Gavin Williams

[bs3]

Williams should of played last night. He played well and impressed on Saturday even know he was only on for 10 mins.

Why doesn't Johson like a creative player in midfield. Is it because it might show up his son who is a so called creative player but don't create anything.

Did Johnson pick a weak midfield so he can bring his son back into the team at the early oppotunitiy unlike last season when he had to wait to the Play off final and shuffle his pack to accomadate his son.

[windmillhillred]

Did Johnson pick a weak midfield so he can bring his son back into the team at the early oppotunitiy unlike last season when he had to wait to the Play off final and shuffle his pack to accomadate his son.

Yes, I'm sure he wanted to lose...

Utterly unbelievable.

[Tunley Legend]

Yes, I'm sure he wanted to lose...

Utterly unbelievable.

Thats the bit that concerns me. I believe, the same as you, that Johnson is actually TRYING HIS BEST but unfortunately his best has seen us amass one victory in our last nine games against a p1$$ poor Southampton outfit.

[bs3]

Yes, I'm sure he wanted to lose...

Utterly unbelievable.

Is it? I wonder.

Tell me why he don 't play Williams or Noble in midfield.

And why he didn't play Carle he the centre of midfield, because I am at a complete loss.

[BCFC_Dan]

Did Johnson pick a weak midfield so he can bring his son back into the team at the early oppotunitiy unlike last season when he had to wait to the Play off final and shuffle his pack to accomadate his son.

Um. Lee Johnson didn't start the playoff final. He had to come on when Bradley Orr went off injured. Please tell me you're not somehow accusing Gary Johnson of deliberately getting Bradley Orr injured so that he could substitute his son on?

[Tunley Legend]

Um. Lee Johnson didn't start the playoff final. He had to come on when Bradley Orr went off injured. Please tell me you're not somehow accusing Gary Johnson of deliberately getting Bradley Orr injured so that he could substitute his son on?

Obviously not. Although his decision to bring LJ on and put the best player in our team into a position where he could have no true effect on the game would hardly have counted as a serious entry for Mastermind.

[windmillhillred]

Is it? I wonder.

Yes, it is.

And as for your play-off rant - I would be grateful for a one word answer to this:

Do you believe that Gary Johnson deliberately weakened the side to bring Lee Johnson on for the play-off final?

[Lack of Action Man]

Williams should of played last night. He played well and impressed on Saturday even know he was only on for 10 mins.

Why doesn't Johson like a creative player in midfield. Is it because it might show up his son who is a so called creative player but don't create anything.

Did Johnson pick a weak midfield so he can bring his son back into the team at the early oppotunitiy unlike last season when he had to wait to the Play off final and shuffle his pack to accomadate his son.

Yes, I'm sure he wanted to lose...

Utterly unbelievable.

Come on, give the original poster a chance. The topic that Gary wont play a stronger more creative midfield than one that has his son in it is one that I consistently hear floating around the Williams at the moment. More so than the smell of those pies...

Whether it is deliberate negligance or just sheer dim wittedness we are going to have to put up with the fact that Gary considers Lj our "creative" midfielder and none of the players who could do a really decent job there (Williams, Noble) will play there because they are better used out of position (Williams on the right wing why???)

[bh_red]

Come on, give the original poster a chance. The topic that Gary wont play a stronger more creative midfield than one that has his son in it is one that I consistently hear floating around the Williams at the moment. More so than the smell of those pies...

Whether it is deliberate negligance or just sheer dim wittedness we are going to have to put up with the fact that Gary considers Lj our "creative" midfielder and none of the players who could do a really decent job there (Williams, Noble) will play there because they are better used out of position (Williams on the right wing why???)

totally agree, not sure why the orginal poster is getting hammered.

personally speaking, despite the results of the last 2 games, the midfield has actually seemed stronger than in the previous 6-7 game. Personally I'd rather have Elliott and Skuse than Elliott and LJ, based on what I've seen.

As midfield unit, as in the whole 4 of them, we do seem better.

[windmillhillred]

Come on, give the original poster a chance. The topic that Gary wont play a stronger more creative midfield than one that has his son in it is one that I consistently hear floating around the Williams at the moment. More so than the smell of those pies...

It's rubbish, simply because the same people who say 'he won't play a creative midfielder just in case he's better than Lee' also say 'He'll play Lee whatever happens.'

[bs3]

Yes, it is.

And as for your play-off rant - I would be grateful for a one word answer to this:

Do you believe that Gary Johnson deliberately weakened the side to bring Lee Johnson on for the play-off final?

By bringing on LJ and moving Marv to full back he weakened the team when there was other and better options he could have made. So a one word answer YES.

Blood is thicker than water!

[windmillhillred]

totally agree, not sure why the orginal poster is getting hammered.

Because by saying 'Did Johnson pick a weak midfield so he can bring his son back into the team at the early oppotunitiy ' he is suggesting that Johnson is deliberately engineering defeats in order to get Lee into the side. Which is clearly either b***ocks, or means that Johnson doesn't have one iota of professionalism in his body.

I'll go with the former.

