[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Dave Allen ignored the three relegations on Saunders' CV, not to mention the lousy, passionless performance his Crawley side delivered at the Proact, to appoint him on the basis of being 'good with kids'. Admitting it was after little more than an hour in his company, too.

But what evidence have we of that? Ebanks-Blake? Novak? Woods? I guess the mostly unimpressive Herd is young but hardly constitutes what Allen referred to, meanwhile O'Neil has been unceremoniously benched. Early games saw a few of Cook's 'kids' fielded yet only because Saunders' recruits had all gone down injured, then as time's passed they've all been sidelined with even Raglan now replaced by an ageing loanee.

Infact everything we've witnessed suggests Saunders prefers veterans.

Then how much notice does Saunders actually take of the youth side? Is it true they've been separated from the first team to train at Langer Lane - costing a four figure sum per month? What message does that send to the likes of the promising Maguire? Has there been any attempt whatsoever to integrate our own products into the first team squad?

I'm certainly not aware of any.

Of course we also had that laughable attempt by our CEO to suggest some 'cunning plan' to excuse the dearth of summer signings, to claim Saunders had intended to bring in crocks and cast-offs unable to get a gig elsewhere all along. So exactly how did that fit in with the 'good with kids' spin?

Nah, it seems to me the façade is quickly falling apart. Dean Saunders talks the talk but falls flat on his face when trying to walk the walk. And he's dragging us down with him.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 24 November 2015 - 10:43 PM

[Stoptalkingbol]

Rolf Harris would've been a cert if DA could be bothered to interview other candidates.

[calvin plummers socks]

Stoptalkingbol, on 24 November 2015 - 10:57 PM, said:

Rolf Harris would've been a cert if DA could be bothered to interview other candidates.

Classy!

[Bonnyman]

MDCCCLXVI, on 24 November 2015 - 10:36 PM, said:

Dave Allen ignored the three relegations on Saunders' CV, not to mention the lousy, passionless performance his Crawley side delivered at the Proact, to appoint him on the basis of being 'good with kids'. Admitting it was after little more than an hour in his company, too.

But what evidence have we of that? Ebanks-Blake? Novak? Woods? I guess the mostly unimpressive Herd is young but hardly constitutes what Allen referred to, meanwhile O'Neil has been unceremoniously benched. Early games saw a few of Cook's 'kids' fielded yet only because Saunders' recruits had all gone down injured, then as time's passed they've all been sidelined with even Raglan now replaced by an ageing loanee.

Infact everything we've witnessed suggests Saunders prefers veterans.

Then how much notice does Saunders actually take of the youth side? Is it true they've been separated from the first team to train at Langer Lane - costing a four figure sum per month? What message does that send to the likes of the promising Maguire? Has there been any attempt whatsoever to integrate our own products into the first team squad?

I'm certainly not aware of any.

Of course we also had that laughable attempt by our CEO to suggest some 'cunning plan' to excuse the dearth of summer signings, to claim Saunders had intended to bring in crocks and cast-offs unable to get a gig elsewhere all along. So exactly how did that fit in with the 'good with kids' spin?

Nah, it seems to me the façade is quickly falling apart. Dean Saunders talks the talk but falls flat on his face when trying to walk the walk. And he's dragging us down with him.

I wonder how much of the budget Blake,Herd,Talbot,martinez takes up...all have had serious injuries prior to this season,hindsight is a wonderful thing but the evidence will have been on black and white on their medical records.

[jack bauer]

MDCCCLXVI, on 24 November 2015 - 10:36 PM, said:

Dave Allen ignored the three relegations on Saunders' CV, not to mention the lousy, passionless performance his Crawley side delivered at the Proact, to appoint him on the basis of being 'good with kids'. Admitting it was after little more than an hour in his company, too.

