LeylandLatic

I know, it's a good thing all these teams have off days against us or we'd be bottom of the League.

They definitely talk some on that forum. I went on there last night after the game to see what they thought of us, here is another view from them: ------------------------------------ Rigoglioso Tue 27-Nov-2007 22:54:20 The goal, or rather the timing of it, changed the whole complexion of the half-time team talk. We should have been comfortably ahead, as football wise keeping the ball on the deck we were destroying Oldham, yet we were going in level. Lewis really did impress me in the first half. Second half, Oldham came at us more and look more rejuvinated and we struggled to contain them a little. They got a good goal after O'Connor slipped, and allowed McDonald to fire home from the edge of the area, after the right wing cross. After that, we struggled a bit really as heads went down, and despite Oldham's unsporting tactics, we never looked like getting back in the game. ------------------------------------ I don't remember us being unsporting or being destroyed at any point really. They had the upper hand for parts of the first half but it was hardly a domination. We didn't really sit back either. There were large parts of the second half that we spent in their half of the field.

I noticed a green light in the second half flash towards me and wondered what it was. It was up to the top left of the stand facing us so it must have been aimed at Crossley in the first half. Didn't see it then though tbh.

I think that's harsh on Davies and I couldn't believe some of the random shouts for him to 'pull his finger out'. When closing down the defenders he was always running between the two centre backs and in the second half when Smalley and Wolfenden sat deeper it was often between the 4. I think he ran out of steam at about the 75 minute mark and I was really surprised that Davies was left on when the Hazel substitution was made. Then again though he is always a threat and it kept Doncaster from throwing further men forward because they were always wary of leaving him one on one with a centre back. There was a point in the second half When the ball was played back to the keeper, then to a CB, then back to the keeper, then back to the other cb, then back to the keeper and then back to the other cb again. Davies chased this down until the last pass when he just appeared shattered from sprinting between them with no help from people pushing on. Someone immediately shouted for him to put some effort in which I thought was unbelievable seeing as he was doing a thankless task on is own there. Some people want our strikers to be able to sprint non stop and all day long but that just isn't realistic. Davies got burnt out having done a difficult job on Tuesday night in a 4-3-3. I don't think he could be called lazy or disinterested for running out of steam. Maybe this is the reason Ricketts was such a hate figure. I do agree about the bookings though. It's not if he doesn't score though imo, it's just the second any opponent gets to him a bit. He just can't let things lie and always has to have the last word.

I agree to an extent that he hasn't done badly there but I don't still think he is better further forward. Defensively he is quite shakey so I don't think he is the first option at left back behind Bertrand, but he does get forward well when playing there. I think he benefits from not being doubled up on when he is left back. As a winger teams identify him as a player who can hurt them and when he get the ball the opposition winger quickly gets back to double up which has made it much more difficult for him. As a left back he isn't as easy to do this from as he is normally making the overlapping run and there isn't the time for the opposition winger to track back. I think though now that him and Bertrand have got a good understanding going they will have to worry about Bertrand as well and it will be a difficult duo to stop.

I'll gladly disagree there. Yes, he gave the ball away a few times but he also put in a lot of effort trying to win high balls forward from Crossley and he did have a few neat touches as well. He was heavily involved with one of our best spells of passing in the second half so I think it's unfair to single him out for criticism. One thing I would say is that he is a young player who has only broke into the team this year and I think that shows with his maturity on the ball. Sometimes he tries too many fancy flicks or goes for things that aren't really on when there are better more simpler options available. He definitely has ability just needs to mature mentally to improve his game to cut out the occasions when he gives the ball away cheaply.

Lol I was commenting on that at the game, saying let them shoot from 25 yards. Every single time they ballooned it high and well wide of the goal. I can remember at least 7. There were some poor crosses as you say as well, was nowt to do with the pitch though.

I agree we were quality in the second half. A few nervy moments towards the end but that is to be expected when you can't get anything off the ref or linesmen and go down to 10 men. I thought for patches in the first we looked ok but just fluffed our lines a bit when we had created a chance to break or play the final ball. Allot played really well imo and was key in us stopping Wellens from playing. Having said that though there were good performances all over the pitch, Eardley was immense. Can't see him staying with us much longer if he continues to perform like that.

I've never really had a good look at these plans, and tbh I very much doubt the residents have. The only 8 story block is on the other side of the stadium to Carlton way so what is the problem? The flats near them are only 4 story.

