Manwell Pablo Posted 6 October 2007 Posted 6 October 2007 As I was saying, we were far from brilliant today, second half especially we were pretty ordinary indeed. Especially when the two strikers, came off. I wish Matty Fryatt had pace. We were the better side in the first half, and looked like a decent footballing side at times, but to be honest Wednesday were the masters of their own down fall, the goals we scored had little to do with an excellent delivery or excellent headers, and alot to do with god awfull defending and goal keeping. But ah well, hopefully we can build on this a move up the table, so Mr Megson can feel his fully deserved the ridiculous amount of popularity he seems to have gained.
potter3 Posted 6 October 2007 Posted 6 October 2007 . No one seemed bothered when we were winning games under MON playing 5-3-2 so I'm not sure why some people are moaning about it now But he still insists on playing Chambers in centre midfield, and making stupid subs like Kenton in centre mid
Floating Fox Posted 6 October 2007 Posted 6 October 2007 Fantastic, a win away from home and a clean sheet. On a ground we've been dogshit on in recent years as well. Consistency is the key, though. Megson needs to keep the wins coming if he's to make me a fan. Jamie you missed an awesome day out. The steward baiting was quality. Hitler would be proud.
Guest Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Anyone who thought that it was a travesty that we didn't sign Kavanagh on loan should hang there heads in shame. To see DJ rob him, and end up on his arse made me howl. I hate the bloke. Sheff Weds were a very poor side. It seems a shame that this is the case, as it takes the gloss off of a good win, and deep down, I still know that there are problems with our squad. The defence is getting sorted, I'm much happier seeing three at the back, and Marton Fulop.... For anyone who didn't go to the game, and thinks that we were playing defensively, you may have a point, however we could easily have won the game by a bigger margin, had we got proper attacking midfielders in the side who are prepared to take a shot, and for that matter forwards who are prepared to take a shot. I suspect that the team might have been happy to soak up the pressure because the opposition was so poor.
Bryn Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 play Stearman defensive right midfield Kaebi attacking right midFulop GK Mattock DLM N Gotty CB Kisnorbo CB Mc Auley CB Stearman DRM Newton ALM King CM Kaebi ARM Campbell St Fryatt ( i hate to say it) St Bench Hume, Cort, Kishishev, Chambers, Hayes There you go Sheff Wed 0 Leicester 2 This is the team i posted to play V Sheff Wed and you all said it was the worst team in the history of Foxes Talk, check my posts if you don't believe me Leicester: Fulop, Kisnorbo, N'Gotty, McAuley, Stearman, Chambers, Newton, Sheehan, King (Kenton 74), Hume (Campbell 61), Fryatt (Cort 61). Subs Not Used: Henderson, Kishishev. Heres the team that played. 8 of the starting 11 were in my chosen team. 2 of my bench players played also Hume and Campbell. Not such a bad team now is it and what was the score? 2-0 Leicester I was right about something! I know on forums you're not meant to flame and you're supposed to argue everything in a balanced way but; you really are the biggest fooking idiot I've ever come across on the net, and believe me there are some tossers out there. On Megson; "The midfield worked their socks off - as they did the other day against Wolves. Today we were playing a right-back, and right winger and an 18-year-old kid in the middle and they have done terrific. But that's what we have got. When we chucked them in it would have been quite easy for them to throw the towel in and say 'I don't fancy this because I'm a right-back and I shouldn't be playing here.' But they didn't do that and great credit to them." He knows Chambers is a right back and shouldn't be playing there, so how did he end up there
Steven Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 I know on forums you're not meant to flame and you're supposed to argue everything in a balanced way but; you really are the biggest fooking idiot I've ever come across on the net, and believe me there are some tossers out there. :D :D Classic.
Ultra Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Bitching about Megson being "negative" is dull, short-sighted and naive. Sorry, but when a manager finishes a game with SEVEN defenders on the pitch, how the hell else are we supposed to describe him? It will take more than a win against a woefully under-strength Wednesday side to convince some of us of his credentials. We're not going to threaten the playoffs by winning once every five league games. Megson still has much to do to persuade us he will be any better than Levein or Kelly.
