Jump to content

jorvik_latic

OWTB Member
  • Posts

    4,406
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jorvik_latic

  1. 38 minutes ago, singe said:

    Dave is correct.

    Only played together 8 games.

    1 goal socred in 531 minutes on the pitch.

     

     

    The best partnership was AAH & Lee Erwin 3 goals in 7 games and 303 minutes.

     

    Or JAck Byrne and Eoin Doyle 5 goals 32 matches. 2,700 hours

    None were prolific.

     

     

    Fair enough :lol: 

  2. 17 minutes ago, Lags said:

     

    Do you believe his contribution in goals was sufficient as the main striker he was signed for at Latics?. I also doubt he'll be remembered at Shrewsbury with any passion either,  

     

    No worse than the majority of forwards we've had over the years. I don't think he was amazing but he was instrumental in helping Main score some critical goals to keep us up that season.

    • Like 2
  3. 18 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

     

    Your point make more sense now except for the question...….what was the point of keeping/punishing a player who was a borderline starter when we could have "sold" him and picked an adequate back up on a short term deal?

     

    Exactly! That was my original point. I’d love to know AL’s thinking on that one. 

  4. 15 minutes ago, mikejh45 said:

    You stated categorically that AL stopped managers from picking Hunt when the team lists from both PS and PW showed this statement to be untrue. What am I getting wrong here?

     

    PW didn’t play him during the transfer window. PS then joins and is allowed to play him due to him insisting on no interference (the interference stated when he left was AL offering contracts without consulting him). PS leaves and Hunt is immediately dropped :mmm:He later makes an appearance in the squad out of necessity. How is this so hard to understand? 

  5. 2 hours ago, mikejh45 said:

    But what the f*ck  is this "it" that you expect me to believe?

    So far, all you've put forward is anecdotal evidence and expect people to accept it as gospel. 

    State clearly your evidence but don't just push Scholes' comments as proof positive because, from my perspective, he was using the "interference" argument to cover his managerial shortcomings.

     

    Push Scholes’ comments? You’re the one who brought him up, not me! :blink:

  6. 1 hour ago, mikejh45 said:

     

    And just trotting out the argument of "interference - end of"  doesn't back up your case either.

    So what's the difference between not selecting him to start and putting him on the bench?

    Surely if AL was having a direct influence as you say, then Hunt would be training with the kids and totally absent on matchdays.

    I'm still thinking that this interference card was just an excuse by Scholes to get out because being a manager was not what he thought it would be. 

     

    Where did I write “interference - end of”? Weird comment. If I need to explain the difference then there’s no point going further. 

×
×
  • Create New...