Match Thread Wycombe Match Thread (1 Viewer)

[Londonccfcfan]

I was at the game last night. Haynes played well both in defence and attack. Played some nice balls forward to both the midfield and forward players.

Burge and Haynes have been very good last two games. Burge seems and looks very confident.

 

---

[JWC]

Because 95% of the time he’s shite

I disagree, i think he's decent at this level. Better than Stokes this season for me.

 

[Adge]

Agreed, i thought he played well. I don't really understand the negativity towards him.

Well let me explain it for you-he (along with others) has contributed to where we are at now (because he isn’t good enough) and was rewarded for failure last season(and the previous 3 seasons) and is still stealing a living while pulling the wool over some peoples eyes.

 

[Adge]

Burge and Haynes have been very good last two games. Burge seems and looks very confident.

Ok-so 2 good games, that’s great! Shall we erase the previous 4 seasons from our memories?

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Well let me explain it for you-he (along with others) has contributed to where we are at now (because he isn’t good enough) and was rewarded for failure last season(and the previous 3 seasons) and is still stealing a living while pulling the wool over some peoples eyes.

We’ve had 4 maybe 5 permanent managers in that time who have had a chance to get rid of him, are they all wrong?

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Ok-so 2 good games, that’s great! Shall we erase the previous 4 seasons from our memories?

No ones said that. Just people like you are nowhere to be seen if a player performs well but will be the first to abuse him if he doesn’t have a good game.

 

[Grendel]

We’ve had 4 maybe 5 permanent managers in that time who have had a chance to get rid of him, are they all wrong?

That’s not really true. Pressley was the one manager who really played him frequently. As soon as Mowbray arrived he left him out and hardly ever included him at all. We’d have gone down that season if Stokes and Ward hadn’t arrived.

We had to offer a parity deal as he was out of contract and I guess if wolves really had looked in January there was hope we’d move him on. This manager also gave Beavon an extended contract by the way.

 

[Adge]

No ones said that. Just people like you are nowhere to be seen if a player performs well but will be the first to abuse him if he doesn’t have a good game.

Oh my! Here we go again!

 

[Adge]

No ones said that. Just people like you are nowhere to be seen if a player performs well but will be the first to abuse him if he doesn’t have a good game.

↑
Really about Haynes? He’s got into good positions, strange to point him out over anyone else
Positions going forward have been good but his end product is poor

Defensively he is woeful. He’s goingto finish the game with cramp in his arms at this rate

Oh, not just me then........

 

[JWC]

Well let me explain it for you-he (along with others) has contributed to where we are at now (because he isn’t good enough) and was rewarded for failure last season(and the previous 3 seasons) and is still stealing a living while pulling the wool over some peoples eyes.

Ah, I get it now! Thanks, you patronising idiot.

I think he’s decent, especially at this level and I reserve the right to have a different opinion to you.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Anybody else counting our blessings that yesterday]s game was even on, having driven around Cov & Warks today. My car just did a good Bambi on ice impression outside my house a minute ago. Saturday's game must be doubtful (Lincolnshire seems very badly hit) and the surrounds to our stadium are going to need a lot of TLS & grit!

P.S. Haynes is a ginger Roberto Carlos

 

[Adge]

Ah, I get it now! Thanks, you patronising idiot.

I think he’s decent, especially at this level and I reserve the right to have a different opinion to you.

Oh dear!

 

[JWC]

Oh dear!

There we go again!

 

[Adge]

There we go again!

Hmmmm.

