LaticNik Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 and Hazell's feck up for the second should never have arisen. And first. And third. Needs a rocket up his backside...sending him far far away. E4e CSUAL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_bro Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 This cup competition was our last chance of some much needed revenue and WAS the priority.........I don't understand this leaving Lee and Furman out to save them from suspension business. Players get suspended all the time and we just have to deal with it .......We shot ourselves in the foot today and should have played our best team..........Well gutted!! Couldn't agree more. The FA Cup should have been the priority. We draw a non league side away next round there's a good chance of TV money. Draw a Prem club at home round 3 another good chance of TV money. Win that and draw one of the top four away and there's a possibility of TV money, plus around £1m of the gate money. This club needs cash. PD also states that Accy wanted it more than we did. Why wouldn't they when arogant Oldham think they can beat them by resting argueably their best two players, and handing a 17 year old his debut. Accys manager didn't need to give them a team talk!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_bro Posted November 6, 2010 Share Posted November 6, 2010 just because he leaves them out of a cup game!!! get a grip ffs... if they pick up a suspension and miss the huddersfield game,then we will get slaughtered...it was hardly a weakened team was it.....plus feeney scored... read the managers comments on the os.seems he has ripped into them at half time and fulltime over this.... if you want to question anybody,question the players,there hunger and there desire,thats what was at fault...turning up with the,oh its only a league two side... they beat us last year so whats the big deal...get over it. The management team stressed to the players that they should not be complacent, but putting that team out they contradicted themselves in the players minds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grim Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 The management team stressed to the players that they should not be complacent, but putting that team out they contradicted themselves in the players minds. We are not blessed with a squad which the manager can pick and choose the matches our better players perform in,Lee and Furman should have played and the fact they didnt and we are out of the cup rests with Dickov.That said what does it say when we cant beat Accrington .I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 just because he leaves them out of a cup game!!! get a grip ffs... if they pick up a suspension and miss the huddersfield game,then we will get slaughtered...it was hardly a weakened team was it.....plus feeney scored... read the managers comments on the os.seems he has ripped into them at half time and fulltime over this.... if you want to question anybody,question the players,there hunger and there desire,thats what was at fault...turning up with the,oh its only a league two side... they beat us last year so whats the big deal...get over it. Our best two players this season didn't play. So yes, it was a weakened team. I stopped reading your post after the first line, as you are clearly talking nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snookmeister Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 (edited) One thing that was abundantly clear to me yesterday was that Accy wanted it more than we did. Even with a weakened team, we would have had too much for them had we played with the same level of intensity that they did. We were second to every loose ball, weaker in the tackle and five yards slower than them. Yes, a heavy, pudding of a pitch, but one that both teams had to handle. The most glaring example of this for me was the ball that we gave up on and the Accy forward didn't, which led to the third goal. Absolutely fuming with that. Deciding to up your game at 3-0 down with 30 mins left is a long way from good enough, and our professional league one squad should be collectively ashamed of themselves. The only players to come out with any credit for me were Brill, Winchester, and Morais. And Mvoto when he was switched up top. The rest? Have a word with yourselves lads........ Edited November 7, 2010 by Snookmeister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 (edited) One thing that was abundantly clear to me yesterday was that Accy wanted it a hell of a lot more than we did. Even with a weakened team, we would have had too much for them had we played with the same level of intensity that they did. We were second to every loose ball, weaker in the tackle and five yards slower than them. Yes, a heavy, pudding of a pitch, but one that both teams had to handle. The most glaring example of this for me was the ball that we gave up on and the Accy forward didn't, which led to the third goal. Absolutely fuming with that. Deciding to up your game at 3-0 down with 30 mins left is a long was from good enough, and our professional league one squad should be collectively ashamed of themselves. The only players to come out with any credit for me were Brill, Winchester, and Morais. And Mvoto when he was switched up top. The rest? Have a word with yourselves lads........ The bolded bit justifies Dickov's post match rant in its entirity. I thought Fenney caused them problems too and actually looked like a goal poacher. (Anyone know why Morais wasn't suspended?) Edited November 7, 2010 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsLee Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 The bolded bit justifies Dickov's post match rant in its entirity. I thought Fenney caused them problems too and actually looked like a goal poacher. (Anyone know why Morais wasn't suspended?) his ban didnt start yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_bro Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 The bolded bit justifies Dickov's post match rant in its entirity. I thought Fenney caused them problems too and actually looked like a goal poacher. (Anyone know why Morais wasn't suspended?) His suspension doesn't start until Monday apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texas_oldham Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 just because he leaves them out of a cup game!!! get a grip ffs... if they pick up a suspension and miss the huddersfield game,then we will get slaughtered...it was hardly a weakened team was it.....plus feeney scored... read the managers comments on the os.seems he has ripped into them at half time and fulltime over this.... if you want to question anybody,question the players,there hunger and there desire,thats what was at fault...turning up with the,oh its only a league two side... they beat us last year so whats the big deal...get over it. i think you're the one that needs to get a grip! as i mentioned in an earlier thread our only sort of income will come from a cup run or selling players. Dropping Furman may result in us losing Furman in January. If a good realistic bid comes in for him in January we won't be able to turn it down; if we had beat Accrington and managed to get to the third round and get a reasonable tie we may have been able to gain enough money to keep Furman. Lets be serious now, our chances of promotion are pretty slim. Id say there are at least 5 or 6 teams better than us and even if we managed to scrape in the play-offs we would struggle against some of the teams in there. If somebody before the game had offered me either a win in the 1st round of the FA Cup & a 4-0 loss to Huddersfield or a loss in the FA Cup and a draw/win against Huddersfield i would have taken the first. This club needs any sort of income it can get and promotion doesn't look likely. I agree the players should take a good chunk of the blame but Dickov made a big mistake yesterday and Im surprised he hasnt mentioned that in his interview Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 His suspension doesn't start until Monday apparently. his suspension starts on the 20th according to the fishal... so he's eligible for Saturday, but will miss Dagenham, Exeter and Dale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsgrandad Posted November 7, 2010 Author Share Posted November 7, 2010 Quick recap on this thread. Most managers & coaches (Markoasis apart) strive to turn out a settled confident team. The manager clearly warned against complacency before the game then contradicted that by dropping two in-form players, one of them being our most influential player (a bit like Liverpool without Gerrard). He includes a player who is due to miss the next three league games. A cup run was essential to maintain player confidence and boost interest amongst the stay-awayers. Sorry, but IMO a mistake that will have far greater repercussions than a single lost game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delfer Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 Basic rule - YOU DO NOT CHANGE A WINNING SIDE Hang on Last Saturdays starting line up had Lewi in it, he played Black & Cedric against Rochdale and again yesterday; so before you get to Lee & Furman the side was already changed. Sorry to let the facts get in the way of a petulant rant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsgrandad Posted November 7, 2010 Author Share Posted November 7, 2010 Hang on Last Saturdays starting line up had Lewi in it, he played Black & Cedric against Rochdale and again yesterday; so before you get to Lee & Furman the side was already changed. Sorry to let the facts get in the way of a petulant rant! Thanks for putting forward the facts - just two observations: 1. The game at Rochdale only lasted 8 minutes or so - that starting eleven didn't constitute a winning side - my comment could have applied just as equally to that game. 2. Lewi (plus Feeney, Kelly etc) are what I call 'option' players and that sometimes means one of them may be played from the start or be a sub. Furman and Lee are not option players - barring injury or a prolonged run of bad form, they should always be in the starting eleven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 Our best two players this season didn't play. So yes, it was a weakened team. I stopped reading your post after the first line, as you are clearly talking nonsense. so by dropping lee and furmman it means were going to sell them in january....bollox the manager clearly thought he would give his two more consistant players a breather before the hectic winter schedule kicks in..that team he sent out there had far more superiority than a league two accrington had..he told them how to play and how to play with pride honour and determination...and they didnt listen....they paid the price for taking the game too lightly and again poor workmanship and team play....end of. the manager fielded a team that should of been capable of winning the game easily,and they didnt. blame should be apportioned appropriately Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delfer Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 Thanks for putting forward the facts - just two observations: 1. The game at Rochdale only lasted 8 minutes or so - that starting eleven didn't constitute a winning side - my comment could have applied just as equally to that game. 2. Lewi (plus Feeney, Kelly etc) are what I call 'option' players and