hughieslastminutegoal

Can he still play at fullback?

So to sum up, your view is that everyone should just be quiet, cross their fingers and pray we stay up, because there is nothing else to do other than just hope? I've made this observation before: many people supported the appointment of SCW "because he had a winner's mentality". THEREFORE they supported his appointment in the belief that his mentality brought something else to the club that wasn't already there. THEREFORE without changing the playing staff, they believed that a change in psychology and approach can bring improvement in results. THEREFORE if you accept the above statements are true, you must see that your original post is nonsense?

I expect you loved his wrestling match on the ground with the vertically-challenged Derek Dooley against Leyton Orient(?) at the Dell? Best laugh ever.

People on here have defended Paterson's lunge on the basis that his studs touched the ball before clattering into shin. On the same basis, I reckon it was a pen because it looks to have touched McG's upper arm before touching his head. In any case, any player who jumps at a lofted ball AND lifts his arm straight up AND turns his head away so he can't see it is a dope. When coaching kids about making a wall, you always tell them to face up and try hard NOT to turn their backs on the ball when it comes in.

Doesn't really matter, does it? We are now so lacking in threat that we are being utterly patronised by Ferguson. "We didn't want to humiliate them..." If all three of their goals had been disallowed they'd just have scored three others, just about whenever they decided to up the pressure.

You gotta be joking. That would have caused a riot in most sunday pub league football, where terrible tackles are the norm. Patterson may have done it in a second of over-exuberance, but that isn't the point - it was a really bad challenge and deserved red.

Yep, we have a good system for playing youngsters. Trouble is we have no system for winning football matches.

How about you trying to remember we are supposed to be a CCC professional football team, not a bloody tyro league side.

You said previously: You've therefore already answered your own question. You say we shouldn't write off these players but you yourself say the signings have the potential to get us relegated. People like me are not completely writing them off their "potential", but feel that this season they will not be good enough to stop us getting relegated - and you have already agreed with that. So I'm rather lost as to what your posts are really trying to say. Since we have very little money, why sign and pay the wages of players "for the future" and stuff our ability to get in some players who at least will give us a chance of survival? And with a manager who clearly has no idea who is coming in next, and how good they are likely to be, we will be needing a miracle if we are to scrape into the 4th from bottom spot. We absolutely must STOP SIGNING "POTENTIAL" AND GET IN SOME PROVEN ABILITY before the end of this window. As an aside, I am utterly flummoxed by JP not wanting to, or being able to recruit good dutch players because they aren't suitable for this league when our stall was set out to make us play the dutch way, and he himself has no variation in tactics. Staggering logic.

Because he's not buying for himself, he's buying people who are to perform for us the unwashed masses.

Come on Grandad, can't you tell a post from Salvadore Dali when you read one?

Because, as some have said, McGoldrick was closer to Paterson this time, so you get:- Davis James Cork Perry Skacel -----Gillet--Gobern----- --Smith----Holmes -------Mcgoldrick------ -------Paterson-------- Which more simply can be seen as Davis James Cork Perry Skacel Smith-----Gillet--Gobern----Holmes -------Mcgoldrick------ -------Paterson-------- When England played 4-2-4 in 1966, it was really 4-4-2 because Peters and Ball were the midfield "wingers" But was it really 4-4-1-1 because Hurst palyed slightly behind Hunt? So the point is if you are pedantic you can argue the toss about formations forever. Even the old-fashioned 2-3-5 was just a programme layout. They didn't actually play like that, well maybe Corinthians did in 1893.

I went off my own bat when I was 11, with a mate who had been taken by his grandad a few times before. Saints were in Div2 (1963) then, and it was exciting, and real value for money, when kids hanging around for autographs were much more than tolerated, and weren't regarded as nuisances. I have taken 2 sons along in the past, one of whom came to regard himself as a fan, but these days he really can't be bothered. He'd rather play Sat and Sun leagues than watch go-nowhere football at inflated prices, played by spoiled brats who think the public owe them a living. But I have a feeling this is more to do with the over-hyping of Prem & Euro football, and anything less than challenging for promotion to the Prem just doesn't cut it with many people these days, especially at these prices. There is just too much else to do nowadays than have to wrap yourself up in being a die-hard fan of an unsuccessful club. That's just how it is now, and I do't hold out a lot of hope for there continuing to be 4 full-time professional divisions for an awful lot longer.

Is the difference a bonus for keeping us up, perhaps? And aren't the "golden Dutch Duo" on bonuses if they do well? OK, so that may well be saved at the end of the day, but people need to compare like with like, and I doubt Lowe will come out and do that (confidentiality with regard to contracts).

Are you sure? Wasn't it that one of the wingers just couldn't hold his position, and continually drifted in (i.e McGoldrick)? Fortuitous, accidental 442 perhaps, but JP won't learn from that. His formation discourages attacking play from fullbacks and if the midfielders don't attack the box with speed, you'll be always crossing to a lone striker, with no-one to feed off knockdowns (even if we had someone who could win something in the air). Our version of 433 or 451 is just too rigid, and if that's the players fault then find an effin system their lack of flexibility can at least cope with. I thought this was called coaching and tactical nous.

I think it was more "I'll give you £1m for your player, but £1.25m if you take my nipper as well" said Mr Pullis Snr.

I got shouted down on here right at the start of the season when I said why on earth were we offering a 3 year deal to a player of his age who had such a long injury layoff, and when we were so short of money. But apparently some people thought it was ok for Jan to sign him .. "there are such things as videos you know", and "our coaches must have recommended him", blah blah. There's none so blind as those who will not see.

Ah, I think you've cracked it... Total Football means having a football on the pitch at all times.

More to the point, do you have any managers that could do better than our Dutch Conference semi-pro equivalent level "coach"?

We will be sorting out our new strategy and tactics for beating Manure, so a 3-0 win is a certainty, with a trio from Mr MaGoodrick.

Are you sure? They can't be all yours, you really don't sound old enough to have 4 kids.

Interesting - so Lowe could look the saviour with much less effort than he has implied?

You made me larf here ... that somehow 0-4 might be another one of those surprises!

Well, "A Merry Christmas and a Happy and Prosperous New To You", then. The same to the other Nick, plus a better memory, as it probably was him!

So, Jan's first signing, sorry, Hockaday's first recommendation, and given a 3 year deal!!! is now surplus to requirements less than half a season in. Quel surprise. I did have quite a tete-a-tete right at the start of the season with one of the Nicks on here about who's signing was Wotton etc. etc., and that when you are skint you need to be particularly careful who you sign, and for how long. The whole of the club's management is being shown up as incapable.