elhombrecito Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 ....not Woodman, not Fortune, not Tinnion, but Wilkshire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John-0 Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 ....not Woodman, not Fortune, not Tinnion, but Wilkshire.←and woodman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Gow Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 wilkshire ###### Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFCfan Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 calm down dear its only one game.......and i believe Woodman was getting done all night, and he got done again to allow the cross.....No blame anywhere, it happens lets move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty H Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Yes it's all Wilkshires fault we played uncreative ###### all night. All his fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elhombrecito Posted August 9, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Yes it's all Wilkshires fault we played uncreative ###### all night. All his fault.←Once he got himself sent off we lost all hope of turning the game around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 For me, I have to question the tatics of the man in charge.Not being funny here, but once Brown came on, we got a foot on the ball and held the tempo of the game up much better.I'm sorry but I don't think Skuse & Wilkshire is going to work. You either have to go 3-5-2 and draft in Russell alongside him or put Brown/Russell against one of them.Woodman was found out of position time and time again and why is he getting the nod when Goldborne finished last season so sucessfully.Why do we spend all summer getting in 3 centre halves only to use a man who's position isn't clear and is primarly a poorer version of Heywood. You need a first ball winner, but you can't have two of them, especially when the second isn't very good at it.Partrige/Keough, Brown in for Saturday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matty H Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Once he got himself sent off we lost all hope of turning the game around.←That's fair enough Stu, but we were poor up to then. One man is rarely soley to blame for a defeat, and tonight he isn't either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atticus Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 For me, I have to question the tatics of the man in charge.Not being funny here, but once Brown came on, we got a foot on the ball and held the tempo of the game up much better.I'm sorry but I don't think Skuse & Wilkshire is going to work. You either have to go 3-5-2 and draft in Russell alongside him or put Brown/Russell against one of them.Woodman was found out of position time and time again and why is he getting the nod when Goldborne finished last season so sucessfully.Why do we spend all summer getting in 3 centre halves only to use a man who's position isn't clear and is primarly a poorer version of Heywood. You need a first ball winner, but you can't have two of them, especially when the second isn't very good at it.Partrige/Keough, Brown in for Saturday←Agree 100 % there.Certainly find some of Tinnions tactics slightly bizzare at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shire_redz Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Yeah, blame it on Wilkshire - even though we played better without him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh_red Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Once he got himself sent off we lost all hope of turning the game around.←a.sre was it! we were actually playing better after Wilkshire got sent off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashcott Boy Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 To be fair on Fortune it sounded like he had a good game although i would like to see Partridge in on Saturday. Woodman sounded dreadful and Golbourne should start on Saturday along with Skuse and Brown in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooter Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 ...Then bung in either Skuse with Brown in the middle or one of those two with Russell, have Golbourne in replacement of Woodman and even Partridge in for Fortune if necessary, although he played apparently well tonight, so not the last one...Surely these have to be very tough decisions for the Tinman to make?No one would have put a bet on for Wilkshire to get sent off tonight, but unfortunately it happened, and it kind of screwed our system up, so let's hope everyone can get it right, (the players and the manager) come Saturday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elhombrecito Posted August 9, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 a.sre was it! we were actually playing better after Wilkshire got sent off.←And who's to say how well we would have played if we'd had our full quota of players on the pitch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpitman Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 We actually played better when Wiltshire went off!Until tinnion took off our two most effective players, then it was backs to the wall... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redtucks Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 For me, I have to question the tatics of the man in charge.Not being funny here, but once Brown came on, we got a foot on the ball and held the tempo of the game up much better.I'm sorry but I don't think Skuse & Wilkshire is going to work. You either have to go 3-5-2 and draft in Russell alongside him or put Brown/Russell against one of them.Woodman was found out of position time and time again and why is he getting the nod when Goldborne finished last season so sucessfully.Why do we spend all summer getting in 3 centre halves only to use a man who's position isn't clear and is primarly a poorer version of Heywood. You need a first ball winner, but you can't have two of them, especially when the second isn't very good at it.Partrige/Keough, Brown in for Saturday←I guessed Fortune would get some of the blame, even though he apparently had a good game according to the commentary.He's this seasons boo boy after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robins72 Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Sounded like a clumsy challenge by Wilkshire and I expect he wont be going out Saturady night when he gets that hefty fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zidereddy Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Once he got himself sent off we lost all hope of turning the game around.