singe Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 If you are not fit enough or not on form you won;t get inth e squad. rightly So. Rightly so? Yes that's the way it has to be.. You don;t win [what he has won] by having a lot of sentiment. I think its good. It keeps the hunger in your belly., the desire the passion. If you get into the situation where people are almost not worried about the squad [teamsheet] coming out because they're expecting to be in, that'sa bad place to start from. It's better off people are on their toes. He as talking about Capello leaving out Michael Owen, in The Times. But substitute Hughes, or Lidell or Gregan for that matter. It begs the question did Shez use the budget on a few top players, and have no one to keep them on their toes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue_tak Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I think we had a relatively large squad at the beginning of the season and with the purchase of O'Grady, we had four strikers, five if you include a match-fit Wolfenden. My opinion is that Hughes and Alessandra had a good partnership in the making and should have been the consistent front pairing. This is just one area where Sheridan should had the nous to stick with the pairing and use O'grady and Davies from the bench. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but this is how successful teams win promotion. Consistent team selection and capable players that can add a different dimension to a match, coming on from the bench. Sheridan thought he was in charge of bloody Chelsea and started unecessary tinkering before the team had managed to gel together and get their season underway. We should never have needed to get a loan striker in at all this season (barring injuries). The only position we needed to cover was at left back. The absolutely ludicrous decision to pull out of reserve team football cost us more dearly than we care to admit. No match practice for the fringe players? They might as well have been at home watching TV, because no amount of training ground "football" can replace what was lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wozz_oafc Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I think we had a relatively large squad at the beginning of the season and with the purchase of O'Grady, we had four strikers, five if you include a match-fit Wolfenden. My opinion is that Hughes and Alessandra had a good partnership in the making and should have been the consistent front pairing. This is just one area where Sheridan should had the nous to stick with the pairing and use O'grady and Davies from the bench. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but this is how successful teams win promotion. Consistent team selection and capable players that can add a different dimension to a match, coming on from the bench. Sheridan thought he was in charge of bloody Chelsea and started unecessary tinkering before the team had managed to gel together and get their season underway. We should never have needed to get a loan striker in at all this season (barring injuries). The only position we needed to cover was at left back. The absolutely ludicrous decision to pull out of reserve team football cost us more dearly than we care to admit. No match practice for the fringe players? They might as well have been at home watching TV, because no amount of training ground "football" can replace what was lost. Couldnt agree more about the reserve team. A stupid idea scrapping it the season we finally got a big squad. Whoevers decision it was made a big error there. I think we must surely be the only team in the league (probably the football league) Which has got rid of 3 of their top 4 strikers at the start of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.