To all the fools having a dig at those questioning certain players in the team...

[Smudger 0]

Is it a crime to suggest that the team could be improved by other players we currently have in the squad?Is it a crime to question Paul Lambert''s decisions?  Let''s not forget that I am one of Paul Lambert''s biggest fans and stated that he would do a good job for us before most did on here.However it is this narrow minded thinking by certain sections of our support which contributed to the mess that we got in to under Worthington, Grant, Roeder and club legend Gunn.Lambert although doing well is in charge of a very big club in the 3rd tier of English Football.  As Nutty says, he has a long way to go yet before we can put him up with Worthy or any other of City''s top managers from the past.This defeat was preventable and many fans have been asking for the changes that many more are now starting to ask for after todays defeat for the last few weeks if not before.Blind happiness with everything led us to Div 3... please learn from the error of your ways!

[morty 0]

I thought you were having digs at players?[:^)]

[morty 0]

Lol, I misread your title, its late and I should be in bed.

[morty 0]

But the defeat was easy to suss out, we miss Holt.Its really not rocket science.

[Smudger 0]

Unfortunately it was down to rather more than just missing Grant Holt Morty.I haven''t seen Holt employed as a centre back or midfielder for us yet, have you?Chris Martin''s goal was enough for 3 points or at least a draw if we were not let down by very poor defending again and a non-entity on the left side of midfield.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]Unfortunately it was down to rather more than just missing Grant Holt Morty.I haven''t seen Holt employed as a centre back or midfielder for us yet, have you?Chris Martin''s goal was enough for 3 points or at least a draw if we were not let down by very poor defending again and a non-entity on the left side of midfield.[/quote]Obviously not but defending begins with retention of the ball up front, allowing both the midfield and defence to push further up the field.So no "big man" up front to hold teh ball up and we drop deeper and deeper, putting far more pressure on the defence.Simples.[;)]

[morty 0]

I shall take it by your silence that you have no retort Mr Smudger.[:)]

[Shyster 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Smudger"]Unfortunately it was down to rather more than just missing Grant Holt Morty.I haven''t seen Holt employed as a centre back or midfielder for us yet, have you?Chris Martin''s goal was enough for 3 points or at least a draw if we were not let down by very poor defending again and a non-entity on the left side of midfield.[/quote]Obviously not but defending begins with retention of the ball up front, allowing both the midfield and defence to push further up the field.So no "big man" up front to hold teh ball up and we drop deeper and deeper, putting far more pressure on the defence.Simples.[;)]

[/quote]

Nay - only one out ''n out winger (brought on too late) and no pace on the right to alleviate the pressure on both the defence and central midfield in a 4-4-2 is the crux.Not so simple to folk who don''t understand the game like Shyster it seems.

[The gut 0]

[quote user="morty"]I shall take it by your silence that you have no retort Mr Smudger.

[:)]
[/quote]

Give him a chance. He''s got Doc, Nelson and Lappin are sh1t on 18 threads!

[Smudger 0]

Very true, but...We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote user="morty"][quote user="Smudger"]Unfortunately it was down to rather more than just missing Grant Holt Morty.I haven''t seen Holt employed as a centre back or midfielder for us yet, have you?Chris Martin''s goal was enough for 3 points or at least a draw if we were not let down by very poor defending again and a non-entity on the left side of midfield.[/quote]Obviously not but defending begins with retention of the ball up front, allowing both the midfield and defence to push further up the field.So no "big man" up front to hold teh ball up and we drop deeper and deeper, putting far more pressure on the defence.Simples.[;)]

[/quote]

Nay - only one out ''n out winger (brought on too late) and no pace on the right to alleviate the pressure on both the defence and central midfield in a 4-4-2 is the crux.Not so simple to folk who don''t understand the game like Shyster it seems. [/quote]And you played pro football for who?Or managed who?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="The gut"]

[quote user="morty"]I shall take it by your silence that you have no retort Mr Smudger.[:)][/quote]

Give him a chance. He''s got Doc, Nelson and Lappin are sh1t on 18 threads!

[/quote]lol... I was going to say a similar thing! [;)]

[morty 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.[/quote]Oh right, so now you can see into the minds of players and actually know what they are thinking.Quite remarkable.

[Allez17 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.[/quote]Utter bollocks. Don''t project your bias against players who have performed fine for weeks onto other players who just haven''t. We lost today because of the midfield. We were pressed, marked out of the game, and only Rusty in the diamond turned up. Smith was lightweight, Wes was absent and Lappin was useless. The game was won and lost there.

[The gut 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="The gut"]

[quote user="morty"]I shall take it by your silence that you have no retort Mr Smudger.

[:)]
[/quote]

Give him a chance. He''s got Doc, Nelson and Lappin are sh1t on 18 threads!

[/quote]

lol... I was going to say a similar thing! [;)]
[/quote]

I can''t keep up reading them, f*ck knows how you''re keeping a track of them and replying! Aaaah spose you could be copying and pasting.

[The gut 0]

[quote user="Allez17"][quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...

