eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,600 
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 6, 2020 15:53:49 GMT
Well played Cam Hargreaves. Not sure about the system, looked like 4 3 3. Nicholls not suited to that, and was very poor. JCH, either injured or not interested! Bennett main contribution, arguing with two of the coaching staff. See no point in having him in the match day squad anymore. Saying that proper cup tie at times, enjoyable. Why no red card for the penalty as was last man? Nichols is a disgrace to the shirt. Not only is he not good enough to play professional football, he doesn't even try. He has the physique of a child. I have never seen someone with so little ability being given such a prolonged "chance to prove" himself. This joke is never-ending. It's not funny. It never was. Please please please just go. Message for Mr Garner. Perhaps we could do a little better starting with eleven players who actually all look like they give a f*ck. |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jan 6, 2020 16:00:44 GMT
Well played Cam Hargreaves. Not sure about the system, looked like 4 3 3. Nicholls not suited to that, and was very poor. JCH, either injured or not interested! Bennett main contribution, arguing with two of the coaching staff. See no point in having him in the match day squad anymore. Saying that proper cup tie at times, enjoyable. Why no red card for the penalty as was last man? Nichols is a disgrace to the shirt. Not only is he not good enough to play professional football, he doesn't even try. He has the physique of a child. I have never seen someone with so little ability being given such a prolonged "chance to prove" himself. This joke is never-ending. It's not funny. It never was. Please please please just go. Message for Mr Garner. Perhaps we could do a little better starting with eleven players who actually all look like they give a f*ck. Tom Nichols has been poor for us in terms of goals. No one can argue that. Any of the other stuff is subjective. He was certainly s**t yesterday
For whatever reason it hasn't worked out for him or us but if I offered you all a striker now with the following league record
106 (42) 43 goals between league two and one
I bet 99% of us would take him
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2020 18:49:20 GMT
I bet 99% of us would take him. Okay, Sir, but this is the third permanent manager to persist with selecting him after abject idle displays on the pitch. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2020 19:42:21 GMT
I bet 99% of us would take him. Okay, Sir, but this is the third permanent manager to persist with selecting him after abject idle displays on the pitch. Is there any such thing as a contract clause that states that a player has to play if fit? Tom's performances are dire, he can't be enjoying himself out there, so you have to wonder who gains what from him playing? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2020 19:43:07 GMT
This is the third managers spunk his stomach must be full of !
|
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Jan 6, 2020 19:46:39 GMT
With regards to the formation, I struggled to work it out for a long time. I think that was down to assuming what it would be in my mind, having seen the team-sheet. However, after I heard someone say no one was close enough to enough to JCH, I noticed in the second half it appeared that TN and CH were operating on the same line, withdrawn either side of JCH on his own. Effectively we had 2 lines of 2 in midfield, with the higher 2 supporting JCH and turning it into a top 3 when we high-pressed (i.e. when Cov were dicking around at the back  ). 3 at the back: AK, TC, RM. 2 wing-backs: LL, AR (reverting to back 5 when defending). 2 deeper midfield: EU, LS. 2 higher midfield: TN, CH. 1 striker: JCH One of the two 'higher midfield' / 'support either side to the striker' appeared to cope much better with the role than the other... |
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Jan 6, 2020 20:12:17 GMT
"Nichols is a disgrace to the shirt."
Apart from his contribution at Ipswich, whom can disagree?
What is it that commands he has his starting place?
