Now about that guy I didn't want called Robins............... (1 Viewer)

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Now?

I think we can make the play-offs.

On the proviso though that we don't lose any quality players, or if we do we replace them with like for like and that we also strengthen.

I think we need to strengthen because of potential injuries and suspensions to key players that could really hurt us.

And CCFC, I took pretty much everything AT said with a pinch of salt. If I recall correctly he said that Cody McDonald was going to be the league's top goalscorer and also that we would 'hit the ground running.'

We certainly hit it hard, I'll give him that.

I'm glad you think playoffs are more than do-able now, I thought you was going to be rigid in your prediction. I think we'll sign 4 players this Jan window, Bailey, done, Clarke, (basically) done, Adams, will be signed, Moussa, well not signed, but resigned. Only McG will be the only one to walk, but, 'the grass isn't always greener' and we could end up taunting him with 'it could've been you' song if he goes to Barnsley. I don't think he'd start for Leeds or Burnley, but would at Millwall.

Cody is a decent striker... Just not as good as Clarke or McG, real shame he thought he'd host a few too many BBQs in the summer, had he been sharp, I'm sure he'd be up there. I also think he needs a strike partner to do well, he doesn't seem to be a 'lone striker type', that's why I think he isn't favoured so much ATM.

 

---

[torchomatic]

Pleased we didn't get Wise, never wanted him. Wasn't sure with Robins, but he has certainly taken us further than we could've imagined. Brilliant.

 

[Otis]

I quite wanted Wise though Torch because I felt the club needed a kick up the backside and he would have brought that. We needed a revolution.

MR though has done and said all the right things so he was very much the right appointment. No-one could have done any better than he was done thus far.

 

[torchomatic]

I know what you mean about Wise, I think he would have shaken stuff up, but I was always concerned about his lack of recent time in the game. He's been gardening for three years or something. Not only that I've never liked him particularly so I was quite relieved when we went with someone else. I think I wanted the guy from Exeter.

I quite wanted Wise though Torch because I felt the club needed a kick up the backside and he would have brought that. We needed a revolution.

MR though has done and said all the right things so he was very much the right appointment. No-one could have done any better than he was done thus far.

 

[wingy]

I quite wanted Wise though Torch because I felt the club needed a kick up the backside and he would have brought that. We needed a revolution.

MR though has done and said all the right things so he was very much the right appointment. No-one could have done any better than he was done thus far.

More than anything else he's demanded respect from Sisu and they're giving him it and he's delivered ,can he make them sign Goldie???:thinking about:

 

[King-Dion]

I wanted Wise but was okay with Robins...now I am ecstatic with his manner & results.

I too had hoped for Wise. But MR has exceeded all expectations and has been truly brilliant. This man was clearly hungry to prove himself and for success. From being very worried about another relegation, it is now not unreasonable to hope for a top six finish. After that.... who knows! PUSB.

 

[Hincha]

Said at the time we needed a manager who was successful at other clubs and had not been a failure before. If you look at the previous records of Reid, Coleman Boothroyd, Adams, etc they were all recent failures. Robins worked wonders at Rotherham and Barnsley. He walked out from the latter when he got no backing. Robins has proved he is a good manager in L1 and the Championship. In the Prem most of the managers are very good and even great managers like O'neil can struggle..

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Hope I didn't "come out" too soon about MR.
I think he was at fault for us losing to Shrewsbury and he made serious selection errors.
No way should he have dropped Elliot and started McG. McG was stupidly yellow-carded for taking his shirt off and getting that 5th yellow before the year end. Baker did the same and paid the price of getting dropped. McG does it and MR shows favouritism and plays McG. Very wrong and sends very wrong message to the team that there are "favourites" who can flout the rules. Bad tactics and bad man-management.
And then he brought on Clarke instead of Elliot. Again, a stupid tactical error that IMHO cost us the game. McG was always going to be off his game after suspension then getting his place back for what he already knew was a final game that had no consequences for his future. Clarke had never played a competitive game with this team, and Elliot - who scored two goals the week before replacing McG - is incredibly left on the bench. IMHO a dreadful series of tactical errors that cost us the game and very probably upset some players who might have expected the rules to apply to all players and instead see that there are favourites.

