Silvio Dante

I’ll go the earliest of anyone and say the season was over when we sold our best player and out of pure spite and dislike to the manager didn’t make funds available for a replacement. Notably, those funds became magically available in January via the bid for Azaz and signing of Twine. So, in hindsight, August.

See you in a few days Lez mate. Look forward to the next account.

Keep up, he was on holiday so couldnt get on here. That bloody World Wide Web and its misleading name. @Moderator - Unless I’ve understood the terms of the forum incorrectly then banned users aren’t allowed to sign up under a new ID (as has happened here as the signup was on Thursday, conveniently the day after @Ian M barred a couple of his other IDs. I believe Lezzie here had just admitted to a breach of forum rules and in order to keep this account active must provide you with his prior accounts so you can check his reason for bans and determine if he is allowed to post. Rules. Just like understanding formations, they’re bastards.

For once I agree with you, a number of forum posters have said what you’re saying. There was Lez, there was Zuni, there was Londoner, there was Dog, there was you, there was Hunstanton Red, there was CiaCru…..

“Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter”

In effect, the best eleven players don’t make the best team.

Fair comment. It probably comes down to short term va long term thinking - I think the overarching point is this; we’ve been on a good run (and results wise we still are) - and there have been positive signs of “intent” on how we want to play next season. With nothing on the game (for us) it was an ideal opportunity both to see JKL (or what’s the point in him being in the squad) and to help the players get used to their roles in the current system - in essence we have the opportunity for an extended pre season / time on the grass. What we instead did is put players in positions they haven’t been playing (and are unlikely to play under normal circumstances) and consequently lost a lot of rhythm and shape. We also lost the opportunity to see if our current “first sub” centre back can play at this level - and it’s unlikely we’ll get another opportunity. We ultimately got out of jail with a 1-1 draw. But we prioritised “today” (which ultimately means nothing) over longer term development, and took a step down in performance. So, arguable that “right” decision in terms of result - and nobody knows how well we would have played if we had not shifted things around - but for me, wrong decision both in the message to young players, and moreso for the overall development of the team.

Cheers Lez, always good to hear from you.

Funnily enough Niges last game against Cardiff came into my head as I was leaving the stadium today. In that game he had the “testicular fortitude” to play Joseph James and also bring on Jamie Knight Lebel for a debut. The rejigs needed were necessary that day, and he had the courage to involve people who hadn’t been anywhere near the first team. This is where I think I have more of a problem than you with today, while fully acknowledging it’s better to play a “youngster” if they have experience next to them. But we had a natural defender who’s been good enough to be on the bench for 25 odd games (so more experience than Nige had available) and chose not to use him - instead doing multiple positional moves which stifled how we played - and weren’t needed. Injuries or not, there was a tactical decision made - and it was the wrong one (and that isn’t benefit of hindsight). If I’m Jamie Knight-Lebel, and I have no idea if he would have played well or not, I’m spitting bloody feathers tonight and wondering if it’s worth it. The decisions made today have likely disillusioned the only academy player (that wasn’t involved regularly before) who has got anywhere near the first team consistently under Liam. It was a really, really bad call on so many levels - injuries or not.

There really isn’t any compelling reason to sign him is there? However, I am getting decidedly Kasey Palmer vibes. An underwhelming loan spell that doesn’t demand he’s signed permanently but a manager who thinks he can make him into a standout player, then us stuck with a player on big wages that we need to somehow offload….

Well. It’s fair to say that Liam is not the best thing that’s ever happened to us. And I’ve been consistent on that - it’s not one of my ever changing moods. I don’t see him shouting us to the top any time soon, irrespective of how much of the money go round he gets this long hot summer. Have you ever had it blue?

It’s really not. To give a parallel, let’s say you were a big fan of Star Wars and loved the original films. They were entertaining, fun and guaranteed you a good time. Now, The Phantom Menace comes out and George Lucas (in this case akin to Brian Tinnion) promises you a front foot film full of entertainment. You then watch it and it’s an interminable bore about trade routes, with the comedy relief in Jar Jar Binks being painfully unfunny. Nobody would blame you for walking out of that cinema. Nobody.

But…other than that you’re relatively happy, right?

