A Few Suggestions

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

1. Stop ******* picking four ******* central ******* midfielders for ****'s sake.

2. Stop ******* picking four ******* central ******* midfielders for ****'s sake.

3. Stop ******* picking four ******* central ******* midfielders for ****'s sake.

4. Sno is not a right sided player, play him in the middle or bench him.

5. Don't play Saborio when he's just got his arse off a plane ahead of a fully fit Clarkson, you missed a great opportunity to take the pressure off Saborio without breaking his confidence.

6. Don't leave it until 70 minutes to make a change on some misguided principle that it might be too early. When 13,000 people can tell you exactly what is wrong half time is not soon enough to change it.

7. Don't sell your only good wide player without a replacement already signed.

8. Stop ******* picking four ******* central ******* midfielders for ****'s sake.

Is this meant to be funny? If so, it fails dismally. Johnson's job is to pick what he sees as the best team at his disposal, and I trust him to do that and to admit, as he has done in the past, if he gets it wrong. The idea that a modern footballer can't play in more than one position is depressing. The premier league is full of players who can play either in central midfield or on the flanks (Gerrard springs readily to mind) and we have players who can do the same, if necessary. If Sno is as good a footballer as people say, then I don't see why he can't play on the right side of midfield, in the same way that David Noble did in the last few games of the play-off season. I don't know what makes you think that a) Saborio was unfit and b) Clarkson was fully fit, but I'm sure that Johnson picked the player he thought most up to the task. I would imagine that after the disappointment of the Costa Rica/USA match, Saborio would have been raring to go. He did sign a replacement for McIndoe, but unfortunately that didn't work out and the player has now left the club. Do you honestly think that Johnson is stupid? Do you really believe that he can't see things that you can?

And finally, why on earth would Johnson want to take advice from people on this forum. The notion that 13,000 people all see games the same is naive in the extreme.

We are two points away from the play-offs, with a squad including new players and which is recovering from injury and illness. We drew a match we might have won on Saturday. Its hardly the end of the world is it? So why the ludicrous over-reactions from fans who, as usual, always think they know better than the manager. I really thought Bradley's intervention on Radio Bristol on Saturday might have humbled a few of the know-it-alls who think they have a god-given right to rant and criticise, but it doesn't seem to have made a ha'porth of difference.

Stop ******* telling a ******* good manager how to do his ******* job, and let him get on with it, for ****'s sake.

[Nibor]

Is this meant to be funny? If so, it fails dismally. Johnson's job is to pick what he sees as the best team at his disposal, and I trust him to do that and to admit, as he has done in the past, if he gets it wrong. The idea that a modern footballer can't play in more than one position is depressing. The premier league is full of players who can play either in central midfield or on the flanks (Gerrard springs readily to mind) and we have players who can do the same, if necessary. If Sno is as good a footballer as people say, then I don't see why he can't play on the right side of midfield, in the same way that David Noble did in the last few games of the play-off season. I don't know what makes you think that a) Saborio was unfit and b) Clarkson was fully fit, but I'm sure that Johnson picked the player he thought most up to the task. I would imagine that after the disappointment of the Costa Rica/USA match, Saborio would have been raring to go. He did sign a replacement for McIndoe, but unfortunately that didn't work out and the player has now left the club. Do you honestly think that Johnson is stupid? Do you really believe that he can't see things that you can?

And finally, why on earth would Johnson want to take advice from people on this forum. The notion that 13,000 people all see games the same is naive in the extreme.

We are two points away from the play-offs, with a squad including new players and which is recovering from injury and illness. We drew a match we might have won on Saturday. Its hardly the end of the world is it? So why the ludicrous over-reactions from fans who, as usual, always think they know better than the manager. I really thought Bradley's intervention on Radio Bristol on Saturday might have humbled a few of the know-it-alls who think they have a god-given right to rant and criticise, but it doesn't seem to have made a ha'porth of difference.

Stop ******* telling a ******* good manager how to do his ******* job, and let him get on with it, for ****'s sake.

I'm sure your questions were rhetorical but I'll answer them anyway.

I know that Saborio wasn't 100% because I know he played 90 minutes for his country in a game that ended at about 3am Thursday UK time and then had an 8 hour flight and didn't arrive back in the UK until pm on Thursday. If you think two days recovery including a transatlantic flight is sufficient recovery then you are wrong.

I know Clarkson was because GJ said he was.