We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.
[/quote]

Utter bollocks. Don''t project your bias against players who have performed fine for weeks onto other players who just haven''t. We lost today because of the midfield. We were pressed, marked out of the game, and only Rusty in the diamond turned up. Smith was lightweight, Wes was absent and Lappin was useless. The game was won and lost there.
[/quote]

You might have added fuel to the fire there

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Allez17"][quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...

We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.
[/quote]

Utter bollocks. Don''t project your bias against players who have performed fine for weeks onto other players who just haven''t. We lost today because of the midfield. We were pressed, marked out of the game, and only Rusty in the diamond turned up. Smith was lightweight, Wes was absent and Lappin was useless. The game was won and lost there.
[/quote]

And where the f*ck was Otsemobor?

He did nothing to stop Millwall scoring today.

Useless.

[Allez17 0]

[quote user="The gut"]

[quote user="Allez17"][quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.[/quote]Utter bollocks. Don''t project your bias against players who have performed fine for weeks onto other players who just haven''t. We lost today because of the midfield. We were pressed, marked out of the game, and only Rusty in the diamond turned up. Smith was lightweight, Wes was absent and Lappin was useless. The game was won and lost there. [/quote]

You might have added fuel to the fire there

[/quote]I''m really not disagreeing with the Lappin thing. I said in my ratings that he was poor. I disagree with Smudger using any opportunity to dig at the centre backs even though they were not responsible for todays defeat. His often repeated stat that Doc has played in X number of Y defeats, as if he is singularly responsible... But no doubt he will be back, excusing the midfield for only being wary of the defenders shortcomings. I do wonder if Smudger had a bad experience with a tall ginger bloke as a kid. His phobia really goes beyond reason.

[The gut 0]

[quote user="Allez17"][quote user="The gut"]

[quote user="Allez17"][quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...

We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.
[/quote]

Utter bollocks. Don''t project your bias against players who have performed fine for weeks onto other players who just haven''t. We lost today because of the midfield. We were pressed, marked out of the game, and only Rusty in the diamond turned up. Smith was lightweight, Wes was absent and Lappin was useless. The game was won and lost there.
[/quote]

You might have added fuel to the fire there

[/quote]

I''m really not disagreeing with the Lappin thing. I said in my ratings that he was poor.

I disagree with Smudger using any opportunity to dig at the centre backs even though they were not responsible for todays defeat. His often repeated stat that Doc has played in X number of Y defeats, as if he is singularly responsible...

But no doubt he will be back, excusing the midfield for only being wary of the defenders shortcomings. I do wonder if Smudger had a bad experience with a tall ginger bloke as a kid. His phobia really goes beyond reason.
[/quote]

I''ve spotted that. Lol

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="The gut"][quote user="Allez17"][quote user="The gut"]

[quote user="Allez17"][quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.[/quote]Utter bollocks. Don''t project your bias against players who have performed fine for weeks onto other players who just haven''t. We lost today because of the midfield. We were pressed, marked out of the game, and only Rusty in the diamond turned up. Smith was lightweight, Wes was absent and Lappin was useless. The game was won and lost there. [/quote]

You might have added fuel to the fire there

[/quote]I''m really not disagreeing with the Lappin thing. I said in my ratings that he was poor. I disagree with Smudger using any opportunity to dig at the centre backs even though they were not responsible for todays defeat. His often repeated stat that Doc has played in X number of Y defeats, as if he is singularly responsible... But no doubt he will be back, excusing the midfield for only being wary of the defenders shortcomings. I do wonder if Smudger had a bad experience with a tall ginger bloke as a kid. His phobia really goes beyond reason. [/quote]

I''ve spotted that. Lol

[/quote]I did mention that Simon Lappin is c. rap too! [:P]Let''s see when Whitbread finally does get his deserved place in Lambert''s starting line-up and gets a few games under his belt and is then partnered by another defender how many of you still crave for Nelson and Doherty to pull on a yellow shirt again.

[Lurd 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.[/quote]I think it''s more because without Holt, the ball doesn''t stick up front and the pressure always gets put back on the midfield and the defence. Our formation and players really require a target man a which is why when Holt is playing we generally play well and don''t look like conceding and when he doesn''t, we don''t!

[ZLF 271]

There are three players in the squad who would have made yesterdays team stronger,  Whitbread, Holt and Drury.    The remainder were 8 from our strongest 11.

2 of those players were unavailable, one injured again and the other because of his own stupidity, which has finally cost us points.

As far as whitbread is concerned I have been championing his place in the side for Nelson for weeks and his time will come.   However who changes a winning side?  Its hard to see why Lambert would have done so before now?

Based on the last few games he could have replaced one of the central midfielders as they are showing signs of flagging,  but with a weeks rest and such a long winning streak do you really bring in hughes for Rusty etc?   And McNamee has done v little yet to suggest he is anywhere near a starting pace.

I may have started with OJ up front,  given he holds the ball up better,  but again with 2 goals in 2 games why did Cody not deserve his chance too?

