|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Dec 19, 2015 20:46:12 GMT
That was a highly predicted outcome to the farce. To fit in with this week, may the farce be with you.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 19, 2015 22:56:47 GMT
Chester, Macclesfield, Wembley and the half is Dover, from memory Puddy was clearly fouled for the Dover goal so how can that be his fault? I can't recall the Chester game and whilst he could have get sent off at Wembley I suppose another way to look at it is did his rush of blood actually keep the score 1-0 rather than let the Grimsby player have a clear run at goal? But even I was nervous at Wembley sat watching! Assuming Puddy starts on Saturday what's the betting this thread will be dead by 5pm should he keep a clean sheet? He did keep a clean sheet,he did pick up the only shot that lamely came his way. Mostly he spent the first half exercising his groin, people could see what was coming. The thread has died because people can't accept the facts that have happened after people have spent the last week pointing them out . On the brightside Mildenhall had more to do, not much more, but did everything competently and made a very smart save down to his left. Mildenhall will rescue this farce.
|
|
Alveston Gas
Brucie Bannister
Once a Gashead always a Gashead
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 746
|
Post by Alveston Gas on Dec 20, 2015 9:46:31 GMT
Probably best left to DC to sort it out. Obviously didn't go to plan yesterday but I don't recall the Manager letting us down so far!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 10:28:22 GMT
Yep, telling Mildenhall he was unwanted and unneeded certainly looks like a masterstroke now.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 20, 2015 10:46:03 GMT
Not really as it gives Mildenhall at least 2 games to prove he's still got what it takes, or prove DC was right to say he's not good enough. Come January I assume the goalie situation can now be sorted out one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 20, 2015 10:49:23 GMT
Yep, telling Mildenhall he was unwanted and unneeded certainly looks like a masterstroke now. But it's DC who can't possibly do anything wrong. Very interesting to see the people who haven't got a view on yesterday's farce.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 10:52:18 GMT
Not really as it gives Mildenhall at least 2 games to prove he's still got what it takes, or prove DC was right to say he's not good enough. Come January I assume the goalie situation can now be sorted out one way or the other. Will it though? Or will it be another unproven rookie on a short term loan?
|
|
|
Post by fanatical on Dec 20, 2015 10:55:25 GMT
Yep, telling Mildenhall he was unwanted and unneeded certainly looks like a masterstroke now. Unwanted at a wage which means DC is hampered in bringing other options to the club. All the shouts for 'a winger' or 'a midfield player' are wasted shouts when we have players in the club who are too expensive for their ability
|
|
lostinspace
Vic Lambden
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 5,212
Member is Online
|
Post by lostinspace on Dec 20, 2015 11:01:28 GMT
Yep, telling Mildenhall he was unwanted and unneeded certainly looks like a masterstroke now. But it's DC who can't possibly do anything wrong. Very interesting to see the people who haven't got a view on yesterday's farce. is that the "carry on camping one or carry on up the Khyber" ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 11:16:33 GMT
Yep, telling Mildenhall he was unwanted and unneeded certainly looks like a masterstroke now. Unwanted at a wage which means DC is hampered in bringing other options to the club. All the shouts for 'a winger' or 'a midfield player' are wasted shouts when we have players in the club who are too expensive for their ability Hardly, he's still here and we've brought in a winger and a striker on loan recently. Wanting Mildenhall gone wasn't the problem (although I think Clarke was wrong). It was making it public while we still needed him in the squad that was pretty bloody stupid.
|
|
|
Post by severnbeachline on Dec 20, 2015 11:32:29 GMT
Mildenhall is a big boy, he's not going to stop preforming because he's been dropped. He's 36 years old and has had a long career I'm pretty sure he's been through it all before. He said he was going to stay and regain his place, so if he proves DC wrong and becomes our no.1 while Puddy is out what exactly is the problem?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 11:37:30 GMT
That won't be a problen, obviously.
The problem was the points Nicholls cost us while Mildenhall was twiddling his thumbs on the bench, which we'll go through again with someone else in January unless Clarke swallows his pride and admits he was wrong about Mildenhall after all.
