Guest Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 As for Cort he demonstrated again yesterday that he is still not fully fit and should not have been considered. Why? Once he got into the game, Cort showed some great touch and vision at times against Plymouth. Even though not fully fit, he offered more pace than MDV. But then again, you weren't there to see that. I can see why Rudkin and Beaglehole took the risk. Oh, sorry, I forgot. I'm risk aversive, you're not. Silly me.
Simon Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 God there's a lot of shit being bandied about here. I thought I'd have calmed down after yesterday but I'm still bloody angry- we SHOULD have won that game. I don't buy all this Megson had nothing to do with the subs and the team tactics. It's utter bollocks. He was the one stood on the touchline with Taggs shouting at the players and giving instructions. Ever heard of the phrase; 'too many cooks spoil the broth'? If Megson wanted to be involved yesterday then HE should have picked the team and done it all. But he said he didn't know the players well enough so let others pick the team (supposedly), and then (in my my view) muddied the waters. If he didn't know the players well enough, then he should have sat in the stands and kept quiet till Monday.
Joe. Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Why? Once he got into the game, Cort showed some great touch and vision at times against Plymouth. Even though not fully fit, he offered more pace than MDV. But then again, you weren't there to see that. I can see why Rudkin and Beaglehole took the risk.Oh, sorry, I forgot. I'm risk aversive, you're not. Silly me. I agree with you there Lisa. After Cort's performance at Plymouth I don't blame Rudkin for picking him. Just because he didn't have his greatest game ever it seems it's down to match fitness for some people.
DanTheFoxBhoy Posted 16 September 2007 Posted 16 September 2007 Complete pish. Only thing that made me happy was hearing that Cov lost to Bristol at home 3-0. That and Rangers being thumped by below average Hearts 4-2 Possibly the only time I've ever vocally supported Hearts. I even drank with the Hearts fans in the pub afterward
Thracian Posted 17 September 2007 Posted 17 September 2007 Why? Once he got into the game, Cort showed some great touch and vision at times against Plymouth. Even though not fully fit, he offered more pace than MDV. But then again, you weren't there to see that. I can see why Rudkin and Beaglehole took the risk.Oh, sorry, I forgot. I'm risk aversive, you're not. Silly me. I wasn't a Plymouth as you say - and mighty glad of it - but didn't see anything at the Wolves Reserves or Lincoln Reserves games which would have made me give Cort a first team place. But he'll be on big wages and it is a shame to waste the money so if your championing of him in some small way helps him rebuild his form, why should I complain? It's not as if there isn't room for improvement in our striking department.
Guest Posted 17 September 2007 Posted 17 September 2007 I wasn't a Plymouth as you say - and mighty glad of it - but didn't see anything at the Wolves Reserves or Lincoln Reserves games which would have made me give Cort a first team place. But he'll be on big wages and it is a shame to waste the money so if your championing of him in some small way helps him rebuild his form, why should I complain? It's not as if there isn't room for improvement in our striking department. Like I've said elsewhere, I'd rather be looking at positives. This role reversal is hard work...
Simon Posted 17 September 2007 Posted 17 September 2007 Not sure why Cort's getting such a bashing. I thought he did OK- although nothing spectacular, especially first half. Second half, lack of fitness showed. Nothing to suggest he should have been picked ahead of De Vries at this point, but IF we can get him properly fit (and its a big IF!) then he will do well for us, I am sure.
Guest Posted 17 September 2007 Posted 17 September 2007 Not sure why Cort's getting such a bashing. I thought he did OK- although nothing spectacular, especially first half. Second half, lack of fitness showed. Nothing to suggest he should have been picked ahead of De Vries at this point, but IF we can get him properly fit (and its a big IF!) then he will do well for us, I am sure. Exactly. If there was one substitution that should have been made, it was this one.
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 17 September 2007 Posted 17 September 2007 I will some up the game in smileys :mad2: HALF TIME
Yaxx Posted 17 September 2007 Posted 17 September 2007 http://www.football.virginmedia.com/page/c...1113542,00.html We actually looked pretty good in the [very brief] highlights! For a while anyway......
Thracian Posted 17 September 2007 Posted 17 September 2007 Like I've said elsewhere, I'd rather be looking at positives.This role reversal is hard work... Five games unbeaten is a positive. Does that help?
lookwhaticando Posted 17 September 2007 Author Posted 17 September 2007 Five games unbeaten is a positive. Does that help? That's a run Rob Kelly would br proud of.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.