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jan 6, 2020 20:15:46 GMT
I bet 99% of us would take him. Okay, Sir, but this is the third permanent manager to persist with selecting him after abject idle displays on the pitch. Why might that be? My point is. There must be something there. He has proved competent in the past. It clearly hasnt worked for him here though |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2020 20:57:29 GMT
One of the two 'higher midfield' / 'support either side to the striker' appeared to cope much better with the role than the other... Supporter high in the East Stand moaned about CH throughout, having apparently no complaint at all about TN. Perhaps you're right though, that the plan was 3 4 2 1 (not 3 4 1 2 as I said) with a two of CH playing inside left and TN walking inside right. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,600
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 7, 2020 9:30:55 GMT
Nichols is a disgrace to the shirt. Not only is he not good enough to play professional football, he doesn't even try. He has the physique of a child. I have never seen someone with so little ability being given such a prolonged "chance to prove" himself. This joke is never-ending. It's not funny. It never was. Please please please just go. Message for Mr Garner. Perhaps we could do a little better starting with eleven players who actually all look like they give a f*ck. Tom Nichols has been poor for us in terms of goals. No one can argue that. Any of the other stuff is subjective. He was certainly s*** yesterday For whatever reason it hasn't worked out for him or us but if I offered you all a striker now with the following league record
106 (42) 43 goals between league two and one
I bet 99% of us would take him
99% of Rovers fans can't be that stupid. 2011 -2016 he scored 46 goals in 127 games in League 2 and non-league. OK. 2016-2017 he scored 11 in 50 for a decent Peterborough side. OK. Though I know Posh fans were on his back and wanted him out the side. In the last 2 1/2 years he has scored just 4 league goals from 94 starts. Most people would look at his previous record and ask - what the hell has happened to him??? IMHO he over-achieved a little at Peterborough and before. He has no physicality. He has no pace. He cannot contest a high ball. He can't win a tackle. He doesn't track back. Add to that a chronic lack of confidence in front of goal and a poor work ethic and I give you the worst value for money signing in the entire history of the Football Club - Tom Nichols. Absolutely no-one wants this useless apprentice hair-dresser because they have looked at what he has "achieved" at Bristol Rovers FC. F*ck all. So PP, yes I would take your bet. Gasheads are not that stupid. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2020 10:28:00 GMT
I just think like coughlan before him garner is being pragmatic with nichols and using him because were very weak in the striker department.
This season clarke-harris and now smith have had injuries making options very thin on the ground.
Its a matter of being unable to get him off the wage bill so we may as well use him.
Also along with adebayo and smith he has had some decent games but no consistency and not enough goals.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jan 7, 2020 10:39:47 GMT
Tom Nichols has been poor for us in terms of goals. No one can argue that. Any of the other stuff is subjective. He was certainly s*** yesterday For whatever reason it hasn't worked out for him or us but if I offered you all a striker now with the following league record
106 (42) 43 goals between league two and one
I bet 99% of us would take him
99% of Rovers fans can't be that stupid. 2011 -2016 he scored 46 goals in 127 games in League 2 and non-league. OK. 2016-2017 he scored 11 in 50 for a decent Peterborough side. OK. Though I know Posh fans were on his back and wanted him out the side. In the last 2 1/2 years he has scored just 4 league goals from 94 starts. Most people would look at his previous record and ask - what the hell has happened to him??? IMHO he over-achieved a little at Peterborough and before. He has no physicality. He has no pace. He cannot contest a high ball. He can't win a tackle. He doesn't track back. Add to that a chronic lack of confidence in front of goal and a poor work ethic and I give you the worst value for money signing in the entire history of the Football Club - Tom Nichols. Absolutely no-one wants this useless apprentice hair-dresser because they have looked at what he has "achieved" at Bristol Rovers FC. F*ck all. So PP, yes I would take your bet. Gasheads are not that stupid. I have not said he has been a success here or anything only that it clearly hasn't worked out for some reason.
If we were to buy a player with
My point is that he has done something before. If we were to buy a player now with that pre-Rovers record how many of us would complain? and how many would say it is a reasonable signing on paper?
So perhaps rather than just slating any player because they have been crap, perhaps we should be asking the question why he has failed and why he seems to keep being picked constantly despite other options being available at various points.
What does Nichols have over Reilly for instance? or Victor or Smith? GC built his team on hard work this season so what did Nichols add to it over the other options
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2020 11:02:07 GMT
99% of Rovers fans can't be that stupid. 2011 -2016 he scored 46 goals in 127 games in League 2 and non-league. OK. 2016-2017 he scored 11 in 50 for a decent Peterborough side. OK. Though I know Posh fans were on his back and wanted him out the side. In the last 2 1/2 years he has scored just 4 league goals from 94 starts. Most people would look at his previous record and ask - what the hell has happened to him??? IMHO he over-achieved a little at Peterborough and before. He has no physicality. He has no pace. He cannot contest a high ball. He can't win a tackle. He doesn't track back. Add to that a chronic lack of confidence in front of goal and a poor work ethic and I give you the worst value for money signing in the entire history of the Football Club - Tom Nichols. Absolutely no-one wants this useless apprentice hair-dresser because they have looked at what he has "achieved" at Bristol Rovers FC. F*ck all. So PP, yes I would take your bet. Gasheads are not that stupid. I have not said he has been a success here or anything only that it clearly hasn't worked out for some reason.
