|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Feb 15, 2016 20:39:47 GMT
God help us Ken Masters owns 5 shares, this could ruin us
|
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Feb 9, 2016 12:46:52 GMT
Just told there are still a few ticket available for those as yet undecided whether to go or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 29, 2015 9:56:07 GMT
Told me in the Vic at end of last season that he'd be here until we got to L1 Print That. T-shirt or banner? |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 29, 2015 8:53:53 GMT
I get the distinct impression his 'plan' is to get us to us League 1. I suspect he would move on after that unless we were taken over with a large injection of cash or a new stadium. So for now no I don't think he is going anywhere. On the negativity on this forum not sure there has been a negative comment on here for months, number of posts seem up and frankly as someone said above despite Gaschat thinking its banterville much less unpleasantness here and there. Chill enjoy the ride BE POSITIVE! Told me in the Vic at end of last season that he'd be here until we got to L1 |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 29, 2015 7:28:50 GMT
Oh for the good old days of Trollope, Buckle, McGhee and ward when we were care and worry free
|
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 26, 2015 17:10:10 GMT
Glass half full or half empty after that result? Myself I would say the former not the latter. 3 pts at home Monday will keep us well on track. Against ten men for almost the whole game is half empty for me. Should have taken all three points so now we will need to win the two home games to keep the pressure on. If you play that long against 10 men away from home, and when you've been plying well away from home, it's 2 points dropped. |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 23, 2015 9:37:10 GMT
Are we looking for a new kit man as well? |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 20, 2015 15:12:22 GMT
Sainsburys have been very cute in their public relations but to potentially send a football club to the wall could be a disaster for them for a small amount of money it would turn football fans in general against them and in the long run cost them a great deal of money they've won the case but still want their pound of flesh not the smartest of moves Disagree, they offered us a settlement, we said no. And as I've said several times, even though this has dragged on for literally years, if you went to a Sainsbury's (outside of Bristol) and asked 100 people for their view, 99 of them wouldn't have a clue what you were talking about. And even in Bristol, most people would be more interested in the price of a cauliflower than our case. Well the Co-op Bank wrote off a very big loan to Sheff Wednesday to avoid the adverse publicity of closing Sheff Wed down. |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 19, 2015 17:19:07 GMT
That was a highly predicted outcome to the farce.
|
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 17, 2015 20:26:26 GMT
Puddy is our God, hopefully
|
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 16, 2015 10:31:53 GMT
You're wasting your time certain people won't allow any questioning of DC's decisions . You can sum up there goalkeeper views as we don't know if Puddy is up to league standard but we should give him a chance, we also don't know if Preston is up to league standard but we shouldn't give him a chance. And making a decision on Mildenhall in August was better than making a decision in May. It's a farce but DC created so it can't be called a farce. No, my view is that I'm content for the manager to judge who should be given a chance or not, as he sees them in training every day and I don't have any strong evidence to the contrary.
I'm also saying farce is an exaggeration. Farce means that something is worthy of ridicule, a ridiculous, comedic, nonsense situation. If you were talking to a fan of another club and they told you the same story - that we had a goalkeeper who lost form, so replaced him with another keeper. That keeper got injured, so we loaned someone in to cover until they got better. Oh, and we have a young goalkeeper on the books, but he's not ready yet. Would you really point and laugh and think that was totally crazy? Personally I would say, "oh right well there you go".
Still can't face up to why it's a farce even when it's explained to you. |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 16, 2015 9:16:46 GMT
Having to loan goalkeepers when you have three on the books is rubbish, when two are fully fit its a farce. You're wasting your time certain people won't allow any questioning of DC's decisions . You can sum up there goalkeeper views as we don't know if Puddy is up to league standard but we should give him a chance, we also don't know if Preston is up to league standard but we shouldn't give him a chance. And making a decision on Mildenhall in August was better than making a decision in May. It's a farce but DC created so it can't be called a farce. |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 15, 2015 16:39:35 GMT
Well you did add not league standard when replying to my post, so pretty fair to assume you were talking to me. Then again you do waffle in your posts and try to avoid being specific. We'll agree to disagree on farce (not that the farce is any of Puddy's doing) but it seems we are both of the opinion that we have to hope he is up to league 2 standard, particularly as the only option has quite clearly been told he isn't. I'll have my fingers crossed at D&G hopefully I can report he had nothing to do if not hopefully I'll be able to report he performed admirably. You replied to my post, which said that some people had written him off as league standard.
I don't see how its a farce though. Would it have been better to have signed another senior keeper, so that when Puddy returned after a month as was expected, we would have been paying 3 of them? That sounds more like a farce to me.
