Jump to content

Stu Armstrong


maysie
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, East Kent Saint said:

Just because he’s named in the squad it doesn’t mean he’s fit to play or he will join up for the match preliminarys !

Of course it doesn't, but why name a player that clearly isn't fit (apparently) and then have to replace him with someone else? It is non-sensical (if he is not fit).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, VectisSaint said:

Of course it doesn't, but why name a player that clearly isn't fit (apparently) and then have to replace him with someone else? It is non-sensical (if he is not fit).

Yes but it what National teams do , esp after Fergie kept preventing Man U players turning out for their National teams !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, northam soul said:

Haven’t won a premier league game without him in the side for nearly 2 years.

That if I may say is insane

Defo a crazy stat, but it doesn't surprise me either. For me, he's the first name on the starting 11 team sheet every time. He's so pivotal to the way we play. We don't have anyone else with the same attributes, and without him Ralph's system falters.

Edited by trousers
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, trousers said:

Defo a crazy stat, but it doesn't surprise me either. For me, he's the first name on the starting 11 team sheet every time. He's so pivotal to the way we play. We don't have anyone else with the same attributes, and without him Ralph's system falters.

Not good that 'the plan' revolves around a single player, and there is no plan B - bad tactics from the manager.  I agree with everything you say, but I think it puts an awful lot of pressure on the player, fans thinking that as soon as he gets back in the side all our woes are over.

Stewart Armstrong is a good player, one of our best players, but not sure he will turn our to be the messiah and turn our season around single-handedly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, northam soul said:

Haven’t won a premier league game without him in the side for nearly 2 years.

That if I may say is insane

It tells us just how feebly inadequate his replacements are and clearly the club have not done enough to sign an adequate player to fill in for Armstrong who picks up quite a few knocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, beavis17 said:

Very strange reply to Blackmore’s question in the PC there from Ralph still. 

Almost a hint that Armstrong needs to work harder if he wants to get back in the team.

Yep, I thought that too... It's not really the answer you'd expect about a player that is simply returning from injury. I know it puts me on the fringes of the conspiracy theorist camp but there are definite vibes that suggest there is more to it they're overtly letting on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, trousers said:

Yep, I thought that too... It's not really the answer you'd expect about a player that is simply returning from injury. I know it puts me on the fringes of the conspiracy theorist camp but there are definite vibes that suggest there is more to it they're overtly letting on.

Yes if Stuart Armstrong starts against Chelsea will be extremely interesting to know what brought about a seemingly miraculous unexpected recovery. Was he unable or unwilling to play or was Ralph not willing to select him, the plot certainly seems to be thickening.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Micky said:

Not good that 'the plan' revolves around a single player, and there is no plan B - bad tactics from the manager.  I agree with everything you say, but I think it puts an awful lot of pressure on the player, fans thinking that as soon as he gets back in the side all our woes are over.

Stewart Armstrong is a good player, one of our best players, but not sure he will turn our to be the messiah and turn our season around single-handedly. 

Excellent post, except I am sure we never have a game plan that revolves around a single player (well, not since MLT hung up his boots - was it bad for Bally to do that then?) and Ralph has clearly used plans A, B, C and D this season. But hey, keep those digs coming......

By the way, which fans have indicated that our woes will all be over once Stuey returns? (And you do realise that he only missed 5 PL matches last season and 8 the one before?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HnycS said:

Yes if Stuart Armstrong starts against Chelsea will be extremely interesting to know what brought about a seemingly miraculous unexpected recovery. Was he unable or unwilling to play or was Ralph not willing to select him, the plot certainly seems to be thickening.

Why is it 'miraculous and unexpected'? I was of the understanding it was a minor injury which went on a bit longer than expected. A couple of weeks ago Ralph said that Theo was just ahead of Stuey in recovery. He also said Theo had ben training with the first team last week; so really not a shock that Stuey is training this week. Also the reason why the Scotland manager selected him for their squad - because he had spoken to the club and had been told SA was likely to be back in full training this week.

Why do people always love to invent conspiracy theories, and stoke them at every opportunity?

For what it's worth, I doubt Stuey will start on Saturday. I think he will be on the bench, as will Theo. Whether either get on the pitch is another matter. Probably more likely Theo will than Stu.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Minsk said:

Excellent post, except I am sure we never have a game plan that revolves around a single player (well, not since MLT hung up his boots - was it bad for Bally to do that then?) and Ralph has clearly used plans A, B, C and D this season. But hey, keep those digs coming......