that sometimes means one of them may be played from the start or be a sub. Furman and Lee are not option players - barring injury or a prolonged run of bad form, they should always be in the starting eleven. Oh I see now, so when you make ridiculous sweeping statements that are factually incorrect, you then include conditions such as your own opinions! - which for the record I don't agree with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsgrandad Posted November 7, 2010 Author Share Posted November 7, 2010 Oh I see now, so when you make ridiculous sweeping statements that are factually incorrect, you then include conditions such as your own opinions! - which for the record I don't agree with. Could you please enlighten me as to what is factually incorrect about my statement. The last winning side was that put out against Plymouth - is that correct or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 Could you please enlighten me as to what is factually incorrect about my statement. The last winning side was that put out against Plymouth - is that correct or not? I think you've drifted from "Don't change a winning side" (which is a cliche often trotted out when a changed side loses, but seldom reversed when they win) towards "Don't change SOME of the players in a winning side, except for the "option players"; of course you should really add, "unless it results in a win" too. I'm not sure what facts define an "option player", you seem to apply it to all except 2 players, in which case we end up with "Don't change 2 specific players from a winning side" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shefflatic Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 (edited) so by dropping lee and furmman it means were going to sell them in january....bollox the manager clearly thought he would give his two more consistant players a breather before the hectic winter schedule kicks in..that team he sent out there had far more superiority than a league two accrington had..he told them how to play and how to play with pride honour and determination...and they didnt listen....they paid the price for taking the game too lightly and again poor workmanship and team play....end of. the manager fielded a team that should of been capable of winning the game easily,and they didnt. blame should be apportioned appropriately EXACTLY! The team PD put out was more than good enough to win that game if their attitude and heads were focused properly. Winchester and Brill aside, they clearly weren't. The resting of 2 players does not consitute accounting for the 10 (CW excluded) from playing :censored:e and not being interested. Totally back his decision to give them a break - if either gets booked and we win the game you know damn well its 'He should have rested KL and DF, we had enough in the squad to beat AS without them' etc Blame the players 100% - NOT PD. All cup shocks occur due to lack of mental attitude, not ability - we had a shocker all round Edited November 7, 2010 by shefflatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsgrandad Posted November 7, 2010 Author Share Posted November 7, 2010 I think you've drifted from "Don't change a winning side" (which is a cliche often trotted out when a changed side loses, but seldom reversed when they win) towards "Don't change SOME of the players in a winning side, except for the "option players"; of course you should really add, "unless it results in a win" too. No drift - all I said was he should have stuck with his best eleven players. Cannot understand how he can preach a "no complacency" view to his players yet drop the two best ones from the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 so by dropping lee and furmman it means were going to sell them in january....bollox the manager clearly thought he would give his two more consistant players a breather before the hectic winter schedule kicks in..that team he sent out there had far more superiority than a league two accrington had..he told them how to play and how to play with pride honour and determination...and they didnt listen....they paid the price for taking the game too lightly and again poor workmanship and team play....end of. the manager fielded a team that should of been capable of winning the game easily,and they didnt. blame should be apportioned appropriately It will be interesting to see if PD transfer lists any of the under performing players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossrocks Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 It will be interesting to see if PD transfer lists any of the under performing players. Such as? Who played on Saturday who has been under performing consistently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shefflatic Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 Such as? Who played on Saturday who has been under performing consistently? jarrett will be gone in jan for a start, possibly black and dare i say it jones and/or hazell if they carry on playing poor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJ33 Posted November 7, 2010 Share Posted November 7, 2010 can you really see him listing hazell he just made him captain and picked him for every game he has been available. I stand to be corrected but i dont think he's dropped jones either so i very much doubt that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted November 8, 2010 Share Posted November 8, 2010 I suppose the main question is why did it take till half time to get instructions to change tempo of the game to the players. Captain's job If not Rubes TAylor is one choice, but he loses his head to easily and will get sucked into rowsa by the other players Who else is left? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.