Pidge

3 hours ago, JoeP said:

 

It won't..and I appreciate the point's being lost by some.

 

Fantastic stats and absolutely brilliant to have when the team are playing well.  Like yesterday.

 

But when the team don't play well, he's as bad as any of them - and if he and the team played well every week, we'd be top of the league, but we're not - regardless of what the individual stats say.

 

I want to see more performances from him like yesterday and occasionally digging us out of the shit when the team's played badly with a winner/equaliser to nick a result when we don't really deserve one.

 

Then I think we'd have the best player in the league...

Maybe this shows a problem analysing football. Norwood is not fast enough or tricky enough to take a loose ball a distance from goal and make something out of nothing. (Those players are worth millions!)

Norwood is a good finisher, so needs a team around him bringing the ball forward and giving it to him much closer to goal.  So when our team is sitting back, not closing down to win it in forward positions, and passing badly, as has happened in our poor performances, how can Norwood possibly just win the game for us anyway? We really need to be realistic if being critical.

Norwood is an arrogant personality, but at the moment we need him, even if he isn’t great for team spirit.

34 minutes ago, mick26 said:

Yep weird subs and formation yesterday coupled with the revelation that Stones didn't train all week because of his Osgood - Schlatter's disease!

Really? How old is he?

15 minutes ago, ceskylatic said:

I agree with you. But until we bring in what’s required in midfield, i.e. 2 athletic wingers and a ball playing central midfielder to dominate opposition, we’ll be a counter-attacking team giving teams most of the possession.

And Until we bring in some pace up front and a midfielder who can pass forward and find them, we can’t be a counter-attacking team. OMG we are fecked!

2 minutes ago, ceskylatic said:

From what I saw, the plan was to allow them possession until approaching the final third, then close them down which to a degree was working first half. Then we conceded within 3 minutes of the second half starting and it went to shit.

 

If that’s true that it was the plan, it’s embarrassing.  We are the home side

2 minutes ago, ceskylatic said:

With these players at Mellon’s disposal, if we’d have played a hard press all over the pitch, Gateshead would’ve played the ball around us and we’d’ve got pummelled by at least 4.

Not necessarily right.  It is easy to pass past a player standing 3 m away.  If that player is closing, he is a bigger barrier and makes me rush.  It’s not rocket science.

Just now, Littlemoor Lad said:

Let's say it's improved thanks in the main to young Stones

Absolute shite until his two timely interventions 

Which kind of shows you what Norwood could be offering each week as he is our star player!

BP, you do realise a review like that is unlikely to report “he had a poor game so was dropped for the next game”? Positive comments only.

God help him if he misses a pass in the first game.

Maybe we should have a separate topic for prostate cancer issues. 
I’d be happy to answer questions as I’m and expert now . Seeing as one in 8 of us blokes will have a problem as some point!

On 11/30/2023 at 8:36 PM, oafcmetty said:

Link?

Thanks for the thought. It’s on my wife’s Facebook, so can’t share the link. 
 

Actually had my surgery this morning.  You can see I’m doing great!

11 hours ago, Londonboy said:

Sheron is not the main problem.

Every team needs someone doing the dirty work and keeping things simple.

If we had the right players to play 4:5:1 with 2 proper attacking wide midfield men, a good baller in the middle 3 (and not DG) and a better right back Sheron would be fine.

Our issue is an aging, static team without the legs to create enough space going forward for the likes of Sheron etc to play more meaningful attacking passes, particularly when we are at home.

Take him out and we are worse than we are today....fact

Actually I feel we have an aging team who cannot play 2 or certainly 3 games in quick succession without running out of steam.

All the best Frank. Stay safe!

2 hours ago, wiseowl said:

All donations are welcome, of course, but let's not get carried away with a donation of about £1600 from people with a combined net worth of circa £175m. It's the equivalent to someone with a net worth of £250,000 (i.e. equity on his house and savings etc) chipping in £2.26.

I’m just collecting for Prostate Cancer Uk, I’d be very pleased with that donation!

Let’s go on and win this. Great chance there for Gardner to make it 2.

1 minute ago, kowenicki said:

Two v good chances missed now. One each for Fondop (sitter) and Norwood. 
 

Playing quite well though I think. Gardner looks better today. 

Did the defender get a touch on the way to Fondop, because otherwise it was a bad miss.

I sometimes wish all Oldham fans thought the same. 
 

Passing forward is more difficult to get right. You are not passing to someone with lots of space. I have often seen players with a pass on, deciding not to make it. 
 

When a player does make a pass and miss it, fans jump all over it.

Gardener had a game Sat where quite a few passes, corners etc went wrong. There have been a lot of comments about the mistakes.  In fact, he was kept on the pitch too long purely because he as the only one looking for and making some decent forward passes.

The highlights view was the same as mine on the day.  They both seem to get to the ball at the same time.  The ball bounces away as if there was some contact from the defender. It is debatable and I’m not sure how you or the ref could be sure.

8 hours ago, wiseowl said:

He's not as effective when he's on from the start BP. Didn't have enough time, though, yesterday to make his impact but, again, you could clearly see he ruffled them for sure. Half hour as an impact sub for me in games like yesterdays.

He was just coming on when we scored.  He was sent to sit down again, so he would have been on 8 or 10 mins earlier. 

2 hours ago, LightDN123 said:

Sure, so he’s counting 3 x 30mins appearances as 3 full appearances to support his narrative. 
 

Just to add, the minute per game is correct. 
 

I have no issue with Reid and I think him and Norwood are the best partnership. But Reid has been used as an impact sub mainly. So his mins per goal will inevitably be lower. 

People just can’t wait for Norwood to fail. Shouting a narrative that he is when he’s on track to get 20 this season in what’s been a shit Oldham team. It’s embarrassing. 

I’m not sure your assumption that “coming on as an impact sub means you will necessarily score more and hence have a lower minutes per goal stat” actually holds up to scrutiny.  That needs some real statistical analysis.

17 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

His record speaks for itself, as I've said previously my doubts are centered on his character and style and whether or not he is the right fit for us.

What about his character worries you to the extent it worries you? What do you know that we don’t?

25 minutes ago, Bobledgersheart said:

..............if fit ?

He was fit last home game. Hopefully MM will play him for only 60 mins and continue to protect him. ST playing him far to much his first week back, considering his age and injury history.

9 hours ago, BP1960 said:

 

sorry, I didnt realise I had to be accountable to you for my whereabouts.

I don’t think anyone cares where you are BP. It was you asking questions that the majority didn’t think worth asking, hence the suggestion you go ask them. 

45 minutes ago, BP1960 said:

 

I meant run direct with pace like Green RM.

I don’t think that was what MM meant by “runners”.

4 hours ago, BP1960 said:

 

I meant for them to be assessed training with the first team, if he thinks they aren't ready fair enough but it's possible one ot two may shine and be promoted to the first team squad.

If he doesn't assess them how will he know?

 

There is plenty of time for this to happen. You really are jumping the gun BP if that’s your criticism of MM, (oh along with not using all his substitutes,)

5 hours ago, LightDN123 said:

Not every youth player is good BP . You seen to think every youth player is better than what we have in the squad. 
 

Anyhow, it’s Murray’s assessment whether the youth players are ready to step up. Have you questioned him or you just pinning it on MM ? 

Youth players can look good against other players of their own age, strength and experience, but when they step up to a competitive match against adults it’s too much.  It isn’t really what we need now, to gamble with youth.