[h again]

MDCCCLXVI, on Oct 25 2009, 07:48 PM, said:

Are you seriously trying to tell us that hoardes of potential fans visit this site prior to attending but are dissuaded by observations of where we need to improve?

What "nonsensical prattle".

As for being "big and clever" or "confrontational", all i do is post opinions like everyone else: are you joining 'Carlsberg' by advocating censorship of those you dislike, though?

But then i guess all this "reasoned debate" is wasted on you as you're too busy sticking your fingers in your ears, squeezing your eyes tightly shut, and repeating "I'm ignoring Chris" in a monotone chant...

Which, by a strange coincidence, is what you do every time I provide you with the facts you're so fond of asking for.

It seems the party's over, old chuck. You got away with the constant whingeing when nobody liked Rico. Now the manager is providing a bit more entertainment for the majority - the home fans - you're starting to get on nerves.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

h again, on Oct 25 2009, 08:06 PM, said:

Which, by a strange coincidence, is what you do every time I provide you with the facts you're so fond of asking for.

It seems the party's over, old chuck. You got away with the constant whingeing when nobody liked Rico. Now the manager is providing a bit more entertainment for the majority - the home fans - you're starting to get on nerves.

Yeah, of course you do.

And me getting on nerves?

Heh, heh, heh, nice one 'H'; irony at it's best.

[Bonnyman]

MDCCCLXVI, on Oct 25 2009, 07:13 PM, said:

Yeah, of course you do.

And me getting on nerves?

Heh, heh, heh, nice one 'H'; irony at it's best.

i actually agree with you match summary inpart,but surely the conceding of the 2nd goal was something that often happens in high scoring games that are for all purposes over, often refered too as a concellation,i certainly didnt think ,that because we conceded a 2nd it was evidence of our frailties,players were probably playing 10 yards higher up the pitch than intended chasing glory,as for it being our final third i think you will find its the first third

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

bonnyman, on Oct 25 2009, 08:22 PM, said:

i actually agree with you match summary inpart,but surely the conceding of the 2nd goal was something that often happens in high scoring games that are for all purposes over, often refered too as a concellation,i certainly didnt think ,that because we conceded a 2nd it was evidence of our frailties,players were probably playing 10 yards higher up the pitch than intended chasing glory,as for it being our final third i think you will find its the first third

First third...final third...middle third...does it matter as long as folk get the gist?

I can understand your point about concentration lapsing when the game is over to all intents and purposes, but i think there's a general acceptance amongst Town fans that we struggle to keep clean sheets and that might cost us in the final analysis. Certainly at two-nil there was a growing unease around where i sit that the opportunities that went begging might come back to haunt us, and sure enough Burton stuck one away to turn a comfortable lead into what could've been a nail biting last twenty-odd minutes but for Jack's timely response. Is it really so wrong to focus on an area where improvement is needed?

Oh, and by the way: thanks for your opening remark, but be carefull about openly acknowledging such things. There are those on here that seem to think anything but joyous outpourings of glee should be banned or, at the very least, strenuously ignored.

[Bonnyman]

MDCCCLXVI, on Oct 25 2009, 08:11 PM, said:

First third...final third...middle third...does it matter as long as folk get the gist?

I can understand your point about concentration lapsing when the game is over to all intents and purposes, but i think there's a general acceptance amongst Town fans that we struggle to keep clean sheets and that might cost us in the final analysis. Certainly at two-nil there was a growing unease around where i sit that the opportunities that went begging might come back to haunt us, and sure enough Burton stuck one away to turn a comfortable lead into what could've been a nail biting last twenty-odd minutes but for Jack's timely response. Is it really so wrong to focus on an area where improvement is needed?

Oh, and by the way: thanks for your opening remark, but be carefull about openly acknowledging such things. There are those on here that seem to think anything but joyous outpourings of glee should be banned or, at the very least, strenuously ignored.

i agree that at 2-1 it could have been a nail biter as for finding negatives in games im sure thats the whole idea,if john sheridan isnt looking for negatives in matches how can he possibly hope to progress

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on Oct 25 2009, 08:11 PM, said:

Certainly at two-nil there was a growing unease around where i sit that the opportunities that went begging might come back to haunt us, and sure enough Burton stuck one away to turn a comfortable lead into what could've been a nail biting last twenty-odd minutes but for Jack's timely response. Is it really so wrong to focus on an area where improvement is needed?

I was having a very similar discussion with a very wise man after the final whistle yesterday, name of Mitchell (the man, not the whistle).......
................and he made the interesting point that if the opposition NEVER had a period of ascendancy then the individual players would not if fact be able to make a living as professional footballers. Would you employ a player who at no point in a game was able to win a personal battle for a header or a tackle, or was never able to outsmart his opponent?. Get 3 or 4 on the ascendancy at the same time, and the wind behind, and there's the period of the game that's nail biting.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dim view, on Oct 25 2009, 10:08 PM, said:

I was having a very similar discussion with a very wise man after the final whistle yesterday, name of Mitchell (the man, not the whistle).......
................and he made the interesting point that if the opposition NEVER had a period of ascendancy then the individual players would not if fact be able to make a living as professional footballers. Would you employ a player who at no point in a game was able to win a personal battle for a header or a tackle, or was never able to outsmart his opponent?. Get 3 or 4 on the ascendancy at the same time, and the wind behind, and there's the period of the game that's nail biting.

Ahhh, the wind.

I was wondering at what point that word might crop up.

Strange how we couldn't cope with it (or hard pitches, or losing key players) under the last manager, yet we can somehow overcome it now.

But fair point Dave, it's true that even the worst sides seem to have encouraging spells during any given ninety minutes, but i'm not sure who the "three or four in the ascendancy" you refer to were.

The underlying issue, though, is our propensity to concede goals and induce pressure upon ourselves. Notts, Grimsby, Huddersfield, and now Burton spring instantly to mind as sides we should've left for dead but who were then allowed back into games. Thankfully we prevailed on each occasion, however i'm sure Les is as concerned by this apparent Achilles heel as the rest of us.

[Wooden Spoon]

JonB, on Oct 25 2009, 04:10 PM, said:

As i said when someone was advocating that Boden should get more of a chance.....who are we dropping to play someone like Benson? It would have to be one of Donal, Lester, Talbot, Small, Lowry, Perkins.....

Away from home, or if things need changing you could drop 1 from 4. Would it matter?

[Bobby Darling]

h again, on Oct 25 2009, 08:06 PM, said:

Which, by a strange coincidence, is what you do every time I provide you with the facts you're so fond of asking for.

It seems the party's over, old chuck. You got away with the constant whingeing when nobody liked Rico. Now the manager is providing a bit more entertainment for the majority - the home fans - you're starting to get on nerves.