on the automatic spots, we are likely the left in League One for another year with dwindling attendances and an Academy-only squad. The fact that we as fans know all this means our goals are entirely realistic, Beau. Infact, given the catastrophic outcomes associated with failure, goals do not get much more "realistic".

[Andy Larkin 15]

Bah… you know nothing Beauseant!Sack Lambert, sack McNally, sack Beauseant… grrrr!This forum has no place for your sensibleness… we should be 87 points clear by now and get promoted directly to The Prem as a result of our brilliance.We get 29,000 at every game you know, that makes us an automatic Premiership outfit!Ah, I can''t continue… I just don''t have it in me to over-react!Great post![:)]

[Dion Dublin=Legend 0]

My dear Beausant,

You are utterly wasted on this board. Someone give this man a column.

[Pete Raven 276]

[quote user="Dion Dublin Legend"]

Someone give this man a column.

[/quote]

I agree...

Longball - wibble.

[Dion Dublin=Legend 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"][quote user="Dion Dublin Legend"]

Someone give this man a column.

[/quote]

I agree...

Longball - wibble.

[/quote]

Couldn''t be any worse than the new MITS Pete.

[Ivana_rubyatitz 6]

Lot of sense here. 

We were good for the first 20 mins until we lost Hughes but that simply exposed the lack of depth on the bench last night and that our youngsters (whilst deserving of a chance) are not yet good enough to rely on in such large numbers at the same time.  In the second half especially the lack of a midfield protection left us very stretched and unable to gain a respite because we could not string passes together - oh what we would have given for Crook and Townsend in their prime.  We need an experienced old pro in the middle in situations like that to slow things down and it was disappointing McVeigh did not do more.  To also lose to experienced defenders was the sort of luck only City seem to generate.

Holt was excellent throughout and the defence was solid for the most part - Askou was also excellent.  Neither goal came from open play and defensively we can take some positives from the game.

I still think the free kick was good, but it was not Beckham standard as it was a foot in from the post.  Forster could have positioned himself better but otherwise he had a good game and seems to command confidence in those in front of him.

Automatic promotion was always unlikely and I agree a steady and gradual improvement is emerging (which will inevitably suffer the odd blip).  We need to be in the playoff shout come January and then the Board must back Lambert  to push on.  I feel more hopeful we can achieve with him in charge than ever I did with Gunny.

[Tim Allman 1]

Hooray for Beauseant! Some sense at last. Watched the game at home on TV, did a quick look at the message board and saw that the post match hanging crew were out in force again. Departed a couple of minutes later with my opinion reinforced that at least 90% of those who post on this message board have zero grey matter between the ears.

To the other 10% -  keep up the good work.

 

[The Butler 0]

Beau you saved me typing the same thing (almost)

Watched a game that I was proud of my team in. Realism that it is 3rd Division BUT we played well until hit man Chadwick did his bit for the cause!!

How come he was always injured here yet managed to crock our main playmaker and stay until subbed!

Had we not been playing 13 at a time we could well have come away with a decent result.

Of course that would not have suited a lot of "fans" that post on this board.

There seems to be nothing between euphoria and depression for some.

[Graham Humphrey 13]

Great post Mr B, agreed [Y]

[Pete Raven 276]

[quote user="Dion Dublin Legend"][quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"][quote user="Dion Dublin Legend"]

Someone give this man a column.

[/quote]

I agree...

Longball - wibble.

[/quote]

Couldn''t be any worse than the new MITS Pete.

[/quote]

Oh you mean a column to write in.

Apologies Beau, love you really! And seriously, a spot-on post.

[First Wizard 0]

Oi! Stop being logical, calm and sensible Beauseant, this is the Pink Un........we can''t have that pal![;)]

[Forces2Canaries 0]

I do wonder whether some supporters level of acceptance has been diluted over the years, and whether some are just ready to accept some of the dross that is served up.

Yes, we had a problem with injuries last night. But to use the substitutions as the failings for last nights result in unbelievable.

At the end of the day, the three players who came on are all professionals and should be able to fit in without any problems - it is not like Lambert had handed a set of boots to someone in the stands and told him to get on without.

