NO EXCUSES

[Ultra]

Not a great start to the season this afternoon. I note that Rob Kelly's critics have wasted no time whatsoever in getting the cross and nails out.

But he cannot be held responsible for players making basic errors, such as those which cost us the first goal, or for too many players being unwilling to compete against a side clearly still smarting from their defeat last March.

Although Williams and Johnson showed glimpses of quality, especially in the first half, they failed to produce the creativity that the front pair required. However Iain Hume needs to show a lot more mobility than he did today, with a performance which was worryingly reminiscent of too many during the Levein era.

Only Henderson, Kenton and Fryatt, plus the three subs, all of whom could and perhaps should have been introduced earlier, gave displays of the standard we should expect from those wearing the blue shirt.

Hopefully the return of Kisnorbo on Tuesday will bring more stability to the defence and the team as a whole.

And if certain cheerleaders on these boards honestly believe that the presence of their centrefolds Sheehan and Porter would have made any difference whatsoever to today's proceedings, they are VERY much mistaken!

[Steven]

Not a great start to the season this afternoon. I note that Rob Kelly's critics have wasted no time whatsoever in getting the cross and nails out.

But he cannot be held responsible for players making basic errors, such as those which cost us the first goal, or for too many players being unwilling to compete against a side clearly still smarting from their defeat last March.

Although Williams and Johnson showed glimpses of quality, especially in the first half, they failed to produce the creativity that the front pair required. However Iain Hume needs to show a lot more mobility than he did today, with a performance which was worryingly reminiscent of too many during the Levein era.

Only Henderson, Kenton and Fryatt, plus the three subs, all of whom could and perhaps should have been introduced earlier, gave displays of the standard we should expect from those wearing the blue shirt.

Hopefully the return of Kisnorbo on Tuesday will bring more stability to the defence and the team as a whole.

And if certain cheerleaders on these boards honestly believe that the presence of their centrefolds Sheehan and Porter would have made any difference whatsoever to today's proceedings, they are VERY much mistaken!

So the point of having a manager is.

[Fez of Mahrez]

So the point of having a manager is.

So the players are unaccountable?

Whenever Stearman gave the ball away today, who were you shouting at? Stearman or Kelly?

[Steven]

So the players are unaccountable?

Whenever Stearman gave the ball away today, who were you shouting at? Stearman or Kelly?

Stearman but that does not absolve RK from his responsibilities as Manager.

[Thracian]

I don't know how long you've been a fortune teller but we'd certainly have had a better chance of retaining possession with those two than with some who did play.

However, it is unlikely to be any use playing attacking players in a defensive format.

People have criticised Fryatt and Hume but they got less support than a pair of trousers with no belt.

I am quite sure Levi would have fared better than Maybury and Sheehan better than Nils but whether I'd have occupied both of them in a 4-3-1-2 system I don't know.

I'd probably have gone with Hume or O'Grady in the hole to start with. In fact, everytime I see him, I find it hard to imagine why O'Grady would be left out.

[Fez of Mahrez]

Stearman but that does not absolve RK from his responsibilities as Manager.

But the point Ultra was making was that Kelly cannot be held responsible for the players making basic errors during a game. Being a football manager only goes so far. You can set your players up to play the way you want them to play and he deserves criticism for the defensive approach but they don't give the ball away because Kelly has told them to, and it doesn't mean that any player who gives the ball away should be dropped immediately. The players earn good money and should shoulder the responsibility for poor individual performances by their own standards.

[Libertine]

O'Grady looks quality to me. He needs to start a few games to really show what he can do.

[Dr The Singh]

Agreed no excuses, the only difference from last season was that effin Levien was missing. The forward line and midfield had so much space between it.........who's effin idea was it to play long balls to Hume.......again I repeat it was like last season instead of playing long balls to MDV they were playing them to Hume.

I know it's only the first game and players maybe rusty..........but that was beyind rusty, the passing was poor, the tactics were all wrong......what's the use of playing a attacking midfielder like Williams and him not pushing beyond the centre circle!!!

[Steven]

But the point Ultra was making was that Kelly cannot be held responsible for the players making basic errors during a game. Being a football manager only goes so far. You can set your players up to play the way you want them to play and he deserves criticism for the defensive approach but they don't give the ball away because Kelly has told them to, and it doesn't mean that any player who gives the ball away should be dropped immediately. The players earn good money and should shoulder the responsibility for poor individual performances by their own standards.

Then there is no point in having a manager. What exactly does he take responsibility for.

[Fez of Mahrez]

Then there is no point in having a manager. What exactly does he take responsibility for.

Poor team performances as whole, yes.

Individuals giving the ball away on specific occasions, no.