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Dec 20, 2015 12:01:22 GMT
Mildenhall is a big boy, he's not going to stop preforming because he's been dropped. He's 36 years old and has had a long career I'm pretty sure he's been through it all before. He said he was going to stay and regain his place, so if he proves DC wrong and becomes our no.1 while Puddy is out what exactly is the problem? Bang on the money SBL, there is no problem other than one or two want to make up. We are a League 2 side with mostly League 2 standard players, they will make mistakes as will our young manager, we're all supposed to be in it together, so stop bl**dy whining like a load of school children. With one exception (Gaffney) the rest of the team were all playing in a non league team last season, I think we've done remarkably well to get to 7th place in the first season back so far. When you think of the appalling lack of effort from many of the senior pro's who were on a lot more money in the season we got relegated and compare it to this season it's like chalk and cheese. So yes DC isn't perfect, he may have made one or two implied comments about players we'd rather he'd not but by and large he's not doing that bad a job compared to Buckle, McGhee or Ward, not one of whom got us anywhere near to to a play off position at this time of the season ?
|
|
|
Post by severnbeachline on Dec 20, 2015 14:23:26 GMT
That won't be a problen, obviously. The problem was the points Nicholls cost us while Mildenhall was twiddling his thumbs on the bench, which we'll go through again with someone else in January unless Clarke swallows his pride and admits he was wrong about Mildenhall after all. Is there any evidence of a personal rift between the two? DC made a decision based on the circumstances, the circumstances change he can justifiably change that decision, don't see what it has to do with pride. Imagine if our manager never dropped anyone for fear of upsetting them.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 16:37:07 GMT
That won't be a problen, obviously. The problem was the points Nicholls cost us while Mildenhall was twiddling his thumbs on the bench, which we'll go through again with someone else in January unless Clarke swallows his pride and admits he was wrong about Mildenhall after all. Is there any evidence of a personal rift between the two? DC made a decision based on the circumstances, the circumstances change he can justifiably change that decision, don't see what it has to do with pride. Imagine if our manager never dropped anyone for fear of upsetting them. I don't think there is a rift. I think Clarke thinks and has inferred that Mildenhall isn't good enough. If that was true in September it ought to be true in December too, but now he has no choice but to play him. If he does OK in the next couple of games, will he suddenly become not good enough again in January?
|
|
|
Post by severnbeachline on Dec 20, 2015 18:18:25 GMT
Is there any evidence of a personal rift between the two? DC made a decision based on the circumstances, the circumstances change he can justifiably change that decision, don't see what it has to do with pride. Imagine if our manager never dropped anyone for fear of upsetting them. I don't think there is a rift. I think Clarke thinks and has inferred that Mildenhall isn't good enough. If that was true in September it ought to be true in December too, but now he has no choice but to play him. If he does OK in the next couple of games, will he suddenly become not good enough again in January? I wouldn't say so no. iirc DC said in the statement re: Mildy being told he wasn't in his plans that Mildy had elected to stay and try and regain his place which was fine with him. DC had transfer-listed Ellis and there was a personal rift of sorts there but when he started applying himself he ended up playing a big part last season and DC had many good things to say about him. So its not like he can't change his mind about a player.
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Dec 20, 2015 23:34:53 GMT
I do find the goalkeeper situation a bit baffling but I'd suggest some of it potentially stems from our general failure to produce our own league quality goalkeepers since Ryan Clarke. Irrespective of whether they make it with us or not, having a youngster who can potentially step in/up for a bit is arguably the most reliable and cost-effective way of managing that part of the squad. Accepting that to some extent, with Macey, we may have been victims of our own success in terms of a vacuum in this area I do think it does go some way to explaining the general chaos. If you produce your own you only have to worry about 1 squad position, not 2 and worrying about 2 is much harder because you have to make the judgement about how much wages you're prepared to throw at it or accept a constant revolving door.
|
|
|
Post by p4perlant3rn on Dec 21, 2015 8:56:56 GMT
What has surprised me is when it was clear that Mildenhall wasnt going anywhere, and with Nicholls loan ending and a question mark over Puddy's fitness, that he wasnt played in the first team (the Chesham game struck me as an excellent opportunity) or at least some of the recent development games. Surely you have to try and keep players match fit where possible as part of contingency planning?
|
|
Igitur
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 2,294
|
Post by Igitur on Dec 21, 2015 9:03:26 GMT
What has surprised me is when it was clear that Mildenhall wasnt going anywhere, and with Nicholls loan ending and a question mark over Puddy's fitness, that he wasnt played in the first team (the Chesham game struck me as an excellent opportunity) or at least some of the recent development games. Surely you have to try and keep players match fit where possible as part of contingency planning? It appears DC has had some duff info from the medics about Puddy and he was targeting to use Puddy after playing for the reserves as soon as Nicholls finished.
|
|