mikejh45

Good grief......that is not balance.....all you putting out is your one-sided, ill thought out rants. Shall we stick to the previous sh*te you posted?

Who generally writes anti-AL bollox and continually adds to it without any consideration for putting forward a balanced argument? Iacovetti, Dearnley and Afoloyan were, in all probability, recommended by Wilde for the first name and Scholes for the second and third names. I supposed you said the same about Lyden whilst he was injured. And don't come back with the crap about Scholes not being in charge until after the transfer window shut. It doesn't take too much imagination to consider that PS told AL of a couple of loan targets to pick up while he was waiting for FA clearance. As for the other three names: Vera appears to be unfit and totally unsuited to the English game BUT how much say did PW have in his signing? Sefil - not seen play so not going to pass comment. Scylla - I've seen signs of a reasonable player at this level but shouldn't be played alongside Missilou as both go chasing the same ball.

I knew that.....just wondering why Chuckie22 hadn't picked up on "As of Feb." Bit!!!

???

You really need to read and fully comprehend posts. I said they have the same look and stature only....if I had added in ability then the point would have a different meaning. Lang is obviously the stand out forward but there was no one to compliment his game yesterday. Having Maouche and Baxter bringing the ball out gave Cambridge time to organise and pack their defence. There was no alternative tactic as we started with a small front four so Iverson launching the ball upfield had no effect.

Disappointed with the whole performance if I'm honest. Too many players had an off day and one or two looked disinterested. Just my opinion but Lang, Dearnley and Afolayan look very similar in stature and style. We need someone up front who can "rough up" central defenders. Edmondson had a particularly poor game which wasn't too much of a problem in the first half but became more evident in the second with misplaced passes and hoof ball. Overall not a good day. I get the impression that, to date, PS is a reactive manager in regards of substitutions rather than proactive.

I'm concerned about the lack of midfield fight!

What have I posted that is rose tinted? Let's have your take on where we are so I can put a sarcastic comment up or I can just put a reasoned argument.

I would say I enjoy our midfield pressing with pass and move. Our problem is we are short of a good mobile CF. Lang is good and does his best bit I think he is better wide right. Baxter seems to be a different player under PS but if I'm honest I do like the Branger/Nepo partnership on the left which is not to everyone's taste.

Bald(ish)...yes. Bald(ish) feminist ….no.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

Based on my thorough knowledge of medicine which does not extend past aspirins, plasters and antiseptic cream, I would say that an almost-fit Lyden would be more of a benefit to the club than a fully-fit Gardner.

But many on here would risk giving Gardner a contract after a far more serious injury with no certainty he will be fully over it.

To replace who though? He's not as lively tackling as Missilou. He can't pass or hold the ball as good as Maouche and he can't replace Baxter or the wingers. Not forgetting his age and getting over a serious injury. Putting a fully-fit Gardner into the starting 11 ahead of the 3 mentioned would weaken the team. Also how much coaching would a 29 year old need to change his mindset and would he want that......I can see him going back to non-league. I would prefer us to try and get Lyden who is out of contract this season......young, hungry and well liked here.

Bit of a strange idea came into my head...……..really not worth thinking about...…..but how about Scholes having an idea of his squad for next season and getting rid of those who are not under contract i.e. Fane and Gardner and possibly bringing in his players of choice for the midfield.

Bit of a daft argument really. Firstly, we don't have reserves so, unless someone gets a serious injury, how does a squad player get an opportunity and for most of last season Byrne, Gardner, Nepo & Fane was the first choice midfield lineup. Secondly, Gardner in the matches I saw him in earlier this season was painful to watch insofar that he was shockingly wasteful when bringing the ball out of defence.....Mansfield away was a particular example where not only did he give the ball away cheaply on so many occasions but not even close to a team-mate something you can't level at Maouche who is very good at holding the ball and nearly always finds a team-mate. Maouche every time for me.

I thought I would wait a while before commenting on yesterday's match. I thought we put in a decent team performance but was a bit niggled about a couple of areas. POSITIVES: Scholes' tactics for 80 mins. Baxter....looking more and more like the player we had the first time around. Maouche......so comfortable on the ball, always there as an outlet for the defenders. Nepo…..on the left wing in the second half. Beasted that right back several times. Missilou…..good for an hour or so. Decision making gets poor when he's tiring. Lang.....before Baxter's substitution. NEGATIVES: Scholes' tactics for the last 13 mins. I thought there was not enough presence in front of our defence when Stevenage went for hoofball. Possibly Scylla instead of a forward or going 3 at the back with Sefil (Almost the same, I know). No point in going for 3 points when our defence was tiring with Stevenage on the ascendancy and just lumping it. Nepo…..lots of tricks but offering nothing on the right in the first half. Edmondson.... much better when he keeps it simple. Lang.....after Baxter's substitution. Pushed into a position where was ineffective.

How many "Hunts" do we have at the club?