Jump to content
IGNORED

Defensive frailties


Recommended Posts

NP really needs to address this asap. The squad has shown they are not up to it defensively. Firstly the question that needs to be asked is will Baker play again. Ideally this needs to be answered before the end of the window. If he not fit to play I would suggest he needs to be paid off, this will free up another wage. We need a championship pedigree defender to play alongside Kalas and this has to be the priority.  Previously with either diedhiou or martin starting provided more defensive cover from set pieces. Somenyo or wiemann do not do this. NP as a defender should be all over this

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, riddlesdown red said:

NP really needs to address this asap. The squad has shown they are not up to it defensively. Firstly the question that needs to be asked is will Baker play again. Ideally this needs to be answered before the end of the window. If he not fit to play I would suggest he needs to be paid off, this will free up another wage. We need a championship pedigree defender to play alongside Kalas and this has to be the priority.  Previously with either diedhiou or martin starting provided more defensive cover from set pieces. Somenyo or wiemann do not do this. NP as a defender should be all over this

Bakers future will ultimately be a question for the player the club and the insurers. Who knows what hoops there are there one way or another. 
 

I’m pretty confident Pearson knows where are defensive frailties are, however our financial frailties are a matter of public record and to fix issues with money is how Johnson Ashton and the Lansdowns got us here. The exact reason Pearson was brought in was to build the club on limited funds using the academy over a three year period. That’s why he has a three year contract. 
 

The fact of the matter is we can all see what we need but even if we had the cash to get that player it’s a crap shoot as to if he will be the right one. For every Webster LJ had five Engvals (minimum) 

Right now we are left in a place where we build from within. Maybe move a couple and perhaps get someone, but don’t hold your breath and to be frank I like the fact we are playing these kids as that will stand us in good stead in future. 
 

This season is a non starter as a top six competitor. Keeping well clear of the bottom 3 is what is important. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, REDOXO said:

Bakers future will ultimately be a question for the player the club and the insurers. Who knows what hoops there are there one way or another. 
 

I’m pretty confident Pearson knows where are defensive frailties are, however our financial frailties are a matter of public record and to fix issues with money is how Johnson Ashton and the Lansdowns got us here. The exact reason Pearson was brought in was to build the club on limited funds using the academy over a three year period. That’s why he has a three year contract. 
 

The fact of the matter is we can all see what we need but even if we had the cash to get that player it’s a crap shoot as to if he will be the right one. For every Webster LJ had five Engvals (minimum) 

Right now we are left in a place where we build from within. Maybe move a couple and perhaps get someone, but don’t hold your breath and to be frank I like the fact we are playing these kids as that will stand us in good stead in future. 
 

This season is a non starter as a top six competitor. Keeping well clear of the bottom 3 is what is important. 

Pretty sure @Coppellosaid that clubs tend not to have insurance for injuries….but might do if they are at at international tournament for example.

Baker, if stories have any substance, could be covered under something else though…just guessing from me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Pretty sure @Coppellosaid that clubs tend not to have insurance for injuries….but might do if they are at at international tournament for example.

Baker, if stories have any substance, could be covered under something else though…just guessing from me.

Certainly they have had external insurance in the past. But perhaps clubs self insure now and it’s contractual per the players contract.

The PFA will have insurance and of course the player himself will carry career termination insurance!

Also clubs will insure their assets , but that does not mean the player is a beneficiary of course which is what I suspect Coppello is referring to

Who knows the actual construct but one thing for sure it won’t be left to a agh well mate your done! 

Edited by REDOXO
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Top Robin said:

The defence looked dreadful today. Is it tactics or player quality..... whatever, Nige needs to sort this soon.

They looked like they couldn’t defend a high ball. But also they were struggling to defend runners from deep. That was as much as the midfield as the defense. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We haven't been a physically dominant team for about 3 years. When we had players like Flint, Baker, Magnússon, Wright, Pack etc we were able to compete, but this team struggles. I've said before that Kalas is not a dominant first ball defender and Vyner (unfortunately) isn't Champ level. The fact that Nige isn't picking Atkinson when we don't have Baker available is a worry.