 

[skybluesam66]

i seem to remember the reports coming from sixfields when we started there, that he was the big reason for our blistering start, and was a star in the making

that is why pressley stuck with him

Being back in the team now has aligned with Stokes being out of form since being back from injury
Either way - haynes is good enough for league2 , but will not be if we get promotion

 

[Adge]

i seem to remember the reports coming from sixfields when we started there, that he was the big reason for our blistering start, and was a star in the making

that is why pressley stuck with him

Being back in the team now has aligned with Stokes being out of form since being back from injury
Either way - haynes is good enough for league2 , but will not be if we get promotion

Which is why I keep banging the drum. Why did we persist with him (and lots of others) when they were obviously not up to the job in previous seasons/higher levels? The “experiment” to see if players can make the step up is a major factor why we are now in the bottom tier. This is not the players fault as they are thrown under the bus when really should be nowhere near the first team.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Which is why I keep banging the drum. Why did we persist with him (and lots of others) when they were obviously not up to the job in previous seasons/higher levels? The “experiment” to see if players can make the step up is a major factor why we are now in the bottom tier. This is not the players fault as they are thrown under the bus when really should be nowhere near the first team.

Can I ask you a question? I’d like you to answer properly rather than your usual response. If we didn’t do the ‘experiment’ (whatever that means) last season, this would have been our team:

RCC

Foley
Clarke
Turnbull
Stokes

Jones
Reilly
Rose
Reid

Tudgay
Beavon

Would we have stayed up?

 

[Adge]

Can I ask you a question? I’d like you to answer properly rather than your usual response. If we didn’t do the ‘experiment’ (whatever that means) last season, this would have been our team:

RCC

Foley
Clarke
Turnbull
Stokes

Jones
Reilly
Rose
Reid

Tudgay
Beavon

Would we have stayed up?

Who knows? Probably not. I'm not sure people understand my point really ref academy players etc. Let me explain.
The reason we are in the bottom tier is a combination of 2 things, 1-The owners who are not interested in a speculate to accumulate policy and budget wise leads to an inferior team on the pitch.
2-Academy players (let me emphasise that it is not the academy players fault!) who because of the lack of investment, are thrust upon the first team far too early when clearly not ready/good enough/or up to the job.
By "experimenting" and putting them in the first team, results suffer over time and we have found ourselves where we are now, the bottom tier.
The club was shouting from the rooftops that there was 6 Academy players on the pitch who finished a first team fixture recently, thats commendable but that is far too many at one time, but I reiterate, NOT THE PLAYERS FAULT.
Yes you will get a Wilson/Maddison who comes along once in a while but for every Wilson you get 20 Burge's, Jordan Clark's, Conor Thomas's,Haynes,Bigi,Finch''s et al, the list is endless.
We will not progress while this policy is maintained and these owners are here.
Now please say you understand where I am coming from?

 

[Nick]

Isn't it the same as every academy where they will get a few superstars, a few trusty lower league players and then some that won't make it at all?

 

[Adge]

Isn't it the same as every academy where they will get a few superstars, a few trusty lower league players and then some that won't make it at all?

Yes. Do we want to progress though? If we do we know the likes of Burge/Haynes etc are not good enough at a higher level.

 

[Nick]

Yes. Do we want to progress though? If we do we know the likes of Burge/Haynes etc are not good enough at a higher level.

Then if we get to the higher level we replace them. The same as if we magically got to the Premier League or Championship and the players coming through that year weren't good enough.

 

[robbiekeane]

Yes. Do we want to progress though? If we do we know the likes of Burge/Haynes etc are not good enough at a higher level.

It would be a nice problem to have wouldn't it, if we were at a level that they weren't good enough

 

[Esoterica]

Yes. Do we want to progress though? If we do we know the likes of Burge/Haynes etc are not good enough at a higher level.

What model would you like us to use to progress?

 

[Adge]

Then if we get to the higher level we replace them. The same as if we magically got to the Premier League or Championship and the players coming through that year weren't good enough.

So you agree then that they are not up to the job if we want to progress and this being the point. Some people it seems are happy with not progressing by all accounts?

 

[Nick]

So you agree then that they are not up to the job if we want to progress and this being the point. Some people it seems are happy with not progressing by all accounts?

Surely it depends on the player?

For example Bayliss would do the job if we went into League 1 with some more experience under his belt.

You can't say "no academy player is good enough if we want to progress". It depends who they are, what position etc.

 

[hamil99]

Maybe we have to play the academy players because the only ones we could afford to buy would be worse. Just a thought.