With Hughes''s injury came about the demise of our playing ability last night. Holt was well off the pace, and failed miserably to put very little pressure on a very weak MK Dons defence.

The midfield after the changes looked like rabbits caught in the headlights, and when Lappin filled in for Drury he looked like a fish out of water.

Our heads dropped, we didn''t push up and we didn''t close the opposition down quick enough, allowing them far too much time on the ball. Yes, we had to rely on a number of youngsters, but the one thing they should give us is pace, and that was sadly lacking!

Our passing was rubbish, with some many balls going astray, we reverted to the long ball and head tennis.

God forbid when Charlton, Leeds and Huddersfield come a knocking!

[Mr.Carrow 376]

Great post Beau.  Couldn`t watch it as was coming back from Germany but managed to catch most of it on R.Norfolk- sounded as though we were easily the better team until the injuries threw us.  Three key injuries, conceding a wonder freekick and a dodgy pen.in one game- that is pure bad luck.

My main concern is that we may well have seen a different result had some of our more senior reserve players been on the bench- are players being frozen out because Lambert has been told he has to cut the wage bill....??

[blahblahblah 2]

When McNally was talking to Lambert before the Norwich Colchester game, Lambert mentioned that we have a huge squad for this league.  You can get away with 30 players in the championship.  Possibly he wants to slim the numbers down to enable him to bring a couple of quality players in ?  Either way, not playing Hoolihan and not moving him on makes no sense at all.

[nutty nigel 7,539]

I doubt we would have seen a different result whoever was on the bench Mr Carrow. Hoolahan may well have been a better replacement for Hughes than McVeigh but if he had been effective they would have crocked him too. As much as I think Doherty is better than Nelson we didn''t really have much of a problem at centre back even when Spillane came on. We defend better as a team under Lambert and although they dominated the game after re-arranging our team it was only that free kick and penalty why we lost. One of the positives from the game for me is that I believe under Lambert we will learn to defend a lead.

 

[Michael Starr 519]

When u look at the heart of the team. It fills me with a little hope. Thought Korey Smith, Holt. and Askou were brilliant. Keeper looks capable too (I''d rather he punched in wet weather than flap or spill)

To tell how the manager is doing, look at ego high maintenance Martin for clues. He''s up for it and motivated, and that speaks volumes to me.

[Shack Attack 0]

A very good post Beau. I was trying to make some similar points post match last night but found myself drowning in a sea of idiocy. Finally gave up and went to bed at 11.30.

[Big Duncs Bloody Shirt 0]

An excellent well informed post as always Mr B ... unfortunately far too wise and sensible!

[macdougalls perm 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"]

drowning in a sea of idiocy. 

[/quote]

It certainly is high tide today isn''t it! Must be the pull of the moon.  

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]
Excellent post Mr. B, as always.

Did you think fitness had anything to do with the performance? It just struck me that the early pressure seemed to tail off, even before the (unfortunately crucial) subs. Or could this be a problem with having too many youngsters in, who can''t pace themselves / get into positions where they don''t have to exhaust themselves? It seems to me that Grant Holt isn''t the fittest player, but he knows when & where to make his contribution most effectively.




[/quote]

 

I think fitness is a major factor, ron. One of the apparent reasons for Gunn''s departure was the "holiday camp" approach to preseason, and I think we''re paying the price of it now. To me a good preseason is the key to success or failure, because the hard yards that you do in that early stage can''t be replicated when the games are coming thick and fast. Preseason training is totally different to match fitness in that it builds stamina rather than explosiveness, but it''s what gets you through a November mudbath when others are wilting.

[Buncey 1]

I agree with a lot of what you say Beau but I''m worried with Charlton, Gillingham, Bristol Rovers, Carlisle and Leeds coming up within the month that injuries can deal our play-off rivals an easier hand. Reality is we have to take points off all these teams (MK Dons were included) to get up into those playoffs. And with almost our entire midfield out, Nelson out, no left back of note at the club and Hoolahan seemingly out of the equation completely, our once "strong" squad (which I think has been commented on in the past) is looking very bare and very tired. I don''t know whether McVeigh and the youngsters in midfield can play as much as they are, and whether we are running a risk of burning Holt out so quickly in the season. I wait for anticipation the injury news later this week.

