Danny G

[mikejh45]

7 minutes ago, LightDN123 said:

Yeah I agree. 

Not saying it is the case, but when I mentioned Maouche had an option he just swerved the comment and said we are all out of contract end of season. We will see what happens. 

 

Doesn't mean anything......he might be still in discussions with AL, ML and PS. And AL won't exercise that option if PS tells him he wants different players in that role next season.

[yarddog73]

12 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

This is just bollox...….you make it sound like we've had dream teams before AL came over and the Stevenage result/failure to win was all down to the French lads. I take it you were by the tunnel and stopped clapping when the French lads went through and started again when the remainder of the team climbed the steps.

As for the 3 loanees, in my opinion, Lang is the only one worth hanging on to. Iverson has parts of his game that he doesn't appear to be able to sort out and Dearnley seems to caught in a trap....is he a winger or a centre forward or a bit of both....whichever way, he's not stood out in either role.

 

So will you be supporting Scholes if the French lads are here next season because he wants them or will you trot out the excuse that AL is interfering?

I will be back next season, didn't bother with Saturday as the result was predictable given the nature of the squad Scholes inherited, just out of interest why bring this 'French lads' argument up when anyone appears to question whether they are good enough, personally only really rate Nepo out of AL's signing, some of the others show glimpses but show little consistency, that's just my opinion though and no doubt Scholes will keep the ones he wants and fire the chaff off accordingly and that includes the non 'French' lads - Gardner, Hunt, Coke and O'Grady to name just a few. 

 

Once we've strengthen with Scholes signings and start competing I will return with the thousand or so others who gave it a swerve after what had been served up in the previous couple of home games, don't care if they are French or Swahili if I'm honest I just want to see a team competing in this dogshit division we are in.

[mikejh45]

3 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

I will be back next season, didn't bother with Saturday as the result was predictable given the nature of the squad Scholes inherited, just out of interest why bring this 'French lads' argument up when anyone appears to question whether they are good enough, personally only really rate Nepo out of AL's signing, some of the others show glimpses but show little consistency, that's just my opinion though and no doubt Scholes will keep the ones he wants and fire the chaff off accordingly and that includes the non 'French' lads - Gardner, Hunt, Coke and O'Grady to name just a few. 

 

Once we've strengthen with Scholes signings and start competing I will return with the thousand or so others who gave it a swerve after what had been served up in the previous couple of home games, don't care if they are French or Swahili if I'm honest I just want to see a team competing in this dogshit division we are in.

Your previous opening paragraph was open to interpretation as you were responding to a post regarding the four French lads hence my reply.

 

In my opinion, the players deserved their applause for the first 80 mins. Where the game faltered was PS not preparing to change his tactics for the last 13 by not seeing our defence was tiring.

[TheBigDog]

1 hour ago, yarddog73 said:

Great news if true. Let Scholes pick his own team and let's judge him on that

 

So we lose Nepomuceno, Missilou, Maouche and that is great news? Your opinion I know but still ...

I agree that Scholes should be allowed to recruit (and ultimately be  judged on) the players he has agreed to bring in but what if Scholes actually wants to keep the three #frenchlads above? Is that then bad news? 

 

 

 

Edited March 6, 2019 by TheBigDog

[mikejh45]

9 hours ago, leeslover said:

What if he was somewhere between shit and invisible like in his first 4 or 5 games? 

Problem is there is no Combination Leagues any longer to get some semblance of match fitness and ready for the first team. Once up to speed he was. at the very least, a useful player.

[leeslover]

9 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

Problem is there is no Combination Leagues any longer to get some semblance of match fitness and ready for the first team. Once up to speed he was. at the very least, a useful player.

I don't disagree, but it's useful to remember when people are saying Sylla is the worst player ever in his first few games out of the French 6th division 

[nzlatic]

It's a squad game.  I don't think to be successful we need 20 new players.  We need a few quality additions to be first team regulars, and the players we're talking about here - Maouche/Gardner/Branger etc, could then be extremely useful squad players who are challenging for starting places or making a difference off the bench.  Currently we're relying on them in the first team with little or nothing coming in behind them.

[mikejh45]

1 hour ago, leeslover said:

I don't disagree, but it's useful to remember when people are saying Sylla is the worst player ever in his first few games out of the French 6th division 

 

Good point. Scylla, in my opinion, is suffering from having to play alongside Missilou when he should be an either/or choice but not both. They both chase the ball in defensive midfield and with Missilou being quicker it makes Scylla look like a headless chicken. I've seen glimpses there, that if played correctly, will be more than useful.

 

I think the problem we have is we are bringing in players who are expected to fit into a rigid system and not played to their strengths.

[youngen]

20 hours ago, Kusunga_Is_God said:

Both good players. Maouche has an option so it's probably nailed on he'll be here next year. I think he's definitely a better passer of the ball than Gardner but he does have a tendancy to go missing during some games whilst Gardner looked like he was doing 2 roles in one at the start of the season when Missilou appeared out of his depth and he started to chip in with a few goals.

  

With our options in midfield 'plenty' to say the least, would it be financially viable to offer Gardner another year? I don't think so.