The most basic requirement of any team is being able to compete physically and i'm afraid this squad struggles badly. I don't blame Nige solely for that as its been a problem for a while, but he certainly hasn't rectified it in the last 12 months.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Its most definitely the latter imo.

 

It's a bit of both. COD man marking Mitrovic at corners is suicide. Mitrovic must have looked at the pathetic way Vyner challenged him in the air and then COD standing next to him at a corner and been rubbing his hands.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Edgy Red said:

We haven't been a physically dominant team for about 3 years. When we had players like Flint, Baker, Magnússon, Wright, Pack etc we were able to compete, but this team struggles. I've said before that Kalas is not a dominant first ball defender and Vyner (unfortunately) isn't Champ level. The fact that Nige isn't picking Atkinson when we don't have Baker available is a worry.

The most basic requirement of any team is being able to compete physically and i'm afraid this squad struggles badly. I don't blame Nige solely for that as its been a problem for a while, but he certainly hasn't rectified it in the last 12 months.

We were outclassed today, but we did exactly what you say when winning at Cardiff this season.

Under Mick they relentlessly hit aerial stuff, so this isn’t true, is it?

Bit about Baker’s absence is fair but as he managed 2 games last season I think we need to look elsewhere.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, grifty said:

It's a bit of both. COD man marking Mitrovic at corners is suicide. Mitrovic must have looked at the pathetic way Vyner challenged him in the air and then COD standing next to him at a corner and been rubbing his hands.

Was definitely a strange set up with COD marking him, possibly doubled up with Scott (only saw a quick glimpse on the highlights). Also was worth taking note how Mitrovic just gives a little nudge while the ball is in flight, clever from him & we need to be stronger. COYR 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The midfield left the defence open on countless occasions today.

We have James or Williams in there and we don't get walked through time and time again.

Yes, the defence made mistakes today but Scott, King and Massengo did not contribute defensively at all.

Every time we have won at Fulham in recent years, we've won the midfield battle and defended as a team, not leaving the defence to deal with their attackers and fullbacks who were constantly overlapping and stretching us wide open which is what happened today.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Bakers future will ultimately be a question for the player the club and the insurers. Who knows what hoops there are there one way or another. 
 

I’m pretty confident Pearson knows where are defensive frailties are, however our financial frailties are a matter of public record and to fix issues with money is how Johnson Ashton and the Lansdowns got us here. The exact reason Pearson was brought in was to build the club on limited funds using the academy over a three year period. That’s why he has a three year contract. 
 

The fact of the matter is we can all see what we need but even if we had the cash to get that player it’s a crap shoot as to if he will be the right one. For every Webster LJ had five Engvals (minimum) 

Right now we are left in a place where we build from within. Maybe move a couple and perhaps get someone, but don’t hold your breath and to be frank I like the fact we are playing these kids as that will stand us in good stead in future. 
 

This season is a non starter as a top six competitor. Keeping well clear of the bottom 3 is what is important. 

So is that the priority for next season too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Edgy Red said:

We haven't been a physically dominant team for about 3 years. When we had players like Flint, Baker, Magnússon, Wright, Pack etc we were able to compete, but this team struggles. I've said before that Kalas is not a dominant first ball defender and Vyner (unfortunately) isn't Champ level. The fact that Nige isn't picking Atkinson when we don't have Baker available is a worry.

The most basic requirement of any team is being able to compete physically and i'm afraid this squad struggles badly. I don't blame Nige solely for that as its been a problem for a while, but he certainly hasn't rectified it in the last 12 months.

