Is the squad good enough?

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="im spartacus"]city 1st do you know this for a fact ? or is it just your take on things ? did not hughton bring back ewan chester ? i don''t pretend to know the ins and outs of the running of the football club if you do then fair enough.[/quote]''fair enough'' it isI would also suggest that this is common practice elsewherewe are talking millions upon millions in fees and wage contractsthe idea that all that would be the sole responsibility of someone without any such legal training and who could be sacked, fall under a bus the next day is aburd

[Ivan Easter 0]

Yes the Management isn''t

[im spartacus canary 0]

nobody thinks hughton or whoever sits there going through the contracts with a magnifying glass but surely the manager has the final say on who he wants  in his squad ?

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="a1canary"]Because I dont even understand what it is you are trying to disagree with. Ok so you think the manager doesn''t decide transfers. I think/thought he did. If you can provide evidence I''m wrong I''ll take it.

Please explain the other points you pick fault with.

We dont need defensive reinforcements and we didn''t play with "two up" yesterday.

I haven''t thrown any toys incidentally, I just dont get why you seem only to come on here to seek disagreement rather than actually discuss things. I only ever see you on here arguing with people.[/quote]it just gets worseif it is a discussion then it is likely that some will take a contrary positionand it is not unlikely that some will back their position with evidencethat is not picking holes or any other such emotive nonsenseso -if two defenders have gone backwards then it suggest there is a problem with either the coaching and or the tactics, merely bringing in new defenders will not sort that out - more so given the fact that the same problem has affected other playersif you believe that a players supposed style (ie forward) determines the playing stye then yes we played two up front just as Garrido means we set out with five at the back

[Darth Catbeard The Old 0]

More than good enough. It''s the management team that has managed a pathetic 9 wins in 42 games and that employs abysmal tactics that are as ugly as they are ineffective which is bottle necking this team of players.

That stat combined with what we have to put up with on the pitch should mean they get the boot soon hopefully, I can''t believe they haven''t already. Less than 30% win ratio etc, it''s beyond unacceptable!

[a1canary 0]

You seem incapable of understanding the difference between a proper discussion - that will of course involve differing view points - and merely searching for irrelevant points to argue about. Like I say, boring.

Was it an overly critical parent or something? Or a harsh teacher?

Well they must be very proud lol!

[Bill 1,788]

or more like a discussion involves not only putting forward points, but being able to offer some backing to them ... and in doing so counter the other points raisedsadly in your case it hasn''t really risen above having a tantrum and personal abuselack of coherent argument perhaps ?

[ron obvious 1,501]

Anybody prepared to take on my suggestion that the squad is too inconsistent in the skills department? And that this is typical of lower level squads?

[Surfer 1,547]

" Clearly under the present management and the present level of injuries, the squad is not good enough "

This

Now with the injuries clearing up over the next couple of weeks that leaves tactics, selection & motivation.

On the latter we have certainly seen better management in recent history, but all three are going to be affected by who''s actually available to play ...

[a1canary 0]

[quote user="City1st"]or more like a discussion involves not only putting forward points, but being able to offer some backing to them ... and in doing so counter the other points raisedsadly in your case it hasn''t really risen above having a tantrum and personal abuselack of coherent argument perhaps ?

[/quote]

Oh right, sorry city1st, you must be the only person on this board to ask posters to ''back up'' basic, uncontroversial statements like "we played with two up" and "we need defensive reinforcements" (eventho the reason for that is referenced in my original post anyway).

Personal abuse? Are you for real?

[Bill 1,788]

I don''t think in tis case that if I suggest that you are not too bright will be considered personal abuse - as in your case it is a complimentThe point about backing up an argument referred to MY posts, the ones you keep bleating aboutNow why not step back, take a  deep breath and re read the exchangesIt might help

[LostTheFaith 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]Anybody prepared to take on my suggestion that the squad is too inconsistent in the skills department? And that this is typical of lower level squads?[/quote]

This.

We have a poor squad and need reinforcements.

[Fleckys Flip-Flop 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]Anybody prepared to take on my suggestion that the squad is too inconsistent in the skills department? And that this is typical of lower level squads?[/quote]

I think that is a fair assessment of the situation. In most positions we have all the skills needed to succeed, but they come from more than one player. For example, if Olsson had Garrido''s crossing ability, if Wes had Howson''s shooting ability, if Turner had Bennett or Bassong''s pace etc. I guess this kind of issue means that CH HAS to tinker.

That and the injuries. They don''t help.

[a1canary 0]

If you think that was personal abuse youre clearly a delicate little flower.

And no you''re ok, i''d won''t read your endlessly pointless arguments more than once - i''d rather stick spoons in my eyes. And please don''t answer my posts either thanks and then i''m certain will get along just fine :)

[Alfie54 76]

Look, if I argue with you I need to take up a contrary position

yes, but that''s not just saying ''no it isn''t''

yes it is

no it isn''t

Python anybody!

[a1canary 0]

Lol - yes, i think that''s a certain someone''s "guide for life"

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="a1canary"]If you think that was personal abuse youre clearly a delicate little flower. [/quote]oh dearie. dear me

so, slowly ....................I did not think it was ............ personal abuseI never claimed it was personal abuse................. that was something you were squeaking about

try reading your own posts, it might help

[a1canary 0]

"sadly in your case it hasn''t really risen above having a tantrum and personal abuse"

try reading your own posts, it might help.

Now please, go away.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="a1canary"]"sadly in your case it hasn''t really risen above having a tantrum and personal abuse"

try reading your own posts, it might help.

Now please, go away.[/quote]and you said you wouldn''t re read my posts or replynice to know someone doesta ra

[ThorpeCanary 71]

Squad is definitely good enough in my opinion but massively hampered by the injuries to Bennett, Tettey, Pilkington and now Howson. As much as I rate snodgrass and Redmond I do not look forward to Pilkington and Bennett linking up with RVW and Hooper while Tettey coming back will hopefully allow Fer to push up field where he is best IMO.

I''ve never seen anyone on this forum suggest the board have no input on signings, that doesn''t mean the manager has nine either

I remember McNally giving an interview after lambert left where he said money had always been made available to Lambert for signings he had wanted when the question was put to McNally over had he left because of lack of ambition from the board. This doesn''t mean The board aren''t involved. I''d imagine most people are well aware they are, but Clearly the manager has a big say in who we sign.

I wonder if some posters saw what happened with spurs and AVB and now assume this is how all clubs are run....hmm

[ThorpeCanary 71]

That should read "do look forward" sorry