You'll need to reread this thread and/or perhaps the other one that was floating around at the same time as to why I believe it's a farce. And a farce it is. |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 15, 2015 15:20:05 GMT
Wait for a clarification 'full debut' or perhaps 'home debut '
|
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 15, 2015 15:17:25 GMT
Just so long as we agree I haven't said he's not league standard. And by God I hope he is as this farce has led us to be relaint on him being league standard. All I'd say on the stats though is that, predominantly, he had the second half of the season where we had established ourselves as being head and shoulders above all but 3 or 4 teams in the league. Indeed I fail to remember a game he played when we were under any great consistent pressure (perhaps Barnet home?), a luxury that happens rarely in this division (Carlisle and York aside).
What farce? There's nothing farcical about covering for injury by using the loan market, its quite common in League 2 and even above.
I never said that you said he's not league standard. Others have.
Barnet were also head and shoulders above any team in the league, except for us, and their keeper didn't have as good stats. You were the one asking for evidence, anyway, and I think that's probably the best evidence we have. Not any kind of proof of Puddy's credentials, but the best we have.
Well you did add not league standard when replying to my post, so pretty fair to assume you were talking to me. Then again you do waffle in your posts and try to avoid being specific. We'll agree to disagree on farce (not that the farce is any of Puddy's doing) but it seems we are both of the opinion that we have to hope he is up to league 2 standard, particularly as the only option has quite clearly been told he isn't. I'll have my fingers crossed at D&G hopefully I can report he had nothing to do if not hopefully I'll be able to report he performed admirably. |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 15, 2015 14:29:43 GMT
I haven't. But where is the evidence that he is league standard?
There is no real evidence that anyone is league standard until they play in the league. Doesn't mean they can't step up. We've seen that happen with other players this season.
To be clear, I'm not saying that he is definitely league standard, as you say I have no real evidence for that. I'm saying that he can't be written off as definitely unable to step up to league standard.
Incidentally Puddy had the best clean sheet ratio of any keeper in the league below the Football League last season - 9 conceded in 18 games. Mildenhall conceded 26 in 31, which is still one of the best ratios. So based purely on factual evidence, surely if anyone can step up to the league, Puddy can?
Just so long as we agree I haven't said he's not league standard. And by God I hope he is as this farce has led us to be relaint on him being league standard. All I'd say on the stats though is that, predominantly, he had the second half of the season where we had established ourselves as being head and shoulders above all but 3 or 4 teams in the league. Indeed I fail to remember a game he played when we were under any great consistent pressure (perhaps Barnet home?), a luxury that happens rarely in this division (Carlisle and York aside). |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 15, 2015 12:46:47 GMT
And some also remember the back pass he ballsed up away to Macclesfield and the one he ballsed up in the following home game. Thankfully he got away with both without conceding a goal due to luck (perhaps after Wembley he is one of those annoying gits thar seem to be born lucky?) and not good judgement. Of course others worry that we are now dependent on a player who is just coming back off a 6 month injury layoff. I mean it's not like you've never heard of a player breaking down on his return from a long layoff is it.
Blimey, if you want a keeper that has never ballsed up a back pass, then we'd be choosing from a pretty short list.
I don't think the fact that a player is coming back for an injury is any reason to describe him as not league standard.
I haven't. But where is the evidence that he is league standard? |
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Dec 15, 2015 12:09:05 GMT
What I meant was it would appear DC doesn't see Puddy as 'an average Conference goalie', why else hasn't he signed a permanent League 2 standard keeper ? DC himself said at the Q&A session the medical advice he received at the beginning of the season about Puddy was that he would recover in a month, hence the signing of Chapman but then as that advice turned out to be incorrect he was then forced into signing Nicholls on a 93 day loan, which is the only reason why Nicholls is returning to Wigan. They are desparately trying to get Puddy fit with some games before Nicholls returns (I think it's his last game with us today ?). There has apparently been an approach to Chesterfield about another short term loan for Chapman in case Puddy doesn't recover his match fitness quickly enough. It would appear Mildenhall won't play for us again unless a goalie gets injured during the game.
Some people appear to have written him off, based on one dropped cross that may have been a foul, and a dodgy first 20 minutes in the biggest game of his life.
And some also remember the back pass he ballsed up away to Macclesfield and the one he ballsed up in the following home game. Thankfully he got away with both without conceding a goal due to luck (perhaps after Wembley he is one of those annoying gits thar seem to be born lucky?) and not good judgement. Of course others worry that we are now dependent on a player who is just coming back off a 6 month injury layoff. I mean it's not like you've never heard of a player breaking down on his return from a long layoff is it. |
|