I know Blackman wasn't brought as a replacement for McIndoe but as one for the future for the same reason.

We missed the three players we attempted to sign as a replacement - they were Yeates, Sinclair and Martin.

I don't think GJ is stupid, I DO think sometimes fans see things he doesn't and that he isn't always right.

Why would Johnson want to take advice from people on here? He wouldn't - clearly. But there are plenty of occasions in the past where he'd have been well served to do so.

Is it the end of the world? Of course not, but it is very frustrating to see obvious flaws in the tactics and selection continue for a number of games and if they do we are definitely not going to improve on last seasons league position or entertainment value.

A few questions for you:

Why do you think a city forum exists if not for fans to express opinions?

When exactly has GJ ever admitted getting any team selection wrong?

Why do you think picking four central midfielders at home to a weak side is a good idea?

Why do you think that just because Steven Gerrard can be effective from the right Evander Sno should be?

Why do you consider this to be a ludicrous over reaction but you think describing Sno as consistently rubbish and saying you'd send back to Ajax now given the chance isn't one?

[Economou]

We can't expect Nicky to convert EVERY chance he gets although his goals to chance ratio must be really good. We need to be more attacking and give him some taps ins to add to his great strikes. In the words of Stephen Hendry "I'd rather lose trying to win than lose trying not to lose". Against Peterboro who haven't won in five I think a more attacking policy should have been adopted. Stating the bl**ding obvious!

From where I was stood on Saturday it was a tap in ! Agree with your general synopsis.

[Mr Gow]

I'm sure your questions were rhetorical but I'll answer them anyway.

I know that Saborio wasn't 100% because I know he played 90 minutes for his country in a game that ended at about 3am Thursday UK time and then had an 8 hour flight and didn't arrive back in the UK until pm on Thursday. If you think two days recovery including a transatlantic flight is sufficient recovery then you are wrong.

I know Clarkson was because GJ said he was.

I know Blackman wasn't brought as a replacement for McIndoe but as one for the future for the same reason.

We missed the three players we attempted to sign as a replacement - they were Yeates, Sinclair and Martin.

I don't think GJ is stupid, I DO think sometimes fans see things he doesn't and that he isn't always right.

Why would Johnson want to take advice from people on here? He wouldn't - clearly. But there are plenty of occasions in the past where he'd have been well served to do so.

Is it the end of the world? Of course not, but it is very frustrating to see obvious flaws in the tactics and selection continue for a number of games and if they do we are definitely not going to improve on last seasons league position or entertainment value.

A few questions for you:

Why do you think a city forum exists if not for fans to express opinions?

When exactly has GJ ever admitted getting any team selection wrong?

Why do you think picking four central midfielders at home to a weak side is a good idea?

Why do you think that just because Steven Gerrard can be effective from the right Evander Sno should be?

Why do you consider this to be a ludicrous over reaction but you think describing Sno as consistently rubbish and saying you'd send back to Ajax now given the chance isn't one?

I be awaiting his reply too Nibor

[Chivs]

Just remind me what number was Gj on sat?????????????

He was Number One. What's your point?

Oh, hang on, you're saying that the rubbish served up on Saturday wasn't Gary's fault because he wasn't playing.

Interesting take on "managership".

[Tunley Legend]

Is this meant to be funny? If so, it fails dismally. Johnson's job is to pick what he sees as the best team at his disposal, and I trust him to do that and to admit, as he has done in the past, if he gets it wrong. The idea that a modern footballer can't play in more than one position is depressing. The premier league is full of players who can play either in central midfield or on the flanks (Gerrard springs readily to mind) and we have players who can do the same, if necessary. If Sno is as good a footballer as people say, then I don't see why he can't play on the right side of midfield, in the same way that David Noble did in the last few games of the play-off season. I don't know what makes you think that a) Saborio was unfit and b) Clarkson was fully fit, but I'm sure that Johnson picked the player he thought most up to the task. I would imagine that after the disappointment of the Costa Rica/USA match, Saborio would have been raring to go. He did sign a replacement for McIndoe, but unfortunately that didn't work out and the player has now left the club. Do you honestly think that Johnson is stupid? Do you really believe that he can't see things that you can?

And finally, why on earth would Johnson want to take advice from people on this forum. The notion that 13,000 people all see games the same is naive in the extreme.