So sorry, but MR was a big disapointment for the Shrewsbury game. Don't know what was going on in his head, but IMHO HE GOT IT VERY WRONG.

Faced the questions and gave honest answers! Also we should have won 5-2

 

[Otis]

I think he was completely right to play DMC ahead of Elliot.

To do anything else would have been sheer madness in my book. You have to play the best striker in the whole division. You simply have too.

 

[Otis]

By the same token you cannot say picking DMC ahead of Elliot cost us the game.

We simply don't know. MR didn't play Baker after his suspension and we failed to win. Did play DMC after his suspension and failed to win that one too.

Maybe Baker playing against Preston would have brought 3 points. Barton really struggled that day. Who knows!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Hope I didn't "come out" too soon about MR.
I think he was at fault for us losing to Shrewsbury and he made serious selection errors.
No way should he have dropped Elliot and started McG. McG was stupidly yellow-carded for taking his shirt off and getting that 5th yellow before the year end. Baker did the same and paid the price of getting dropped. McG does it and MR shows favouritism and plays McG. Very wrong and sends very wrong message to the team that there are "favourites" who can flout the rules. Bad tactics and bad man-management.
And then he brought on Clarke instead of Elliot. Again, a stupid tactical error that IMHO cost us the game. McG was always going to be off his game after suspension then getting his place back for what he already knew was a final game that had no consequences for his future. Clarke had never played a competitive game with this team, and Elliot - who scored two goals the week before replacing McG - is incredibly left on the bench. IMHO a dreadful series of tactical errors that cost us the game and very probably upset some players who might have expected the rules to apply to all players and instead see that there are favourites.

So sorry, but MR was a big disapointment for the Shrewsbury game. Don't know what was going on in his head, but IMHO HE GOT IT VERY WRONG.

I agree he did cost us that game, but what I disagree with you on is what mistakes he made.

Firstly, MR was right to select McG to start, it was his last game of his loan (and turned out to his last game for CCFC) but besides that, McG is top goal scorer in the league by 4 goals, in less games. Elliott, fair play to him scored a brace v MK, but he wasn't great 1st half and McG is clearly a superior player. I wouldn't say leaving out Baker and not McG doesn't help your argument, we didn't play Baker v PNE (who was in form prior to that suspension) and we drew, and played poorly, which to me, MR starting McG suggests he learned his lesson.

I think MR's BIG mistake came when he took off Fleck, who was dictating the play, if Bailey had come on, it would've been a decent sub, BUT, we brought on Clarke and changed to 4-4-2, which restricted our ability to go and pass our way through the Shrews, I think Clarke should've come on for McG and left it at 4-5-1/4-4-1-1, but we didn't, we moved to 4-4-2 which killed us off as it is a formation that doesn't suit CCFC, we don't have a 4-4-2 midfield! Clarke looked like a good player when he came on, looks strong, dynamic, a handful etc. whereas Elliott isn't really a handful.

Elliott isn't that good, and the bottom line is, although he scored 2 at the weekend, we had 2 of the league's top goal scorers at our disposal, USE THEM!

I think MR shouldn't have took off Fleck and we shouldn't have moved to 4-4-2, that was stupid.

I don't know why you expected Elliott to be some superstar after his brace v MK...

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I 100% think the mcgoldrick pick was right, however he is right Elliott should have came off the bench before Clarke

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

By the same token you cannot say picking DMC ahead of Elliot cost us the game.

We simply don't know. MR didn't play Baker after his suspension and we failed to win. Did play DMC after his suspension and failed to win that one too.

Maybe Baker playing against Preston would have brought 3 points. Barton really struggled that day. Who knows!

I don't know why you chose to single out Barton, he didn't play well, but, none of the team played very well, did they?

I think whoever would've played in the AMC role would've struggled simply because the distribution wasn't there.

