Redhyde Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 You've got three strikers in the squad, you're playing one and have two on the bench, your new signing who's taking wages and a squad place can't make the top 3 strikers that you yourself pick. And you're struggling with squad size. I've no idea about Ryan Taylor's ability. I don't see too many people clambering for him to start or play, certainly not over Maynard, Stead or Pitman. Keith always says about not panicking and not getting people in for the sake of it. Yet three signing of Keith's aren't in the first team, and two aren't even in the squad. Woolford for whatever reason hasn't worked so far, Bolasie is nowhere to be seen. Maybe i've missed injury stories but they all played in the latest reserve game. This is being posted while i listen to the match, the result isn't a vindication or a damnation on this point. But i don't see how Keith can complain about having too many players when he's brought a few of them in he doesn't seem to rate. He can't escape that criticism. 3/4 of his signings aren't in the first team when fit. That's a really really bad success rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megansdad Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 pittman and Stead are both Millen signings as are Spence McGivern and Kilkenny, and Woolford. Bolasie and Taylor are clearly there as cover for Stead and Adomah so can expect to be in the squad if the no 1 choice is unavailable. With 5 subs it make things more difficult. Who would you leave out to accommodate Taylor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Reynolds Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 pittman and Stead are both Millen signings as are Spence McGivern and Kilkenny, and Woolford. Bolasie and Taylor are clearly there as cover for Stead and Adomah so can expect to be in the squad if the no 1 choice is unavailable. With 5 subs it make things more difficult. Who would you leave out to accommodate Taylor? You just reinforced his point! If our squad is too big then why is he bringing in players who won't dislodge our current first team? The point is that he isn't accomodating his own signings, so why buy them if our squad is so big? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 I think the point is we were constantly told that Citys squad was unbalanced, an argument that seems to have gone quiet since Millen has signed players to unbalance the squad and then does not play them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 No instead of wasting money on positions we didn't need to strengthen with players who aren't even good enough to make the squad we could of signed players in positions we needed strengthening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 pittman and Stead are both Millen signings as are Spence McGivern and Kilkenny, and Woolford. Bolasie and Taylor are clearly there as cover for Stead and Adomah so can expect to be in the squad if the no 1 choice is unavailable. With 5 subs it make things more difficult. Who would you leave out to accommodate Taylor? Nobody, which seems to be Redhyde's point. Keith is now saying he would only consider signing somebody who would improve the starting 11 because the squad is too big but has already signed players who will not even figure in the squad, thereby making the squad bigger. A tad contradictory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted September 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 I wouldn't. so i don't see the point of him being here if the manager feels the same way. Pittman and Stead aren't in the team either. So that's 5 of 6 permanent signings he's made he's not picking. Yet whining about the squad size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Reynolds Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Nobody, which seems to be Redhyde's point. Keith is now saying he would only consider signing somebody who would improve the starting 11 because the squad is too big but has already signed players who will not even figure in the squad, thereby making the squad bigger. A tad contradictory. I was 100% behind Keith when he said that signing Bolasie at the money we paid was a bargain, even if we weren't crying out for wingers. But then he didn't play him for a single second against Swindle, which I felt was a perfect opportunity to get some game time and state his case. So why did he sign him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megansdad Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Sorry but point missed taylor is back up and one for the future as is Bolasie. Don't see them as the problem rather the "dead" wood that are seen as neither the future nor sufficient replacement, namely the defensive "options" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megansdad Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 who would be first in if one of the current strikers was injured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 We only play with one striker so pitman would followed by stead followed by clarkson and then a toss up between Jackson and Taylor waste of money that should of been used to strengthen the back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Reynolds Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Sorry but point missed taylor is back up and one for the future as is Bolasie. Don't see them as the problem rather the "dead" wood that are seen as neither the future nor sufficient replacement, namely the defensive "options" But the point is that Millen cannot use excuses and then contradict himself! And this 'one for the future' business doesn't wash as they're first team players who command first team wages and first-team transfer fees. (I'm sure they're not too much but I'm guessing more than Marlon Jackson et al.) And they won't improve without game time. Millen can't say that the team is unbalanced then sign two players who unbalance it further, then say he's only interested in players who will be first team players when he's permanently purchased two who don't get a look in! He can't have it both ways. People are baying for his blood as it is, and his handling of the media is shockingly bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Sorry but point missed taylor is back up and one for the future as is Bolasie. Don't see them as the problem rather the "dead" wood that are seen as neither the future nor sufficient replacement, namely the defensive "options" I would agree on those 2 if Keith was not making such an issue of how difficult it is to keep players happy with such a big squad. As others have said a number of the players he has signed may well be among the unhappy players. So much coming out of the club seems