Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Never said Chelsea's tactics weren't effective. If you also look at our performances under MP at the end of last season -when MP's basically had the same squad as NA to choose from, its ridiculous to conclude that we haven't become tighter and harder to beat. One one level, MP has the worst of both worlds -not only a poor squad to choose from (the same for NA) but also players with little match practice/cohesion playing together because (thankfully and until recently), they no longer get near the first team. So would you describe conceding 3 goals in one half of football as a collapse or not? So there you go cherry picking games again, yet conveniently forgetting that MP had a fit Boruc in those games, Adkins didn't have that until New Year's Day, he was fired a few weeks later. This is as like for like as it gets, the main difference being that we have a quality centre half in Lovern available now, which Adkins didn't have. So arguably our available defence is better now than under Akdins, but just as fragile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Fonte was on the bench so not injured - Shaw admitted that he was fit "rested", Clyne is back training Fonte is injured, people need to stop disputing this fact, Clyne wasn't passed fit, you need to lay off asserting things that you just do not know. Shaw was assessed by the docs and wasn't allowed to play. Doesn't matter what he says on twitter he wasn't fit to play. No sane manager in the whole wide world would play Fox if he had a fit Shaw at his disposition. Same with Clyne, if he was fit he would have played at LB with Chambers on the right, but he wasn't so he didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Fonte is injured, people need to stop disputing this fact, Clyne wasn't passed fit, you need to lay off asserting things that you just do not know. Shaw was assessed by the docs and wasn't allowed to play. Doesn't matter what he says on twitter he wasn't fit to play. No sane manager in the whole wide world would play Fox if he had a fit Shaw at his disposition. Same with Clyne, if he was fit he would have played at LB with Chambers on the right, but he wasn't so he didn't. If Fonte was injured, why not have Turnbull or Stephens on the bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olallana Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 I´m amazed how many ITK´s there are here that knows the exact fitness status on our players. Cortese really has to look at this leakage out of Staplewood.... Oh....wait.....agenda. Sorry, my bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 If Fonte was injured, why not have Turnbull or Stephens on the bench? How would that have helped yesterday's result? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 I´m amazed how many ITK´s there are here that knows the exact fitness status on our players. Cortese really has to look at this leakage out of Staplewood.... Oh....wait.....agenda. Sorry, my bad. Why is it an agenda to point out a few facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 If Fonte was injured, why not have Turnbull or Stephens on the bench? probably because they're not good enough for the first team, I know very little about the development group, watched them twice but it was too atrocious to be repeated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 How would that have helped yesterday's result? I'm not saying it would have helped yesterday's result, I'm trying to understand if Fonte is injured and can't play why he was on the bench ahead of Stephens or Turnbull? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 probably because they're not good enough for the first team, I know very little about the development group, watched them twice but it was too atrocious to be repeated. Neither are Hooliveld or Fox but doest stop them being picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintSteve Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Fonte is injured, people need to stop disputing this fact, Clyne wasn't passed fit, you need to lay off asserting things that you just do not know. Shaw was assessed by the docs and wasn't allowed to play. Doesn't matter what he says on twitter he wasn't fit to play. No sane manager in the whole wide world would play Fox if he had a fit Shaw at his disposition. Same with Clyne, if he was fit he would have played at LB with Chambers on the right, but he wasn't so he didn't. Sorry, but Fonte is not injured, he would not be on the Subs bench if we could not come on for an injured defender... where do you get this rubbish from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 probably because they're not good enough for the first team, I know very little about the development group, watched them twice but it was too atrocious to be repeated. But surely they'd be better than a player that can't play because he's injured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) So would you describe conceding 3 goals in one half of football as a collapse or not? So there you go cherry picking games again, yet conveniently forgetting that MP had a fit Boruc in those games, Adkins didn't have that until New Year's Day, he was fired a few weeks later. This is as like for like as it gets, the main difference being that we have a quality centre half in Lovern available now, which Adkins didn't have. So arguably our available defence is better now than under Akdins, but just as fragile. Cherrypicking, you alright? I'm looking at MP's entire history of results which is a perfect sample, the very opposite of cherrypicking. By contrast, one half of football against a team that had never lost at home under their manager.... And Adkins dropped Boruc and stubbornly stuck with Gazzanigga. Nothing to do with him being unavailable. Edited 23 December, 2013 by shurlock