Barton's 'pussy headers' didn't do him any favours! But no one on our team was winning anything in the air

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I agree he did cost us that game, but what I disagree with you on is what mistakes he made.

Firstly, MR was right to select McG to start, it was his last game of his loan (and turned out to his last game for CCFC) but besides that, McG is top goal scorer in the league by 4 goals, in less games. Elliott, fair play to him scored a brace v MK, but he wasn't great 1st half and McG is clearly a superior player. I wouldn't say leaving out Baker and not McG doesn't help your argument, we didn't play Baker v PNE (who was in form prior to that suspension) and we drew, and played poorly, which to me, MR starting McG suggests he learned his lesson.

I think MR's BIG mistake came when he took off Fleck, who was dictating the play, if Bailey had come on, it would've been a decent sub, BUT, we brought on Clarke and changed to 4-4-2, which restricted our ability to go and pass our way through the Shrews, I think Clarke should've come on for McG and left it at 4-5-1/4-4-1-1, but we didn't, we moved to 4-4-2 which killed us off as it is a formation that doesn't suit CCFC, we don't have a 4-4-2 midfield! Clarke looked like a good player when he came on, looks strong, dynamic, a handful etc. whereas Elliott isn't really a handful.

Elliott isn't that good, and the bottom line is, although he scored 2 at the weekend, we had 2 of the league's top goal scorers at our disposal, USE THEM!

I think MR shouldn't have took off Fleck and we shouldn't have moved to 4-4-2, that was stupid.

I don't know why you expected Elliott to be some superstar after his brace v MK...

But baker wasn't in poor form before his suspension though was he, he had just scored 2 goals against Walsall in the game he got his 5th booking

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I 100% think the mcgoldrick pick was right, however he is right Elliott should have came off the bench before Clarke

Why? Clarke looked a handful when he came on. People are clinging on to Elliott's 28m too much!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

But baker wasn't in poor form before his suspension though was he, he had just scored 2 goals against Walsall in the game he got his 5th booking

I said he was 'in form'!

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Why? Clarke looked a handful when he came on. People are clinging on to Elliott's 28m too much!

Clarke will be the better player for us but Clarke had only 1 or 2 training sessions with his teammates before the game with us as we have mostly rested in between games over christmas

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I said he was 'in form'!

Ah yes, sorry that's me reading too quickly

 

[No1SkyBlueFan]

I 100% think the mcgoldrick pick was right, however he is right Elliott should have came off the bench before Clarke

Maybe he thought Clarke could pull off a last minute goal like he did at Scunny against us, as for McGoldrick he has been a great player and has helped us a lot but at the end of the day he will always go for the better club.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Ah yes, sorry that's me reading too quickly

I thought I had made another mistake! I read my post 3 times to see if I had said he had been in poor form!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Clarke will be the better player for us but Clarke had only 1 or 2 training sessions with his teammates before the game with us as we have mostly rested in between games over christmas

I don't rate Elliot particularly highly, I think Clarke offers more as a player, nearly scored as well. If we look back to how we played that game, ask yourself this, would Elliott had been the right move? Bear this in mind, we became a lot more direct with lofted balls coming toward Clarke, who won quite a lot tbf, would Elliott have won as much in the air? Don't be silly.

 

[wingy]

I don't rate Elliot particularly highly, I think Clarke offers more as a player, nearly scored as well. If we look back to how we played that game, ask yourself this, would Elliott had been the right move? Bear this in mind, we became a lot more direct with lofted balls coming toward Clarke, who won quite a lot tbf, would Elliott have won as much in the air? Don't be silly.

We also played a lot of that type of ball to DMC,futile

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

We also played a lot of that type of ball to DMC,futile

Again, because we moved to 4-4-2, mixed with desperation to get an equaliser, we resorted to hooking it, because we couldn't play though the midfield because we lost fluidity because of the move to 4-4-2.

 

[Grendel]

Again, because we moved to 4-4-2, mixed with desperation to get an equaliser, we resorted to hooking it, because we couldn't play though the midfield because we lost fluidity because of the move to 4-4-2.