[BartonFox]

Not a great start to the season this afternoon. I note that Rob Kelly's critics have wasted no time whatsoever in getting the cross and nails out.

But he cannot be held responsible for players making basic errors, such as those which cost us the first goal, or for too many players being unwilling to compete against a side clearly still smarting from their defeat last March.

Oh FFS are we going to have to put with apologists for the remainder of the season?

He set the formation, an alleged 4-4-2, but it was really a 6-2-2 as Steven has suggested. He has 2 right wingers in Sylla and Low and neither make the bench. We are supposed to be difficult to beat yet a piss poor Luton were able to stroll past us without so much as a whimper in defiance.

Although Williams and Johnson showed glimpses of quality, especially in the first half, they failed to produce the creativity that the front pair required. However Iain Hume needs to show a lot more mobility than he did today, with a performance which was worryingly reminiscent of too many during the Levein era.

Perhaps if he got some service, but with 6 defenders it is unlikely he'll get anything.

Only Henderson, Kenton and Fryatt, plus the three subs, all of whom could and perhaps should have been introduced earlier, gave displays of the standard we should expect from those wearing the blue shirt.

Jeez if that is deemed as an expected standard then we are in real trouble.

And if certain cheerleaders on these boards honestly believe that the presence of their centrefolds Sheehan and Porter would have made any difference whatsoever to today's proceedings, they are VERY much mistaken!

Your right, neither are good enough, but the way we were set up would have meant even Zidane would have found it difficult to make a difference.

[Steven]

Poor team performances as whole, yes.

Individuals giving the ball away on specific occasions, no.

The overall team performance doesn't contribute to an individual performance?

[Fez of Mahrez]

The overall team performance doesn't contribute to an individual performance?

We're talking about specific occasions though.

If the team played well as a whole but Stearman gave the ball away and it resulted in a goal, would you blame Kelly then?

[Thracian]

The only wingers we have of any consequence are Gradel and Low, in that order I'd say. Hammond, Sylla and Maybury are not wingers in terms of effect.

[Ultra]

Maybury and Hughes were effective wide players last season, if a tad unspectacular for some tastes.

However it would appear that RK isn't entirely convinced with the current full-back pairing of Stearman and Johansson (neither of whom are natural full-backs anyway), so feels compelled to include Maybury and Tiatto as protection.

Maybe he should just deal with the problem at source. Shift Maybury or Kenton to right-back and bring someone with more creativity in front.

I'd also look at dropping Nissa, but none of the alternatives (Maybury? Tiatto? Sheehan?) are particularly appealing.

[Thracian]

If you mean positive effect, when were they effective as wide players?

Maybury scored once, Tiatto once and I don't remember a string of assists...

Please enlighten me.

[Ultra]

They contributed to some decent team performances which pulled us out of trouble.

Hughes also scored match-winning goals against QPR, Millwall and Palace.

[Thracian]

They contributed to some decent team performances which pulled us out of trouble.

Hughes also scored match-winning goals against QPR, Millwall and Palace.

If that's it for season and that's a full-stop at the end of your sentence, big deal. Are you saying any other two players wouldn't make at least that sort of a contribution over a season?. Just for example Joey scored eight goals in his League season exactly double what Maybury and Hughes scored together.

We pay those two for 46 matches a season not three and a few nebulous "okays".

[Swedging]

If that's it for season and that's a full-stop at the end of your sentence, big deal. Are you saying any other two players wouldn't make at least that sort of a contribution over a season?. Just for example Joey scored eight goals in his League season exactly double what Maybury and Hughes scored together.

We pay those two for 46 matches a season not three and a few nebulous "okays".

Hughes effectively only played half a season, was carrying an injury for much of the time and was normally out of position. On that basis, if you want to play stupid number games, his contribution stacks up OK against Joey's.

[Thracian]

Hughes effectively only played half a season, was carrying an injury for much of the time and was normally out of position. On that basis, if you want to play stupid number games, his contribution stacks up OK against Joey's.

Hughes played 28 games for his three League goals so if that ranks as okay then we clearly have different expectations.

If he was injured he should have been left out but he didn't look very injured to me when I watched him - just ordinary and largely ineffective.

In some set-ups I could make a case for him in central midfield but not a particularly enthusiastic one. He simply doesn't make enough happen for me.

Joey made mistakes just as he does, just as all players do particularly in the Championship and given that you won't eliminate mistakes it then matters what good things you do, what effect you have.

Effect in football means preventing goals (he's not a good tackler), scoring goals (3 in 28) and making goals (he's not a genuine creater).

I like his industry, he's got stamina and I'm not saying I would never play him, particularly as a substitute. But if the team is to have balance and the characteristics I mentioned there wouldn't be a space for him except possibly Johnson's.