Harry Dowds Green Shirt

Gone for Derbyshire simply because he summed up the team ethic for the night. He closed everything down from start to finish and gave the Crewe centre halves a torrid time and capped it with the 2nd goal where he chased the Crewe defender into the corner forced the error and then got in the 6 yard box to convert Montarno's cross back in from the opposite flank. Unlucky to have 1 chalked off in the 1st half to.

Waterlogging lol. So since the new pitch went down over 10 years ago how many games have been called off because of a waterlogged pitch? Zero

There is still a slope to the pitch. Prior to the plastic going down it was 6 foot from the RRE to the CRE. This was too steep fr a plastic pitch and was halved so there is still a 3 foot slope

Not necessarily.

The stats from yesterday don't reflect what most were seeing and certainly don't prove the OP right. Possession (%) 53 -47 Shots on target 11 -7 Shots off target 7 -3 Corners 7 -12 Fouls 11 -6 On reflection those show that we were not too bad. However whilst we are "competitive," we are (1) clearly not entertaining and (2) despite recent signings still don't have a cutting edge to our play. The second point to an extent partly provides the reason for the 1st. The fact remains that people are not feeling entertained and when you have paid good money to travel and get in, they want to be entertained. The stats show that we had 10 attempts at goal. The relaity is it didn't feel like we had. Nor did it feel like we had 12 corners, which for an away team is a high number. When things aren't working there are various options for the manager/club. First you change the players and to be fair the manager has been given the opportunity to do that bringing in 48 in total in just over 2 seasons in charge. If that doesn't work change your tactics. I don't think he has really done that yet, but the arrival of Baxter may see a subtle change if he leaves out 1 of Furman or Wesolowski. I don't agree with those who automatically think that Furms and Wes both sit deep, but I do see why people think that is the case. However, more baffling for me is that Furman shone at international level in 2 games last week and the question would be is why? when he is not doing so for his club. If he is playing well for his country, he can't then be said to be out of form. Finally if the change of players doesn't work and then a change of tactics doesn't then the club have the ultimate option of changing the manager. If people aren't being entertained patience will grow thin quicker than if they are. The stats show we were competitive yesterday but the fans were not happy. We started and finished the game on top and were the better team until they scored but the 60 minutes in between we dropped a level and hardly threatened their keeper with the exceprtion of a couple of long range efforts from Montano. It has been said that we have a team that is more than capable of being at least top half if not challenging for something a little better and the manager himself has said that this is the best squad he has had. I would agree with that. The fact remains however that we are sitting in 19th place have only scored once away in 4 games this season and even then that was an og. We haven't won in 5 attempts at home, 5 in the last 19 games and we have only won 15 out of 52 at home under this management and haven't won by more than 1 goal in any of our last 40 games. IMO our tempo especially at the start of each half isn't high enough and if we do go in front we sit back and invite the opposition on instead of going for a killer 2nd or 3rd. Until those things change we will be perceived to be negaitive and not entertaining. If that doesn't change there will, sadly, only be 1 ending. In defence of the players, I always look to see if they are "playing" for the manager. I would say that they are and have a belief in what they are being asked to do, just as I believed they did for DP and in relation to another thread that is why I will clap the players at the end of a game. If they are trying and it doesn't end in a positive result for us then so be it, but they are entitled to be applauded for their efforts as there are more often than not other reasons for us not getting that (expected/hoped for) result

Well we scored from the spot 9 times last season. I can recall Kuqi missing at home to Burton in the FA cup 1st round and at Chesterfield in the JPT 1st leg. So I'd suggest that it's your sketchy memory thats actually pretty crap Must agree though that Simpsons effort yesterday was pretty horrific

Slew's loan is covered by section 53.2.1 as highlighted in bold 53.2.1 Subject to the proviso that the duration of a Standard Loan must be the time between two Transfer Windows, Standard Loans can be for half a Season or a full Season. Any recall clause requiring the early termination of a Standard Loan can only be included in a full Season Standard Loan and this can only be activated during the second (January) Transfer Window. Any other early termination of a Standard Loan must be by way of a mutual agreement in writing (including by way of a recall clause within the Standard Loan Agreement) between both Clubs and the Player but can only be completed after the expiry of 28 days and only during a Transfer Window (but subject to Regulation 53.2.2 below). Edit: So Slew can go back but can't play for Rovers until 1st January is my reading. However as he will be out for 12 weeks anyway he wouldn't be playing in any event.

I think the relevant section is the following: - 53.3.8 Emergency Loans and Youth Loans may contain a break clause but only where that break clause is exercisable after the expiry of the initial 28 day period of the loan.