A bit of short term perspective.
Last week, Fulham (9changes) put out a 'decent' Championship team. We competed well, caused problems and dominated the ball for long spells. This week, Full first team out which would probably be lower Prem standard. Our midfield couldn't dominate, the forward line was too good , but we still caused problems.
IMO Pearson made mistakes with the line up, easy in hindsight, but I couldn't see how we were going to win the ball in MF. Very technical side chosen, and in Nige's opinion Vyner had been a stand out CB so chose him over Atkinson. He also wanted COD in the side, which I understand . What I would have wanted, after a very good game last week, why not have - Vyner/Kalas/Atkinson ? Stronger in the air. If you want Pring in, move Vyner to RWB. The only real physical battle we lost yesterday was Mitrovic, who was just too good for all our defence. I don't think we lost out all over. 

I think Nige is getting stuck between 2 stools. Wanting to get certain players involved, while wanting a system that doesn't suit. Not having a RB/RWB is really causing problems. Simpson must be absolute garbage in training.
 

  • Like 4
  • Flames 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Pretty sure @Coppellosaid that clubs tend not to have insurance for injuries….but might do if they are at at international tournament for example.

Baker, if stories have any substance, could be covered under something else though…just guessing from me.

I’d be putting in a claim on home insurance let’s hope we’ve got old for new replacement.

Edited by Clevedon Red
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

A bit of short term perspective.
Last week, Fulham (9changes) put out a 'decent' Championship team. We competed well, caused problems and dominated the ball for long spells. This week, Full first team out which would probably be lower Prem standard. Our midfield couldn't dominate, the forward line was too good , but we still caused problems.
IMO Pearson made mistakes with the line up, easy in hindsight, but I couldn't see how we were going to win the ball in MF. Very technical side chosen, and in Nige's opinion Vyner had been a stand out CB so chose him over Atkinson. He also wanted COD in the side, which I understand . What I would have wanted, after a very good game last week, why not have - Vyner/Kalas/Atkinson ? Stronger in the air. If you want Pring in, move Vyner to RWB. The only real physical battle we lost yesterday was Mitrovic, who was just too good for all our defence. I don't think we lost out all over. 

I think Nige is getting stuck between 2 stools. Wanting to get certain players involved, while wanting a system that doesn't suit. Not having a RB/RWB is really causing problems. Simpson must be absolute garbage in training.
 

Agree that we’re always going to struggle against the better teams with an inexperienced defence and wing backs playing out of their usual position. At the start  of this season, who would have thought that Scott, O’Dowda and Benarous would have turned out at wing back and Dasilva would have played RWB? I accept that injuries have played a part, but feel we need to get round pegs in round holes: Pring or DaSilva at LWB/LB and Vyner or Simpson at RWB/RB. Atkinson needs to be playing CB. If we don’t then have enough fit CBs to play 3 at the back, then we might have to go to a back 4 - or ideally recruit some defenders in the window. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To only have one team conceding more than us clearly shows where our problems are.  The frustrating thing is that as Pearson is a central defender, I thought we would be hard to beat and score against and that’s my biggest disappointment. As @Davefevssaid to play Vyner central after Brum was plain stupid.  With us having no money he spent £1.7m on Atkinson and he’s now not a starter. In addition he resigned Simpson all to boost our defence who also doesn’t start.

The injury to Baker is devastating as probably our best defender and would make a huge difference.  From comments, I don’t think we will see Baker again this season. However, with such a small squad and playing 3 at the back we are desperately short of options.  We have no idea if Cundy can step up & god help us if we lose Kalas.  No interest in recalling Moore but with Towler needing development, is he a better bet to have in the building although our cost base increase if we recall.

if there is a deal to be done for Palmer in swapping with Harlee Dean on loan then do it as whilst not reducing our wages, it gives us another body in an area that we are exposed in and nets out the same as nobody else is coming in for KP.

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, REDOXO said:

They looked like they couldn’t defend a high ball. But also they were struggling to defend runners from deep. That was as much as the midfield as the defense. 

Exactly this, the first 20 mins or so yesterday Fulham we denied space and time and we were keeping the ball, after that the energy levels seemed to drop and press faded away and we reverted to form not getting close enough to their midfielders and giving the ball away cheaply either through aimless longer balls or trying to be too clever. Give that midfield that much ball and time and they’ll tear you apart which is largely what happened.
 