We are two points away from the play-offs, with a squad including new players and which is recovering from injury and illness. We drew a match we might have won on Saturday. Its hardly the end of the world is it? So why the ludicrous over-reactions from fans who, as usual, always think they know better than the manager. I really thought Bradley's intervention on Radio Bristol on Saturday might have humbled a few of the know-it-alls who think they have a god-given right to rant and criticise, but it doesn't seem to have made a ha'porth of difference.

Stop ******* telling a ******* good manager how to do his ******* job, and let him get on with it, for ****'s sake.

If you can't handle people coming onto a football forum and expressing an opinion then why come on? What do you think this football forum is for? To agree with everything GJ says or does? This is EXACTLY the right place to air views and if GJ comes on here and gets offended then he is unprofessional in my view.

The standard argument people like yourself use is that we are only two points off the play-offs. Agreed, and how many people are moaning about our league position? And how many people have noticed that we are only a couple of defeats away from the lower end of the table?

Give me one constructive reason why playing four central midfield players across the middle at home to a bottom three side is a positive move that gives people the clear impression we mean business and are looking to win the game?

Please tell me whether our keeper saved us from certain defeat on Saturday by pulling off two stops that he had no right to make?

Please tell me whether you think we had enough width in our play both on Saturday and pretty much every other game this season.

Do you think that our squad is balanced when it doesn't have a single wide player on the left that we can call upon and that the one we did have and sacked a few weeks back was eighteen years old and had not played a single league game?

Do YOU think that GJ is right to play without any width?

Does anyone on this forum, apart from you, honestly believe that Lee Johnson should be forcing Paul Hartley to sit on the bench and Evander Sno to play out wide?

Doesn't it frustrate you, even a touch, that we have players earning thousands of pounds per week and notwithstanding their excellent defensive abilities they keep getting the basics of passing and crossing wrong week after week despite telling us how hard they work and pleading poor hard done by on local radio? There are plenty of fans earning a lot less who would get sacked if they couldn't get basic skills of their job right believe you me. Bradley should be the one who is humble not the paying punters who have to put up with his misplaced passes and sliced crosses that he works so hard on week after week.

And finally, hasn't it occurred to you that 13,000 "so called experts" is a lot less than the 16,000 we were getting last season? I'll agree that we had a few glory hunters and some cannot afford to go in the current economic climate. But if you are not aware that a growing number of people are growing disillusioned with the style of football (which bears no correlation to the current league position and how many points from a play off place we find ourselves) then you are simply burying your head in the sand.

[Tunley Legend]

Just remind me what number was Gj on sat?????????????

GJ picks the team, sets the formation and decides on the system. He is paid to get it right and at the moment, notwithstanding where we sit in the table, he is boring people with his negative football that has no natural width. The buck stops with him. If GJ is not responsible then you are effectively saying that any one of us could manage the team.

[barry_mack]

If you can't handle people coming onto a football forum and expressing an opinion then why come on? What do you think this football forum is for? To agree with everything GJ says or does? This is EXACTLY the right place to air views and if GJ comes on here and gets offended then he is unprofessional in my view.

The standard argument people like yourself use is that we are only two points off the play-offs. Agreed, and how many people are moaning about our league position? And how many people have noticed that we are only a couple of defeats away from the lower end of the table?

Give me one constructive reason why playing four central midfield players across the middle at home to a bottom three side is a positive move that gives people the clear impression we mean business and are looking to win the game?

Please tell me whether our keeper saved us from certain defeat on Saturday by pulling off two stops that he had no right to make?

Please tell me whether you think we had enough width in our play both on Saturday and pretty much every other game this season.

Do you think that our squad is balanced when it doesn't have a single wide player on the left that we can call upon and that the one we did have and sacked a few weeks back was eighteen years old and had not played a single league game?

Do YOU think that GJ is right to play without any width?

Does anyone on this forum, apart from you, honestly believe that Lee Johnson should be forcing Paul Hartley to sit on the bench and Evander Sno to play out wide?

Doesn't it frustrate you, even a touch, that we have players earning thousands of pounds per week and notwithstanding their excellent defensive abilities they keep getting the basics of passing and crossing wrong week after week despite telling us how hard they work and pleading poor hard done by on local radio? There are plenty of fans earning a lot less who would get sacked if they couldn't get basic skills of their job right believe you me. Bradley should be the one who is humble not the paying punters who have to put up with his misplaced passes and sliced crosses that he works so hard on week after week.