By the way, which fans have indicated that our woes will all be over once Stuey returns? (And you do realise that he only missed 5 PL matches last season and 8 the one before?)

Whoa sorry for any offence caused, perhaps you should go back, read trousers post that I replied to, get some context, and then come back.  Get yourself a chill pill, forums are about opinions, they will differ,  we don't all have our rose tints on. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why Stuart has to fight for his place back, no one is keeping him out of the side as they are inept. They're just playing by default. If he's fit and ready, out goes one of Ely, Redmond or Moussa and we'd automatically be a better side.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Not sure why Stuart has to fight for his place back, no one is keeping him out of the side as they are inept. They're just playing by default. If he's fit and ready, out goes one of Ely, Redmond or Moussa and we'd automatically be a better side.

Agree. Outside of Ings, Armstrong has been our next best attacking threat the past two seasons. Great to have him back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, woodsaint1 said:

Agree. Outside of Ings, Armstrong has been our next best attacking threat the past two seasons. Great to have him back

No way he can be fit for Saturday though surely having been out for so long. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Micky said:

Whoa sorry for any offence caused, perhaps you should go back, read trousers post that I replied to, get some context, and then come back.  Get yourself a chill pill, forums are about opinions, they will differ,  we don't all have our rose tints on. 

I'm perfectly chilled. I did read the post you responded to. I also listened to what Ralph had to say. Nothing surprising in there at all. Do you honestly think he should have said something like: 'Yes it fantastic Stu is back in training this week. Even though he hasn't played at all since pre-season he will definitely be in the starting 11, as he is much better than the other options I have'?

All Ralph said was that he would see on the weekend if Stu would be ready to be in the squad and, as every manager says about virtually every player, that he would need to show in training that he deserves to be in the starting 11 when he is ready. Don't see anything wrong there at all. It would all sorts of wrong messages to many players had he said the opposite. It's about managing your workforce (squad in his case).

From that you formed the opinion that Ralph build a game plan around one player and never has a plan B. My opinion is different. Sorry if you didn't like my sarcastic reply, but I have just as much right to post my opinion as you.

By the way, you failed to answer either of questions: 1. Was Bally wrong to build a team around MLT? 2. Which fans have said all our woes will be over once Stuey returns to first team action?

 

Edited by Minsk
accidentally posted before I had finished typing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, JRM said:

No way he can be fit for Saturday though surely having been out for so long. 

Exactly. But Ralph saying he would have to wait and see is obviously an indication of a rift in the squad................ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Minsk said:

I'm perfectly chilled. I did read the post you responded to. I also listened to what Ralph had to say. Nothing surprising in there at all. Do you honestly think he should have said something like: 'Yes it fantastic Stu is back in training this week. Even though he hasn't played at all since pre-season he will definitely be in the starting 11, as he is much better than the other options I have'?

All Ralph said was that he would see on the weekend if Stu would be ready to be in the squad and, as every manager says about virtually every player, that he would need to show in training that he deserves to be in the starting 11 when he is ready. Don't see anything wrong there at all. It would all sorts of wrong messages to many players had he said the opposite. It's about managing your workforce (squad in his case).

From that you formed the opinion that Ralph build a game plan around one player and never has a plan B. My opinion is different. Sorry if you didn't like my sarcastic reply, but I have just as much right to post my opinion as you.

By the way, you failed to answer either of questions: 1. Was Bally wrong to build a team around MLT? 2. Which fans have said all our woes will be over once Stuey returns to first team action?

 

Yeah - I didn't answer any of your questions because evidently you just want an argument.  Have a nice day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Micky said:

Yeah - I didn't answer any of your questions because evidently you just want an argument.  Have a nice day.

No I don't. You asked me to get context and come back. I did just that. You are the one who has responded somewhat 'confrontationally' both times. Please don't get keep getting upset when others have different opinions to you and aren't afraid to call out your drivel. 

As for the questions, you made sweeping statements with zero evidence to back up your (wrong) opinion.

