Jump to content

Sorry to say it...

Unbelievable Jeff

By Unbelievable Jeff,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
It obviously depends on how far developed youngsters are - perhaps the conveyor belt isn't as chockablock as is made out. At the same time, the manager has a squad to balance -players to keep match fit who could be starting in the league or the cup if a there are injuries or suspensions. In the real world, they're called trade-offs.

 

But you started banging on just now about how else do we blood our young players if we don't use the league cup? Well theres your answer, we aren't using the league cup, not like you make out we are anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
As if your way of thinking is the only sane and correct one?

 

You've clearly missed the various parts of my posts (all tonight) where I said that mine is just an opinion. As are others. Not surprised you got confused though, to be honest. If you can find a post from me tonight that equalises the straw man effort you've just posted then I'll certainly apologise for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
But you started banging on just now about how else do we blood our young players if we don't use the league cup? Well theres your answer, we aren't using the league cup, not like you make out we are anyway.

 

And? It's called a spectrum -some players are further developed than others. There's no point in starting a youngster if the game is going to fly by him and he's going to have a mare. Others are further down the road, though still far off from starting week in, week out in which case, cups are perfect inductions. Perhaps Reed is the only current youngster at this stage.

 

Don't know enough about our youth players to be able place them along this spectrum. But certainly don't think every single youngster we produce is destined for greatness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
You've clearly missed the various parts of my posts (all tonight) where I said that mine is just an opinion. As are others. Not surprised you got confused though, to be honest. If you can find a post from me tonight that equalises the straw man effort you've just posted then I'll certainly apologise for it.

 

It appears to me that you put yourself as some sort of arbiter saying people are 'doing well' and 'normally alright'. This whole place is about posting opinions and many will view their own as absolutes and not be swayed. I found it odd you felt the need to pick me up for it and then started rambling on about infectious humour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
It appears to me that you put yourself as some sort of arbiter saying people are 'doing well' and 'normally alright'. This whole place is about posting opinions and many will view their own as absolutes and not be swayed. I found it odd you felt the need to pick me up for it and then started rambling on about infectious humour.

 

Again Whelk; I've got no idea what you're trying to do. Apart from pick an argument, which seems to be your thing . I just can't work out what you're arguing against, other than that's it "me". If you've got a point (or points) that you disagree with, then fine. Address them, if you will. I'm sure I'll have a go at answering them. But it seems to me you just want to appear a bit contrary and funny, without actually asking anything. Maybe I missed it? I really don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
And? It's called a spectrum -some players are further developed than others. There's no point in starting a youngster if the game is going to fly by him and he's going to have a mare. Others are further down the road, though still far off from starting week in, week out in which case, cups are perfect inductions. Perhaps Reed is the only current youngster at this stage.

 

Don't know enough about our youth players to be able place them along this spectrum. But certainly don't think every single youngster we produce is destined for greatness.

 

Maybe that's why we didn't play all the kids like at Sunderland like you claimed we did at the start of this discussion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
Maybe that's why we didn't play all the kids like at Sunderland like you claimed we did at the start of this discussion?

 

Playing two or three youngsters is not trivial. Starting clyne (chambers), wanyama (reed) or bringing on lambert instead of gallagher would have given us a much better chance of winning the game given how dire Sunderland were. Would have liked to see Isgrove but that's about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
Playing two or three youngsters is not trivial. Starting clyne (chambers), wanyama (reed) or bringing on lambert instead of gallagher would have given us a much better chance of winning the game given how dire Sunderland were. Would have liked to see Isgrove but that's about it.

 

You made out earlier they were complete Rookies, they weren't. chambers has already made several premier league starts, Reed was the only untried youngster we blooded, unless you want to call Gallagher's little run out at the end that too. You made out at the start we were practically playing a youth team, we weren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
You made out earlier they were complete Rookies, they weren't. chambers has already made several premier league starts, Reed was the only untried youngster we blooded, unless you want to call Gallagher's little run out at the end that too. You made out at the start we were practically playing a youth team, we weren't.

 

No I didn't - I said I am for using (league) cup games to blood youngsters. It's a general principle - hence why I mentioned other examples- rather than being specifically about the Sunderland game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
Again Whelk; I've got no idea what you're trying to do. Apart from pick an argument, which seems to be your thing . I just can't work out what you're arguing against, other than that's it "me". If you've got a point (or points) that you disagree with, then fine. Address them, if you will. I'm sure I'll have a go at answering them. But it seems to me you just want to appear a bit contrary and funny, without actually asking anything. Maybe I missed it? I really don't know.

 

Right here goes a summary from my perspective

 

I post on this thread about being be interested to know who supported selection of under strength team on Wed.

You reply saying what woudl it show

I actually think fair point and agree but in your eyes make the mistake of calling those that support it and in effect write off the cups as 'w@nky'

You patronisingly reply saying I was doing well until then and end with some smug provocative comment about 'the limitations of thinking eh'

I sarcastically reply about appreciating guidance - so a comment about what you picked me up on. And reiterate my view on the cups

You then say you are confused although suspect you weren't really and some comment along the the lines of run along.

I am genuinely confused as to what you are on about.

I saw another post about an M-boarder and you saying he is normally alright Incidentally - is replacing M for mong a concession to become up to date with accepted opinion or would you rather use 'mong' in the way so many Neanderthal f*ckwits use it as a derogatory term on here.