And finally, hasn't it occurred to you that 13,000 "so called experts" is a lot less than the 16,000 we were getting last season? I'll agree that we had a few glory hunters and some cannot afford to go in the current economic climate. But if you are not aware that a growing number of people are growing disillusioned with the style of football (which bears no correlation to the current league position and how many points from a play off place we find ourselves) then you are simply burying your head in the sand.

Patronising people with the freedom of speech thing really doesn't work to strengthen your case. It's not a case of what is said rather than the manner. A forum, by definition means exactly freedom of speech, this however doesn't mean that people should be allowed to act like children. People shouldn't be allowed to take offense to being called a disgrace when it's completely blown out of proportion? Ridiculous.

We are not a 'couple of defeats from the bottom of the table'. Several results would need to go against us for several weeks.

4 central midfielders means we have a stronger midfield. It's that simple. Look at Chelsea.

The goal keeper did his job.

"Width" is not some magical term that wins you games. Explain which players would provide this width.

Sno will not add the link between defence and attack. Hartley had an illness that will have left him very delapidated.

As for the basics you keep going on about, just grow up. We drew a game in the fourth best league in Europe. Do you think we'd be able to do that without having first mastered the basics?

Your argument is paper thin at best. Take a breathe and consider what you are saying before making such ridiculous kneejerk reactions.

[Nibor]

Patronising people with the freedom of speech thing really doesn't work to strengthen your case. It's not a case of what is said rather than the manner. A forum, by definition means exactly freedom of speech, this however doesn't mean that people should be allowed to act like children. People shouldn't be allowed to take offense to being called a disgrace when it's completely blown out of proportion? Ridiculous.

We are not a 'couple of defeats from the bottom of the table'. Several results would need to go against us for several weeks.

4 central midfielders means we have a stronger midfield. It's that simple. Look at Chelsea.

The goal keeper did his job.

"Width" is not some magical term that wins you games. Explain which players would provide this width.

Sno will not add the link between defence and attack. Hartley had an illness that will have left him very delapidated.

As for the basics you keep going on about, just grow up. We drew a game in the fourth best league in Europe. Do you think we'd be able to do that without having first mastered the basics?

Your argument is paper thin at best. Take a breathe and consider what you are saying before making such ridiculous kneejerk reactions.

Did you get to see the game? If so, how can you really feel that some criticism of the selection and resulting performance is unjustified?

We aren't stronger with four central midfielders on the pitch - if we were we'd be getting better results. Our record lining up like that is 6 points in 5 games - that is nearly relegation form. We got better results against better sides with 3 central midfielders. What do Chelsea have to do with it? Four central midfielders might work for them when their players are some of the best of the world and they have full backs who can get up and down and supply - we don't.

Width? It's the opposite of being completely unable to attack or defend down one side of the pitch and ineffective on the other. Yes, the lack of balance in the squad makes it difficult to address this but by playing a different formation and using Haynes we can provide a lot more than we did Saturday.

The goalkeeper did his job excellently and is a great signing, yes, but I'd rather we weren't relying on two world class saves to scrape a point at home against relegation candidates.

[barry_mack]

Did you get to see the game? If so, how can you really feel that some criticism of the selection and resulting performance is unjustified?

We aren't stronger with four central midfielders on the pitch - if we were we'd be getting better results. Our record lining up like that is 6 points in 5 games - that is nearly relegation form. We got better results against better sides with 3 central midfielders. What do Chelsea have to do with it? Four central midfielders might work for them when their players are some of the best of the world and they have full backs who can get up and down and supply - we don't.

Width? It's the opposite of being completely unable to attack or defend down one side of the pitch and ineffective on the other. Yes, the lack of balance in the squad makes it difficult to address this but by playing a different formation and using Haynes we can provide a lot more than we did Saturday.

The goalkeeper did his job excellently and is a great signing, yes, but I'd rather we weren't relying on two world class saves to scrape a point at home against relegation candidates.

I feel that criticism of the selection is unjustified as you do not know the variable decisions that GJ was forced to make when making said selection. If you have got an insider understanding and know exactly what decision was made for what reason then I take it back, otherwise I fear that you could be using this event as a vehicle to voice otherwise unfounded opinions.

Whether we are stronger with four CM's is open to interpretation, however it is undeniable that the opposition will be weaker as we cut out the heart of their engine room. Call nullifying your opposition negative by all means, however it is an integral part of football. I'd imagine GJ's intention was to win the midfield battle and use the attacking midfielders to launch attacks, that that did not happen is not GJ's fault but the players.