[paul moy 235]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP.      

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

[quote user="Scooby"]Be careful Beau.  Too much sanity and a dose of reality thrown in for good measure will not go down well with some on here.  You little Percy Positive you[;)][/quote]

 

Baaah![:D]

[/quote]

Yep, that''s the self-congratulatory sound you flock of ever presents make on here when you all agree with each other normally (A) anti Gunn and his supporters and (B) pro Lambert and McNally. I read your post last night, you stated the obvious and on cue the flock gathered round baaaing and nodding sagely in profound agreement. 

My own brief view is this  : I thought that 4 3 3 was ambitious away from home but I''m not the manager and, unlike our new leader, not an expert on football management. Luck was on our side from the off and Chris Martin took his chance extremely well only to show minutes later why he is not yet the complete article by missing a chance which he really should have put away. A short while later Holt should have had a penalty but the same linesman who gave MKDons their dubious penalty kept his flag down by his side. So, IMO it really should have been game over after 25 minutes and the forced substitutions would not have made a difference.

But, how often do fans of all clubs make the same observations match after match ? If this had happened or that had happened or if we had been given a penalty - it all sounded so hollow and so "groundhog day" when I discussed the game with my work colleagues this morning, a mixture of Southampton, Portsmouth, Arsenal and Man U supporters. Yes, we did look good for the first quarter of the game but then of course the injuries did take their toll. Yes, Hughes''s injury was the most significant in a negative sense of course. He has proved to be an excellent signing by Gunn. Gunn''s signings, central defenders, Nelson and Askou, performed extremely well together and were highly effective twin pillars in defence. Gunn also rehabilated Lappin and what a threat he was whilst left of midfield.  

And, yes, the enforced substitutions meant that tactical options (if any) for later in the game were denied Lambert. However, where were the contingency tactics to accommodate injuries ? Surely, any manager must legislate for injuries to key players especially now that they are allowed 7 subs on the bench ? Why were both McDonald and Cureton on the bench ? Why both McVeigh and Whaley ? Where were Russell and Hoolahan ? Why was there no direct cover for Drury (Sam Habergham) who is known to be carrying an injury and therefore likely to need to be substituted ? Many on here rubbish Russell and Hoolahan but of course they should have been on the bench. We lost both our main threats : Hughes down the right and and Lappin on the left. Hughes of course had to come off and was replaced by McVeigh but then the injury prone Drury had to come off several minutes later and without someone like the impressive Habergham as a direct replacement Lambert''s lack of foresight left him with no option but to drop Lappin to left back. From that moment we offered no obvious threat apart from hopeful balls up field.

The sacking of Gunn after just one match this season (and Dublin made his opinion on that clear last night) was greeted with euphoria by the lifers on here and I was dismayed by the malice and spite shown to Gunn by so many of the posters. No chivalry shown by Knights Templar banner waving Beausant either. Equally, the appointment of Lambert was greeted as though he was some kind of footballing messiah. Of course, no one wants Lambert to fail (this silly suggestion was made on the MB today) but for me the jury is out on Lambert and I will judge him in December. Sadly, Gunn was not given that luxury, the opportunity to demonstrate what a good (or bad) manager he might have been with the squad of players that he selected in the summer. Not only that but IMHO his treatment by the club and the claims made about him were shoddy and shabby in the extreme. I shan''t forget his treatment for a long time and my "relationship" with the club has subtly changed and I suspect many other fans feel the same way.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Bob Franklin"]

 

Yep, that''s the self-congratulatory sound you flock of ever presents make on here when you all agree with each other normally (A) anti Gunn and his supporters and (B) pro Lambert and McNally. I read your post last night, you stated the obvious and on cue the flock gathered round baaaing and nodding sagely in profound agreement. 

[/quote]

In my experience, Bob, if the lemon is that bitter it''s best not to continue to suck.

[Lambo 0]

I thought sensible, well reasoned and thought out posts had been banned??