Still on football manager? Bit past your bedtime isn't it!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Still on football manager? Bit past your bedtime isn't it!

Because I'm a rebel I'm still up muhahaha. Seriously, no need for the patronising tone.

I don't have FM13 PC version, only iPad, and I can't be on SBT on iPad and FM13 on iPad at he same time can I?

I used unfortunate vocabulary that is linked to FM, but nonetheless, I think my point stands, as it was very true.

Or do you disagree?

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Hope I didn't "come out" too soon about MR.
I think he was at fault for us losing to Shrewsbury and he made serious selection errors.
No way should he have dropped Elliot and started McG. McG was stupidly yellow-carded for taking his shirt off and getting that 5th yellow before the year end. Baker did the same and paid the price of getting dropped. McG does it and MR shows favouritism and plays McG. Very wrong and sends very wrong message to the team that there are "favourites" who can flout the rules. Bad tactics and bad man-management.
And then he brought on Clarke instead of Elliot. Again, a stupid tactical error that IMHO cost us the game. McG was always going to be off his game after suspension then getting his place back for what he already knew was a final game that had no consequences for his future. Clarke had never played a competitive game with this team, and Elliot - who scored two goals the week before replacing McG - is incredibly left on the bench. IMHO a dreadful series of tactical errors that cost us the game and very probably upset some players who might have expected the rules to apply to all players and instead see that there are favourites.

So sorry, but MR was a big disapointment for the Shrewsbury game. Don't know what was going on in his head, but IMHO HE GOT IT VERY WRONG.

I think credit where it's due...Shrewsbury came into the game unbeaten in 9 games I think...& maybe it was a bit of a gamble with MR expect DM would be he'll-bent on going out on a high.
Ultimately, we lost...let's get over it. DM has left -let's get over that too...enjoy the day tomorrow come he'll or high-water, & then focus again on L1

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

I don't rate Elliot particularly highly, I think Clarke offers more as a player, nearly scored as well. If we look back to how we played that game, ask yourself this, would Elliott had been the right move? Bear this in mind, we became a lot more direct with lofted balls coming toward Clarke, who won quite a lot tbf, would Elliott have won as much in the air? Don't be silly.

Would we have gone as direct if Elliott had came on though?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Would we have gone as direct if Elliott had came on though?

Possibly, because we were getting desperate and the passing came had 'gone to shit'.

 

[dongonzalos]

That did worry me about the Clarke signing.

If things are not going our way will we ditch the passing and loft it at him?

 

[wingy]

Again, because we moved to 4-4-2, mixed with desperation to get an equaliser, we resorted to hooking it, because we couldn't play though the midfield because we lost fluidity because of the move to 4-4-2.

No i meant I thought we were doing too much of that before he made the changes.
I just thought DMC was really ineffective through the match ,we played way below our regular tempo of late ,overworked the ball .They had all the time in the world to set for our delivery.

 

[stupot07]

I don't know why you chose to single out Barton, he didn't play well, but, none of the team played very well, did they?

I think whoever would've played in the AMC role would've struggled simply because the distribution wasn't there.

Barton's 'pussy headers' didn't do him any favours! But no one on our team was winning anything in the air

He singled out Barton because he was bakers replacement, I.e if Robins had of played Baker, Barton would have been on the bench.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Possibly, because we were getting desperate and the passing came had 'gone to shit'.

Murphy's hoof extravaganza was a 90 minute affair. Utter stupidity when the target was Baker up against giant defenders.

 

[Otis]

I don't know why you chose to single out Barton, he didn't play well, but, none of the team played very well, did they?

I think whoever would've played in the AMC role would've struggled simply because the distribution wasn't there.

Barton's 'pussy headers' didn't do him any favours! But no one on our team was winning anything in the air

Errm, I singled out Barton because he took Baker's place when Baker was suspended and Barton kept his place ahead of Baker for Preston when Baker came back from suspension.

Barton replaced Baker. Many people were saying Baker should have had his place back for the Preston game, but Barton retained his place.

That's why I singled out Barton! It is the DMC Elliot scenario!