I then directly quoted you in my reply

 

And here we are.

 

Picking an argument isn't my thing but I will reply to smug directed comments. Interesting to note how so many replied abusively to Tom so I wouldn't take the moral high ground as the well rounded eloquent one. Feel like there is a little bit of a pack on here who like to intimidate and bully but I am not one to kowtow.

 

Anyway the amount of time put into this response indicates I care too much although I genuinely hope it does help any misunderstanding

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
No I didn't - I said I am for using (league) cup games to blood youngsters. It's a general principle - hence why I mentioned other examples- rather than being specifically about the Sunderland game.

 

When i said we played a weakened team you jumped down my throat saying that I wanted my cake and eat it and when else where we meant to play the kids, when it turned out that only one had actually made their debut on Wednesday you started all the back tracking you are doing now. FWIW I agree it is the right place to bring them in, but I'd surround a couple of them with good senior pros rather than the likes of Hooliveld, Lee and Fox who should only play if their is no one else fit in the entire squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)
When i said we played a weakened team you jumped down my throat saying that I wanted my cake and eat it and when else where we meant to play the kids, when it turned out that only one had actually made their debut on Wednesday you started all the back tracking you are doing now. FWIW I agree it is the right place to bring them in, but I'd surround a couple of them with good senior pros rather than the likes of Hooliveld, Lee and Fox who should only play if their is no one else fit in the entire squad.

 

I said you wanted your cake because you said we should be going out to win cups - I simply said that for a club that prides itself on developing youth, the cup, among other things, is a great learning experience. And that there's a tension between wanting to win things and bringing through youth that is raw and not quite ready. It applies not just to the league cup and Wednesday night but every competition we play in -after all, it's a discussion we've been having for years.

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
I said you wanted your cake because you said we should be going out to win cups - I simply said that for a club that prides itself on developing youth, the cup, among other things, is a great learning experience. And that there's a tension between wanting to win things and bringing through youth that is raw and not quite ready. It applies not just to the league cup and Wednesday night but every competition we play in -after all, it's a discussion we've been having for years.

 

Expect you didn't did you. You got quite upset and indignant that the league cup was she we should be playing our youth and then when it was pur to you we'd only played one debutant on Wednesday came out with the stuff you're coming out with now. I agree with much of what you've said later on, it was the first bit that was a load of bol*ocks, but you realised that yourself didn't you sunshine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
I am Turkish. I am the best fan ever.

 

The rest of you are puny fools that should kneel before me blah blah zzzzzz.

 

There Are two reasons why I appear superior to most of you. The first one is because I am, the second one is because most of you talk complete and utter bol*ocks. I hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)
Expect you didn't did you. You got quite upset and indignant that the league cup was she we should be playing our youth and then when it was pur to you we'd only played one debutant on Wednesday came out with the stuff you're coming out with now. I agree with much of what you've said later on, it was the first bit that was a load of bol*ocks, but you realised that yourself didn't you sunshine.

 

 

Been my point throughout - the purpose of cup competitions. glad you've finally woken up and grasped it. Took a while mind you.

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
Been my point throughout - glad you've finally woken up and grasped it. Took a while mind you.

 

So it's taken you about 15 posts, a succession of straw man arguments, backtracking quicker than an Italian tank and getting yourself tied up in knots to make your point. Well done you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
So it's taken you about 15 posts, a succession of straw man arguments, backtracking quicker than an Italian tank and getting yourself tied up in knots to make your point. Well done you.

 

Would have been the first post had you grasped a very simple point. But hey it wouldnt be a mongboard if you didn't need to be patient and tolerant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
Would have been the first post had you grasped a very simple point. But hey it wouldnt be a mongboard if you didn't need to be patient and tolerant.

 

That when I said we'd fielded a weakened team and you Immediately started banging your 'this is when we play the untested kids' drum I should have pointed out then we'd only played one? Fair point I guess would have saved you a lot of embarrassment

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
That when I said we'd fielded a weakened team and you Immediately started banging your 'play the untested kids' drum I should have pointed out then we'd only played one? Fair point I guess would have saved you a lot of embarrassment

 

I was making a GENERAL POINT - hence why you had a pop at me about Shaw/Stevenage and how I was claiming (though I never said anything of the sort) that the only way to blood youth was through cups. Suggests that you knew my point wasn't limited to the Sunderland game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted (edited)
I was making a GENERAL POINT - hence why you had a pop at me about Shaw/Stevenage and how I was claiming (though I never said anything of the sort) that the only way to blood youth was through cups. Suggests that you knew my point wasn't limited to the Sunderland game.

 

Ahh right I see. So when you jumped down my throat for saying we fielded a weakened team against Sunderland and wanting my cake and eating it because without playing the kids in this tournament they'd never get a chance and started your 'we use this tournament to play the untested kids' drum banging, you weren't actually talking about the Sunderland game because we only played one kid in that one. It was general point, right about the competition as a whole, right? So Surely you must have been referring to the previous round where the total untried kids we played was none. surely at Barnsley, bottom the champion ship and leaking goals would have been the ideal time to thrown in a few untried kids? Indeed we did. One started. Although to be fair we did play a few late subs when the game was won of course. Yep we definitely re using the league cup to try out the kids, what are we to do now we are out of it? generally of course.

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...