[windmillhillred]

Yes, it is.

By bringing on LJ and moving Marv to full back he weakened the team when there was other and better options he could have made. So a one word answer YES.

Blood is thicker than water!

I'm grateful for your honesty.

I'm slightly perplexed by your idea that Gary would deliberately weaken the team, fore-going the Premier League and the fame, cash and glory that goes with it, to give Lee a run-out at Wembley.

[BCFC_Dan]

Obviously not. Although his decision to bring LJ on and put the best player in our team into a position where he could have no true effect on the game would hardly have counted as a serious entry for Mastermind.

What would you have done then? I've just had a look at the line-ups (to save you the hassle: Basso;Orr,Carey,Fontaine,McAllister;Noble,Elliot,Carle,McIndoe;Adebola,Trundle Subs: Weale, Johnson, Vasko, Sproule, Byfield)

The only viable option I can really see is to bring on Vasko and either play him at right back (which I don't think he'd ever done before) or play Carey at right back with Vasko in the middle (which would involve breaking up the central defensive partnership and leave it lacking leadership). Given that Elliot had at least played right back a number of times before I think it looks like Johnson took the best option in a difficult situation.

You could, of course, argue that he should have included Wilson or Skuse in the squad - indeed I'd say there was a strong case for including a player with such flexibility, but then who does he leave out? I suppose you might suggest Lee Johnson but I don't think leaving out a player who'd been a first team regular until his injury is something many managers would do.

[windmillhillred]

What would you have done then? I've just had a look at the line-ups (to save you the hassle: Basso;Orr,Carey,Fontaine,McAllister;Noble,Elliot,Carle,McIndoe;Adebola,Trundle Subs: Weale, Johnson, Vasko, Sproule, Byfield)

The only viable option I can really see is to bring on Vasko and either play him at right back (which I don't think he'd ever done before) or play Carey at right back with Vasko in the middle (which would involve breaking up the central defensive partnership and leave it lacking leadership). Given that Elliot had at least played right back a number of times before I think it looks like Johnson took the best option in a difficult situation.

You could, of course, argue that he should have included Wilson or Skuse in the squad - indeed I'd say there was a strong case for including a player with such flexibility, but then who does he leave out? I suppose you might suggest Lee Johnson but I don't think leaving out a player who'd been a first team regular until his injury is something many managers would do.

Sanity at last.

[Will Rollason]

Windmill, if you reply to these threads it only encourages them to post more, especially when the chips are down like now. Hit the ignore button mate.

[Lack of Action Man]

totally agree, not sure why the orginal poster is getting hammered.

personally speaking, despite the results of the last 2 games, the midfield has actually seemed stronger than in the previous 6-7 game. Personally I'd rather have Elliott and Skuse than Elliott and LJ, based on what I've seen.

As midfield unit, as in the whole 4 of them, we do seem better.

The original poster is getting hammered because these people assume we are saying Gary is deliberately weakening the side possibly with the intention of detrimental results. We or I and you are not saying that at all. I'm saying that Gary could be biased but he could also be under the professional opinion that Lee is the best creative midfielder. It is something we have to put up with.

[windmillhillred]

The original poster is getting hammered because these people assume we are saying Gary is deliberately weakening the side possibly with the intention of detrimental results. We or I and you are not saying that at all.

So what does: "Is it because it might show up his son who is a so called creative player but don't create anything." mean if it doesn't suggest he's biased.

[RedM]

Several posts have been removed from this thread due to personal insults. Please debate the topic and add opinions without insulting eachother.

[Tunley Legend]

What would you have done then? I've just had a look at the line-ups (to save you the hassle: Basso;Orr,Carey,Fontaine,McAllister;Noble,Elliot,Carle,McIndoe;Adebola,Trundle Subs: Weale, Johnson, Vasko, Sproule, Byfield)

The only viable option I can really see is to bring on Vasko and either play him at right back (which I don't think he'd ever done before) or play Carey at right back with Vasko in the middle (which would involve breaking up the central defensive partnership and leave it lacking leadership). Given that Elliot had at least played right back a number of times before I think it looks like Johnson took the best option in a difficult situation.

You could, of course, argue that he should have included Wilson or Skuse in the squad - indeed I'd say there was a strong case for including a player with such flexibility, but then who does he leave out? I suppose you might suggest Lee Johnson but I don't think leaving out a player who'd been a first team regular until his injury is something many managers would do.

Putting the best player in the side in the position where he could have the least effect on the game was not the best option in my view. I would have brought Vasko on in the middle (it wasn't like Hull were battering us) and put Carey on the right (again, it wasn't like they had a flying left winger who was going to do him for pace time and again).

[SJC]

Somebody claiming that the manager deliberately plays a weakened team in order that he can re-introduce his {rubbish} son clearly has absolutely no idea what they are talking about and, in my opinion, is fair game to be told how ridiculous that opinion is and what a (insert colourful word) they are being. I'm sure the original poster is a charming individual in the flesh, doesnt change the fact his opinion portrays him as a moron.

