Lord Duckhunter

The great thing about forums is that the posters teams and formations dont ever get to go out and play Man Utd, Everton, Man C and Arsenal like Nigel's teams have had to. Christ, how many points did people expect us to get? All this talk of 4-4-2 is nonsense, when we went into taht formation against Wigan we were outplayed and couldn't get hold of the ball. Against Man C, the experts in the MoTD studio said it was a great move leaving Lambert on the bench and then bring him on as a game changer, it so nearly worked. Against Arsenal we were undone by poor errors with people like Gary Neville saying we were set up right.He then contrasted our set up with Readings, is their manager getting stick on their messages boards? Everton, our starting formation confussed them at the start and had Jay Rod buried a very scoreable chance who knows what would have happened. It's too simplistic to balme Nigel and claim he hasn't got his tactics right. Personally I think the midfield are not protecting the back 4 enough. The main culprit is AL, but he's untouchable on here. Lets get AB in nets and then see where we are after our next 4 games.

I thought West Ham looked pretty decent yesterday. They certainly were'nt all about knocking long balls, they defended pretty well and hit QPR on the break well. A good professional performance and there's nothing wrong with that.

That's it now, I'm sick of that ****ing Dave Merrington banging on like he's some sort of Brian Clough like expert on managing in the Premier League, I'll be relying on the experts on here now for updates.

People like Coogan and that chump Johnny Rotten get a free ride from Dimble, they shouldn't be on their spouting their nonsense. He was so one eyed it was unbelievable. He even started blaming the Torys for the Lib/Dem idea of pension pots being used to guantee mortgages. His rant about only Torys having a private education was embaressing, particulary when Kirsty Allsop pointed out that Harperson (who was sat next to him) was privately educated.I thought his rant about how he was a state school pupil, was a great advert for privately educating your children. Dimble needs to grow a pair and treat these b list celebs like he does politicans. Contrast his nonsense with Rhyss-Mogg's points. You may not agree with them, but they were coherent and well thought through, particulary his point about the capital banks held. Coogan had a completely closed mind and just wanted to bash the rich.That's no way to run an ecomony and he should stick to making second rate comedy shows and leave political debate to people without an axe to grind.

The whole problem with tax in this Country was summed up by that idiot Steve Coogan on QT last night. When discussing the riots in Sapin and could they happen here, he called for higher tax on the wealthy, his exact words were that it may not bring in much more money, but it sends a signal to the masses in these tough times. That's the problem in a nutshell, political posturing and punishing people, rather than setting taxes at levels that bring the maximum in. I thought this arguement had been won after the disasterous tax policies of Labour and Grocer Heath in the 70's, but now the politics of envy are back. This weak Government seem unable to grasp that you can tax people less and bring in more revenue. Just to chuck around the phrase "wealth tax" is just lazy. Does wealth include pension pots, or is it just that you live in a big house and have a nice car. Are the rates different for different parts of the Country, because wealth in London has a completely different threshold than wealth in Hull. Do people seriously believe that the wealthy can not drive a coach and horses through any wealth tax, reducing their rate with clever accountants. Until we see concrete propsals about how "wealth" is judged and what exactly you are taxing, it just looks to me like an extension of the council tax. I guess calling it a mansion tax is easier politically than saying "we intend to raise council tax and put in an extra band at the top".

Rollocks. There would have been no need for tactical voting if we had PR. Take away Labour voters keeping Torys out and Torys keeping Labour out and their support will collapse. The last UK wide PR election, they came 4th.

The Lib/Dems USP was that they weren't Tory's and they weren't Labour. They attracted Labour votes where the Tory's were strong and visa versa. How many votes did Huhme pick up from labour supporters voting to keep the Tory out? Those votes have now gone. My Labour supporting mate votes Lib/dem in Poole because there's more chance of going to the moon in a shoe box than Labour winning the seat. He now hates the Lib/Dems even more than the Tory Party and doubts if he'll vote next time. Couple that with the loss of votes due to this pledge nonsense and they are heading back to 1970's type MP numbers. 2 examples. Solihull -175 votes Dorset Mid and Poole North -269 It doesn't take Jon Snow to work out that these seats were won because of voters voting tactically. Will they again? Of the 200 most marginal seats 27 of them are Lib/Dem ones, that's a high % when you only have 57 seats. Of the safest 200 only 4 are Lib/Dem ones. Clegg's pledge will hurt him in Sheffield and Huhme is toast in Eastleigh. Dont forget they lost 5 seats at a time everyone "agreed with Nick".

Perhaps the coppers outside Downing Street are Plebs. Gordon certainly doesn't want to follow Obama's lead and shake their hands.

That's the thing in a nutshell, and to be fair to Clegg ect they haven't really tried to weasel out of it. Why is it that labour had a manifesto commitment not to introduce/raise fees, broke it, yet didn't get the stick that Cleggover and his chums are getting? The reason in my opinion, is because people thought they were different and the people can see the original pledge was pure opportunism and political posturing. One phrase you wont hear at the next election is "I agree with Nick". Clegg has been found out, and if "Dr" cable becomes leader, he'll go the same way. I cant think of a time when politicans of all 3 parties were so poor and useless. Looking forward to UKIP trouncing the whole lot of them at the Euro elections.

But they knew that when they signed their "pledge".

Surely the morally right thing to do was to ensure that this long held belief (pledge if you like) around uni fees was part of the agreement. They sat down and negotiated a coalition agreement. Quite clearly Uni fees were not that important to them.

It means so much to them, but clearly not quite as much as a ministerial car.

Their "fully costed" manifesto said they would half the Department of Health.

