|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 15, 2017 15:09:58 GMT
a game we could've won using an aliesque rope-a-dope.... Exactly. And just a narrow offside away from implementing it perfectly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 15:14:29 GMT
Thanks for the confirmation guys. Message to Mr Socrates. You sir, are colored blind. I am indeed. Never mind mate. I have had a different colored pair of spectacles to many on here for 3 years.
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Feb 15, 2017 15:15:56 GMT
Thanks for the confirmation guys. Message to Mr Socrates. You sir, are colored blind. I am indeed. But you'll always support the boys in aquamarine and taupe.
|
|
|
Post by womble on Feb 15, 2017 15:31:02 GMT
This reminds me of a conversation that was supposed to have taken place between Nobby Stiles and Alf Ramsay. Realising that he had nowhere near the technical ability of team mates like Bobby Charlton and Bobby Moore, Stiles asked Ramsay why he was in the team. He got the wonderful reply "Well Nobby, in a team of piano players, you also need a piano mover".
|
|
|
Post by mariobalotelli on Feb 15, 2017 15:34:29 GMT
Sorry but the nonsense of "we looked better went Sinclair went off" is nonsense.
We looked better when he went off because he had done what was asked of him and allowed us to switch to wingers against a tiring team. SS is not there to hit perfect 40 yard passes or to split defences. He's there to harass and give them no time on the ball. DC said the plan was to hit on the counter for the first 60, but if SS wasn't doing what he does best then there would have been no point swirching to 442 and utilising wingers.
|
|
|
Post by 2nd May 1990 on Feb 15, 2017 15:36:27 GMT
Sorry but the nonsense of "we looked better went Sinclair went off" is nonsense. We looked better when he went off because he had done what was asked of him and allowed us to switch to wingers against a tiring team. SS is not there to hit perfect 40 yard passes or to split defences. He's there to harass and give them no time on the ball. DC said the plan was to hit on the counter for the first 60, but if SS wasn't doing what he does best then there would have been no point swirching to 442 and utilising wingers. Exactly right. The question I would ask is do you think we would have been level after 60 mins if Montano had started in place of Sincs? Of course we can't be certain, but we played a bloody good team last night and we were set up the way we were, with the personnel we had, for a very good reason.
|
|
|
Post by alvestongas on Feb 15, 2017 16:17:34 GMT
Sorry but the nonsense of "we looked better went Sinclair went off" is nonsense. We looked better when he went off because he had done what was asked of him and allowed us to switch to wingers against a tiring team. SS is not there to hit perfect 40 yard passes or to split defences. He's there to harass and give them no time on the ball. DC said the plan was to hit on the counter for the first 60, but if SS wasn't doing what he does best then there would have been no point swirching to 442 and utilising wingers. Xactly!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 16:51:38 GMT
A good squad contains players of alsorts of builds and attributes. It is then the skill of the manager to select the correct people to complete the required task. A game is 90 plus minutes ,so the team need to fulfil various tasks within that time to achieve a good result. Having a versatile and changing game plan is what makes a good team .It is what has achieved the success BRFC have gained over the last three years. A standard 4-4-2 picked every home game with the traditional set up and plays is very predictable and unless your players are exceptional it rarely leads to success over a season. Sinclair is a player with certain attributes and skills and DC uses them the way he sees as being best for the team DC will always want a Sinclair type player in his matchday squad .The hard part will be when SS reaches his ceiling and needs a higher level replacement finding that player will be tough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 16:54:49 GMT
In Your opinion, just as valid as mine, you consider him a good player... I do not Spot on mate. Work rate and determination 100%. Ability 30%.
Depends what you mean by ability, ability to do what?.
If you mean 'Hollywood style' passes that failed more often than they succeed then (bar Rochdale away), or goalscoring, then you are right with 30%.
Other players are there to do the things he doesn't, lets not knock him for not doing things we have always known he cannot do. There are far worse players than him in our squad.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 16:55:14 GMT
DC has used a similar tactic on many occasions,changing from wing backs to 442 and it has worked often with late winners. I thought Utd pressed the ball all over the pitch,we chose to drop back but by the time our wingers were introduced their players energy levels were dropping and they weren't closing us down so quickly and in the final part of the game were happy to get a draw.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 17:08:19 GMT
Spot on mate. Work rate and determination 100%. Ability 30%.
