Pure DFC Archive

Arthur I can understand what you are saying and respect it

I dont get this sometimes Gents. They won the game yet their decisions are being queried. I might be wrong but surely winning the game in whatever way is vindication of their decisions. Gents I promise im not being argumentative but surely they can't win. I only post this thought as i say not for arguement but i just can't understand what they have to do.

But I can see where Jony/Mick W/Dave T/Spike/Park Life are coming from and they are also highly respected posters who are asking the question rather than directly criticising the managers.
I didn't post it but agree with asking the question why did we make the substitutions we did and why move Bradders into defence which resulted in us being under pressure for most of the second half.
There are other posters no doubt thinking the same thing and plenty of fans who may just have watched the game and gone away puzzled.
We won but we were a little bit lucky I feel but on the other hand the managers have I believe mentioned that we had injuries on the bench so have justified their decisions about the substitutions.

I wasn't surprised that Mark didn't come on for the second half as I had got my Os mixed up in my mind & thought Kudos was on the bench. Will have to pay more attention when the teams are read out in the future, or perhaps the ears need a syringe. The eyes have gone, so no reason why the lugs haven't as well.
I wonder if clubs are missing a trick by always appointing retired players as managers and coaches when there is so much untapped talent readily available on the terraces. . Naturally, I have my own thoughts on selection, but it is so much easier knowing my choices aren't going to be put the test, but it is all part of fun. There are plenty of times I've groaned on finding some player or other in the side or being brought on, to then witness said player playing a blinder or being the hero of the moment.

I love that quote Mr Linaman. Untapped terrace managers.. It's like betting shop jockies!!! Your statement is both brilliant and to the point. It's easy isnt it when there is no consequence. We are 6th and it might go Pete Tong. However we are in the midst of a brilliantly run club unlike others. We will be around in 10 years along others.so it simple Chelmsford here we come and COYD

Trevor I've only just read your post sorry. But they won the match so how can anyone challenge their moves. People talk hypothetically after the event but of course that can never be in question as that is hypothetical. In the managers case their is of course a result. So maybe Im wrong but when people say their decisions are wrong to move this man to there and this man to there why didn't they do this or why didnt they do that, but they won the game. So surely but surely they must be considered as doing the right thing. I mentioned im not arguing but i simply cannot possibly understand what the hell they have to do. Win every game 5 6 7 nil top the league. I just don't get the quotes.

Luv you Trev and where's my pint

IMHO Arthur, it's quite simple - no matter how many the team wins by, there's always the thought in fans' minds that it could have been (so much) better if....

Mr S. Let's get this right and i might be wrong If they won 9 nil in the fans mind it could have been so much better. Once again I'm not arguing I'm only asking about your question.

One thing i did notice on Saturday was the poor dead ball kicks. If Ryno is on the pitch he has to be taking the free kicks and corners his assist numbers for goals are phenomenal. No disrespect to Ben, he works hard but doesn't put the same whip on the ball and i can't remember any goals at the end of the crosses. If Ryno isn't there then fair enough.

There is only one way the management team could possibly satisfy certain posters on this forum methinks and that would bee to change their names to Tony and Burman....

You be 6th in the table after all the changes so far this season is no small achievement for a new management team

Arthur Horsfield wrote:Trevor I've only just read your post sorry. But they won the match so how can anyone challenge their moves. People talk hypothetically after the event but of course that can never be in question as that is hypothetical. In the managers case their is of course a result. So maybe Im wrong but when people say their decisions are wrong to move this man to there and this man to there why didn't they do this or why didnt they do that, but they won the game. So surely but surely they must be considered as doing the right thing. I mentioned im not arguing but i simply cannot possibly understand what the hell they have to do. Win every game 5 6 7 nil top the league. I just don't get the quotes.

I don't think the comments on here are anywhere near as bad as you seem to think they are Arthur. Most people seem to be of the opinion that it hasn't been pretty so far but we are improving and we're not in a bad position in the league. Sure there's a few questions about team selection and subs etc, but that's normal for any club forum. That's the nature of football. There are lots of positives to be taken from Saturday. It was a very good win, we're in a decent position in the table, we played very well, the strength in the squad is looking much better, Crook had a fine debut and Roberts was a 5 star hero. Yes, the management deserve credit for the recent recruits and the team get the plaudits for digging in, but ultimately, it took a wonder goal out of nowhere to win the game and that doesn't alter my opinion that the changes at half-time unbalanced the team and we were considerably less effective in the second half. Initially those changes made absolutely no sense until we later found out that the two defenders on the bench were injured. Of course you are right that ultimately it's all about getting the win, but I do think we had lost our way a little in the second half and it was only thanks to a world class finish from Phil Roberts that we snatched the victory. It would be unrealistic to expect him to do that every week.

Overall though, it was a very good day and another step forward, but I do think it's perfectly fair to ask why we are naming subs who are too injured to play and why we were so short on the bench for the second week in a row when we have a decent academy team. Surely we could have had one or two of these lads on the bench, especially given that Taylor Fisher has already proven that he can do a decent job.

There you go, that's about 9 positives to 1 negative (if you can call a question a negative), but I bet I know which one you'll focus on.