I agree , Bertrand has been improving all the time and i've said numerous times how valuable he is to us (even when everyone was claiming we should 'send him back to Chelsea'). Eardley has been improving all season as well and we evidently missed him when Hazell played RB whilst Eards was on international duty. I still think though that Kilkenny has the creativity and football brain to be massive for us. He is still young though and gives the ball away trying to do much but hopefully with the amount of football he is getting he will mature and become a major player for us consistently. I think it is noticeable that our improvement has coincided with having a number of players on the same wavelength as well with the improvements being made by the full backs and Taylor and Smalley ie. looking to play it to feet rather than going long, this goes with the introduction of Stam as well.

Yeah I think a Ricketts/Hughes partnership could have been unstoppable in this League because you can tell that both of them are thinking a step ahead of the rest of the team barring maybe Kilkenny. I think a Davies/Hughes front pair can be as good as any in the division though. Davies is guaranteed to get chances with his pace and Hughes just looks a class act. They seem to be getting some sort of understanding as well from what I have seen. Davies isn't an easy player to read but I think Hughes can get the best out of him as he always tells you where he wants the ball.

I don't think it could be argued that we are benefiting from Ricketts not being on the pitch because we were no better without him when he missed the Huddersfield game and to be fair he did the best he could with some awful service. However, I think the main problem was he was a really bad influence in the dressing room, he certainly wasn't sent on loan for poor performance. As you say though Ricketts being shipped out may have given the rest of them a kick up the arse as it showed Shez wasn't going to mess around with them this season.

If Ferdinand can cut out giving it away by launching it 60-70 yards all the time and start playing simple then he would be the natural choice alongside Terry. But whilst he continues to think he can play the ball like Beckham he is more of a liability in International football as you just can't afford to repeatedly waste possession. Rooney, sorry just can't agree. He will be a great player when his game matures but currently he just tries to do too much all the time and it results in him being frustratingly wasteful. We shouldn't be trying to force him into the team whilst Owen and Crouch are guarenteed threats and more intelligent with the ball. Rooney has a creativity the others don't but he needs to use it when the chances are there rather than trying to force it. If you watch Kaka you can see the difference between the two. Kaka picks his moments and plays alot of simple passes in between. Rooney isn't worth his place yet on the off chance he may produce something amazing. Remember he hadn't scored a goal in a competitive match for four(?) years before the goal away at Russia. Gerrard is definitely a player who could be great for us but like Rooney he tries to do too much still for me. I agree attacking midfielders are going to give the ball away more than players like Barry and Hargreaves but he just tries ridiculous passes at times and it is so frustrating when he quite clearly has the ability. Needs to mature, but is definitely one of 3 midfielders I would be considering for the central 2. As I have already said Barry and Hargreaves would be my preferred partnership. You say that people would see this as negative, and they would, but Hargreaves played quite an attacking role for Bayern Munich. I'm not a fan of categorising midfielders as 'attacking' or 'defensive' midfielders as I don't think it's necessary to have one playing attacking and one playing defensive if you have the quality and intelligence in that department to mix it up a bit. I think Barry would take on more defensive duties than Hargreaves in this partnership but let's not forget that Barry has played left wing/midfield for Villa on numerous occasions. As for Heskey he proved what a quality player he can be if used in the right way in a couple of internationals earlier in the year. He was vastly underrated first time round for England and scapegoated by the vast majority despite always contributing to the team. I would pick Crouch ahead of him because he has a superb first touch and is an intelligent player with his flicks and lay offs. Heskey though is a natural replacement as someone who can hold the ball up and isn't afraid to turn defenders and run at them. Worth another go as he was unlucky to get injured when he did. I think you are a little harsh re:the left side. Fair enough Joe Cole isn't naturally a left sided midfielder but he has consistently performed there for us and so I wouldn't be looking desperately for a replacement, although it would be nice to have somebody who could come on and make a difference on the left. You're right thatw e don't need to pick the 'best 11' though, we need to pick the team that will fit the tactics best. I'm not as set on the 4-4-2 as you are but I think that it should be our primarily used formation as everybody will be most comfortable with it. We definitely have the scope to go to a 4-5-1 or 4-3-3 though to mix it up when needed though imo. Final point, I agree agianst weaker sides than us. We should be dictating tempo and possession for much of the game and dominating them (when was the last time we did this though!), but first we need to get the basics right with keeping possession and getting the structure of the team right. Against the top sides though it is natural that you are going to have to change your tactics to an extent to counter their superior quality (I,m talking Brazil, Italy, Germany etc.).

Maybe it could be through the trust that all campaigns are now organised. That would cut out the need for all of us to know and they do after all have a seat on the board. That way without everyone knowing the new plans we could coordinate the campaign accordingly to the changes.

Will he be driving both his cars at once though?