 

 

According to most Maoche is on 4k a week. So surely it wouldnt make financial sense to extend his option. For 4k a week, Id want 3 players his standard or 1 player who can win us the league single handedly. I can only see him remaining if Lemsgasm continues to ludicrously overpay him.

[youngen]

3 hours ago, mikejh45 said:

This is just bollox...….you make it sound like we've had dream teams before AL came over and the Stevenage result/failure to win was all down to the French lads. I take it you were by the tunnel and stopped clapping when the French lads went through and started again when the remainder of the team climbed the steps.

As for the 3 loanees, in my opinion, Lang is the only one worth hanging on to. Iverson has parts of his game that he doesn't appear to be able to sort out and Dearnley seems to caught in a trap....is he a winger or a centre forward or a bit of both....whichever way, he's not stood out in either role.

 

So will you be supporting Scholes if the French lads are here next season because he wants them or will you trot out the excuse that AL is interfering?

 

Your point about Iversen makes your whole post unreadable. Wed be fighting releagtion if we hadnt signed him. 

[nzlatic]

11 minutes ago, youngen said:

 

According to most Maoche is on 4k a week.

I still struggle with this 'fact'.  Given where he was playing previously that would surely be a colossal pay hike.  Why would we do that?

[mikejh45]

6 minutes ago, youngen said:

 

Your point about Iversen makes your whole post unreadable. Wed be fighting releagtion if we hadnt signed him. 

So is your post.....what does "Wed be fighting releagtion if we hadnt signed him" mean? 

 

Do I take it you agreed with my earlier points up to Iverson?

Try being a bit objective.

How many goals have we conceded because he hasn't come off his line......not as many as he's saved with shot-stopping but enough to lose us games at the death? Until he learns that part quickly, he won't be a big success here. We need a goalkeeper brought up to mix it with forwards. Shame we couldn't have got Conor Ripley back.

[youngen]

12 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

So is your post.....what does "Wed be fighting releagtion if we hadnt signed him" mean? 

 

Do I take it you agreed with my earlier points up to Iverson?

Try being a bit objective.

How many goals have we conceded because he hasn't come off his line......not as many as he's saved with shot-stopping but enough to lose us games at the death? Until he learns that part quickly, he won't be a big success here. We need a goalkeeper brought up to mix it with forwards. Shame we couldn't have got Conor Ripley back.

 

You mean Conor Ripley who signed for a Championship team and was on loan in League 1? We dont get players like that now.

So he hasnt come to claim a couple of crosses, when he has Clarke and Edmondson infront of him, now hes no good?

 

He has saved our skins a lot more than he has let a few crosses go. And he wont be a big success here, he will be a success at a team higher up the pyramid.

 

23 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

I still struggle with this 'fact'.  Given where he was playing previously that would surely be a colossal pay hike.  Why would we do that?

 

I never said fact, I mentioned gossip. And its not unbelievable with him being an AL signing. Can imagine Vera is on around the same amount. But if its true, there is no way we should be wasting that wage on a mediocre player.

Edited March 6, 2019 by youngen

[GlossopLatic]

54 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

So is your post.....what does "Wed be fighting releagtion if we hadnt signed him" mean? 

 

Do I take it you agreed with my earlier points up to Iverson?

Try being a bit objective.

How many goals have we conceded because he hasn't come off his line......not as many as he's saved with shot-stopping but enough to lose us games at the death? Until he learns that part quickly, he won't be a big success here. We need a goalkeeper brought up to mix it with forwards. Shame we couldn't have got Conor Ripley back.

 

The goal.on saturday came from someone getting a free header at the back post the sane thing happened against Crewe.

 

The Goalkeeper should only come for a cross when he is 100% certain he will get it. Its not his responsibility to mark men at the far post.

 

Both scenarios wouldn't have happened anyway had we had players on the bench who could come on and keep the ball. Both Branger and Sylla were on the bench on saturday neither came on for this reason.

 

Also don't forget we are talking about a player with time on his side who is nowhere near his peak yet and will get significantly better if he is playing regularly.

Edited March 6, 2019 by GlossopLatic

[Dave_Og]

41 minutes ago, youngen said:

 

According to most Maoche is on 4k a week. So surely it wouldnt make financial sense to extend his option. For 4k a week, Id want 3 players his standard or 1 player who can win us the league single handedly. I can only see him remaining if Lemsgasm continues to ludicrously overpay him.

Who knows if the option specifies the same terms. 

[Bobledgersheart]

Whilst I will agree that Iverson has had a good season overall with us he does have faults, and being reluctant to leave his six yard box is the major one. Several times this season Clarke and Edmondson have "looked" for him to come for crosses and through balls and he has shown no inclination. I'm not talking about charging off his line like a demented Lloris but just coming to claim balls that any other goalkeeper would.

As a shot stopper he's first class but he does have flaws and many of our opponents have noticed, and play on them. 

[jorvik_latic]

38 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

I still struggle with this 'fact'.  Given where he was playing previously that would surely be a colossal pay hike.  Why would we do that?

