Nahki Wells

[Davefevs]

11 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

You don't like being called names yet you are quite happy to throw around platitudes like "tongue up peoples arseholes" and calling people "followers" as a derogatory term............sat behind a monitor, that wouldn't happen face to face as it happens (I await the see me round the back of the Dolman next home game then, you ***, retort).

Anyway, it's only a forum, nothing to get wound up about.

Here was my reply to him (assume it’s a him from the “uncle” bit) further up the page.

On 12/11/2023 at 17:58, Davefevs said:

You’ll see from some of my posts last week that I asked for people to be civil.  But I’m not a forum moderator, and there’s a “report button” on each post.  Why not use that?  I use it if I feel things have overstepped the mark.  I used it several times last week, and not necessarily who you think I may have used it on.

But if you’re on a mission to lay lots of stuff on me, you carry on.  Fill your boots.

I tried to be polite in my response, we all have our moments on here I guess?

Not sure why the attack was aimed at me, and why he deems it is my job to take others to task though.

11 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Yep. Dishes it out but whines when he gets it back.

Ignored.

A good idea.

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If I had one constructive query about NP it would be the excessive reliance on width.

Width is good, perhaps if Scott was still here we would see more of a balance but a lot of the time crossing vs a packed penalty box..at times can build pressure well, perhaps won territory but also be a bit predictable for a defending side.

Yep, those are the bits I’m looking to see how LM resolves.  On Saturday we saw the inability to get the ball “back” infield once it went wide.  That’s not a dig at all, just stating what happened, and I’m not apportioning to LM after 2/3 sessions of which he’s stated they were mostly w/o the ball tweaks.

[BCFC Rich]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, mainly referring to your use of “partnerships” or pairings….I’m big on this….and I don’t think we see enough of them.

My Bell and Conway reference is slightly facetious, but I do wonder whether the two could bring more out of each other playing close(r) together.  I think you could perm any two more effectively than playing the three the way we do.  But that’s just me.

 

43 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If I had one constructive query about NP it would be the excessive reliance on width.

Width is good, perhaps if Scott was still here we would see more of a balance but a lot of the time crossing vs a packed penalty box..at times can build pressure well, perhaps won territory but also be a bit predictable for a defending side.

Something Hogg and Manning have talked about is the flexibility of formation and positions eg - this player is a defensive midfielder and holds that position, if he sees the opportunity though he pushes forward and this other player knows it's his job to drop in and cover etc. 

I really like to see this with the front three. Let's say it lines up Bell Conway Sykes - we are attacking down the left, Sykes needs to get into the box close to Conway so they form more of a 2-up top. We attack down the right and Bell gets closer to Conway. Obviously it's not that simple and it doesn't always have to be exactly that, There was one bit vs QPR where we attacked down the left and Sykes raced across to be an option at CM that worked really well. I'm hoping we will see these kind of things develop under LM. 

[miketh2nd]

Wells is the glue that keeps bell Conway on the right path and many people overlook his unselfish runs that pull sometimes two cbs out of place for other players. 

 Whilst wells is injured I wouldn't mind seeing a hybrid of 

Conway  Cornick 

Sykes 

Conway is a great striker but needs a player with creativity( last season Scott) in behind him or alongside him. 

[cidered abroad]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Similar thread started by @spudski a few weeks back, where we all had similar thoughts.

Sorry, missed that one or cannot remember it. Senility creeping in?

[UncleRed]

3 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

You don't like being called names yet you are quite happy to throw around platitudes like "tongue up peoples arseholes" and calling people "followers" as a derogatory term............sat behind a monitor, that wouldn't happen face to face as it happens (I await the see me round the back of the Dolman next home game then, you ***, retort).

Anyway, it's only a forum, nothing to get wound up about.

“Tongue up peoples arseholes” or “followers” I may have said and you may deem that derogative. No one’s denied it and I know I’m not the only one to witness it.

I don’t know if it was you or another one of the few users who seem to follow each other around thread to thread, seem to use the phrase “you and your clique” or just “clique” when referencing me and the users on here I’m friends with in real life. Doesn’t bother me because we do share similar(not the same) opinions and we do know each other irl so kind of true .

I speak, how I’m spoken to online and in person. Being called “names” doesn’t bother me, I only highlight it as people perceive me as someone with a superior manner. Yet someone in my “clique” got called an idiot not too long ago for having his own opinion on something, something doesn’t add up there. I’ve had a few respectful back and forths with the likes of grahamc and mr p. Even though we don’t share the majority of the same opinions, it was a friendly manner and I understood their stance on the subject and reasoning.

Expect people to be OTT polite? Try not labelling them as a BS employee when they post just because their opinions different. Probably didn’t have a different response worth responding with. 

Agendas aye.

3 hours ago, bcfc01 said:

Yep. Dishes it out but whines when he gets it back.

Ignored.

Only “whine” about the unnecessary name calling. Because you know…it’s unnecessary.

Edited November 15, 2023 by UncleRed