If we were to buy a player with
My point is that he has done something before. If we were to buy a player now with that pre-Rovers record how many of us would complain? and how many would say it is a reasonable signing on paper?
So perhaps rather than just slating any player because they have been crap, perhaps we should be asking the question why he has failed and why he seems to keep being picked constantly despite other options being available at various points.
What does Nichols have over Reilly for instance? or Victor or Smith? GC built his team on hard work this season so what did Nichols add to it over the other options
A small part of the problem with Nichols is that our fitness coaches have failed him. His gait his just horrible, his leg speed very poor. His upper body strength can be worked on as well. Improve in those areas and he may have a chance of competing against men. |
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,600
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 7, 2020 12:40:20 GMT
99% of Rovers fans can't be that stupid. 2011 -2016 he scored 46 goals in 127 games in League 2 and non-league. OK. 2016-2017 he scored 11 in 50 for a decent Peterborough side. OK. Though I know Posh fans were on his back and wanted him out the side. In the last 2 1/2 years he has scored just 4 league goals from 94 starts. Most people would look at his previous record and ask - what the hell has happened to him??? IMHO he over-achieved a little at Peterborough and before. He has no physicality. He has no pace. He cannot contest a high ball. He can't win a tackle. He doesn't track back. Add to that a chronic lack of confidence in front of goal and a poor work ethic and I give you the worst value for money signing in the entire history of the Football Club - Tom Nichols. Absolutely no-one wants this useless apprentice hair-dresser because they have looked at what he has "achieved" at Bristol Rovers FC. F*ck all. So PP, yes I would take your bet. Gasheads are not that stupid. I have not said he has been a success here or anything only that it clearly hasn't worked out for some reason. My point is that he has done something before. If we were to buy a player now with that pre-Rovers record how many of us would complain? and how many would say it is a reasonable signing on paper? So perhaps rather than just slating any player because they have been crap, perhaps we should be asking the question why he has failed and why he seems to keep being picked constantly despite other options being available at various points. What does Nichols have over Reilly for instance? or Victor or Smith? GC built his team on hard work this season so what did Nichols add to it over the other options
I'm not slating "any player". I am slating Tom Nichols. A £300k signing, on good money and a 3 year contract. He's been shocking ever since his debut back in 2017. I always keep a close aye on new signings and concluded he was a waste of space well over 2 years ago (plenty of posts to back that up!). Why is he so crap? Well I think I've outlined that above. Why was he "better" before? Absolutely no idea. Why does he still get selected? Absolutely no idea. No other Club has ever shown any increase in him and he is destined for the Conference (at best) at the end of the season. Luke James has been doing OK at Hartlepool apparently (though hardly prolific), I think that is Tom's level. |
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,069
|
Post by Angas on Jan 7, 2020 14:52:40 GMT
Oh don't ... you'll have someone trawling back through the forum to prove they don't exist  |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2020 20:36:51 GMT
This is the third managers spunk his stomach must be full of! Degg. I'm not cross with you. But I am disappointed. This is not what I expect from a Rovers historian of your standing. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2020 23:52:25 GMT
This is the third managers spunk his stomach must be full of! Degg. I'm not cross with you. But I am disappointed. This is not what I expect from a Rovers historian of your standing. I see it as progress, of a sort. At least we've moved on from threats of getting his mate to give people a 'slap' behind the bicycle shed at play time, and at least today, so far, he hasn't pretended that he worked as a code-breaker at Bletchley. Small steps towards recovery, small steps. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2020 1:03:56 GMT
This is the third managers spunk his stomach must be full of! Also, please use an apostrophe before the 's' to denote possession: it's "manager's spunk" if the semen belongs to the manager, not "managers spunk". Who proof reads your books? |
|
dido
Predictions League
Peter Aitken
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by dido on Jan 8, 2020 7:09:39 GMT
Know-one, obviously.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,600
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 8, 2020 9:24:30 GMT
Oh don't ... you'll have someone trawling back through the forum to prove they don't exist Of my 3,125 posts I reckon only about 500 make derogatory reference to Tiny Tom. Over to you padstow. |
|
). 