I don't think so. Basically Derbyshire's loan is classed as an emergency loan. During the 1st month of an emergency loan you cannot insert a recall clause. However from days 32-93 you can irrespective of whether it carries into the transfer window. The only way you can then extend a loan beyond the 93 days is durring the January window take out a 1/2 season loan. The Simpson Loan last season was initially extended to the full 93 days but we couldn't extend to cover the period to 31st December as the loan was started outside the transfer window. We then took a half season loan from 2nd January. Basically if we were to loan out any of our players we cannot recall them during the 1st month and could only recall them thereafter if we have a recall clause. I'm not sure how the 1/2 season loan recalls work as Slew was recalled last Thursday just after the initial month had expired. I don't know if he could have been recalled before that.

You can't during the 1st month but in months 2 & 3 you can insert a (24 hour) recall clause.

Just watching the highlights on Player and there's more evidence that Furman is pushing up to be an attacking threat as he bursts into the box and flashes a header wide following a ball in from Byrne with the score at 1-1.

I hear what you are saying but the way I see it, Furman is pushing further forward. Early 2nd half he was in the 6 yard box trying to get on the end of a cross but was behind (I think) Derbyshire and a defender got to the ball 1st and on the penalty incident as the ball is crssed in Furman is stood on the penalty spot. The important thing is that Furms is looking to move forward. Yesterday with County Down to 10 they were generally sitting deep with plenty of men behind the ball and looking to hit on the break as you would expect. So when we got possession it was generally in our half and Furman and Wes were dropping to pick the ball up from Cisak or a defender and look to get it out wide. Croft was making some good breaks inside into space that the 2 DM's had created with their own movement and when the wingers or full backs went down the wing to cross, Furman was generally lurking just outside the box looking for the pick ups and knock backs with Wes generally 10-15 yards further back as an anchor/cover. So I think it is in our set up to be more than 1 dimensional and if PD sticks to this then we will see more play in the opposition box, more crosses, more chances and more goals. If we concede some as a result then so be it. I'd rather see the entertaining games like yesterday than the borefests such as the recent Stevenage game. By the way for all the critiicism of our defence I think we look generally pretty solid and it is only the odd individual mistake that is costing us as with their 1st yesterday. I think the stat for the 2nd half was that County had 1 shot on target, which was the 1st goal. Their 2nd coming direct from a miss hit cross.

It's a good job Uncle Joe didn't use that Philosophy then in the 89/90 season when Henry & Milligan were the 2 holding midfielders and Adams & Holden the 2 wingers well supported by the bombing on Irwin & Barlow Supplying the ammunition for Bunn & Ritchie and not forgetting the dodger. Millie & henry were sometimes criticised for playing the ball sideways too often but their instructions were quite simple. Go in and break up the oppositions game and keep it simple and get it out wide asap because that's where the creativity was in that team. We had wingers who could go outside or come inside so that more than made up for little coming directly through the middle. Quite simply with the squad we have now surely we are better equipped to play more like the way we did then. PD has brought in 2 flying wingers (who look better by the game) and in Warbara (or Connor Brown) & Grounds full backs who can bomb on and are capable of creating space for their wingers. On that basis, Furman & Wes sit and protect and break the game up and give it out wide asap. We started to see more of that yesterday and 1 thing it did was lead to more entertainment. Long may that continue IMHO. I don't necessarily see Furman & Wes not being an attacking option either. They will weigh in with a number of goals between them and if they can contribute 10-12 goals over the season then we would be up at the right end of the table. The challenge to that happening will be keeping Wes fit.

Pathetic stewarding (once again) ball ends up in the stand. A fan holds onto it for a few seconds and returns it in a way aimed at wasting a few more seconds only for the ball to hit the pole at the back of the goal and rebound straight to the keeper who can only smile. Stewards move in and eject the supporter. You can nly imagine the conversation can't you Steward - right son your out Fan - why? Steward - for time wasting by holding the ball Fan - but it went to the keeper Steward - yes but you intended to waste time Fan - but I was just showing my silky skills Steward - out you go son. Unbelieveable Jeff

I'm with Prozac as we discussed yesterday. The lad needs game time 8,9 or 10 games on the bounce not 10 or 15 mins here and there. He has shown in the 2 games this last week what he is capable of and with a run in the team this will improve and the goals will come. Really impressed with the lads attitude and hope he gets a chance now. Smith and Simpson certainly can work although I would like to see them play closer together so that Simpson can pick up more of the the knock downs and flick ons. It's certainly not 1 dimensional as yesterday we knowcked the ball around far more than at any time since the 1st half against Sheff Wednesday and the moves where we hit the post and scored both came because of passing moves and the movement of both Smith and Simpson up front created the spaces. our very own SAS.

The Rifle are running 2 mini buses that are full. There are 5 on a list for the 3rd bus. Contact Mark if you are interested.

I take back my initial cmments. Simpson is onside. For some reason I hadn't noticed Lewington trying to block Crofts pass and Simpson is at worst level with him.

