Pidge

5 hours ago, Guy Branston Pickle said:

 

 

Course you wouldn't 

I predict you are heading for a blocking!

I try to resist replying to his every post, but they are irritating, sometimes I can’t resist! 

10 hours ago, BP1960 said:

 

Do they have fitness tests before they sign for this club I wonder?

Strange question for someone who knows so much about recruitment.

What do you even mean by fitness test? Are you talking about assessing the risk of injury, because the fact that players get injured after being signed seems to be your point?  Or are you talking about assessment of VO2 max? Or are you talking about joint range and muscle strength assessments? 
 

“Fitness tests” is such a simple term. 

Players signed at our level have to be a bit of a gamble. The better quality players are often being let go by teams higher up the pyramid because of their injury record or age. 

4 hours ago, TwistingMyMellon said:

 

I've not seen that watching Oldham. Any hint of a head injury and the Refs usually (and quite rightly) stop the game. It is a great way to time waste and I imagine we'll see a lot of it tomorrow when Boring Wood are hanging on for the inevitable 1 nil win...

Maybe you are looking for different things then me. I can assure you there have been occasions when players went down with head injuries, the ref, yes, stopped the game and having spoke to the player allowed the game to restart.

So far no harm done but the facts are that a player with a more serious head injury and confusion, will often say they are fine and want to carry on. 

2 hours ago, whittles left foot said:

Looks like his lad had a bad knock at the weekend.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68273991

Did sound like a bad one. Good job the doc just ran on.

This new thing where players get a mandatory minimum of 30 seconds off the pitch to get treatment has meant occasions where a ref has assessed head injuries and agreed with the injured player that he does not need the physio or doctor to assess him.  That really should not/cannot happen as they are not trained to do so.

11 hours ago, Wardie said:

A big squad, yes, but if 80% of the squad are performing below par, who does he pick? I can't decide if they are not good enough or just can't be arsed. Fucking baffling.

I guess is somewhere between.  As you exert yourself in any sport, there is a comfortable level of exercise (which increases with fitness), then it becomes uncomfortable because you start getting those tired and breathless feeling from lactic acid buildup. At that point you are probably at 80% of your max capacity to exercise. Most can push it a bit, but to get close to 100% you need motivation, both self and other (loyalty to manager, team mates, club).

IMO the players are good enough, evidenced by the few good performances, or good spells.

So the issues are to a large extent motivation. Lots of factors to get right here from club and management. Buying the right players at the right point in their careers. Handling them in the right way, getting the right culture in the dressing room etc etc

Compliated!

11 hours ago, Boroblue said:

https://themastermindsite.com/2018/10/14/the-importance-of-receiving-the-ball-on-the-half-turn/

Lol, do we need to take the advice of a Canadian football writer?

Taking the ball on the half turn is something you do when you know where the space is around you. If there is no space there is no point as you will have to pass back.

The players who appear to get on the half turn more often are those who are aware of what is around them. Players who regularly glance around. It bugs me greatly when a pass in made to a midfielder who is free with room to turn, and he just stays looking backwards and he then has to pass there. Not knowing where the space is around you and where players are moving is the biggest fault in football IMO.

24 minutes ago, TheBigDog said:

 

Two valid points.

 

The number of times a limited but hard-working and well drilled side has come to Boundary Park and outplayed our ‘stellar’ team is worrying.

 

Is it a mental thing? Are the players simply not up to it? Are successive managers failing to get through to the team that they have to play with more energy, strength and desire?

 

I went to the game yesterday full of anticipation, expecting us to win. What I witnessed was a team that were simply not interested in competing and a manager who failed to change it.

 

It was a horror show and the lack of urgency was criminal and an insult to the fans.

 

in Mellon we trust?

It’s definitely a mental thing.  Not enough players brave enough to make a forward pass, or turn, or step out 5 yards up the pitch. It means more at home. Away from home a mistake goes unnoticed.

That whole issue needs addressing directly, “we don’t mind you making mistakes.”

But let’s start with us fans, how many of us can say that? Most of us call the players “shit” when they make a mistake!

2 hours ago, nzlatic said:

We passed it more when Fondop went off. I wonder whether that’s because when we’re up against it some of the players take the easier option of hitting it long to him. Or maybe that was Mellon’s instructions. Who knows?

The passes were made by the players who came on

Very happy if this turns into a result, 

3 hours ago, L1onheartNew said:

I wish that I knew what they are talking about. One bet, one win. Aldaniti' 1981.

Quit while you are ahead...

My win was on Chaddy the Owl at 40/1 in the mascot race.  Back then he did that run from one penalty to the other to kick a penalty. I remember thinking he was fast and so put a tenner on .

46 minutes ago, nzlatic said:

Exactly exactly exactly! FA trophy not a priority so don’t put more miles into the first team players. Play fringe players. They should still be capable of winning but if they don’t then it’s not a disaster as the competition is not as important. Plus you learn something (or confirm something!) about those players. 
 

The rotation was about the bigger picture of the rest of the season and prioritising the league, not because we had a game on Tuesday. 

Exactly 

Why do certain people not understand this and say it was poor management from MM.

It was a great opportunity to get into the heads of the fringe players.  If they can’t motivate themselves to put some effort in and show they can contribute to the matches that really matter, then they are actually just giving up, waiting for the end of their contact. And many of them didn’t pass the test.