 

[Nick]

Maybe we have to play the academy players because the only ones we could afford to buy would be worse. Just a thought.

Or we would get more free agents like the majority of other clubs at our level who don't have the luxury of a Cat 2 Academy?

 

[hamil99]

Or we would get more free agents like the majority of other clubs at our level who don't have the luxury of a Cat 2 Academy?

Absolutely, I definitely see us bringing academy players through a bonus. Rather than relying on league 2 journey men.

 

[harvey098]

Haynes was quality on Tuesday. Obviously got forward well, as we kind of take for granted with him but also defensively he was rock solid.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Who knows? Probably not. I'm not sure people understand my point really ref academy players etc. Let me explain.
The reason we are in the bottom tier is a combination of 2 things, 1-The owners who are not interested in a speculate to accumulate policy and budget wise leads to an inferior team on the pitch.
2-Academy players (let me emphasise that it is not the academy players fault!) who because of the lack of investment, are thrust upon the first team far too early when clearly not ready/good enough/or up to the job.
By "experimenting" and putting them in the first team, results suffer over time and we have found ourselves where we are now, the bottom tier.
The club was shouting from the rooftops that there was 6 Academy players on the pitch who finished a first team fixture recently, thats commendable but that is far too many at one time, but I reiterate, NOT THE PLAYERS FAULT.
Yes you will get a Wilson/Maddison who comes along once in a while but for every Wilson you get 20 Burge's, Jordan Clark's, Conor Thomas's,Haynes,Bigi,Finch''s et al, the list is endless.
We will not progress while this policy is maintained and these owners are here.
Now please say you understand where I am coming from?

...I posted a team without the ‘policy’ and you’ve said it ‘probably wouldn’t’ (lol) have stayed up. A team with Stuart Beavon and Marcus Tudgay up front in the league above ‘probably wouldn’t’ have stayed up

No one has any idea where you’re coming from, people don’t ‘understand’ you because what you post makes little to no sense

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

So you agree then that they are not up to the job if we want to progress and this being the point. Some people it seems are happy with not progressing by all accounts?

Majority of our squad isn’t up to the job if we get promoted. It was agreed on here the other week we have 7-8 players at most who could perform at a higher level

 

[Adge]

Surely it depends on the player?

For example Bayliss would do the job if we went into League 1 with some more experience under his belt.

You can't say "no academy player is good enough if we want to progress". It depends who they are, what position etc.

Majority of our squad isn’t up to the job if we get promoted. It was agreed on here the other week we have 7-8 players at most who could perform at a higher level

Correct. Now can you please explain why we find ourselves in the bottom tier?

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Isn't it the same as every academy where they will get a few superstars, a few trusty lower league players and then some that won't make it at all?

This is what about 10 people have put to him.

CCFC academy is 9/92 in England for producing professional footballers (which is the aim). So, generally compared to others it’s a high performing academy.

I can’t imagine his reaction if he supported Stoke for instance - who put millions in and have produced nothing

 

[Adge]

...I posted a team without the ‘policy’ and you’ve said it ‘probably wouldn’t’ (lol) have stayed up. A team with Stuart Beavon and Marcus Tudgay up front in the league above ‘probably wouldn’t’ have stayed up

No one has any idea where you’re coming from, people don’t ‘understand’ you because what you post makes little to no sense

Tried to explain it.

Surely it depends on the player?

For example Bayliss would do the job if we went into League 1 with some more experience under his belt.

You can't say "no academy player is good enough if we want to progress". It depends who they are, what position etc.

But we throw too many in at the same time-as a consequence results on the pitch suffer and we find ourselves where we are now.

 

[Adge]

This is what about 10 people have put to him.

CCFC academy is 9/92 in England for producing professional footballers (which is the aim). So, generally compared to others it’s a high performing academy.

I can’t imagine his reaction if he supported Stoke for instance - who put millions in and have produced nothing

So having a good academy is the be all and end all? Let's forget about results on the pitch then.