I can't believe so many people haven't yet realised that most of the England team have the egos of world class footballers without the ability. Ferdinand (the footballing centre back!?), the guy who repeatedley gives the ball away trying ridiculously difficult long balls that Xabi Alonso would be proud to make, isn't worth a place in the team when you consider we have Carragher, Woodgate and Ledley King waiting for a chance. Rooney, possibly the most overrated player of all time at the moment imo. He has loads of potential that is obvious from the glimpses of brilliance we see, but these are far from frequent. Even against Russia although scoring a great goal he gave the ball away over and over again and was incredibly frustrating. In a few years when his game matures and he can cut out going for the 'hollywood ball' everytime he gets it, we will start to see a player who can be really effective for England. At the moment he is a luxury that we can't afford to have. Another not worth a place imo, at least at the moment. Crouch and Owen or Heskey and Owen would be a far more productive partnership. Lampard is another who is constantly giving the ball away. That's fine in the Premiership where the pace is so quick and the opposition will give it you back pretty quickly anyway. In International football it's a completely different story though and we can't afford to carry players who are constantly wanting to play the killer ball when it isn't on. Gerrard could fall into this category as well to an extent but he does make plenty of tackles and makes good driving runs (at time, still not enough) for England. I'd go for Hargreaves and Barry over Gerrard and Lampard anytime. They know how to take care of the ball and not repeatedly give possession away cheaply. Hargreaves is no slouch going forward either and Barry's passing is much better than Gerrard's or Lampard's. Personally I think we need some major changes, mainly in the midfield but also we need to play to our strengths up front and not just pick the 'best 11' and force them into a system. Eriksson showed that we can have a rock solid defence so not much needs changing back there. Ferdinand can be a very good defender but he needs to cut out thinking he can play passes like Beckham and stick to winning the ball and giving it easy to the midfield. Midfield needs an overhaul to shake things up and have us playing a style of play which will be effective in International football. In Internationals we are playing against sides that play a much slower tempo and keep possession well. We can't approach the games like we are against Premiership sides that will play more direct and give us the ball easily.

Don't mention that to the residents! They will be claiming that the development will see an increase in drink driving!

I love those figures Bashforth dreamed up about how many cars would be on the road at once . What was it? 2000 cars for 1000 adults? I think as someone else suggested a 'tow a car to work day' might be a good way to mock this fool.

I haven't read everyones idea yet so i'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet, but has anyone thought about producing leaflets that detail what the development is actually about and then maybe we could distribute these to the objecting residents. It seems to me that the residents who object have no idea what they are going on about and in fact are objecting to things that they have made up on the back of their neighbours scare mongering. Maybe if we let these people know the real deal, that key workers will be housed in the properties, young professionals, first time buyers etc. ie people who have an interest in looking after their property they would be much more accommodating. It seems to me like they are expecting council flats. Also the traffic issues and how they will be eased need explaining. this will surely cut down some objectors as imo a number of them are in the dark over the whole thing and are in fact just following the angry mob which is being led by people who just don't want any change. It could be a real boost if we can get some of the residents on our side. Poster/car sticker ideas are good ones as well whoever mentioned them, keep it in the public eye. That one should definitely be given a go imo.

The people who are fighting the stadium are ridiculous, end of. They claim they want a compromise but they want nothing but it all their own way. They want a stadium with no apartments and with loads of concessions made by the club on top of that. They are incredibly unreasonable and tbh I would absolutely love it if we managed to get it passed without much change just so that they are miserable, the moaning old tw@s!

If Shez picked some kid out of the blue for a big game and it went wrong I would blame Shez. I would say it was a poor decision to throw the kid in there. I'm not really sure which side of the argument you are on to be honest. McClaren has to take the blame for putting Carson in, but at the same time he can't take the blame for the fact that our players aren't technically as good as the majority of nations on the continent regardless of what our media tries to feed us. McClaren didn't play to out strengths and probably lost us the game by trying to defend a 2-2 when we had pulled it back but the simple fact is we just aren't good enough on the whole. Team selection was bad (as it has been for years) though. If you are going to put the defeat solely down to the goalkeeper then yes McClaren should take the blame for his poor judgement.

I think that depends on whether he had David James and Paul Robinson as other possible selections. Personally I think David James had earned another chance.