6 points from 5 is one view, unbeaten in 5 and unlucky is another. Perception is important in any walk of life however Nibor I feel that for a good poster you are increasingly loosing yours.

[Nibor]

I feel that criticism of the selection is unjustified as you do not know the variable decisions that GJ was forced to make when making said selection. If you have got an insider understanding and know exactly what decision was made for what reason then I take it back, otherwise I fear that you could be using this event as a vehicle to voice otherwise unfounded opinions.

Whether we are stronger with four CM's is open to interpretation, however it is undeniable that the opposition will be weaker as we cut out the heart of their engine room. Call nullifying your opposition negative by all means, however it is an integral part of football. I'd imagine GJ's intention was to win the midfield battle and use the attacking midfielders to launch attacks, that that did not happen is not GJ's fault but the players.

6 points from 5 is one view, unbeaten in 5 and unlucky is another. Perception is important in any walk of life however Nibor I feel that for a good poster you are increasingly loosing yours.

Unbeaten in 5 is a view - it's a factually incorrect one though. We lost to Derby.

If we need to be the manager to have an opinion on a formation or selection this forum is pretty pointless. If GJ was forced into those selections by circumstance you can be sure we'd have heard about it.

I would suggest that the only objective measure of whether we're better with four central midfielders or not is points - and we have 1.2 points a game from lining up like that compared with 1.7 points a game lining up with three. I'd also suggest that we played on average better opposition in the first 7 league games than in the last 5.

I'm not losing my perspective, it's the same as it always has been. I'll constructively criticise what I think is wrong and praise what I think is right. You're making the mistake of assuming that everyone has to have a black and white view - I don't and never will.

[Rednready]

I feel that criticism of the selection is unjustified as you do not know the variable decisions that GJ was forced to make when making said selection. If you have got an insider understanding and know exactly what decision was made for what reason then I take it back, otherwise I fear that you could be using this event as a vehicle to voice otherwise unfounded opinions.

Whether we are stronger with four CM's is open to interpretation, however it is undeniable that the opposition will be weaker as we cut out the heart of their engine room. Call nullifying your opposition negative by all means, however it is an integral part of football. I'd imagine GJ's intention was to win the midfield battle and use the attacking midfielders to launch attacks, that that did not happen is not GJ's fault but the players.

6 points from 5 is one view, unbeaten in 5 and unlucky is another. Perception is important in any walk of life however Nibor I feel that for a good poster you are increasingly loosing yours.

It takes goals to win matches. Perception is in the eyes of the spectator and I dont need 3 paragraphs of dialogue to spell that out.

[barry_mack]

Unbeaten in 5 is a view - it's a factually incorrect one though. We lost to Derby.

If we need to be the manager to have an opinion on a formation or selection this forum is pretty pointless. If GJ was forced into those selections by circumstance you can be sure we'd have heard about it.

I would suggest that the only objective measure of whether we're better with four central midfielders or not is points - and we have 1.2 points a game from lining up like that compared with 1.7 points a game lining up with three. I'd also suggest that we played on average better opposition in the first 7 league games than in the last 5.

I'm not losing my perspective, it's the same as it always has been. I'll constructively criticise what I think is wrong and praise what I think is right. You're making the mistake of assuming that everyone has to have a black and white view - I don't and never will.

Pesky facts getting in the way of my argument.

I clearly wasn't saying that you need to be the manager to form an opinion, I was saying that in order to form a rational unbiased opinion you would need to know the exacts of any situation, that's obvious, and something that you are not privy to. The fact that Hartly is not yet fit to play is obvious and yet still ignored by the majority on here. How do you know that GJ had further options than the four players used on Saturday? And yet you formulate over the top opinions as a result of assumtion.

You contradict yourself saying that things are never black and white, yet point out that the only way of forming an opinion is from points gained. Again you use the threadbare facts available as a vehicle to spawn your own vindictive argument. Again I'd like you to have some more perspective.

We had something of a crisis couple of months with illness and injury. We are now getting the players back from that period, players that by their own admission feel like they need to re-do pre-season training in order to get back into Championship standard fitness. How people cannot see that this has had a knock on effect and forced GJ's selections is beyond me.

I'll I'm trying to do is rationalise your over the top reactions (IMHO), I'm doing quite the opposite of saying that anything is black or white.