But what evidence have we of that? Ebanks-Blake? Novak? Woods? I guess the mostly unimpressive Herd is young but hardly constitutes what Allen referred to, meanwhile O'Neil has been unceremoniously benched. Early games saw a few of Cook's 'kids' fielded yet only because Saunders' recruits had all gone down injured, then as time's passed they've all been sidelined with even Raglan now replaced by an ageing loanee.

Infact everything we've witnessed suggests Saunders prefers veterans.

Then how much notice does Saunders actually take of the youth side? Is it true they've been separated from the first team to train at Langer Lane - costing a four figure sum per month? What message does that send to the likes of the promising Maguire? Has there been any attempt whatsoever to integrate our own products into the first team squad?

I'm certainly not aware of any.

Of course we also had that laughable attempt by our CEO to suggest some 'cunning plan' to excuse the dearth of summer signings, to claim Saunders had intended to bring in crocks and cast-offs unable to get a gig elsewhere all along. So exactly how did that fit in with the 'good with kids' spin?

Nah, it seems to me the façade is quickly falling apart. Dean Saunders talks the talk but falls flat on his face when trying to walk the walk. And he's dragging us down with him.

just to pick up one point here, the introduction of wood... how many goals have we shipped since his arrival? not really made us more solid has he?

[Stoptalkingbol]

calvin plummers socks, on 24 November 2015 - 10:59 PM, said:

Classy!

Cheers bruv.

[Misnomer]

calvin plummers socks, on 24 November 2015 - 10:59 PM, said:

Classy!

Still funny,though! Stop being so over-sensitive.....

[Mr Mercury]

MDCCCLXVI, on 24 November 2015 - 10:36 PM, said:

Dave Allen ignored the three relegations on Saunders' CV, not to mention the lousy, passionless performance his Crawley side delivered at the Proact, to appoint him on the basis of being 'good with kids'. Admitting it was after little more than an hour in his company, too.

But what evidence have we of that? Ebanks-Blake? Novak? Woods? I guess the mostly unimpressive Herd is young but hardly constitutes what Allen referred to, meanwhile O'Neil has been unceremoniously benched. Early games saw a few of Cook's 'kids' fielded yet only because Saunders' recruits had all gone down injured, then as time's passed they've all been sidelined with even Raglan now replaced by an ageing loanee.

Infact everything we've witnessed suggests Saunders prefers veterans.

Then how much notice does Saunders actually take of the youth side? Is it true they've been separated from the first team to train at Langer Lane - costing a four figure sum per month? What message does that send to the likes of the promising Maguire? Has there been any attempt whatsoever to integrate our own products into the first team squad?

I'm certainly not aware of any.

Of course we also had that laughable attempt by our CEO to suggest some 'cunning plan' to excuse the dearth of summer signings, to claim Saunders had intended to bring in crocks and cast-offs unable to get a gig elsewhere all along. So exactly how did that fit in with the 'good with kids' spin?

Nah, it seems to me the façade is quickly falling apart. Dean Saunders talks the talk but falls flat on his face when trying to walk the walk. And he's dragging us down with him.

It's an absolute disaster Chris , I've just got in after another completely passionless directionless effort. It's ridiculous that supposed football people employed this guy!

[Misnomer]

Mr Mercury, on 24 November 2015 - 11:02 PM, said:

It's an absolute disaster Chris , I've just got in after another completely passionless directionless effort. It's ridiculous that supposed football people employed this guy!

I said at the beginning of the season, i reckon it'll be his last job as a manager; he's had a £2m budget, and, effortlessly and expeditiously, managed to turn us into one of THE worst performing teams i can remember!

[calvin plummers socks]

Misnomer, on 24 November 2015 - 11:02 PM, said:

Still funny,though! Stop being so over-sensitive.....

I'm not- id have gone for Gary Glitter for more comic effect though :-)

[Tyrion]

jack bauer, on 24 November 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:

just to pick up one point here, the introduction of wood... how many goals have we shipped since his arrival? not really made us more solid has he?