[BS3_RED]

Because by saying 'Did Johnson pick a weak midfield so he can bring his son back into the team at the early oppotunitiy ' he is suggesting that Johnson is deliberately engineering defeats in order to get Lee into the side. Which is clearly either b***ocks, or means that Johnson doesn't have one iota of professionalism in his body.

I'll go with the former.

No he is not. He said making a weaker midfield.

In other words, playing Scuse instead of Noble or Williams as it will be easier for Lee to get his place back from Scuse.

[sh1t_ref_again]

Irrespective of what GJ reasons behind not playing Noble or Williams in the middle with Elliott, I think most fans would like to see one of them playing in their natural positions and given a chance to create the flair we are missing.

Whilst playing Ivan at home (don't rate him, although had a good game against Swansea) I am not sure wingers are a good idea away from home, particulaly where we got thumped 6-0 lst year.

So who plays on the right?

Although I was not thrilled at Skuse playing in the middle he has done very well, so do you play Noble in the middle (most gifted player at the club) with Skuse or Williams out right?

[Tunley Legend]

Irrespective of what GJ reasons behind not playing Noble or Williams in the middle with Elliott, I think most fans would like to see one of them playing in their natural positions and given a chance to create the flair we are missing.

Whilst playing Ivan at home (don't rate him, although had a good game against Swansea) I am not sure wingers are a good idea away from home, particulaly where we got thumped 6-0 lst year.

So who plays on the right?

Although I was not thrilled at Skuse playing in the middle he has done very well, so do you play Noble in the middle (most gifted player at the club) with Skuse or Williams out right?

Or do you play a proper full back at right back and give Wilson the nod on the right hand side of midfield?

[BCFC_Dan]

Putting the best player in the side in the position where he could have the least effect on the game was not the best option in my view. I would have brought Vasko on in the middle (it wasn't like Hull were battering us) and put Carey on the right (again, it wasn't like they had a flying left winger who was going to do him for pace time and again).

Fair enough. We'll never know what would have happened had Johnson done that so it's pointless speculating. I think, though, that his decision was based more on a desire to keep Carey in the middle than to get Lee on the pitch.

[sh1t_ref_again]

Or do you play a proper full back at right back and give Wilson the nod on the right hand side of midfield?

Thats a very good point, I had forgot about Wilson. Away from home this would add a bit more defensive cover as well as a player who is better and more inteligent than Sproul going forward. Leaves us with right back, now theres a problem!!

[windmillhillred]

No he is not. He said making a weaker midfield.

In other words, playing Scuse instead of Noble or Williams as it will be easier for Lee to get his place back from Scuse.

Yes, and suggesting we are deliberately playing a weaker midfield deliberately makes the team weaker - it's not a huge jump of logic. People who are saying it are accussing Johnson of gross misconduct effectively.

As I said previously, most of the 'Skuse is only being played to make it easy for Lee to get back in the team' crowd, also believe that Lee's name is first on the team sheet.

[William Stand]

Putting the best player in the side in the position where he could have the least effect on the game was not the best option in my view. I would have brought Vasko on in the middle (it wasn't like Hull were battering us) and put Carey on the right (again, it wasn't like they had a flying left winger who was going to do him for pace time and again).

Arguably Elliott was nowhere near as good after Xmas last season, I would say at the time of the PO final Carey was in fact our best player. So you could say it was a decision about keeping our best player, our best defender in his best position as there was carnage in the defence all around him (McCombe out before the game & Orr carted off). Had he moved Carey to RB we would have played an hour with 1 of our 1st choice back 4 playing in their regular position.

The only problem with my theory is that it doesn't help support the absurd notion that one of the most successful managers in the lower leagues over the past 5 years has achieved great things whilst handicapping his team by deliberately playing a poor player in possibly the most important position on the pitch.

[bcfc4ever]

Putting the best player in the side in the position where he could have the least effect on the game was not the best option in my view. I would have brought Vasko on in the middle (it wasn't like Hull were battering us) and put Carey on the right (again, it wasn't like they had a flying left winger who was going to do him for pace time and again).

You say they didn't have a flying left winger but they had Campbell in the middle. Now are you saying you would really want McCombe & Vasko up against Campbell? He would have ripped them to shreds with his pace as neither were very good against pacy front men?

[bully]

You say they didn't have a flying left winger but they had Campbell in the middle. Now are you saying you would really want McCombe & Vasko up against Campbell? He would have ripped them to shreds with his pace as neither were very good against pacy front men?

I don't think Louis Carey is quicker than Vasko so he should have been brought on - I am not an anti LJ ranter, but I do believe that GJ is biased towards his son.

If LJ was totally shite then I don't think he'd dare select him, but if he's ticking along without doing too much wrong then its an easy decision for the manager.

If that's me calling GJ unprofessional then so be it, but it's no different to a new manager joining a club and effectively getting an existing backroom staff sacked, so he can bring his mates in .

I don't think he avoided picking Noble or Williams the past two games because they'd show his son up as inferior - he needed (and still needs) to beef up in the centre so Skuse and Elliot is logical - i'd like to see it again, but suspect that will only happen in a 5 man midfield with LJ back in.