PhilStarbucksSilkySkills

So because Turner claims that Winchester made him some space and that's why he decided to go solo, I should ignore the video evidence to the contrary? Ever been on a jury? But in all honesty I think Turner is talking about his thought process after the point he should have played Winchester in. So we aren't talking about the same thing. This is the situation I'm talking about:

Winchester didn't affect the defender's movement at all. He was all on his own. And even if Turner was right about Winchester creating him some space, that doesn't refute the fact that Winchester should have been played in way before Turner knew there was any space to be taken advantage of.

Haven't people already done that?

If it had been Maradonna on the on the pitch instead of Turner, That would change the odds somewhat. Perhaps. Although I'd sooner that the game was a bit safer before we stop playing as a team. He shapes to block a shot. And in any case it was after the point when Winchester should have been released.

Bla bla bla. I am rubber you are glue. Do you have a point to make yet?

I'd rather they had used that instinct to make intelligent choices. If they are playing for us at least.

Winchester should have passed for that too. You seem to imply a hypocrisy where none exists. And it's only me "moaning" (or stating an opinion) and everyone arguing the toss against me. I'd much rather players played with common sense and intelligence that be greedy bastards. That is the only point I am making. Apparently though, according to some, footballing IQ and logical decision making is something to be discouraged.

???

Am I worried? I just have opinion that people are trying to argue with. Don't worry so much about me worrying.

I've just watched it a gazillion times more and I have no idea what you are talking about. At the point that Turner should have played Winchester in, nobody picks him up at all. People continue to not pick Winchester up thereafter. Turner has no serious expectation, at the point of opting not to play Winchester in, that a gap would open up. The gap doesn't appear until the point that the number 22 sticks out a leg to block the shot that he thinks is coming. By then the ball should have already been played much earlier.

If the expectation is that Winchester is going to cock it up then perhaps he shouldn't be making the run in the first place. However I still think that playing Winchester into space is a better option than hoping that the five Rochdale defenders in close proximity will part the Red Sea.

Not even close to offside. You are looking at the wrong point in the highlights. I am talking about the position everyone was in a 1:18

I understand what you are saying, however you are talking about hindsight. I am not. Let's imagine the exact same scenario happens again in the next match. Freeze frame the youtube video if it helps. Rhys Turner is surrounded by defenders on the edge of the box. No defender has spotted Winchester running into space. Turner only has to play a simple through ball to leave Winchester in a 1 v 1 with the keeper. What should Turner do? It's a bit like placing an evens bet on the number 6 coming up on the roll of a dice and having it come though, yet you could have taken an evens bet on the numbers 1-5 combined. Then arguing that you should repeat the bet in the same circumstances next time. I am saying that next time he should be making the more logical choice.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but that's not how the game works. As a coach you teach people to make good decisions. Rhys Turner made the wrong decision by going it alone. Dinking a through ball to WInchester, where he would have been in yards of space inside the area, is the option that would be by far the most to likely result in a goal. It's just simple mathematics and probability.

Not wishing to be over critical of the lad, but I hope Turner gets a bollocking for the third goal. He should have played Winchester in. He got really lucky that the Rochdale defenders made it so easy for him to get so close on his own.

If that is the case then I doubt Halifax are too bothered. He struggled in his first game and hasn't had a look in since. They were clearly not impressed.

Dowie every time. Sheridan had a fair crack at it and was found lacking imho. Let's also not forget that Corney sacked him. Why would he come back and why would Corney want him back? I'd honestly prefer to have Ronnie Moore back than Sheridan.

We'll agree to disagree then. I'm fine with him giving his opinion in this context, I wouldn't take it too badly even if I disagreed with it. The only thing he did recently that annoyed me a bit was the ham handed way he tried to get stay-away fans to come back a few months ago. He's certainly no tactician. And are you really comparing a Football Director sharing his opinions on the guilt or otherwise of a footballer, with a politician stating his dislike for black people?

I haven't heard the interview yet since I haven't found a link that works for me. I'll try again later. However, surely with a phrase like "rape crime" the emphasis would be on the type of crime it is. ie "rape crime" as opposed to "murder crime". Without listening to it i can't be sure, but that is my first impression. Strawman much? I don't think he's guilty of "rape crime". That's not to say I think he's innocent. I'm just not convinced he's guilty. And thanks btw. I love you too.

Club Director or ex copper, I just don't know why he should be basing his judgements on the current position under the law. He's entitled to his opinion. If he has a choice of saying alleged or convicted (both equally correct), and he chooses the word that suits him best, then that's fine by me.

Even if each crime was described as a "banana hammock" I'm sure society will operate just fine.

No. It just implies that Barry isn't happy to use the court's verdict to describe the alleged crime. And either way, he is entitled to think that Evans is not guilty. He's not alone.

No That makes the verdict guilty. The law has decided he did it. That doesn't mean that he actually did. And even with the omniscience required to decide his actual guilt, the crime would still be "alleged". "Alleged" just means that it has been claimed. Whether the judicial system found him guilty or not, it has still been "alleged". Barry's use of the word is perfectly correct.