Mitrovich is going to be a handful and I would suggest given he has 27 goals already, nobody this season has really dealt with him, therefore perhaps the focus should have been preventing the ball coming into the box rather than trying to directly counter him. You’re wasting your time if you expect Vyner to win any sort of aerial battle, and if I see him facing goal again in the 6 yd box with no idea of who is behind him it will be one time too many. That was for me one of the puzzling selections, surely Atkinson would have been a better match to go up against Mitrovich?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, eardun said:

Agree that we’re always going to struggle against the better teams with an inexperienced defence and wing backs playing out of their usual position. At the start  of this season, who would have thought that Scott, O’Dowda and Benarous would have turned out at wing back and Dasilva would have played RWB? I accept that injuries have played a part, but feel we need to get round pegs in round holes: Pring or DaSilva at LWB/LB and Vyner or Simpson at RWB/RB. Atkinson needs to be playing CB. If we don’t then have enough fit CBs to play 3 at the back, then we might have to go to a back 4 - or ideally recruit some defenders in the window. 

If we do offload some players, then have money to spend , the question is where to spend it.

Popular shouts;
Striker .....  Our scoring record isn't that bad, and yesterday we caused them problems and could have scored more.
Winger ....  Why? We haven't played with a winger for an age. If we "need" one, we have COD & Benarous.
Midfielder .. With Williams nearing fitness, James almost there and King, HNM, Bakinson and Scott already around. Do we need more?
Defence ...  Just looking at goals conceded you'd have to think yes. Depending on how highly rated Cundy is/was , we have Kalas, Vyner, Atkinson and Pring at a push. I'd say at least one short , I don't think Baker will back sadly. With Vyner looking short on confidence, Atkinson still learning this level and Pring not a true CB, another central defender could be on the Radar.
We have cover at LB/LWB Pring & JD at RB/RWB we have Simpson or Vyner. Neither of which Pearson wants there so with Tanner out for most of the season , this has to be a priority. 

However bad Simpson has been in training, and can he have been that bad, as he has made the bench. Why has he not been given a try, at least it would be round peg, round hole. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shuffle said:

To only have one team conceding more than us clearly shows where our problems are.  The frustrating thing is that as Pearson is a central defender, I thought we would be hard to beat and score against and that’s my biggest disappointment. As @Davefevssaid to play Vyner central after Brum was plain stupid.  With us having no money he spent £1.7m on Atkinson and he’s now not a starter. In addition he resigned Simpson all to boost our defence who also doesn’t start.

The injury to Baker is devastating as probably our best defender and would make a huge difference.  From comments, I don’t think we will see Baker again this season. However, with such a small squad and playing 3 at the back we are desperately short of options.  We have no idea if Cundy can step up & god help us if we lose Kalas.  No interest in recalling Moore but with Towler needing development, is he a better bet to have in the building although our cost base increase if we recall.

if there is a deal to be done for Palmer in swapping with Harlee Dean on loan then do it as whilst not reducing our wages, it gives us another body in an area that we are exposed in and nets out the same as nobody else is coming in for KP.

 

 

 

Agree with every word of this.

Simpson has been a mistake & if he cannot even make the 18 at present then the judgement surely has to be his legs have gone.

It seems highly likely that Baker won’t be back this season & who knows beyond that?

This means we are left (Kalas aside) with a lot of inexperienced defenders, though it is arguable that Vyner at 24 with circa 100 games at this level, including the Rotherham loan, cannot be seen in quite the same way as Pring, Tanner or Atkinson.

Any arrival this month therefore has to be a defensive one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

A bit of short term perspective.
Last week, Fulham (9changes) put out a 'decent' Championship team. We competed well, caused problems and dominated the ball for long spells. This week, Full first team out which would probably be lower Prem standard. Our midfield couldn't dominate, the forward line was too good , but we still caused problems.

The big difference to last week until they made subs was Mitrovic, and to a lesser extent Wilson…more on this below…and of course Nige’s team selection.
IMO Pearson made mistakes with the line up, easy in hindsight

not sure it’s in hindsight Mike, think plenty of posters voiced concerns with the line-up, and that was before we saw how it actually lined-up…which surprised me.

but I couldn't see how we were going to win the ball in MF.