Complete and utter rubbish, and if the Lib/Dems go into the next election trying to claim there would have been no tuition fees if they had governed alone (god forbid) they'll lose even more seats than last time. If you really think that a Government can tax its people enough to fund free uni places in this day and age, then you're clearly drinking more than Charlie Kennedy. At least Paddy Pantsdown showed some honesty over this, he called it "opportunistic". Bloody hell that's how far the sandal wearers have fallen that Pantsdown is the most statesmen like one of them now.............

The stupid pledge was political opportunism at its very worst. As they have spent 100 years as a protest party they thought they could be really clever and hoover up some votes, knowing full well they would not be able to deliver. There is no credibility in blaming the Torys. They negotiated a coalition agreement, they could have made tuition fees a red line. The simple truth of the matter was they knew all along it was an unaffordable pledge but signed it to get votes, pure and simple. It's like me telling Mrs Duck that I would never **** Pippa Midleton, cause I know I'll never get the chance. It's great for politics that they got their comeuppence over this, perhaps it will make them think again about their electrol tactics. They fight Tory seats to the right and Labour ones to the left. They are chancers who will say anything to get elected. Dont forget they lost seats at the last election. What it be better under "Dr" Cable who also signed the pledge. He has somehow managed to fool some people that he's some sort of wise old head, in fact he's just a doddery old fool. I really hope he gets the chance to lead this party, because people will see this chancer for what he is.

Jones had been number 1 and a Premiership keeper for a few years. Gazza hasn't played 50 games in his entire career. Unless he really is a boy wonder ala Shilts, I expect Boruc to start Sat. In fact if Gazza does and gives us a Bart like performance (which can happen to any youngster) Nigel will have made a balls up. Goodison is not the place to play a young Keeper when you have an experianced international on the bench.

I remember when Richard Wright came in under Pearson. despite not having played much lately, he set about organsing our back 4 and we looked more confident for it. I don't know if Boruc is that sort of guy, but I'd have thought that 2 years in Italy mean he will have some sort of understand of what's required.

Goalkeeper is the one position that you can get away with not being 100% match fit for. I expect Boruc to start at Everton and be our number 1. He was training with Everton and expected to sign a deal with them, until we managed to beat them to a deal. Surely being installed as number 1 will have tipped the balance in favour of signing for us, as he wasn't going to dislodge Tim Howard. gazza did ok, but hardly had a thing to do, and if you wanted to be really critical you could look at him for their goal. Goodison is no place to continue with this experiment and risk a Bart like Blackpool performance, it could set him back. I would go Boruc number 1, Kelvin number 2 and loan out Gazza to a Championship side if possible.

I found the doormen at the Alfred a bit strange as well, maybe it was under police orders but no common sense at all. After the game I go in there for one with my 13 year old. Both of us had Saints shirts on and yet the doormen wanted to see our tickets to prove we were home supporters. I'm sure a middle aged Villa supporter is going to come down, change into a Saints shirt from 2 years ago, get his nipper to change into this seasons Saints shirt, just to kick off in the pub afterwards. To top it all the Saints ale in there is shiete as well.

I once heard Ray Wilkins on Sky talking about this subject in relation to Bridge and Cole when England were weak on the left of midfield. He said left mid is a completely different postion and needs completely different skill sets and awareness to play there. Said that it's easier for a full back to switch sides, than to push up to midfield.

I maybe a sad old git but I do think that Clyne was a **** for jumping in the crowd. If he'd picked upa second yellow for a mistimed tackle with 10 mins to go, I'm sure a few more would start to agree. Lawro is a plum, but I thought Redknapp was ok, good praise for Nigel and "they'll do well to keep him long term" should be noted by NC.

And NC has been judging Nigel since he set foot in the door. I dont believe Sharp or Hammond were good enough and fully support ditching them. My point is that maybe NC feels the same about Nigel. Nigel is paid to make judgement calls like that and NC is also in a position that requires him to do the same. I'm not saying he should get rid of NA, merely pointing out that if he does he's just making a judgement call on NA ability in the top flight. Nigel didn't give Deano or Billy Sharpe 12 games to prove themselves he went with his gut feeling and from what he's seen in the past. NC will be doing the same.

I really do wonder at some of our posters and their grip on reality. They seem to package up opinion as fact. Benitez is in a different league than Nigel Adkins. I hope Nigel grows the club and is with us in 10 years time, but come his retirement from the game, if he's achieved half of what Benitez has he'll be the most sucsessful English manager for a generation. I can understand people saying Benitez is not for us my , but you cant knock what he's a achieved in the game. If NC is looking to replace Nigel, then the players will be impressed if a man with Benitez's CV walks through the door to replace him. For those saying it's unfair to judge NA on 4 games. 4 games is a lot more than Nigel judged Deano and Billy Sharp on. Football is ruthless..........

Adkins decided Deano and Billy Sharpe aren't good enough for the Premiership, perhaps NC feels the same about him. I think Nigel has done a fantastic job and would love to see him stay and carry it on. BUT, I feel we have more chance of staying up under Benitez. That's not to say I'm sure Nigel will take us down. At the end of the day staying up is the be all and end all.

The difference between what Neville said about us and Reading was vast. He said that our defensive shape was pretty good and had a bit of praise, whereas basically said Reading were a bit of a shambles. This suggest to me that Nigel does in fact know what he's doing, and sets us up right. It's just down to errors. Watching Neville last night highlighted how much these people know, compared to some of the "experts" we have on here. Most posters critical of our play always seem to exclude Clyne from critisism of the back 4 and keeper. Yet Neville blamed him for 2 goals. I guess it's about opinions because Fat Sam on Goals on Sunday blamed Lallana for not closing down Artetta for the third goal and Yoshi for stepping up, whereas Neville blamed Fonte's starting position and the gap between the 2 centre halves. What they both agreed on was that our shape was right. If our shape "right", then Nigel must be doing something right and maybe he does know a bit more than some give him credit for.