7 in 3 in the league 8 in 4 if you count the cup

[Blue95]

Tyrion, on 24 November 2015 - 11:40 PM, said:

7 in 3 in the league 8 in 4 if you count the cup

Its actually borderline insane.
HOW CAN HE NOT SEE THIS

[azul]

Tyrion, on 24 November 2015 - 11:40 PM, said:

7 in 3 in the league 8 in 4 if you count the cup

You are being too kind, surely 8 in 3?

Didn't play against Fleetwood and we kept a clean sheet. Speaking of them, their results have picked up a bit since he left

[firedodger]

calvin plummers socks, on 24 November 2015 - 11:17 PM, said:

I'm not- id have gone for Gary Glitter for more comic effect though :-)

And a bit more festive too, nice touch.

[dazcarrlegend]

jack bauer, on 24 November 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:

just to pick up one point here, the introduction of wood... how many goals have we shipped since his arrival? not really made us more solid has he?

The irony is, beyond Morsy, Raglan is the most likely player we have (in my opinion) to command a fee in the future. If we write this season off as mid-table mediocrity (which DA appears to have done given his answers at the shareholders meeting), why wouldn't we be using it to blood our most promising youngsters? For me, Raglan & Ariybi should be the first names on the teamsheet. Perhaps even O'Neill- he has hardly been given a run in the side in his favoured position of midfield has he...

[Mr Mercury]

dazcarrlegend, on 25 November 2015 - 09:29 AM, said:

The irony is, beyond Morsy, Raglan is the most likely player we have (in my opinion) to command a fee in the future. If we write this season off as mid-table mediocrity (which DA appears to have done given his answers at the shareholders meeting), why wouldn't we be using it to blood our most promising youngsters? For me, Raglan & Ariybi should be the first names on the teamsheet. Perhaps even O'Neill- he has hardly been given a run in the side in his favoured position of midfield has he...

I'll tell you something Dazz after what I've witnessed recently mid table mediocrity is a pipe dream, it's relegation all the way!

[Bonnyman]

dazcarrlegend, on 25 November 2015 - 09:29 AM, said:

The irony is, beyond Morsy, Raglan is the most likely player we have (in my opinion) to command a fee in the future. If we write this season off as mid-table mediocrity (which DA appears to have done given his answers at the shareholders meeting), why wouldn't we be using it to blood our most promising youngsters? For me, Raglan & Ariybi should be the first names on the teamsheet. Perhaps even O'Neill- he has hardly been given a run in the side in his favoured position of midfield has he...

Charlie raglan is a strange player for cfc,strange in the fact I have never seen him have a bad game but he drifts in and out of the team.Im not sure how well that puts him mentally,it may be giving him self doubt.Ariyibi on the other hand is still work in progress ,he has lots of flaws in his game,looks more of an impact player at present and is not ready to play left or right midfield in a flat 442,it just does not suit,his best position would be as one of the three behind a lone striker where he can have less responsibility.

[dtp]

From what he said at the AGM it was clear that he was not happy with our defence and he thinks it could take a little time to sort it out - I agree with him, I don't think our defence has been brilliant since we moved to the Proact, but I would argue John Duncan would sort it out overnight by comparison to his efforts.

At the outset of his reign it was obvious that RB was going to be a problem, Tendayi was going to leave, Drew was nowhere near fit, Hird will never be a RB, we'd got no up and coming youngster to take a chance on etc. So, eventually, what dies he do - he signs a RB who needs weeks of rehabilitation before being anywhere near fit enough to play but then puts him into central midfield. On top of which he signs a young midfielder, puts him in at RB where he fails and loses any confidence he might have had. Meanwhile, he waits for Drew to get back to 60% of what he was before playing him and then dropping him. Wouldn't it have been easier to sign a fit and proper RB?

We have 3 right-sided CB's, an up and coming young one, a 34 year old, and one lacking in height. So he does he extend all their contracts? I believe the answer was "yes" but "why" - why not wait and assess them as surely, at most, we only need 2 of them going forward.