[bully]

The fact that Hartly is not yet fit to play is obvious and yet still ignored by the majority on here.

I'll I'm trying to do is rationalise your over the top reactions (IMHO), I'm doing quite the opposite of saying that anything is black or white.

Your comment about Hartley seems pretty black and white - I haven't seen anything from the club saying that he wasn't fit, and according to posters who spoke to the man (I know he's not necessarily going to tell them anything), he was fit to play.

Surely we had enough central midfielders on the pitch to enable a reshuffle if necessary without PH being dragged from his sickbed to warm the bench?

If he wasn't fit to play then surely he shouldn't have been anywhere near the match day squad - the fact that he was appears evidence that he was match fit, or at least able to complete a big chunk of a match otherwise he couldn't replace anyone who got injured early doors.

[barry_mack]

Your comment about Hartley seems pretty black and white - I haven't seen anything from the club saying that he wasn't fit, and according to posters who spoke to the man (I know he's not necessarily going to tell them anything), he was fit to play.

Surely we had enough central midfielders on the pitch to enable a reshuffle if necessary without PH being dragged from his sickbed to warm the bench?

If he wasn't fit to play then surely he shouldn't have been anywhere near the match day squad - the fact that he was appears evidence that he was match fit, or at least able to complete a big chunk of a match otherwise he couldn't replace anyone who got injured early doors.

Jesus wept. The man had shingles. You don't have to be a rocket surgeon to figure that that will leave you fairly dehibilitated. He is on the bench for a number of reasons, but mainly so that he can influence the team as much as possible. It's not like you can only be fully fit or not fit. He could have been 70% fit, available for influence and a 10 minute cameo and not much else.

[bully]

Jesus wept. The man had shingles. You don't have to be a rocket surgeon to figure that that will leave you fairly dehibilitated. He is on the bench for a number of reasons, but mainly so that he can influence the team as much as possible. It's not like you can only be fully fit or not fit. He could have been 70% fit, available for influence and a 10 minute cameo and not much else.

Sounds like more black and white comments - waste of a sub and poor selection if its how you say it was.

A 10 minute cameo is fine unless one of the CM's gets crocked after 10 minutes - then someone still iffy after shingles is a liability on the pitch for 80 minutes.

As for the influence comment - agree that influential players should be around the dressing room even if not playing (Scotty got an extra year on the basis of that) but hows he influencing anything as a player on the bench? - he'd have his balls cut off if he started giving instructions out from the dugout!

[Nibor]

Pesky facts getting in the way of my argument.

I clearly wasn't saying that you need to be the manager to form an opinion, I was saying that in order to form a rational unbiased opinion you would need to know the exacts of any situation, that's obvious, and something that you are not privy to. The fact that Hartly is not yet fit to play is obvious and yet still ignored by the majority on here. How do you know that GJ had further options than the four players used on Saturday? And yet you formulate over the top opinions as a result of assumtion.

You contradict yourself saying that things are never black and white, yet point out that the only way of forming an opinion is from points gained. Again you use the threadbare facts available as a vehicle to spawn your own vindictive argument. Again I'd like you to have some more perspective.

We had something of a crisis couple of months with illness and injury. We are now getting the players back from that period, players that by their own admission feel like they need to re-do pre-season training in order to get back into Championship standard fitness. How people cannot see that this has had a knock on effect and forced GJ's selections is beyond me.

I'll I'm trying to do is rationalise your over the top reactions (IMHO), I'm doing quite the opposite of saying that anything is black or white.

I said only objective measure not only way of forming an opinion which is subjective by nature. Please don't misrepresent what I posted.

What on earth is vindictive in my post? That's a very strange choice of words. Why have you said that?

The illnesses affected the selections a few weeks back and I didn't criticise them then. They can't have affected selections on Saturday because GJ himself has commented on players fitness. Hartley IS fit to play and WAS on Saturday. Ditto Haynes and Clarkson.

I know GJ had more options because he said so.

How have you formed the rational unbiased opinion that he didn't?

[Nibor]

Jesus wept. The man had shingles. You don't have to be a rocket surgeon to figure that that will leave you fairly dehibilitated. He is on the bench for a number of reasons, but mainly so that he can influence the team as much as possible. It's not like you can only be fully fit or not fit. He could have been 70% fit, available for influence and a 10 minute cameo and not much else.

