Jump to content

Do we need to act now? before its to late


Mr X
 Share

Recommended Posts

Lowe for the love of duck hunting! admit poorvliet and the reliance on youngsters was a mistake! you can turn this around and earn a degree of respect from fans if you act now and get somone in who has the experience to keep us up! you know its right :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all knew it would never work - but Rupert is a law to himself and always knows best. I fear we won't see the back of him until this latest experiment is seen to have spectacularly failed. Normally with a manager doing so badly at this point in a season, he would be gone, but Rupert has bet everything on JP and youth succeeding so has to see it through to the bitter end. I just hope that, if we are relegated then he finally admits he got it wrong and goes. I feel numb - I'll be going to the Reading and Man U games but without much enthusiasm for either. :( I certainly won't be going to watch in League 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reliance on youngsters is a necessity.

Why ?

 

As it is, we are not reliant on youngsters, we have a mix which currently includes Davis, Perry, Skacel, and Euell, and until this week also had Wotton, and may yet get Saga back. Most of the teams in this division are a mixture of youth and experience. It wouldn't be so bad if the youngsters were all ours, but alongside Peckhart, Pearce, and Robertson, (none of whom are ours ), we have even got a loanee in from a League 1 club ffs.

 

It's the reliance on crap tactics, a poor manager, and D McG as the lone striker that have got us into this mess.

Edited by badgerx16
Forgot Perry - oops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why ?

 

As it is, we are not reliant on youngsters, we have a mix which currently includes Davis, Perry, Skacel, and Euell, and until this week also had Wotton, and may yet get Saga back. Most of the teams in this division are a mixture of youth and experience. It wouldn't be so bad if the youngsters were all ours, but alongside Peckhart, Pearce, and Robertson, (none of whom are ours ), we have even got a loanee in from a League 1 club ffs.

 

It's the reliance on crap tactics, a poor manager, and D McG as the lone striker that have got us into this mess.

 

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im really dissappointed. To the stage where I dont care. To cheer me up could only be a video (on youtube) of Matt Le Tiss firing balls at Poortvliet and Lowe from 5 yards out like a firing squad may do it. I couldnt trust any of our current players as they may miss the target 99.6% of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why ?

 

As it is, we are not reliant on youngsters, we have a mix which currently includes Davis, Perry, Skacel, and Euell, and until this week also had Wotton, and may yet get Saga back. Most of the teams in this division are a mixture of youth and experience. It wouldn't be so bad if the youngsters were all ours, but alongside Peckhart, Pearce, and Robertson, (none of whom are ours ), we have even got a loanee in from a League 1 club ffs.

 

It's the reliance on crap tactics, a poor manager, and D McG as the lone striker that have got us into this mess.

 

If it wasnt then we would have a team full of experienced prem class players and the youngsters wouldnt get a chance.

 

I wasnt saying that we are the only ones to rely on youth as your right, plenty of other teams have to do it.

 

How its done and the skill to apply what the manager wants is the magic factor in any team. WGS took lowly southampton to its best prem league finish and a FA Cup final with a similar team that got relegated a few years later.

 

Wires are crossed with our club and its looking like its never going to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

zzzz. think about it...if it changed everytime people were worried it wasn't right, we'd change every few months.

 

yes it's a risk to give someone time, but that's always the case. under anyone you could say "but what if it gets worse", "what if it's too late then?". it's nonsense.

 

sometimes change works sometimes it doesnt. but change when the manager isn't doing anything but the expected, and the new person would have the same poor squad and no funds? it's just ridiculous.

 

losing at plymouth is **** but not a surprise. i'd stick with jan even if we went down. just utterly fed up with all the changes and people refusing to accept we're just a poor team. where's the underperformance? seems about right to me. survived just last season, jan gets a far far cheaper and less experienced squad, so if we were to stay up then he's done a terrific job.

 

long term is not 6 months. even most of you lot can surely see that. no? well, probably not. don't tell me, we should employ someone who regularly wins this league, has never failed, get all our loan players back and spend a few million in january without selling anyone? why didn't anyone else think of that.

 

You need to remember though that things could have been done so much better and differently, we don't have time for a solution that takes ages to show any results we are fighting for our lives in a relegation battle and if the right man was appointed in the first place the future would be much brighter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

zzzz. think about it...if it changed everytime people were worried it wasn't right, we'd change every few months.

 

yes it's a risk to give someone time, but that's always the case. under anyone you could say "but what if it gets worse", "what if it's too late then?". it's nonsense.

 

sometimes change works sometimes it doesnt. but change when the manager isn't doing anything but the expected, and the new person would have the same poor squad and no funds? it's just ridiculous.

 

losing at plymouth is **** but not a surprise. i'd stick with jan even if we went down. just utterly fed up with all the changes and people refusing to accept we're just a poor team. where's the underperformance? seems about right to me. survived just last season, jan gets a far far cheaper and less experienced squad, so if we were to stay up then he's done a terrific job.

 

long term is not 6 months. even most of you lot can surely see that. no? well, probably not. don't tell me, we should employ someone who regularly wins this league, has never failed, get all our loan players back and spend a few million in january without selling anyone? why didn't anyone else think of that.

 

You can snooze all you like whilst the club enters a tailspin into the third division.

 

Most others accept that although stability is a great policy when you are melding a team together, it is useless when you have the number of personnel changes we have had recently in the players used. Look at today for example. Why is it preferable to keep a manager for the sake of stability and not for that manager to keep the same team for more than a handful of matches? I'd like you to explain it to me, as either I'm thick, or you have just contradicted yourself with your stability argument. A bit like Lowe, in fact; he can't see that Portvliet is the weakest manager we have had recently and will no doubt argue for stability with his own choice, when his track record over managerial appointments is one of the worst in British football. He didn't allow us much stability with Pearson, did he, so how can he expect us to allow his appointment more time?

 

And yes, your last line is exactly what we should be doing. Replacing the nice but incompetant Dutch guy for somebody who knows what he is doing, keep at least one of those strikers who knew where the goal is and rid us of the scourge that is Lowe who is doing his level best to reduce attendances at St Marys to the level that every match puts our debt levels higher and higher. Great strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can snooze all you like whilst the club enters a tailspin into the third division.

 

Most others accept that although stability is a great policy when you are melding a team together, it is useless when you have the number of personnel changes we have had recently in the players used. Look at today for example. Why is it preferable to keep a manager for the sake of stability and not for that manager to keep the same team for more than a handful of matches? I'd like you to explain it to me, as either I'm thick, or you have just contradicted yourself with your stability argument. A bit like Lowe, in fact; he can't see that Portvliet is the weakest manager we have had recently and will no doubt argue for stability with his own choice, when his track record over managerial appointments is one of the worst in British football. He didn't allow us much stability with Pearson, did he, so how can he expect us to allow his appointment more time?

 

And yes, your last line is exactly what we should be doing. Replacing the nice but incompetant Dutch guy for somebody who knows what he is doing, keep at least one of those strikers who knew where the goal is and rid us of the scourge that is Lowe who is doing his level best to reduce attendances at St Marys to the level that every match puts our debt levels higher and higher. Great strategy.

 

spot on

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

×
×
  • Create New...