I was less worried about that, my biggest concern once I saw the positions of each player was how the hell is a non-physically dominant Zak Vyner gonna cope with Mitrovic?  I might also have been concerned how Vyner at RCB (had he played there) coped with Kebano too!! But Mitro is never gonna run away from you, so you have to match him physically.  The selection of Vyner to play centrally was a mistake…and that’s not in hindsight. @Shuffle‘s highlights Brum (a) v Deeney as another example where it didn’t work.  So although Zak didn’t execute yesterday, I hold Nige responsible.  Unlike some fans, Nige making a mistake doesn’t suddenly mean he needs to be knee-jerked sacked.  Nige might argue for 25-30 mins at 2-1 up he was justified!

What was successful last week was Kalas and Pring happy to mark wide, whilst Atkinson handled whichever rotating forward found themselves central.  It enabled Scott and O’Dowda to push on, and the midfield could press with confidence that if Gazzaniga or Hector / Tosin went long, our 3 CBs would win the ball, but also our midfield would pick up the bits and pieces.

I worried all week whether Atkinson (because I expected him to start) would deal with with Mitro in the same set up, and whether our CBs might have to tuck in a bit more, thus meaning our WBs might not be able to press so high.  Our midfielders might less commit to the press if they thought the ball might stick and then see their midfield markers start running past them.

Very technical side chosen, and in Nige's opinion Vyner had been a stand out CB so chose him over Atkinson. He also wanted COD in the side, which I understand.

I understand that too, but I have started to see a slight trend (and I use both of those words on purpose) of decreasing levels of performance, but still acceptable.  What I saw yesterday was a significant drop below “acceptable”.  I felt he offered Pring little to no support against Wilson, nor did he stop Tete either.  The two had formed a good partnership last week.  Yesterday it was awful.  It meant Pring couldn’t support Vyner.  Last week, when Atkinson was struggling in a situation it was Pring covering round to get rid of any danger.  Yesterday he couldn’t do that.  I don’t agree with O’Dowda tracking Mitrovic on corners (another poor set up from Nige and his team) either, but the way he lost out to Kebano for their 6th showed up his technical and physical weaknesses in certain situations.  One player wanted the ball, the other didn’t.

So, through a combination of things, after the opening 15 mins our press broke down. We stayed in the game, even got ahead, but we got picked off with ease.  I felt sorry for King and Massengo, constantly dragged left, then bypassed by a ball infield.

What I would have wanted, after a very good game last week, why not have - Vyner/Kalas/Atkinson ? Stronger in the air. If you want Pring in, move Vyner to RWB. The only real physical battle we lost yesterday was Mitrovic, who was just too good for all our defence. I don't think we lost out all over.

you could of course have done either of those things.  I just would’ve kept the same back 5 as last week.  James not fit might’ve influenced team selection too.  Dasilva did ok defensively, but he didn’t really help us retain the ball when we had it…most of it was by going back to Kalas.

I think Nige is getting stuck between 2 stools. Wanting to get certain players involved, while wanting a system that doesn't suit. Not having a RB/RWB is really causing problems. Simpson must be absolute garbage in training.

Last week we played an almost perfect 352, against still a very decent Fulham.  Yesterday the weaknesses of a 352 were exploited.  Much of that down to Fulham.  Some of it down to 2 players playing well below par.  You can’t go to Fulham unless everyone has decent games.  That’s not scapegoating those two players, just my opinion of their performance yesterday, being well below everyone else.  Re Vyner I think Nige was (for once) deflecting from poor team selection. Re O’Dowda, I hope this was a one-off.
 

Comments above ⬆️⬆️⬆️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to wonder if Pearson is definitely the right man for the job.............when after nearly a year in the job he continues to put square pegs in round holes .   While i appreciate he  is limited in his selections, tactically he is not helping himself.  Fulham are an exceptional side, but we made it so,  so easy for them?  He needs to show us that he is getting the hang of it with team selection next week, he owes us that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

not sure it’s in hindsight Mike, think plenty of posters voiced concerns with the line-up, and that was before we saw how it actually lined-up…which surprised me.