Guest Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Sorry, but when a manager finishes a game with SEVEN defenders on the pitch, how the hell else are we supposed to describe him? So who would you have put on then, clever clogs? What quality would you have packed the bench with yesterday? Why oh why are you not the manager of our once great, sorry, ok football club?
brookfox Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 But he still insists on playing Chambers in centre midfield, and making stupid subs like Kenton in centre mid And our alternatives in centre mid at the minute are....?! Kish hasn't lived up to expectations and I'd say Chambers has got his head down and done a job for the team. Admitedly Kenton centre mid sucks but... WE WON! Oh and we've got the best defensive record in the league! If Campbell could just get us the 20 goals his price tag promised we'd be looking pretty useful.
filbertway Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 So who would you have put on then, clever clogs? What quality would you have packed the bench with yesterday? Why oh why are you not the manager of our once great, sorry, ok football club? Kishishev?
Daggers Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 you really are the biggest fooking idiot I've ever come across on the net, and believe me there are some tossers out there. ...and almost on cue, Ultra comes on to post something to challenge for the title.
Smudge Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Sorry, but when a manager finishes a game with SEVEN defenders on the pitch, how the hell else are we supposed to describe him?It will take more than a win against a woefully under-strength Wednesday side to convince some of us of his credentials. We're not going to threaten the playoffs by winning once every five league games. Megson still has much to do to persuade us he will be any better than Levein or Kelly. That's the point............Megson does have much to do I wonder what you do for a living but I assume that you have managed a business in your time. When have you ever started a new job, assessed the staff, retrained those with potential and replaced the rest in 3 weeks?
Daggers Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 That's the point............Megson does have much to doI wonder what you do for a living but I assume that you have managed a business in your time. When have you ever started a new job, assessed the staff, retrained those with potential and replaced the rest in 3 weeks? He works for the NHS...
Bryn Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 We're very much a longball team aren't we? From the highlights, Campbell looked full of effort and looked very good on the ball, finishing wasn't quite there but wasn't God awful. Defending wasn't that good, better teams would have scored at least twice. But Fulop's keeping was magnificent, two awesome saves, especially from Tudgay.
Smudge Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 He works for the NHS... Ah..................In which case he should be giving Megson 5 seasons to sort it out
davieG Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Goals is goals whichever way they are scored, the amount we're scoring anyway is better than no way!
davieG Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Ah..................In which case he should be giving Megson 5 seasons to sort it out Then carry out a review with consultation, cancel his contract, pay him compensation, carry out another review with consultation, re-recruit him and let him try all over again on a bigger salary.
Harpenden Fox Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 although our league position is pretty much as it has been for 4 seasons, I would contend that we now have far more reason to be optimistic..... we clearly have a tremendous youth policy, as we now have Stearman, Mattock, King, Sheehan, Weso and Porter in or around the first team we have others, such as Gradel, showing real promise just one league down, and hopefully he will feel like a new signing when he returns and will be a real contender we seem to be playing well defensively. It's a start. Most successful teams build on sound defence. with a little more luck, frankly, we'd have beaten Blackpool, QPR and/or Stoke. we have a game in hand. most of us would settle for a season of progress, and finishing around 10th - 12th, before making a real challenge next season. we have a manager who seems happy to give youth a chance. we have the financial backing to do some business in January. The addition of an attack minded centre midfielder to play with Clemence and/or Weso, would, to my mind, make us look half decent. We don't need much more, we need a touch of class, and a touch of composure. We're still getting around 22k to 23k through the turnstiles. Win a couple on the bounce and the stadium will approach capacity, and there's every chance we'll be on a run. Even if this happens I'd still settle for finishing 10th this season, but really starting to build some momentum, and making perhaps 2 or 3 quality signings over the next 12 months whilst undertaking more pruning on the existing playing staff. no doubt there'll be some more horrible performances to endure just yet, but we're heading in the right direction.
Bellend Sebastian Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 You ceratinly live up to the first part of your username. You seem tense. Do you need a hug?
Bellend Sebastian Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Present Simple or Imperfect? I've no idea. You choose
Daggers Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Really, with defending like this what did they really expect?
Bellend Sebastian Posted 7 October 2007 Posted 7 October 2007 Really, with defending like this what did they really expect? It's supposed to be the working man's game, and here's proof that our glorious game has degenerated into some sort of interpretative dance. No wonder Kenton looks bemused, and the punters are staying away in droves
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.