facepalm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 But surely they'd be better than a player that can't play because he's injured? Probably not no, both went on the summer tour, neither has progressed enough since then to be considered for first team duty. Expect some serious shipping out of the development group soon. Fonte could probably have played 10 minutes but I feel that in case of injury to Lovren or Jos Yoshida would have come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Probably not no, both went on the summer tour, neither has progressed enough since then to be considered for first team duty. Expect some serious shipping out of the development group soon. Fonte could probably have played 10 minutes but I feel that in case of injury to Lovren or Jos Yoshida would have come on. brilliant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olallana Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Why is it an agenda to point out a few facts? Well the facts are that neither of Clyne, Fonte or Shaw is 100% fit and therefore they weren´t playing. Fonte probably on the bench since we lack other options and a semi-fit Fonte could cover if more injuries would´ve happened during the game, but nothing anyone really wanted to due to his injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Cherrypicking, you alright? I'm looking at MP's entire history of results which is a perfect sample, the very opposite of cherrypicking. By contrast, one half of football.... And Adkins dropped Boruc and stubbornly stuck with Gazzanigga. Nothing to do with him being unavailable. No you're not, you said the end of last season when Boruc was fit and available, he wasn't fit under Adkins until the end of December and even then out of match practice. I'm glad you know the real reason why Adkins picked Gazzaniga over Boruc though. Did he tell you that himself or did you make that up too?? Not sure what your 'by contrast' comment was meant to mean, I simply asked your view on of conceding three second half goals was a collapse or not. As I've stated, this is as like for like as it gets, same Keeper, same left back, same centre back, we have a right back playing at the moment who is good but not as good as Clyne and a centre back who is much better than anything else available so they balance things out. Overall its very much like for like as The hand Adkins had. Same type of results, same type of performances, same players making the same errors. It cost Adkins his job on a better run than we are currently on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Well the facts are that neither of Clyne, Fonte or Shaw is 100% fit and therefore they weren´t playing. Fonte probably on the bench since we lack other options and a semi-fit Fonte could cover if more injuries would´ve happened during the game, but nothing anyone really wanted to due to his injury. FACTS? what were you saying about knowing all the details of our injuries and leaks from Staplewood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 No you're not, you said the end of last season when Boruc was fit and available, he wasn't fit under Adkins until the end of December and even then out of match practice. I'm glad you know the real reason why Adkins picked Gazzaniga over Boruc though. Did he tell you that himself or did you make that up too?? As I've stated, this is as like for like as it gets, same Keeper, same left back, same centre back, we have a right back playing at the moment who is good but not as good as Clyne and a centre back who is much better than anything else available so they balance things out. Overall its very much like for like as The hand Adkins had. Same type of results, same type of performances, same players making the same errors. As I have told you all many times Adkins was sacked mainly because of his handling of the GK situation. He insisted that KD was going to be our Number 1 and did not want another first line goalkeeper at the club to put him into the shadows. This is fact, I'm not going to explain how I know but it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 As I have told you all many times Adkins was sacked mainly because of his handling of the GK situation. He insisted that KD was going to be our Number 1 and did not want another first line goalkeeper at the club to put him into the shadows. This is fact, I'm not going to explain how I know but it is. Yet he picked Boruc and was sacked anyway. This is clearly nonsense as Adkins knew he was on his way before the end of our championship season before Boruc was even here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) No you're not, you said the end of last season when Boruc was fit and available, he wasn't fit under Adkins until the end of December and even then out of match practice. I'm glad you know the real reason why Adkins picked Gazzaniga over Boruc though. Did he tell you that himself or did you make that up too?? Not sure what your 'by contrast' comment was meant to mean, I simply asked your view on of conceding three second half goals was a collapse or not. As I've stated, this is as like for like as it gets, same Keeper, same left back, same centre back, we have a right back playing at the moment who is good but not as good as Clyne and a centre back who is much better than anything else available so they balance things out. Overall its very much like for like as The hand Adkins had. Same type of results, same type of performances, same players making the same errors. Boruc has gone on record saying that the whole time under NA was very strange (check his prematch interview against Swansea (a)). Nothing to do with being unavailable. It was down to NA's erratic managerment which prevented Boruc getting match fit. After discovering the harsh way that KD was not up to it, NA's faith in Gazzanigga is still one of the great unresolved