Why did the player himself say he was 100% fit?

[redcityman]

Jesus wept. The man had shingles. You don't have to be a rocket surgeon to figure that that will leave you fairly dehibilitated. He is on the bench for a number of reasons, but mainly so that he can influence the team as much as possible. It's not like you can only be fully fit or not fit. He could have been 70% fit, available for influence and a 10 minute cameo and not much else.

I find it odd how you decry others for not having facts and just using suposition.

I've had shingles twice, once it knocked me sideways for nearlly 2 months, last time just a couple of weeks and I was back to my previous level of fitness, no two cases are the same. none of us can say whether he was fit to play or not, but i'm sure I saw an interview last season saying as to why noble wasn't on the bench , even if it wasn't just to be used as an impact player, i'm sure GJ answered "with if a player is not fit to start, he's not fit enough for the bench".

[SE23Red]

As for the influence comment - agree that influential players should be around the dressing room even if not playing (Scotty got an extra year on the basis of that) but hows he influencing anything as a player on the bench? - he'd have his balls cut off if he started giving instructions out from the dugout!

Off at a tangent but you've reminded me of a game under Tinnion. Late into the second half he turned to his subs and instructed them to warm up. One of them - Mickey Bell - offered a three fingered salute in reply. Tins looked bemused at first but then the penny dropped as he realised he had used all three subs earlier in the game

So a senior player can influence something from the sidelines...

[bully]

Off at a tangent but you've reminded me of a game under Tinnion. Late into the second half he turned to his subs and instructed them to warm up. One of them - Mickey Bell - offered a three fingered salute in reply. Tins looked bemused at first but then the penny dropped as he realised he had used all three subs earlier in the game

So a senior player can influence something from the sidelines...

I'd hope Keith Millen would be able to remind GJ if that ever happened again!

[Portland Bill]

QUOTE (barry_mack @ Oct 20 2009, 12:37 PM)

The fact that Hartly is not yet fit to play is obvious and yet still ignored by the majority on here.

So thats why he came on 2 mins before the equalizer on saturday. If he wasnt fit why would he have come on at such a crucial time?

[barry_mack]

I said only objective measure not only way of forming an opinion which is subjective by nature. Please don't misrepresent what I posted.

What on earth is vindictive in my post? That's a very strange choice of words. Why have you said that?

The illnesses affected the selections a few weeks back and I didn't criticise them then. They can't have affected selections on Saturday because GJ himself has commented on players fitness. Hartley IS fit to play and WAS on Saturday. Ditto Haynes and Clarkson.

I know GJ had more options because he said so.

How have you formed the rational unbiased opinion that he didn't?

I am not representing what you post in any form or manner, only you are doing that, if you want to go into semantic's of it, this is the opinion I have formed having read your posts, you are the only person responsable for the way your phrases connotate.

I say vindictive due to the attitude you show in your initial post, it's hardly constructive is it.

You do not know that Hartly, Haynes and Clarkson were fit. You cannot know this. Just because GJ says something before a match, essentailly as he speaks to his opposition via the media, does not make it any where near the truth. Hartly's comment on being 100% fit is baffling, but that sort of information would normally come from a physio rather than a player.

At the beginning of the season GJ made it clear that he would employ a 352 formation. He has not been able to follow this formula lately due to various reasons and I beleive it is a matter of time before he is able to due to the aforementioned criteria. Until then expect him to field the best team available while creating smokescreens to hide the weaknesses of the team to oposition.

[barry_mack]

QUOTE (barry_mack @ Oct 20 2009, 12:37 PM)

The fact that Hartly is not yet fit to play is obvious and yet still ignored by the majority on here.

So thats why he came on 2 mins before the equalizer on saturday. If he wasnt fit why would he have come on at such a crucial time?

Why would you need to be fit to play 3 minutes of football? Even I could manage that

[barry_mack]

I find it odd how you decry others for not having facts and just using suposition.

I've had shingles twice, once it knocked me sideways for nearlly 2 months, last time just a couple of weeks and I was back to my previous level of fitness, no two cases are the same. none of us can say whether he was fit to play or not, but i'm sure I saw an interview last season saying as to why noble wasn't on the bench , even if it wasn't just to be used as an impact player, i'm sure GJ answered "with if a player is not fit to start, he's not fit enough for the bench".