←thats not true according to the comentary we seemed to play our best stuff when after wiltshire was sent off,we even got into there half and managed a crap cross!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 I guessed Fortune would get some of the blame, even though he apparently had a good game according to the commentary.He's this seasons boo boy after all.←No, i'm not saying he may be the wrong option, what I'm saying is primarly he is a first ball winning centre half. Playing two of them can cause problems.For my money you've got to have Keogh or Partridge alongside Heywood or Fortune. Not two of similar ilk together.I hope and pray that Partridge gets the nod on Saturday, if not then Keogh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redtucks Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 No, i'm not saying he may be the wrong option, what I'm saying is primarly he is a first ball winning centre half. Playing two of them can cause problems.For my money you've got to have Keogh or Partridge alongside Heywood or Fortune. Not two of similar ilk together.I hope and pray that Partridge gets the nod on Saturday, if not then Keogh.←I don't think he is a first ball winning centre back. He had pace and can actually play football. He is more able to cover the first ball winner. That's why I think he actually complements Heywood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 I don't think he is a first ball winning centre back. He had pace and can actually play football. He is more able to cover the first ball winner. That's why I think he actually complements Heywood.←I agree and most of the stick he gets is because people think he should be a big clunker like Heywood.Fortune can actually play, according to the commentary tonight he saved at least one goal and was a contender for MoM.Golbourne I thought was injured for the bulk of pre-season? Is he fit now?Nibor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbcfc Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Wilkshire should be blamed for his part in the defeat however when the center half has to deal with cross upon cross because the full backs aren't stoping them.Listening we struggled with with Abbott and Booth, Lacking pace at the back is also going to give strikers chances.When a goalkeeper fails to comand his box there is always going to be trouble.We didn't get a good ball into the box all evening as good as Cottrill looks running forward he hasn't go the final telling ball which Smith has also lacked (so far).Also which I think is most evident from the two games we lack bite in midfield, The bite the Doc gave us Skuse and wilkshire certainly aren't in that mold, Orr is the closest thing to that however not in the same class. TINS SHOULD NEVER GOT RID OF TOMMY EVEN WITH HIS POOR ATTITUDE HE WILL THE MOST MISSED PLAYER ON THE PITCH THIS SEASON.However give it a few more games before Tins out chants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whirling Ted Smith Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Wilkshire was out of it in the first half, occasionaly getting the ball and passing it to the opposition. He got involved enough at one point to get a booking - maybe he knew the ref would pick on him. We'll never know what might have happened but we were better without him and Brown helped to show the team how to get stuck in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cider head Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 the sending off was harsh BUT we started to play better in midfield when he wentoff as scott brown started doing the battling midfield job we were missing,i would say woodman, skuse, fortune and wilkshire should not be in the startingline up after what i've seen in the first 2 games, we have no midfield servicegoing to the front 2 and heywood is too busy covering fortunes arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wesco Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 Stu you can't blame Wilkshire from wheer I was sat it didn't look like a sending off in the first place. Woodmen was teh man to blame for the goal he was not close enough to his man like he wasn't all night but you have to ask how someone can get a head in the box when we have to giants at centre back. Like others have said it is far to early to be getting upset and after all it is only a game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 It wasn't Luke's fault, he did nothing wrong, it was the awful ref that sent him off for nothing. It was never a red card, neither were fair bookings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted August 10, 2005 Admin Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 Once he got himself sent off we lost all hope of turning the game around.←Once he got himself sent off?!Don't make me laugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted August 10, 2005 Admin Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 When a goalkeeper fails to comand his box there is always going to be trouble.We didn't get a good ball into the box all evening as good as Cottrill looks running forward he hasn't go the final telling ball which Smith has also lacked (so far).←It doesn't help when Cotterill gets in behind the defence, puts what looks to be a decent cross in, only for the Huddersfield defender to clear it with his hand.Andy Hall, of course, was in the middle of doing his very best Arsene Wenger impersonation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorsetred Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 talkin about sendings off did anyone see the forest keeper get sent off for apparently taking out leitao? he slid for the ball and it was miles away, they both went into the tackle when the ball had gone and the keeper got sent off"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kit Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 talkin about sendings off did anyone see the forest keeper get sent off for apparently taking out leitao? he slid for the ball and it was miles away, they both went into the tackle when the ball had gone and the keeper got sent off"!←I don't know if its possible to have the same ref at two games, cos that decision was as bad as some of them last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.