mysteries - remember him throwing points away against Norwich and people calling for to be dropped, only for him to remain in goal and do exactly the same against Swansea. And when NA did make the change, he initially went back to KD (who missed a soft cross at Fulham for their goal) before finally opting for Boruc. Too little, too late. Edited 23 December, 2013 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Yet he picked Boruc and was sacked anyway. This is clearly nonsense as Adkins knew he was on his way before the end of our championship season before Boruc was even here. What is the point of argueing with you, these are the facts, accept them or don't, makes no difference to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olallana Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 FACTS? what were you saying about knowing all the details of our injuries and leaks from Staplewood? No I´m just listening to official sources and make my own simple conclusions.....no rocket science really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Boruc has gone on record saying that the whole time under NA was very strange (check his prematch interview against Swansea (a)). Nothing to do with being unavailable. It was down to NA's erratic managerment which prevented Boruc getting match fit. After discovering the harsh way that KD was not up to it, NA's faith in Gazzanigga is still one of the great unresolved mysteries - remember him throwing points away against Norwich and people calling for to be dropped, only for him to remain in goal and do exactly the same against Swansea. And when NA did make the change, he initially went back to KD. Yet he suddenly decided to pick him on New Year's Day and persisted with him until he was sacked. So who was picking the tem then if Adkins was 'stubbornly refusing to pick him'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 What is the point of argueing with you, these are the facts, accept them or don't, makes no difference to me. Except it isn't a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 What is the point of argueing with you, these are the facts, accept them or don't, makes no difference to me. Is it a FACT? it's just you claiming it but won't say how you know. I was told that Adkins knew he was on his way before the end of the championship season, from after the Reading 3-1 loss. This was before Boruc was even here, so nothing to do with refusing to pick him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Yet he suddenly decided to pick him on New Year's Day and persisted with him until he was sacked. So who was picking the tem then if Adkins was 'stubbornly refusing to pick him'? Yes after KD's performances against Fulham and Stoke (where he reminded everyone of his inability to command his 6 yard box). Boruc finally got in and hey presto, results began to pick up. Looks like NA's not the only slow learner... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) Yes after KD's performances against Fulham and Stoke (where he reminded everyone of his inability to command his 6 yard box). Boruc finally got in and hey presto, results began to pick up. Looks like NA's not the only slow learner... So he didn't 'stubbornly refuse to pick him' at all then? He did in fact pick him. Edited 23 December, 2013 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 So he didn't 'stubbornly refuse to pick him' at then? He did in fact pick him. Dear oh dear. It took NA how many months to realise that Boruc was our no.1 keeper??? And only then when all of NA's preferred alternatives had failed, even though it was blindingly obvious to the rest of us. How many points did it cost us? Whereas NA played Gazzanigga out of choice, MP is playing him out of necessity. Having bit of a mare, aren't you? And btw I said NA stubbornly stuck with Gazzanigga. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dick Last Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 What I find strange is yesterday Pochettino stated " You need a full squad to maintain those levels, and we are struggling to do that right now " yet he does not think we will be doing any business in the January transfer window ! It is very obvious to most fans that our 2nd string is just not good enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) Dear oh dear. It took NA how many months to realise that Boruc was our no.1 keeper??? And only then when all of NA's preferred alternatives had failed, even though it was blindingly obvious to the rest of us. How many points did it cost us? Whereas NA played Gazzanigga out of choice, MP is playing him out of necessity. Having bit of a mare, aren't you? And btw I said NA stubbornly stuck with Gazzanigga. IM having a mare?!! Anyone could see when Boruc joined us he was about 3 stone over weight and hasn't played for months. So NA 'stubbornly stuck within Gazza' except he dropped him. He also 'stubbornly refused to pick Boruc' expect he picked him. So did he stick with gazza or not? Did he refuse to pick Boruc or not? I it's all very confusing pal. Despite all this it doesn't detract from the Fact that the defence yesterday was like for like similar to the one Adkins had and got similar results, however you're trying to spin it. Edited 23 December, 2013 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokyo-Saint Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Didn't Boruc put himself out of contention for a bit by throwing his vodka bottle at some junior saints before a match or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) IM having a mare?!! lol!! So NA 'stubbornly stuck within Gazza' except he dropped him. He also 'stubbornly refused to pick Boruc' expect he picked him. So did he stick with gazza or not? Did he refuse to pick Boruc or not? I it's all very confusing pal. Sticking with a player (or players) for several months when it