Well, I said hindsight as I really wasn't sure how we would shape up. If Kalas would have taken Mitrovic, it leaves 2 very mobile sweepers to defend as normal. 
I agree about Vyner playing RCB, he's done well there. I don't think Pearson has been impressed with Atkinson for a while , and a good game week wasn't enough to make him think he was the right man to go up against Mitrovic. I see it the other way, he much better equipped than Zak and he's much more physical.

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

What I saw yesterday was a significant drop below “acceptable”.  I felt he offered Pring little to no support against Wilson, nor did he stop Tete either.

COD has done pretty well lately, but having a think about the games, he has had a fairly easy run. QPR , Albert gave him every opportunity to run into empty grass, even Fulham he had plenty of space. He hasn't had to do too much donkey work and yesterday that seemed to show.
I thought yesterday was the day for Pring to move to WB, we know they want to supply crosses and COD isn't the best cover.

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Dasilva did ok defensively, but he didn’t really help us retain the ball when we had it…most of it was by going back to Kalas.

I thought it was a big ask for him to play there, against probably the best side in the division. Nige doesn't think he's good enough for RB/RWB, I doubt he'll improve on his wrong side. Bit tongue in cheek there, but it highlights how desperate we are for cover. 

I do think there was a bit of "nothing to lose" about the team. Sadly, far from throwing up answers, it just posed more questions. Nobody covered themselves in glory, apart from Semenyo of course. 
You have to think Atkinson comes in against Cardiff, but for who?
The other change you would expect is James comes in (fitness allowing). Probably for HNM, who was (like many) below Par. 
I would have a question mark over COD, but as (I think) Cardiff play WB's, I'd keep him in to exploit the space.

I see they had a CB sent off and Flint came on.  I wonder if the stars are lining up for Antoine's first hat trick :thumbsup:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, maxjak said:

You have to wonder if Pearson is definitely the right man for the job.............when after nearly a year in the job he continues to put square pegs in round holes .   While i appreciate he  is limited in his selections, tactically he is not helping himself.  Fulham are an exceptional side, but we made it so,  so easy for them?  He needs to show us that he is getting the hang of it with team selection next week, he owes us that?

I won’t be defining Nige by yesterday.  Overall I’m still more than happy with the progress we are making.  Ultimately we don’t have a very good squad, whatever some say, it is unbalanced in that it requires players to play in less favourable roles / position regardless of formation.  Couple that with inconsistency and you’re gonna get games like that, whether it’s Fulham or other team capable on their day (okay maybe not a hammering but a defeat).

The “nearly a year” is a bit of an irrelevance in my eyes.  That’s just me…last season’s squad that was available to him post-window (let’s not forget he couldn’t change it) and the financial constraints mean he was literally just trying to get us to the seasons end.  I honestly think that if relegation was on the cards he’d have set up for some 0-0s and eked us over the line…but it didn’t really become a threat.

So he started his reign in the summer for me…his first chance to put a squad together, severely hamstring financially.  We are 16th, probably 17th if Swansea pick up points in their game in hand.

He will continue to make team selections that look like mistakes but as fans we have short memories. We bemoan playing Alex Scott as RWB when we lose, but not when we win.  How does that work.

Ultimately we need all the team (or the vast majority) to function to grind out results.  We will see more bumps in the road across the remaining 20 games no doubt.  Some of those might be in games that fans perceive we should win easily.  I don’t think we will any easy games, if we play well in games we will generally pick up points.

I think we will pick up enough points quickly enough to not even have to look over our shoulder.  We are 11 points clear of Peterborough.

Yesterday was a bad day in the office for Nige imho, and I’m sure deep down he knows he got it wrong, hence his somewhat defensive / defective response in the post-match interview.

  • Like 4
  • Flames 1
  • Robin 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...