Personally, I would have answered them like this:

1. Of course Bally was right to build a team around MLG. He was a unique player who we were blessed to have. However, without such a rare talent, it shouldn't be done. We don't have such a talent in our squad now, which is why Ralph doesn't do this (even though you, apparently, think he does).

2. I haven't seen any poster say all our woes will be over once Stu is back. (Yet you claim there are people who think this way).

My thinking is that you didn't answer those questions because you know that if you did so honestly your answers would prove your early post wrong.

Have a nice day too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whitey, that was Minsk being sarcastic and maybe you were too. It's hard to tell on here! There are certainly plenty of conspiracy theorists here when a player is out.

When he does get back he'll add a different aspect to our play with his carrying of the ball in the final third. I sometimes think Livramento has the pace and ability to do something similar.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

That's quite a leap of logic there. Player out injured for several weeks not coming straight back into the first team lineup shock.

It wasn't me saying that, it was other people on here. There was whole conversation about it above. I agree, that is certainly quite a leap in logic - or maybe people looking for something that isn't there/anything to bash Ralph with?

As I said elsewhere, I will be very surprised if Stu starts tomorrow. He might be on the bench (no harm seeing as we can have 9 on there) but, again, not so sure he will get any actual game time even if he is. No doubt there will uproar in the pre-match build up/post match thread should he either be left out entirely or fail to get on the pitch though.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, suewhistle said:

Whitey, that was Minsk being sarcastic and maybe you were too. It's hard to tell on here! There are certainly plenty of conspiracy theorists here when a player is out.

When he does get back he'll add a different aspect to our play with his carrying of the ball in the final third. I sometimes think Livramento has the pace and ability to do something similar.

 

Then I shall apologise to the gentleman. Sarcasm doesn't come across too well in the printed form.

5 hours ago, Minsk said:

It wasn't me saying that, it was other people on here. There was whole conversation about it above. I agree, that is certainly quite a leap in logic - or maybe people looking for something that isn't there/anything to bash Ralph with?

As I said elsewhere, I will be very surprised if Stu starts tomorrow. He might be on the bench (no harm seeing as we can have 9 on there) but, again, not so sure he will get any actual game time even if he is. No doubt there will uproar in the pre-match build up/post match thread should he either be left out entirely or fail to get on the pitch though.......

My apologies sir 

Edited by Whitey Grandad
My apologies for my apologoies
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem with some of these threads is that you have to read a fair bit to understand the situation and like myself and many others you probably don't bother so I'm sure Minsk understands that.  Plus if you ignore some posters it makes it even more an 'er, what?' situation!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/09/2021 at 03:23, northam soul said:

Haven’t won a premier league game without him in the side for nearly 2 years.

That if I may say is insane

couldn't you say the same for James Ward Prowse?

 

Edited by SaintTex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know why we bothered having him on the bench today, clearly not fit enough, keep him working on recovery and get withdrawn from the Scotland squad. Being away for two weeks international duty is no good for us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said:

He has been back in training for longer than Armstrong.

Exactly this. As I said before, anyone expecting Stu to go straight in today having not played at all this season and only having trained for this week was going to be very disappointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JRM said:

Don't know why we bothered having him on the bench today, clearly not fit enough, keep him working on recovery and get withdrawn from the Scotland squad. Being away for two weeks international duty is no good for us. 

I'd be very happy for him to get some game time on the clock against the Faroe Islands. Good prep for when he comes back to us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
6 hours ago, Minsk said:

Zero minutes on the pitch in either match for Scotland. Doesn't help his match fitness and doesn't help us. Would have been better if he had stayed with us, imho.

Agree waste of time, should have withdrawn from the squad and focused on getting fit for the Leeds game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Minsk said:

Zero minutes on the pitch in either match for Scotland. Doesn't help his match fitness and doesn't help us. Would have been better if he had stayed with us, imho.

 

1 hour ago, JRM said:

Agree waste of time, should have withdrawn from the squad and focused on getting fit for the Leeds game. 

 

58 minutes ago, SFC Forever said:

who is to say that he wasn't training with Scotland.

He was...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

 

 

He was...

 

I'm sure he was, but I doubt it would have been to the level he would have been training had he stayed here. Could have even arranged a match for him to play 60 minutes in. Even if it was against the U23s. Given the zero minutes for Scotland, I sincerely doubt he will be starting on Saturday.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lighthouse changed the title to Stu Armstrong

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...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})