royalgull wrote:
This is fun, I now get to dissect this absolute LOL of a post bit by bit.
The Tim Sills bit, horses for courses he was good in the division below with the style we employed. He wasn't good enough for the Football League he had to be replaced along with others after he was given a chance. Lathrope proved last year he was more than good enough for a team that finished 5th in League 2. If we had more decent forward players we would have gone up. Lathrope was a little unsung hero last season and I see no reason why we are all adament he should be dropped from a position he made his own not just last season but the back end of the year before as well.
Horses for courses, DL was good enough for a team finishing 5th last year, but not good enough for this year's team, containing Easton, which will finish third. If we had had the same forward players and a better covering midfielder, someone like, say, Craig Easton, we would have gone up. The argument works both ways.
royalgull wrote: Signing someone like Wayne Rooney or a better example would be Billy Bodin who clearly improves the side from last year of course changes things. I expect bodin to start on one of the flanks because he's better than any of our current options. This is not the case for Craig Easton or Nathan Craig. Easton was on trial for quite a bit before he signed, if he was that much better or a clear improvement on what we had at the time, don't you think Ling would have signed him immediately? As it happens, we signed Easton when it was clear Eunan was off to give us some cover, experienced cover for this current season.
The first half of this is pure opinion, Bodin is better than our current wide options, I'll agree, but then it's my opinion that Easton is a better bet than Lathrope and I'm really not sure how anyone could possibly contest that Morris (who is surely the only one capable of consideration for filling the Eunan role) could be a better bet than NC in the middle.
Neither of us is privy to the thoughts of ML, the state of play at the club, or any of the million and one other considerations surrounding the timing of the Easton signing, so it's a meaningless argument. I know from speaking to him at reserve matches involving Easton that ML was absolutely delighted with Easton's form.
royalgull wrote: No mickey mouse opinion based scoring system makes Easton a better player. He's 33, had a few clubs recently who have all moved him on and he's coming into a squad that finished 5th last year. It's your opinion that makes us a better team with him instead of Lathrope, based only one can assume on some friendly games. So completely dismissing 48 competitive matches in this league, because Easton has possibly outperformed Lathrope against Exeter and a jetlagged Stoke side we are now bringing him in for one of our stalwarts of last season. While we're on this theme, Ricey has been better than Poke so far, do we play Ricey? Or how about Tom Cruise I've heard nothing bad about him, lets drop Nicholson as well.
It's not Mickey Mouse just because you don't happen to agree with it. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with playing Ricey ahead of Pokey, and am considering a thread on the very subject. Not hearing anything bad about a boy isn't the same as seeing with your own eyes a player that could well be better than what we already have.
royalgull wrote: With regards Nathan Craig you haven't seen him in a competitive match because since his time at Torquay united he hasn't played a single minute of first team football. FACT. Again if Martin Ling thought we had the next Eunan or somebody who is this superstar head and ahoulders outr best player etc, I am very surprised he never turned to him at the back end of last year when our legs were going and we were chasing a few games. He's a very young player who clearly must have some talent but he's come from a mince league, will be very raw and needs slowly bringing through into the side. Which is what will happen, I am certain in exactly the same way Buckle did with Eunan when he first arrived.
Reserve games are competitive. He comes from that well known 'mince' league, the Premiership, where he spent a number of years with Everton before being released and heading home to find some regular football. I am, of course, referring here to Eunan O'Kane, but if you can think of anyone else to whom this applies, you be sure to let me know...
What will happen and what should happen are a couple of completely different things. Chuck the kid in at the deep end, he'll flourish.
It doesn't matter that ML didn't think he was better than Eunan, Eunan isn't here anymore, so he only has to be better than Morris, which he is.
royalgull wrote: There is no clique about it, it's about rewarding players that have proved over the course of a season/2 seasons or more that they are our best players and best team for the immediate future. That may well change over the course of the season, players will get injuries, suspensions and some will lose form, this is when these other lads will get their chance and that's when they have to take it and put a marker down.
Football isn't about reward, it's about the best XI available at the time. Do it the other way round, shake the tree, put Easton and NC in for the first few matches, if we tank, then so be it, if we don't Lathrope and Morris will work double hard to get back in the team. Either that, or they won't bother and they can happily be shown the door.
royalgull wrote: Had we finished 3rd bottom and mass change needed I'd be in favour of change. When you lot spat the dummy out and wanted to sack Buckle for daring to get rid of Todd, Sills and Hargreaves some of us could see the bigger picture. That was the time change of personell and philosophy was absolutely needed. Right now after finishing 5th it's small details that are required not wholesale change. We need to find the right partner for Damo and Manse, it might be Easton it might be Craig it mmight be Morris or somebody not here yet, we need Aaron Downes to stay fit and we need Michael Poke to get to somewhere near his best form. We don't need to be mending things that aren't broke.
I'm not mending, I'm tweaking. Tweaking us up from 5th and playoff disappointment which was absolutely the best that last year's mob could offer, to 3rd, which will require a mild mannered change of personnel.
As an aside, there was no dummy spitting from me over Sills et al, I wasn't amused, but I wasn't THAT upset. For someone who can see the bigger picture and doesn't appear to appreciate people hung up on sentiment, you seem to be hung up on an awful lot of sentiment.
We, between us, clearly differ in our approach to management. We'll never know which system would carry more success, because we can't play both in the real world.
Matt.