35 minutes ago, BP1960 said:

 

If MM had read the weather forecast last week he'd have had no need to prioritise the Boreham Wood game. It's near zero chance of being played.

So BP, are you really suggesting that you make a decision which could cost us a league game on the basis of the accuracy of a weather forecast 4 days ahead.  Wow you do talk silly sometimes!

Don’t we love to be right

The FA Laws of the Game Law 12: Fouls and Misconduct have not changed. section 3 Cautions for Unsporting behaviour  A player must be cautioned if attempting to deceive the referee e.g. feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation).

Football is still a contact sport.  So inherent in that comment is the fact that some contact will not be a foul.  So the change to asking "was there ANY contact" cannot possibly be right.  

VAR gives a great opportunity to negate the speed of the game you mention.  It is easy to see in most cases when a player has gone down when they did not need to fall.  In my book the only reason a player goes to ground risking injury, is because he wants to deceive the referee that he was fouled.  When I used to play 5-a-side, I would never fall unless properly clattered. It hurt to much!

Is there a debate to be had around the changes in approach to this by refs recently. It used to be that football was a contact sport, so a foul was only awarded when contact was sufficient to bring the player down or seriously affect his balance so that he was unable to continue with the ball. It was simulation if a player fell over to influence the refs decision, and in fact a yellow card should be given for doing that. Now refs are just asking if there was any contact.

Last night United were given a penalty when Fernandez suffered a minimal contact to his foot. For me that is not a foul. Do we like this change?  Do referees have the right to change the rules to this extent?

Very happy to have those 3 points in the bag.  Maybe this run of results will mean the MM doubters will have a couple of weeks off.

Scoring early doesn’t help this team. They just drop back into the stile of play which we have be watching since “you know who” became manager.

Why can’t they just keep playing on the front foot for a bit instead of dropping back to defend the one goal lead. It’s embarrassing!

39 minutes ago, Monty Burns said:

yeah but @Pidge has just had his first wikipedia so he knows best

Lol, Monty ask me something else,

25 minutes ago, Longlostfan said:

That is the downside of the loan system- someone who isn't good enough for their club gets game time in a lower division and improves potentially denying one of our own the chance.

However Stones has improved us, and I'd be OK with 2-3 loanees to the end of the season if it filled those problem positions with Stones' quality and workrate.

The fact that smiley is improving Stones is a reason why if the player has a choice he might stay another month

You worked hard to find a downside of the loan system!

I’m not sure which of our multitude of players is missing his opportunity. They have been given their chance. It’s more of a problem in my book that bigger club from higher up keep young players in their youth systems till they loose interest and drop out of football, before breaking into their first teams.

The loan system allows some of them to play competitively and progress. Most of the players at lower levels of football are on short contracts anyway.

So many seasons the team changes beyond recognition during the summer.

Obviously we don’t know what his symptoms are, but it call that diagnosis into question.  Maybe he has Chondromalacia Patella. LOL, maybe the physios in Wigan should read this!

1 minute ago, Monty Burns said:

human males, especually those raised in earth based sporting environs, do not stop growing until around their 24th journey around our parent star.

Oh so it was a question.

OK, Osgood Schlatter’s is caused because the infra-patella tendon attaches to the Tibia, (the main leg bone) over the soft growth plate of the Tibia.  This growth plate fuses (becomes bone) at between 14 and 18 yrs of age.  Any growth after that time does not involve the lower leg getting longer.

5 minutes ago, Monty Burns said:

why would you suspect he has stopped growing three years earlier than everybody else?

Not sure if that’s a serious question Monty.  I’m assuming it isn’t

3 hours ago, Dave_Og said:

I had the same knee problem he has, came on when I grew a foot in a year. I can honestly say it has had no impact at all on my professional football career.

Osgood-schlatter’s happens to teenagers when they are still growing but training hard with a lot of sprinting etc. I suspect Stones is finished growing. It kind of suggests that diagnosis is not the real problem.

7 minutes ago, Wardie said:

Generous and good natured strikers probably don't score as many goals as the greedy and arrogant ones and how do you know he "isn't great for the team spirit"? We have no idea what the other players think of him and after the Reid/McGahey fiasco, I doubt they will be voicing any derogatory opinions.  

I was actually defending him Wardie.  There are plenty on here saying they don’t like his body language and lack of smile and lack of goals in games when the team are playing badly.

I never said he was greedy, and a little bit of arrogance in a striker on the pitch is a good thing. Off the pitch, less so.

1 hour ago, TheBigDog said:

Don’t agree with any of what you’ve said above…

 

’not fast enough… to take a loose ball a distance from goal…’ 

I give you the third goal at Barnet

 

’an arrogant personality’ 

Know the guy do you?  I wonder if many of his teammates would agree with you?

 

For me, the problem is the micro analysis that seems to be prevalent at the moment. 
 

I'm just glad that he is finally showing what he is capable of at this level

 

 

 

 

LOL, I do love forums. There is always someone who will disagree with everything you said!

I’m not sure the 3rd goal at Barnet proves Norwood is fast running with the ball. Once the defender fell over, Norwood was on his own. Even I wouldn’t have been caught! He is quick off the mark and gets half a yard. Great in the box.

I stick with my opinion that fans are wrong to expect him to make a winning goal when the rest are playing poorly. He needs support and some decent passes to feed off. Then he will continue to show us what he does do well.