Then, we don't have a natural left-sided CB so he has to play an ageing right-footer there who actually did better than the ageing left-footer he has recently loaned. But why did he not sign a decent left-footed CB before the season started.

Then, we have Jones at LB - good going forward but poor defensively. Possibly would be better employed on the left side of midfield- I don't know. In fairness to Dan he looks like he is enjoying this season better than last but that should not detract from his defensive weaknesses nor the fact that we have, absolutely, no other left back on the books to put pressure on him and his position.

One could say that Tommy Lee should come into the defensive equation but I have seen far worse keepers behind defences perform much better than our unit.

Basically, I agree with Saunders in that our defence does need sorting but I don't agree with how he is doing it.

If Herd is to be any good to us, in fact if he is any good, he should be at RB. Evatt or Raglan at RCB. We need a LCB better than what Woods appears to be and definitely with a bit more pace, then we at least need a decent LB to put pressure on Jones or, in fact, give us the option of moving him further forward and thus making us more solid on that side.

On top of Saunders efforts in failing to sort out the defence he will be faced with even more problems in January to sort out midfield - not as if that job doesn't need doing now!!!

[Spire-Power]

dtp, on 25 November 2015 - 09:59 AM, said:

From what he said at the AGM it was clear that he was not happy with our defence and he thinks it could take a little time to sort it out - I agree with him, I don't think our defence has been brilliant since we moved to the Proact, but I would argue John Duncan would sort it out overnight by comparison to his efforts.

At the outset of his reign it was obvious that RB was going to be a problem, Tendayi was going to leave, Drew was nowhere near fit, Hird will never be a RB, we'd got no up and coming youngster to take a chance on etc. So, eventually, what dies he do - he signs a RB who needs weeks of rehabilitation before being anywhere near fit enough to play but then puts him into central midfield. On top of which he signs a young midfielder, puts him in at RB where he fails and loses any confidence he might have had. Meanwhile, he waits for Drew to get back to 60% of what he was before playing him and then dropping him. Wouldn't it have been easier to sign a fit and proper RB?

We have 3 right-sided CB's, an up and coming young one, a 34 year old, and one lacking in height. So he does he extend all their contracts? I believe the answer was "yes" but "why" - why not wait and assess them as surely, at most, we only need 2 of them going forward.

Then, we don't have a natural left-sided CB so he has to play an ageing right-footer there who actually did better than the ageing left-footer he has recently loaned. But why did he not sign a decent left-footed CB before the season started.

Then, we have Jones at LB - good going forward but poor defensively. Possibly would be better employed on the left side of midfield- I don't know. In fairness to Dan he looks like he is enjoying this season better than last but that should not detract from his defensive weaknesses nor the fact that we have, absolutely, no other left back on the books to put pressure on him and his position.

One could say that Tommy Lee should come into the defensive equation but I have seen far worse keepers behind defences perform much better than our unit.

Basically, I agree with Saunders in that our defence does need sorting but I don't agree with how he is doing it.

If Herd is to be any good to us, in fact if he is any good, he should be at RB. Evatt or Raglan at RCB. We need a LCB better than what Woods appears to be and definitely with a bit more pace, then we at least need a decent LB to put pressure on Jones or, in fact, give us the option of moving him further forward and thus making us more solid on that side.

On top of Saunders efforts in failing to sort out the defence he will be faced with even more problems in January to sort out midfield - not as if that job doesn't need doing now!!!

I agree that if Drew can't play then put Herd RB. That said, DS has signed a RB - Graham - who should be fit by now.

[BlueDay]

jack bauer, on 24 November 2015 - 11:00 PM, said:

just to pick up one point here, the introduction of wood... how many goals have we shipped since his arrival? not really made us more solid has he?

Spot-on.

Strangely enough we had seemingly turned the corner and were actually on a bit of a decent run until Wood arrived. Now we're back to square one and heading the wrong way.