Today undid a proportion of the good work from Blackburn, Plymouth and Leicester - precisely because of the style. Post Easter, I’ve used the word “intent” a lot - we have looked to move the ball quicker and we’ve been a better side for it. Today, we didn’t. And the largest part of that was due to the unenforced changes (McCrorie to CB, Sykes to WB, and especially Knight to AM). I said at half time that there was a huge gap between the back and front of the team, particularly because up top Twine didn’t seem to be interested unless the ball was directly to his feet (I made my mind up on him today - there are sparks of creativity but it’s not a deal I’d do). So, we ended up without the ability to move the ball quickly through the thirds. As a result it was back to sideways and backwards passes - precisely because there was no other ball on - and if I’m being picky, that was due to the way we set up forcing us into that style as opposed to the players choosing that style. Today, we saw again that Liam is a naturally cautious coach. Maybe he felt he earnt the right to be so today through the current run. But it failed - pretty badly. And all it did was raise the question again of “Did we play with that intent recently as it was the only way to save his job?”

You are right - I read 22nd June as age 22.

I’d be 100% that Twine is his and 99% that Medube is.

In respect of the last line, I kind of hope he does. If he “betrays” us and goes to another club it’s likely that opportunity will arise if he’s done well/acceptably for a period. I’m in no doubt he’ll leave at the first available bus that takes him to a higher location. He owed Oxford and didn’t stay - he owes us nothing and is a polarising figure at best so his incentive to stay is arguably less than at Oxford. But, if I had to put money on it, based on what we’ve seen so far, he’s more likely to leave with his sandwiches in a roadmap. My hope is that if he does make signings they are better than Murphy (injured), Twine (indifferent), Mebude (God knows) because if they aren’t we could be left in a little bit of a pickle if and when that does happen.

At the time of the Huddersfield goal we’d had one shot on target that I recall - a tame edge of box effort from James. We had more ball second half yes but the chance creation remained pretty limited and there wasn’t a great sense we could get back in the game. Add in that it was a nothing game for us and the result really didn’t matter either way (performance did - and that was below par - but that’s another thread), and there wasn’t a compelling reason for people to want to stay. I missed seeing the penalty but left in added time. I don’t overly regret that decision tbh and wouldn’t knock people for leaving earlier than that.

Damn them all..

He’s had a couple of “moments” - the dummy on about 30 minutes and a decent free kick delivery. He’s not massively keen to engage, and I know that’s not his game. There was one ball up on around 40 minutes which the centre half won and Twine didn’t even make it difficult - he basically moved out of the way to give the path. As I said, the gap between front and back is huge but Scott, for me, is not doing enough to involve himself or make himself an option when up there.

Forseeable. Losing Vyner was a blow but we compounded it by moving McCrorie, and therefore taking out that attacking threat, Sykes, and therefore taking out a player who is on an assist a game at present from an area where he could do so, and Knight, and therefore losing the link between the back and front part of the pitch as James/Williams are sitting far deeper. From the sideline, the gap (dislocation) between front and back is huge. We’re ceding most of the pitch as a result. I’m not saying playing Knight-Lebel would have led to a better performance. But losing one player through injury and then causing four issues is a bit careless at best.

I do agree on the last part if it’s “incidentals” - the distinction I’m probably making is between a JKL who has been on the bench all season and the bench fillers for fillers sake. If you’re on the bench for 60% of the season you should be trusted to start if needed.

22 years old, attacking midfielder. Loan spells at quite a few local clubs including the mighty Yate. Not a name I expected on the bench as he seems to play in a position we’re well covered for today and may well not be renewed in the summer. As I said earlier, I’d have probably gone Campbell-Slowey for no other reasons than position, age and definitely here next year.

True enough, and I do acknowledge the point though about playing him without anyone who does have experience may be a factor. There are two relatively straightforward points for me: - Your subs should broadly be players who you can trust to play a decent part in the game if needed. Obvious exceptions when you have things like Backwell today, but JKL has been on the bench for, what, 25 games? Hes a consistent first team squad member and when an opportunity arises in his natural position to start, we rejig the side instead. Regardless of the merits of the call, he’s got to be feeling pretty shitty right now - and it does also call into question as to if he’s worth the place on the bench - By making the call we have, I think the game becomes a bit more “pressure” than otherwise it would. Experiment and things don’t work, fine. Fall back on experience and rejig the side through choice - less patience if we do perform badly. Hopefully all moot at 4:45 and we win 17-0 with JKL and potentially Backwell getting decent time off the bench.

I’d envisage that some of the stat there would be dependant on turnover of players. I can get on board with that if you have a squad that’s winning at the back end of one season then if that squad is largely stable at the start of the next season the style of play, positions etc are well ingrained and there’s less bedding in on a new year. The issue here is that 4 of our starting eleven have doubts over whether they’ll be here next year and if they aren’t, I’m not sure a win here correlates to anything next year.