Search results

I agree. Home against teams that are struggling we need to be more positive. 1 6 and 2 8's rather than 2 6's and 1 8. Rudoni and Torp as the 8's and one of Sheaf or Eccles in the other.

Maybe the thinking is that if everyone else starts the game at 100% then he'll struggle because his fitness isn't there. Bringing him on as a sub evens it up a bit and gives him more time on the ball.

It's the Welsh language version.

If I were a pro and training every day, I'd notice there were things like that I wasn't good at and spend extra time improving. Simms with his trapping, Sheaf with his shooting, Bassette using his right foot.

They had the list upside down?

Not a very good one seeing as he was his choice if things don't improve. Especially with the rumours that others warned him against bringing in Frank and he supposedly ignored them and did it anyway.

While I don't necessarily agree with the OP, the performances/results so far under CCFL have been little different to those under MR. So while I'm hoping Frank does a good job and will support him, it does suggest the problem wasn't the manager.

We've got a member of staff who's supposedly been doing this.

Not sure many are blaming him. Certainly the first was unlucky and the second is more on the defence/midfield BUT it's another game where they've scored every shot on target with him in goal (arguably scored one more than shot on target depending on the deflection). You can't have a keeper that...

Shooting: Sheaf

But he reckons they're a 'top 6 deck'. I don't see anything to suggest they are. At some point he needs to acknowledge that but he's been very complimentary of Austin.

Our overall play wasn't bad against an organised team. But we concede goals from very few chances given away and miss very good chances ourselves. Team that do that end up in trouble. Would like to say it's because it's another bogey ground but it's a theme throughout the season.

We're not scoring today are we.

He chose to start with Eccles and Sheaf, so I imagine he was setting it up quite negative.

When we sign a backup for the RB position

He's knackered having to play every game

Let's hope he drops a clanger

Nah mate. Wide open at the back and goes down too easily.

He's been in charge for more than a few months and hasn't crashed the economy, so no he can't.

So shouldnt' it go to Australia to help grow the game there then?