Its so easy with hindsight,  but I think the manager was right to do what he did,  and I also expect him to make just 2 changes for the brighton game,  holt and whitbread in for nelson and macdonald  

 

[Erik the Viking 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

There are three players in the squad who would have made yesterdays team stronger,  Whitbread, Holt and Drury.    The remainder were 8 from our strongest 11.

2 of those players were unavailable, one injured again and the other because of his own stupidity, which has finally cost us points.

As far as whitbread is concerned I have been championing his place in the side for Nelson for weeks and his time will come.   However who changes a winning side?  Its hard to see why Lambert would have done so before now?

Based on the last few games he could have replaced one of the central midfielders as they are showing signs of flagging,  but with a weeks rest and such a long winning streak do you really bring in hughes for Rusty etc?   And McNamee has done v little yet to suggest he is anywhere near a starting pace.

I may have started with OJ up front,  given he holds the ball up better,  but again with 2 goals in 2 games why did Cody not deserve his chance too?

Its so easy with hindsight,  but I think the manager was right to do what he did,  and I also expect him to make just 2 changes for the brighton game,  holt and whitbread in for nelson and macdonald  

 

[/quote]

Agree ZLF on the three points 110% although unless we see an improvement from Lappin Hughes deserves an opprtunity to stake his claim. Will also be intersting when Askou becomes fit again  if Doc is capable of holding onto his place as everyone was saying before he was injured hes the best CB at the club, when he is fit Askou & Whitbread everytime for me..............

[nutty nigel 7,506]

Do you think Hughes could have made yesterdays team stronger Zip?

 

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="Larry David"][quote user="Smudger"]Very true, but...We also drop deeper and deeper because the players upfront and in midfield are concerned that we do not have two quality centre halves.[/quote]I think it''s more because without Holt, the ball doesn''t stick up front and the pressure always gets put back on the midfield and the defence. Our formation and players really require a target man a which is why when Holt is playing we generally play well and don''t look like conceding and when he doesn''t, we don''t![/quote]This is the point, surely. We had kept 13 clean sheets out of 27 League games. All but every other game. And those figures include pre-Lambert, and then while Lambert and Culverhouse were sorting out the defence.In the three games without Holt (or a replacement target man) we have conceded at least one goal in each.

[Erik the Viking 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Do you think Hughes could have made yesterdays team stronger Zip?

 

[/quote]

Just posted that Nutty! ha ha!, you?

 

[When Saturday Comes 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]Is it a crime to suggest that the team could be improved by other players we currently have in the squad?

Is it a crime to question Paul Lambert''s decisions? 

Let''s not forget that I am one of Paul Lambert''s biggest fans and stated that he would do a good job for us before most did on here.

However it is this narrow minded thinking by certain sections of our support which contributed to the mess that we got in to under Worthington, Grant, Roeder and club legend Gunn.

Lambert although doing well is in charge of a very big club in the 3rd tier of English Football.  As Nutty says, he has a long way to go yet before we can put him up with Worthy or any other of City''s top managers from the past.

This defeat was preventable and many fans have been asking for the changes that many more are now starting to ask for after todays defeat for the last few weeks if not before.

Blind happiness with everything led us to Div 3... please learn from the error of your ways!
[/quote]

I kind of agree with what you''re saying, but the fact is we were unbeaten in 16 games. Yes, a few cracks may have been starting to show, but we were still picking up points while not playing great, so there was no need to change personnel. Most managers & players would agree with this theory.

However, how do you know he won''t mix things up next week now that we have lost a game? Personally I think he might, will be a wake-up call for some of them.

It''s clear Lambo is a big fan of Lappin though so I don''t expect to see him dropped after one annonymous performance.

 

[nutty nigel 7,506]

[quote user="Gazza"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Do you think Hughes could have made yesterdays team stronger Zip?

 

[/quote]

Just posted that Nutty! ha ha!, you?

 

[/quote]

I think Hughes is an excellent footballer. Just not sure he can stay fit very long. Maybe that''s why he''s not at a higher level.

 

 

[Erik the Viking 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Gazza"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Do you think Hughes could have made yesterdays team stronger Zip?

 

[/quote]

Just posted that Nutty! ha ha!, you?

 

[/quote]

I think Hughes is an excellent footballer. Just not sure he can stay fit very long. Maybe that''s why he''s not at a higher level.

 

 

 

[/quote]

Agreed Nutty he is an excellent player especially at this level. I have a few friends who are Leicester fans, he was at Leicester a few years ago before his time in Scotland-they always accused him of being a little bit lightweight but he certainly had obvious qualities. In his time back up in jocko-land I believe he has developed his game to become a more complete player but since his time with us his injuries are a concern. If fit, ability wise he warrants a starting place in the team. Where would you potentially play him in the side and in place of who though Nutty that is the question????  

[nutty nigel 7,506]

It''s difficult to fit him in Gazza. That''s the problem. His most effective position in the diamond is probably where Russell plays. Korey Smith''s legs and energy have been vital to us this season. Could he play left? Or maybe a different system suits him better.