Quite clearly my point is that NONE OF US KNOW THE FACTS. This really is hard work. I've already highlighted the merits of having Hartly on the bench, I'm not going to repeat my argument for those that can't read properly.

[bully]

Quite clearly my point is that NONE OF US KNOW THE FACTS. This really is hard work. I've already highlighted the merits of having Hartly on the bench, I'm not going to repeat my argument for those that can't read properly.

Clearly there's a lot of people who can't read your posts properly - or more probably don't agree with the content.

No need to repeat your argument though...

[Steve Watts]

I find it odd how you decry others for not having facts and just using suposition.

I've had shingles twice, once it knocked me sideways for nearlly 2 months, last time just a couple of weeks and I was back to my previous level of fitness, no two cases are the same. none of us can say whether he was fit to play or not, but i'm sure I saw an interview last season saying as to why noble wasn't on the bench , even if it wasn't just to be used as an impact player, i'm sure GJ answered "with if a player is not fit to start, he's not fit enough for the bench".

Just one thing to point out (and for the record I don't agree with the way he lined up on Saturday...) but as for comparing being fit for the bench this season with being fit for the bench last season - we have an extra two subs this year - who else was going to take Hartley's place on the bench? I've neither seen nor heard either GJ or PH state that he was fit - likewise I haven't heard either state anything to the contrary, but to use the fact that GJ has said when we were allowed 5 subs that if you're not fit to play you're not fit for the bench, is flawed on the basis that we can now have more, and have limited options.

I also think it's quite unfair to criticise the decision to play Lee instead of Hartley, but not to bat an eyelid at playing Marv instead of Hartley - PH is a hybrid of the two, a tough tackling (M.E.) playmaker (LJ) and I would love to see someone explain what Marv offers over Hartley as well. Due to the family relation I don't think we'll ever see a balanced debate on that one.

Hopefully tonight, we will see a more positive approach....I just don't know how without the width, and we have no-one who can play it in a 4-4-2. 3-5-2 seems the only way, and I'd be tempted to do that with Hartley, Skuse and Sno... but I ain't GJ!

[Nibor]

I am not representing what you post in any form or manner, only you are doing that, if you want to go into semantic's of it, this is the opinion I have formed having read your posts, you are the only person responsable for the way your phrases connotate.

Phrases don't connotate, people do. You're reading stuff that isn't there.

I say vindictive due to the attitude you show in your initial post, it's hardly constructive is it.

On the contrary there are several suggestions in the initial post. Suggestions are constructive. Again, please stick to what I've posted not how you choose to read it.

You do not know that Hartly, Haynes and Clarkson were fit. You cannot know this. Just because GJ says something before a match, essentailly as he speaks to his opposition via the media, does not make it any where near the truth. Hartly's comment on being 100% fit is baffling, but that sort of information would normally come from a physio rather than a player.

I'm glad to see you're sticking to relying on facts...

At the beginning of the season GJ made it clear that he would employ a 352 formation. He has not been able to follow this formula lately due to various reasons and I beleive it is a matter of time before he is able to due to the aforementioned criteria. Until then expect him to field the best team available while creating smokescreens to hide the weaknesses of the team to oposition.

GJ said it would be nice to be able to play that shape not that it was first choice. He had the option of playing it on Saturday but he chose not to and that was IMO a bad choice leading to a bad result. Hartley's fitness is irrelevant to whether or not we could play a 352 anyway. We weren't short of central midfielders were we?

[Frenchay Red]

The fact that Hartly is not yet fit to play is obvious

Quite clearly my point is that NONE OF US KNOW THE FACTS.

[barry_mack]

Phrases don't connotate, people do. Wrong. Anything and everything connotates. Why are you again focusing on tangents and the trivial? You're reading stuff that isn't there.

On the contrary there are several suggestions in the initial post. Suggestions are constructive. Again, please stick to what I've posted not how you choose to read it. I will read what ever I choose to - are you trying to tell me how to form my opinion?

I'm glad to see you're sticking to relying on facts... Snidey comments? Well done, you're taking this down to playground level

GJ said it would be nice to be able to play that shape not that it was first choice. He had the option of playing it on Saturday but he chose not to and that was IMO a bad choice leading to a bad result. Hartley's fitness is irrelevant to whether or not we could play a 352 anyway. We weren't short of central midfielders were we?

Why are you finding it so hard to have a rational debate? Why are you refusing to see my point? Do you think that GJ sees the team that started on Sat as his strongest available team with all players fit?