MIne's working ok. Simpson is definately offside. The ball goes forward from Croft and there is only 1 defender there. Interesting about certain people thinking Tarky Hoofs the ball too much (myself included to a point) as our best chance yesterday comes from Tarky "hoofing" it up to Simpson who turns his man gets in and the drags wide of goal when he should of at least hit the target.

So Tarky goes forward with JYM and CB for a set piece that will have been set up on the training pitch presumably on the instructions of the management team. Non of them get back or could of got back and that is Tarky's fault. Brilliant. What position is that he should have been in to "MAYBE have made a difference"? Lets take JYM for example. He didn't get back. The closest he was was about 5 -10 yards away. Watch the highlights again. go to 52.35 on the link below. He wasn't as far in the MK box when the free kick was played in by Changy and isn't as quick over 80-90 yards as JYM. How the hell is that Tarky's fault? Please show me what I am missing. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01m9fsk/The_Football_League_Show_2012_2013_18_08_2012/

^ This. Put far better than I ever could

Winning at MK does not take a miracle. Despite the D&G we often hear about having no chance of beating this team or that. I believe that we always have a chance of taking points in any game. If you don't believe that then there is no point in the game. This league is closer than many believe and it really is all about fine margins and some consistency. Yesterday was interesting in the 1st half especially the tactical game between the 2 managers (and enjoyable from that point of view) and until they scored when Simpson lost his man there was little or nothing between the teams. A quick throw out from the keeper and a breakaway for the 2nd goal. Simpson shooting wide when well placed to score, Tarky being elbowed in the box near the end. Whilst they have also had a couple of chances, the fact remains that there isn't too much between most teams and as we saw with winning at Sheffield Utd last season from 2-0 down away from home, it's not miracles. I would never accept that we can't win. You might not expect to win but you always can win.

Now your answering the question at last but your still wrong on the 2nd goal nothing Tarky did cost us the goal. I think he is learning from his mistakes. As an example I thought he got very tight with Lowe to put him off when he had a good chance, somnething he didn't do well enough on Monday for O'Grady's 1st. As for his positional sense, I don't get what you want from him. He has looked far more solid than the end of last season where too many times he was rooted to the spot. He holds the line well, he wins plenty of headers. His long balls forward I would agree with to an extent and would rather see the ball played forward into midfield more often as a 1st option. I don't get the issue of reckless tackling that you raise. Reckless in what way? He hasn't been booked yet, had a stern word from the ref and I'm not convinced he has missed too many tackles Your right it is all about opinions and mine is that Tarky is unjustly being targeted. Very little of it has been constructive. It's took me several attempts to get you to actually come up with anything constructive which I can accept but your original posts contain the following "stupid, dumbass, dickhead, stupidity." that to me is slagging off a player and is personal irrespective of if he is "1 of our own" or bought in. Your posts also clearly blame Tarky for the 2nd goal you state "Tarky was at fault...end of!!!" Whilst be both agree that he should not be arguing with the MK player, please show me how this cost us the goal. I do not believe that you can and therefore it is personal with Tarky. If that is not the case, then you should withdraw the comment. I would have no problem with that and maintaining the point that he shouldn't have been arguing. Just my opinion like.

Yeah you've already said that and I do agree he should be aiming to get back. Hopefully he will learn from that, but that did not cost us the goal. That was the result of a poor free kick from Changy, a quick breakway and an excellent finish Anyway are you going to answer the question? What did you see yesterday to back up your claim that he is a little boy lost. I would genuinely like to know or are you saying that it is only the issue on the 2nd goal?

Ah right. I presume you are also blaming JYM and Bynre for the 2nd goal because they didn't get back either. Should they see a sprinting coach? Should they be left out of the side because of it? In any event the sprint issue falls under the remit of Paul Butler the head of sports science. Do you not think that they do any of that already? So now you want to shift the blame to the coach? Who do you suggest as a replacement? he would have to be acceptable to the manager of course and it would only happen if the manager would accept the coach being sacked. Back on point though you keep going back to the 2nd goal and we have a difference of opinion about that so can you point me to anything else yesterday to back your claim up.

Sorry can you just explain what exactly he did wrong yesterday that leads you to claim "I do see a boy not ready for the job" What mistakes did he make yesterday (that other more experienced players didn't). I'm not saying that he didn't make mistakes because as I've said elsewhere, show me a football pitch and I'll show you 23 people making mistakes. I didn't see anything yesterday to justify your claim. Against Sheff Wed on Monday you would have a point for O'grady's 1st goal but I saw nothing yesterday to back up your claim. Which headers did he miss, who did he not mark, where did his concentration slip. Don't claim the 2nd goal. We were attacking, He was pushed up for the set piece with JYM and Byrne. NEITHER got back