is clear that they are not up to it is the definition of stubborness, regardless whether they belatedly realise the error of their ways. That just shows how ******* misguided they were. Edited 23 December, 2013 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 What I find strange is yesterday Pochettino stated " You need a full squad to maintain those levels, and we are struggling to do that right now " yet he does not think we will be doing any business in the January transfer window ! It is very obvious to most fans that our 2nd string is just not good enough. We will most likely be trying to do some business in Jan, but you don't shout about it from the roof tops, plus it is very hard to find any quality to come in without being completely ripped off in doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) Sticking with a player (or players) for several months when it is clear that they are not up to it is the definition of stubborness, regardless whether they belatedly realise the error of their ways. That just shows how they misguided they were. Ahh okay, I get it. He didn't stubbornly stick with Gazza all the time, just some of the time. You do know there were only 10 games and 2 months since Borucs last game v spurs and his return v Arsenal. Of these gazza only played 5 and Davis played 5, then Boruc came into the side. 5 games, no more, not 'several months' Or is 5 games and 23 days the new the cut off for 'stubbornly sticking' with someone over several months in the mongboard universe? What were you saying about having a mare? Edited 23 December, 2013 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Saintsteve calm down . It's not the first time there has been a semi fit player on the bench . I was suprised yoshida didn't come on . I think if fox had been better JWP would have gone to midfield and not left back . I'm sad we lost but I am not to worried about the recent run of results of late . We were poor at times arsenal have been having a poor run as well . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) Ahh okay, I get it. He didn't stubbornly stick with Gazza all the time, just some of the time. You do know there were only 10 games and 2 months since Borucs last game v spurs and his return v Arsenal. Of these gazza only played 5 and Davis played 5, then Boruc came into the side. At what point is the cut off for 'stubbornly sticking' with someone? What were you saying about having a mare? So when Gazza was dropped, he turned to Davis rather than Boruc who demonstrated all his old frailties. It took 10 games -over a quarter of the season for NA to realise, after everything else had failed, that Boruc was no.1. Whereas NA chose not to play Boruc, MP is forced not to play him. But, of course, that's just a trivial detail. The two managers selection options are like for like. Keep up sunshine Edited 23 December, 2013 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 I'm not saying it would have helped yesterday's result, I'm trying to understand if Fonte is injured and can't play why he was on the bench ahead of Stephens or Turnbull? Point is, it doesn't matter if Jose was on the bench or not. He didn't train last week so obviously not considered as a starter. The issue we have it not who is on the bench but the fact that when the combination of Gazza, Jos and Fox come in, our chances of any positive result in a game is significantly reduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Fonte might have been on the bench but if he was playable he'd have come on at some time in the game as he did against Villa. He's obviously not fit and was on the bench to make up the numbers, same as Yoshida otherwise the Chambers left/JWP right nonsense would make no sense. If Clyne had been fit he would have started or been on the bench, just because they're in training doesn't make them fit to play. Our bench yesterday consisted of 3 subs and 4 to make up the numbers, I don't know if there's a rule to say you must present 7 subs but yesterday might suggest that there is. Shaw was ill, he might think he could play, the docs thought otherwise. Once again I would refer you to the training gallery, no Yoshi or Fonte because they're walking wounded. IF that is true, then Pochettino is an IDIOT ...... surely no one in their right mind puts injured players on the bench as Subs ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Yes after KD's performances against Fulham and Stoke (where he reminded everyone of his inability to command his 6 yard box). Boruc finally got in and hey presto, results began to pick up. Looks like NA's not the only slow learner... If it his "inability" to command his area, fair enough, but I believe so called "goalkeeping coaches" are not worth the title. They teach GK#s to stay on their line, just like the one in the famous Morecombe & Wise sketch. I'd love the chance for just one hours coaching with our GK's, I could certainly teach them to be far better than what they are, and that includes Boruc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 So when Gazza was dropped, he turned to Davis rather than Boruc who demonstrated all his old frailties. It took 10 games -over a quarter of the season for NA to realise, after everything else had failed, that Boruc was no.1. But he was unavailable, you say And 10 games is nothing is it? And whereas NA chose not to play Boruc, MP is forced not to play him. But, of course, that's just a trivial detail. The two managers selection options are like for like. Keep up sunshine Ahh so now he didn't 'stubbornly stick with Gazza' at all! You're becoming a joke mate. So you think Boruc looked fit and in shape when he started against West Ham and Spurs? He may have been 'available' but he certainly wasn't the trim, fit and sharp Boruc that played the latter part of last season, where you're claiming MP had EXACTLY the same squad as he has now to chose from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diggers Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 I normally hate conspiracy therories but to be onset, I really can't think of a genuine reason why he should of broken up the best center half pairing we've had for years to put one of them on then bench while playing an absolute waiste of space in his position. Osvaldos mysterious leg injury in training, Shaw fit but rested, I'm starting to wonder if there's been some sinanagins going on in the camp that's affecting 1st team selection, I really hope I'm wrong but I really don't think a premier league team would have a center half on the bench for three games who's not fit to play a part? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 IF that is true, then Pochettino is an IDIOT ...... surely no one in their right mind puts injured players on the bench as Subs ?? 7 subs, 3 changes possible, obviously JWP was bound to come on so that leaves 2, the fact that Jos was pretty dire and still didn't get subbed says it all as does the switching of full backs. Poch isn't an idiot but he's not going to put Stephens and Turnbull n the bench because that would be a dead giveaway. 2 blokes who've never played a first team game ( as far as I know ) for us on the bench cries out we're f*cked come and nobble one of our CBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 7 subs, 3 changes possible, obviously JWP was bound to come on so that leaves 2, the fact that Jos was pretty dire and still didn't get subbed says it all as does the switching of full backs. Poch isn't an idiot but he's not going to put Stephens and Turnbull n the bench because that would be a dead giveaway. 2 blokes who've never played a first team game ( as far as I know ) for us on the bench cries out we're f*cked come and nobble one of our CBs. Not sure what the big deal is, plenty of players who are not 100% are benched and not risked. Don't understand why people are reading too much into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 I normally hate conspiracy therories but to be onset, I really can't think of a genuine reason why he should of broken up the best center half pairing we've had for years to put one of them on then bench while playing an absolute waiste of space in his position. Osvaldos mysterious leg injury in training, Shaw fit but rested, I'm starting to wonder if there's been some sinanagins going on in the camp that's affecting 1st team selection, I really hope I'm wrong but I really don't think a premier league team would have a center half on the bench for three games who's not fit to play a part? fonte first disappeared from the starting line up for the Villa game. He came on after an hour when Clyne got injured. Fonte played well against Chelsea and you'd have to suppose that being benched against Villa was just a gesture to try to manage fatigue and yellow cards. We were pretty crap against Villa so the fact that he didn't start against City says something...he's not fit and we're just trying to manage that. I haven't a doubt that there have been no shennanigans as you call them, just injures and illness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Not sure what the big deal is, plenty of players who are not 100% are benched and not risked. Don't understand why people are reading too much into it. indeed they are, the theory being that if you're on the bench you're fit to play and the manager doesn't rate you. We have a grave injury crisis and silly little knobs like Shaw tweeting and ****ting that he could play but the docs din't want him to just really doesn't help. It just fuels "the manager is an idiot" for not playing our best players conspiracies. Shaw was poor against Toon and an ill Shaw wouldn't have been much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 (edited) Ahh so now he didn't 'stubbornly stick with Gazza' at all! You're becoming a joke mate. So you think Boruc looked fit and in shape when he started against West Ham and Spurs? He may have been 'available' but he certainly wasn't the trim, fit and sharp Boruc that played the latter part of last season, where you're claiming MP had EXACTLY the same squad as he has now to chose from. Boruc had a ropey start against Arsenal IIRC but this time NA stuck with him because his decision to play Gazza and Davis for over a quarter of the season had backfired spectacularly. Would not have been surprised that if NA had stuck with him after the Wham and Spurs games, a player who had been playing in Serie A months before would have been able to knock off rust and regain match fitness in no time. As Boruc himself said, NA dealt with the whole situation very oddly. Keep teliing yourself mate that our performances, form, results are no different under MP than NA when both had the same players while forgeting the fact that MP is missing other players NA had available (Clyne) or chose not to play (Boruc). Point stands - you're comparing apples and pears and looking like bit of a plum. Edited 23 December, 2013 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ART Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 Yesterdays substitution of Cork while leaving Rodriquez, Lambert to play on was one of the decisive factors as to why we capitulated ad lost a winnable game. Let us not forget what we then thought as Harry's abismal run of 11 draws, at least it earned us 11 points. If Pochettino doesn't get us points over the holiday games, I can believe he's been found out, and will struggle for the remainder of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ART Posted 23 December, 2013 Share Posted 23 December, 2013 It didn't stop little Miss Porcelain from dining at Nandos last night and sticking into Christmas Diiner down at Staplewood today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now