Depends what you mean by ability, ability to do what?.
If you mean 'Hollywood style' passes that failed more often than they succeed then (bar Rochdale away), or goalscoring, then you are right with 30%.
Other players are there to do the things he doesn't, lets not knock him for not doing things we have always known he cannot do. There are far worse players than him in our squad.
Exactly, each player have different "abilities" Could Monty do the role that Sinclair does? Probably not. But you don't hear people saying he hasn't got much "ability" do you?
|
|
|
Post by toddy1953 on Feb 15, 2017 17:09:47 GMT
Spot on mate. Work rate and determination 100%. Ability 30%. He was one of the major reasons why we did not look like scoring until DC removed him IMO he was the major reason Blades didnt either, the defence isn't all about the back 4. I agree on the 100% work rate etc. But for me I would also give him 100% on the Ability to do what was asked of him for the team. He is not the most technically gifted player we have seen, but if he was, along with the rest of his game, he'd be playing in the Premier League. He brings a massive amount to the team, both on & off the pitch.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 18:28:12 GMT
In Your opinion, just as valid as mine, you consider him a good player... I do not Yes, but you're overlooking the fact you're wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 18:29:06 GMT
Depends what you mean by ability, ability to do what?.
If you mean 'Hollywood style' passes that failed more often than they succeed then (bar Rochdale away), or goalscoring, then you are right with 30%.
Other players are there to do the things he doesn't, lets not knock him for not doing things we have always known he cannot do. There are far worse players than him in our squad.
Exactly, each player have different "abilities" Could Monty do the role that Sinclair does? Probably not. But you don't hear people saying he hasn't got much "ability" do you?
Very true, each player has their strengths and weaknesses. What is important is that they all work well as a team and at the moment they are doing quite well especially since Lumley and Sweeney came in.
Just need to try and score some goals now while still keeping it tight at the back, we haven't scored more than one since the Northampton game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 18:31:22 GMT
When interviewed, Sinclair comes across as the opposite of a big time Charlie. Humble, open and just a like a bloke you know at work.
It's irrelevant in football terms but I like his personality and it's good to have grounded players in the team. Think most of our squad also come across as fairly normal. Except Ellis. But Elllis is Ellis
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2017 18:33:35 GMT
Its funny isn't it how some people will bow down to Gosling in honour of playing a part over the last few years that achieved back-to-back promotions, then in the same breath criticise Beard saying we only hit form when he is out of the side.
|
|
|
Post by 2nd May 1990 on Feb 15, 2017 20:01:29 GMT
Its funny isn't it how some people will bow down to Gosling in honour of playing a part over the last few years that achieved back-to-back promotions, thenĀ in the same breath criticise Beard saying we only hit form when he is out of the side. Agree, but regardless of whether he was fit at the business end of the last two seasons, he has made 33 appearances this season for a team that is 10th in league 1. He's good enough, for sure.
|
|
|
Post by miamigas on Feb 15, 2017 20:06:54 GMT
No to mention he's responsible for one of the greatest threads of all time on GasChat. UTG!
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Feb 15, 2017 21:07:11 GMT
Its funny isn't it how some people will bow down to Gosling in honour of playing a part over the last few years that achieved back-to-back promotions, then in the same breath criticise Beard saying we only hit form when he is out of the side. On that score I don't think he works he a midfield two where DC had tended to play in the previous two seasons, this new role he's played since returning to the side seems to suit his game. The fact we've played three top 6 sides in succession without conceding one goal suggests he's doing something right, it's just a pity we're a goalscorer down or we could have well picked up a win or two in those games.
|
|
|
Post by badengas on Feb 15, 2017 21:08:22 GMT
In Your opinion, just as valid as mine, you consider him a good player... I do not Spot on mate. Work rate and determination 100%. Ability 30%. I'd rather this than 100% ability and 30% work rate and determination.
|
|