Selection was all wrong and so were the tactics. Did you see the bench after we got to 2-2 telling the players to defend?! Whate were they thinking. I think it's a given McClaren will be sacked, but who shoudl take over? I think the vast majority were against the appointment of McClaren, partly because he has never achieved anything at club level on his own (even with huge financial backing), but also because it seemed like there were so many other better choices on offer at the time. Just off the top of my head I can remember Allardyce, Curbishley and Pearce as 3 of the contenders at the time, all of whom were arguably better choices for the job. The main reason McClaren was picked was because he was the safe option. Now looking forward, personally I would prefer a European coach, someone who can identify the weaknesses that the English game has. We all enjoy the fast pace that we see in the English game, but unfortunately that isn't the way that football is played on the continent and indeed throughout the world. It's all well and good saying well why do English teams do well in Europe then and bla bla bla, but in reality it is becaue they rely heavily on European players who can adapt to both games. In the Premiership you can give the ball away relatively cheaply because the opposition give you it straight back in a similar manner. That is the nature of playing direct football from the back. However our lack of technical ability and at times understanding of the tactical side of the game is found out time and again at international level when it is 11 Englishmen being forced to play a game at a slower tempo. Even against the Macedonians it was evident we lacked the quality to keep possession and build patiently from the back. We claim to have the best players in the world, but when it comes down to it we are severely lacking. Personally I think it is a problem which stems from how players are scouted at a young age (at least from when I was young). Players who showed the technical ability and natural football brain who would be rewarded on the continent were overlooked for youngsters who were particularly strong physically, with the idea that big lads could be coached to play football. I'm now 21 and this was definitely how things were done when I was playing Sunday League although things may have changed in recent years. I think this has started to show on an international level as it is plainly obvious to me that technically the European nations who we are supposedly on the same level as are by far and away out of our league (looking at Spain and France etc). Even teams like Croatia who our media and pundits claim we are better than seem to have the edge on us. They keep the ball better, they use it better, they don't give it away cheaply and they make us work for openings. All the evidence imo points to the fact that we just aren't as good as we think we are and that England needs to move forward with football into the modern game. We are living in the past where physicality and determination are enough. That is no longer the case and we need to realise that quickly. A Eorpoean manager like Mourinho might be the breath of fresh air that we need. We can't keep picking the 'best 11' and forcing them to play a system. We need to pick players that will fit into the system that the coach wants to play. We need massive changes imo but then again we have done for years.

It's a really difficult one who to choose for next England manager. If you pick a foreigner then you run the risk of them being scapegoated for not being English and allegedly not having the passion that an English manager (which is toss!). Whereas if you pick and Englich manager you run the risk of them being tactically inept lol! I think the vast majority were against the appointment of McClaren, partly because he has never achieved anything at club level on his own (even with huge financial backing), but also because it seemed like there were so many other better choices on offer at the time. Just off the top of my head I can remember Allardyce, Curbishley and Pearce as 3 of the contenders at the time, all of whom were arguably better choices for the job. The main reason McClaren was picked was because he was the safe option. Now looking forward, personally I would prefer a European coach, someone who can identify the weaknesses that the English game has. We all enjoy the fast pace that we see in the English game, but unfortunately that isn't the way that football is played on the continent and indeed throughout the world. It's all well and good saying well why do English teams do well in Europe then and bla bla bla, but in reality it is becaue they rely heavily on European players who can adapt to both games. In the Premiership you can give the ball away relatively cheaply because the opposition give you it straight back in a similar manner. That is the nature of playing direct football from the back. However our lack of technical ability and at times understanding of the tactical side of the game is found out time and again at international level when it is 11 Englishmen being forced to play a game at a slower tempo. Even against the Macedonians it was evident we lacked the quality to keep possession and build patiently from the back. We claim to have the best players in the world, but when it comes down to it we are severely lacking. Personally I think it is a problem which stems from how players are scouted at a young age (at least from when I was young). Players who showed the technical ability and natural football brain who would be rewarded on the continent were overlooked for youngsters who were particularly strong physically, with the idea that big lads could be coached to play football. I'm now 21 and this was definitely how things were done when I was playing Sunday League although things may have changed in recent years. I think this has started to show on an international level as it is plainly obvious to me that technically the European nations who we are supposedly on the same level as are by far and away out of our league (looking at Spain and France etc). Even teams like Croatia who our media and pundits claim we are better than seem to have the edge on us. They keep the ball better, they use it better, they don't give it away cheaply and they make us work for openings. All the evidence imo points to the fact that we just aren't as good as we think we are and that England needs to move forward with football into the modern game. We are living in the past where physicality and determination are enough. That is no longer the case and we need to realise that quickly. A Eorpoean manager like Mourinho might be the breath of fresh air that we need. We can't keep picking the 'best 11' and forcing them to play a system. We need to pick players that will fit into the system that the coach wants to play. We need massive changes imo but then again we have done for years.

Interesting quote from Jill Read talking about Phil Woolas backing of the plans: "he would perhaps have been less forthright with his views had they been his voters" Doesn't this confirm what many have been saying, that the planning refusal was partly on the fear for losing votes from the residents?