 

Ask Abdallah. He was signed around the time we signed Menig for £11k a week.

[disjointed]

Regarding the goalkeeper, I wouldn't be adverse to us having the lad from West Brom here next season, I know it was only 1 game but it looked as though he had a bit about him.

[nzlatic]

25 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

Ask Abdallah. He was signed around the time we signed Menig for £11k a week.

But Menig came via Nantes/Ajax, so I can believe that £11k a week was representative of what he would have been on. And he was a loan.  So although it's a stupid amount to pay, I can understand why he'd have to pay it to get him.

 

Wasn't Maouche a free agent, having been released from French div 2?  Would he have been on or close to that previously, or would it have needed that level of salary to get him to join?  The guy had no credentials to suggest he was worth that.  If it's true, then it's utter, utter madness given what you could probably get elsewhere for £4k a week.

[jorvik_latic]

8 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

But Menig came via Nantes/Ajax, so I can believe that £11k a week was representative of what he would have been on. And he was a loan.  So although it's a stupid amount to pay, I can understand why he'd have to pay it to get him.

 

Wasn't Maouche a free agent, having been released from French div 2?  Would he have been on or close to that previously, or would it have needed that level of salary to get him to join?  The guy had no credentials to suggest he was worth that.  If it's true, then it's utter, utter madness given what you could probably get elsewhere for £4k a week.

 

But if he was willing to pay £11k for someone to play in L1, it's not inconceivable that he thought £4k was 'good' value. Also part of the reason we have such a shit budget this season. 

[mikejh45]

47 minutes ago, youngen said:

 

You mean Conor Ripley who signed for a Championship team and was on loan in League 1? We dont get players like that now.

So he hasnt come to claim a couple of crosses, when he has Clarke and Edmondson infront of him, now hes no good?

 

He has saved our skins a lot more than he has let a few crosses go. And he wont be a big success here, he will be a success at a team higher up the pyramid.

 

Yes, I know Ripley went to toast his arse on Burton's bench but all I said it was a shame, nothing more.

 

Where the f*ck did I say he was no good....you really need to stop and read my post. He may well be a success higher up but at this level he needs to command his area and be prepared to get himself roughed up. We've seen plenty of keepers in this division do just that. At the end of the match against Stevenage, we had two tall defenders up against 5 big Stevenage lads. Clarke and Edmundson can't deal with them on their own and that is where the keeper has to come off his line.

[youngen]

23 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

Yes, I know Ripley went to toast his arse on Burton's bench but all I said it was a shame, nothing more.

  

Where the f*ck did I say he was no good....you really need to stop and read my post. He may well be a success higher up but at this level he needs to command his area and be prepared to get himself roughed up. We've seen plenty of keepers in this division do just that. At the end of the match against Stevenage, we had two tall defenders up against 5 big Stevenage lads. Clarke and Edmundson can't deal with them on their own and that is where the keeper has to come off his line.

 

Keep your hair on, I only asked as you implied you dont rate him. Hes the best we are going to get, and is only young and an U21 international for a 2nd tier nation. More than saved us this year, and will go on to have a successful career higher up than league 2. I would 100% look to keep him.

 

IMO the big lad issue against Stevenage could have been solved by Scholes bringing on 6ft+ Sylla instead of the small striker Afolayanat 1-0 up. Could also have done with Callum Lang just jumping and heading the ball away from the corner as it was on his noggin. But hey ho, Scholes is only 5 games into his managerial career, can be allowed these mistakes for now.

[mikejh45]

47 minutes ago, youngen said:

 

Keep your hair on, I only asked as you implied you dont rate him. Hes the best we are going to get, and is only young and an U21 international for a 2nd tier nation. More than saved us this year, and will go on to have a successful career higher up than league 2. I would 100% look to keep him.

 

IMO the big lad issue against Stevenage could have been solved by Scholes bringing on 6ft+ Sylla instead of the small striker Afolayanat 1-0 up. Could also have done with Callum Lang just jumping and heading the ball away from the corner as it was on his noggin. But hey ho, Scholes is only 5 games into his managerial career, can be allowed these mistakes for now.

 

Oh.....bald jokes now.....ya b*stard!!!

If we are going down the route of getting a goalie for free from a Premiership club on loan then Iversen is a good shout but I have seen good, experienced goalies at this level that inspire confidence in the defenders.

 

I said exactly the same and I will support Scholes through his mistakes so long as we are seeing improvements which we are doing but just not for a full game.

[youngen]

32 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

 

Oh.....bald jokes now.....ya b*stard!!!

 If we are going down the route of getting a goalie for free from a Premiership club on loan then Iversen is a good shout but I have seen good, experienced goalies at this level that inspire confidence in the defenders.

  

I said exactly the same and I will support Scholes through his mistakes so long as we are seeing improvements which we are doing but just not for a full game.

Would have taken the "knickers in a twist" but wasnt sure if you were a feminist

[whittles left foot]

37 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

I said exactly the same and I will support Scholes through his mistakes so long as we are seeing improvements which we are doing but just not for a full game.

Where would you say we are showing improvements at the moment please?