Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

if the measly amount received for tarky was to finance 3 mediocre signings and service the debt we are in more trouble than i thought. If thats the case and we are a couple of hundred grand from going under why didnt Mr 'self-serving' Corney consider letting somebody else have a go ? It says a lot when the mans ambition runs to getting the club to Wembely and indeed he may have his wish when we run out in the FA Vase final in a few years time. The parallels with Dickov are there for all to see a chairman who falls for patter, a rookie manager who makes mistakes along the way who is using us as a stepping stone to his next project who talks the talk but struggles to walk the walk, crowds of 2700 a team that cant score more than one goal 95% of the time, quality players replaced by chaff, we could go on and on the parallels are there for all to see if the happy clappers wanna see that as progress I respect that but to me its we are where we are - its become the norm and acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harkins has made a very good start, but he's not fit to lick Baxter's ball sack at the moment.

 

Earlier in the season, the same was said of Philliskirk...

The rule is, though, that every player who leaves Latics was pretty :censored: all along. That is, unless there's a remote possibility of us signing them again, in which case they are 'worth a punt'.

 

Jose Baxter didn't fit in; Neal Eardley was :censored:; Chris Taylor was never going to make it in the Championship and would regret leaving; Chris Porter was a crap bastard; Dean Furman was a :censored: sideways passer; Stephens didn't contribute enough, Wilson and Lockwood are perfectly good enough to replace Tarkowski, etc.

 

Matt Smith seems to have sneaked onto the 'worth a punt' list, alongside Wabara and ever-presents Kilkenny, Vernon and Wellens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule is, though, that every player who leaves Latics was pretty :censored: all along. That is, unless there's a remote possibility of us signing them again, in which case they are 'worth a punt'.

 

Jose Baxter didn't fit in; Neal Eardley was :censored:; Chris Taylor was never going to make it in the Championship and would regret leaving; Chris Porter was a crap bastard; Dean Furman was a :censored: sideways passer; Stephens didn't contribute enough, Wilson and Lockwood are perfectly good enough to replace Tarkowski, etc.

 

Matt Smith seems to have sneaked onto the 'worth a punt' list, alongside Wabara and ever-presents Kilkenny, Vernon and Wellens.

 

They'll get a good few transfer windows out of Joseph Mills now..

Edited by HarryBosch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule is, though, that every player who leaves Latics was pretty :censored: all along. That is, unless there's a remote possibility of us signing them again, in which case they are 'worth a punt'.

 

Jose Baxter didn't fit in; Neal Eardley was :censored:; Chris Taylor was never going to make it in the Championship and would regret leaving; Chris Porter was a crap bastard; Dean Furman was a :censored: sideways passer; Stephens didn't contribute enough, Wilson and Lockwood are perfectly good enough to replace Tarkowski, etc.

 

Matt Smith seems to have sneaked onto the 'worth a punt' list, alongside Wabara and ever-presents Kilkenny, Vernon and Wellens.

Can we add Iain Dowie?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's :censored:, been :censored: for the 10 years I've been back in Manchester and going to the games again, there is no difference between now and 2004. We've had some ups, we've had some downs but I still support OAFC financially and emotionally. I turn up at the games, have a laugh with the people I sit with, have a singsong when it happens, have a cheer when we score and a cheer at the final whistle when it ends.

 

The one thing that has changed is the number of other supporters that go to the games has fallen which means there is even less money going into the club which means the players on the pitch will be of a cheaper nature and likely to be lesser quality than before. Which logically means that the numbers on the terraces is less resulting in even less money going into the club and the vicious cycle continues.

 

At this rate they might as well stop farting about with holes in the ground making out they are building a stand and let the club die. Now that Utd are failing I could jump ship there and get the same self flagellation I've given myself over the last 30 odd years supporting this bloody club by supporting a club going nowhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This season he tried to sign players with a specific style of play in mind, and also moved some on for the same reason.

 

It's gone tits up in various ways, many beyond his control, and he's had to draft in any old player that's available just to get body's in and the style has had to change completely.

It's still going OK though (just about).

He's been able to grind out 3 points to stop the rot every time things were starting to look worrying.

As bad as it's been of late I still maintain it's not as bad as it was under Dickov at times.

 

What I hope he does next season is sign (and keep) the best possible players available to us and build the style, formation etc.. around them, rather than the other way round.

 

We can't rely on one specific system at this level because when your two fastest wingers get caught for spot fixing or make certain "lifestyle choices" like for like replacements aren't readily available on our limited budget.

 

He knows now that he'll need to adapt the the team several times and often quite drastically over the course of a season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ENTROPY:

 

Inevitable and steady deterioration of a system

Lack of pattern or organization; disorder

A measure of the amount of energy in a physical system not available to do work

Gradual decline into disorder
Lack of order or predictability

 

Oldham [entropy] Athletic

The irony is, that season after season, it is all becoming a bit too predictable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read through all the thread but one thing that isn't a parallel is that LJ's subs and in-game formation changes make much more of an impact than Dickov's.

Bournemouth at home in Dickov's first season : One down. He made a double substitution that effectively won us that game. Alessandra came on along with someone else I think...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any facts to support that view?

 

Obvious one being Peterborough.

 

Dickov would wait far too long to make subs, LJ made three at half-time on Tuesday night which made us much more competitive. Yes you could argue that he chose the wrong starting lineup, but at least he recognised the need to change things - towards the end of Dickov's time he'd often wait until the 75th/80th minute to make subs which was completely ineffective. Even when he made them he wouldn't change the system to suit them; he'd bring Smith on, have us hoof the ball to him, watch him win headers and have no-one around him to run onto them and no-one putting crosses in for him to win. It was just hoof and hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Obvious one being Peterborough.

 

Dickov would wait far too long to make subs, LJ made three at half-time on Tuesday night which made us much more competitive. Yes you could argue that he chose the wrong starting lineup, but at least he recognised the need to change things - towards the end of Dickov's time he'd often wait until the 75th/80th minute to make subs which was completely ineffective. Even when he made them he wouldn't change the system to suit them; he'd bring Smith on, have us hoof the ball to him, watch him win headers and have no-one around him to run onto them and no-one putting crosses in for him to win. It was just hoof and hope.

I've just pointed out three times which dispel that myth, I'm afraid...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Obvious one being Peterborough.

 

Dickov would wait far too long to make subs, LJ made three at half-time on Tuesday night which made us much more competitive. Yes you could argue that he chose the wrong starting lineup, but at least he recognised the need to change things - towards the end of Dickov's time he'd often wait until the 75th/80th minute to make subs which was completely ineffective. Even when he made them he wouldn't change the system to suit them; he'd bring Smith on, have us hoof the ball to him, watch him win headers and have no-one around him to run onto them and no-one putting crosses in for him to win. It was just hoof and hope.

End being the imperative word..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forest was towards the end of his reign...

 

Forest was a freak in a competition which Dickov knew he was under no pressure to succeed. I agree that at the beginning of his tenure he made some good subs, but they soon dried up (which LJ doesn't seem likely to do) and, had he managed in the league with the same mentality as he did in that Forest game, he would have been much better off. Unfortunately, after the defeats by Southampton and Peterborough in his first season, it seems like he was more scared to fail than he was driven to succeed and he became much more conservative. Hopefully this won't happen with LJ, but of course none of us saw it with PD either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...