contradictory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 One issue has been the change from 7 to 5 subs. It appears that no one saw it coming and it came at a time when a number of clubs had done alot of recruitment. It's had a serious impact at champaign level and made it awkward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Sorry but point missed taylor is back up and one for the future as is Bolasie. Don't see them as the problem rather the "dead" wood that are seen as neither the future nor sufficient replacement, namely the defensive "options" He's 23 years of age. If he were good enough he'd be in the team now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 One issue has been the change from 7 to 5 subs. It appears that no one saw it coming and it came at a time when a number of clubs had done alot of recruitment. It's had a serious impact at champaign level and made it awkward. Agreed. Makes sense for League 1 and 2 perhaps but not the Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Reynolds Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 One issue has been the change from 7 to 5 subs. It appears that no one saw it coming and it came at a time when a number of clubs had done alot of recruitment. It's had a serious impact at champaign level and made it awkward. I'm sure that I read that all 24 clubs agreed on that though. Pompey couldn't name a full squad and I thought it stemmed from that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackorack Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Sorry but point missed taylor is back up and one for the future as is Bolasie. Don't see them as the problem rather the "dead" wood that are seen as neither the future nor sufficient replacement, namely the defensive "options" I think people are forgetting that bolasie who is now 22 and taylor who is 23. I certainly don't put them in group of "one for the future". If they are good enough they should be in the team, surely they themselves would think that to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse With No Name Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 One issue has been the change from 7 to 5 subs. It appears that no one saw it coming and it came at a time when a number of clubs had done alot of recruitment. It's had a serious impact at champaign level and made it awkward. You never saw it coming? Did you go to the same coaching school as Keith? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zip Nolan Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 One issue has been the change from 7 to 5 subs. It appears that no one saw it coming and it came at a time when a number of clubs had done alot of recruitment. It's had a serious impact at champaign level and made it awkward. 7 substitutes were a joke anyway, when i started playing you were only allowed ONE sub, too many excuses these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbcfc Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 I said this weeks ago, same with bolasie why sign players who aren't good enough to be in the first team then moan the squads too big Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenyards Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 The original post is quite right and the explanation is that Keith Millen is not experienced or good enough to run a championship side. ALL the players in the current squad were signed when he was manager or assistant manager. There are so many things he has got wrong and so many things he doesn't explain -but simply on team selection/ transfer issues etc over players I would ask him? Why did you drop James for Gerken a few weeks ago but not put him back in the side when he recovered from "a minor groin strain"? How do you expect defenders you have signed to be motivated when you constantly tell the media they are not good enough? What has Damion Stewart done wrong to make him "not part of my plans"? Why has Cisse (last year's best defenmsive midfielder) not had a game? Why did you sign Bolasie if he is not good enough to play? Maynard is not the type oif player who can play on his own up front - so why do you constantly put him there? James Wilson has been excellent in the middle of defence - why haven't you praised hgim in the media yet? Are there are other young players that can do a good job? What happened to Bobby Reid...will he get a chance in midfield? How do you expect defenders to be motivated when you bring in loan signings to play instead of full-time club professionals? Why is last year's top scorer Bret Pitman never selected? Why did we sign a left winger in Woolford -yet play a right winger in that position? Why are we playing defensively at home? Of coiurse we will never get any of the answers to these questions....basically I suspect Millen doesn't know. We need an experienced manager competent at this level as soon as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Sorry but point missed taylor is back up and one for the future as is Bolasie. Don't see them as the problem rather the "dead" wood that are seen as neither the future nor sufficient replacement, namely the defensive "options" What firkin future?? The one in the 3rd division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pezo Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 You've got three strikers in the squad, you're playing one and have two on the bench, your new signing who's taking wages and a squad place can't make the top 3 strikers that you yourself pick. And you're struggling with squad size. I've no idea about Ryan Taylor's ability. I don't see too many people clambering for him to start or play, certainly not over Maynard, Stead or Pitman. Keith always says about not panicking and not getting people in for the sake of it. Yet three signing of Keith's aren't in the first team, and two aren't even in the squad. Woolford for whatever reason hasn't worked so far, Bolasie is nowhere to be seen. Maybe i've missed injury stories but they all played in the latest reserve game. This is being posted while i listen to the match, the result isn't a vindication or a damnation on this point. But i don't see how Keith can complain about having too many players when he's brought a few of them in he doesn't seem to rate. He can't escape that criticism. 3/4 of his signings aren't in the first team when fit. That's a really really bad success rate. Your trying to apply logic to guy that plays Stead on the wing! Your going to drive yourself round the bend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddoc Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 In fairness the three you mention have scored 3 in 7 games between them so I don't think he's got a chance of featuring until this goal fest drys up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.