Worst attacking options since January 2000

380 posts
Dorset-Knob
Member
Posts: 458
Joined: 20 Jul 2009 17:57
Location: The Biscuit Tin

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Dorset-Knob » 30 Nov 2009 21:10

Ideal
Southbank Old Boy
Dorset-Knob I suspect Ian Holloway would beg to differ!


Why?


Holloway: bad team that overperforms = high league position, indicates tactical nouse and motivational skills, makes right moves in transfer market when needed
Rodgers: reasonable team that underperforms = low league position, indicates tactical ineptitude and lack of motivational skills, signed 7 players so far, only one of them seems to be what we needed (Bertrand)

Does this answer your question??????


What he said............... :wink:

User avatar
Southbank Old Boy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1954
Joined: 15 Aug 2006 18:42

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Southbank Old Boy » 30 Nov 2009 22:50

Neither of those answer the question no.

Holloway is doing a good job yes, but DK said: I suspect Ian Holloway would beg to differ!

That was in response to my comment about our squad being unique in being ripped apart and having all its top performers shipped out to balance the books. Holloway didnt need to rebuild a squad this summer. He didnt lose his clubs 3 best centre forwards, its number 1 keeper, 2 of its 3 main centrebacks, a mainstay of the clubs central midfield not to mention the quite influential club captain and then have the previous seasons player of the year ruled out by a career threatening injury

Instead Holloway took over a side that performed steadily last season and lost 3 players, 2 of which hardly played last season. Holloway has Blackpool playing well and getting some good results and I think we should have signed Bouazza to solve our left wing problem

The point I was making as Rodgers situation is pretty unique because of the changes forced on him

Shall I ask the question again? why would Holloway beg to differ that he didnt have his squad ripped apart and have to rebuild his side almost from scratch???

User avatar
Southbank Old Boy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1954
Joined: 15 Aug 2006 18:42

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Southbank Old Boy » 30 Nov 2009 23:09

Not making excuses, just putting into context the position

Who was this debut scoring loanee then? Genuinelly dont know

Not that it really makes any difference, but whos team, who havent won a home game for the best part of a year just beat Holloways wonder team? If Holloway was as perfect as you suggest surely he could mastermind the defeat of the team with the worst home record in the country

Still Hate Futcher!
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 31 Jul 2008 17:28
Location: Cloud 9

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Still Hate Futcher! » 30 Nov 2009 23:10

[/quote]signed 7 players so far, only one of them seems to be what we needed (Bertrand)[/quote]

What about McAnuff?

User avatar
Southbank Old Boy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1954
Joined: 15 Aug 2006 18:42

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Southbank Old Boy » 30 Nov 2009 23:45

Fair enough, I couldnt be arsed to check it out

From what I remember of seeing Siep play isnt he a fullback? All goals are welcomed obviously, but I doubt Holloway signed him to contribute goals, so not quite the masterstroke you make out


User avatar
Para Handy
Member
Posts: 798
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 21:01
Location: One of the 10,961

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Para Handy » 30 Nov 2009 23:49

Ideal
Southbank Old Boy Who was this debut scoring loanee then? Genuinelly dont know


Marcel Seip. From the glorious internet:
After receiving clearance to play, three days later he made his first team debut, and scored the opening goal in a 2-0 win over his parent club, Plymouth Argyle
.....
In his second game for the club Seip opened the scoring, in a 3–0 win at home to Sheffield United on 20 October. It was his second goal, both of them headers, in three days. He was named in The Championship "Team of the Week"


As for the losing against RFC part, every team loses every now and again. Just like we occasionally win one despite being shit, they have to lose one every now and then despite being generally OK in most matches.


It's life. Every team has a few shit posters too. We just have to live with them. We have to try to transcend their blinkered bullshit. We'd like to swap them for a few more positive guys but we just don't have the money. I've offered you around but even Chester don't want you. What can we do eh?

User avatar
Southbank Old Boy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1954
Joined: 15 Aug 2006 18:42

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Southbank Old Boy » 30 Nov 2009 23:58

Ideal obviously it did a world of good. Unlike our signings, which only brought more pain and misery.


Apart from Bertrand, who along with Gyfli is out player of the season so far, and has been outstanding, and Mcanuff who has been pretty good since he got fit, and Rasiak who has chipped in with important goals despite not being a fav of mine etc etc etc

We HAD to go out and get a fullback once Goldbourne left and Armstrongs injury cropped up. Thats been an excellent signing
We needed an experience proven goalscorer at this level. Rasiak was a cheap solution and is doing whats expected of him
McAnuff is a proven Championship winger, again JUST WHAT WE NEEDED
I agree that I dont think we needed another central midfielder, but I bet the Howard loan was part of the Harper deal to save us money
Cummings has been a liability but we had to get a right back in as well, as every manager proves, you cant it right every time
Mills, we had to get in a centre back with Ivar injured, Bikey on his way out. Mills was very highly rated following an excellent season last year. He hasnt hit the ground running, but unlike Rasiak he is a siging for the long term. I would like to see someone with more pace back there

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Ian Royal » 01 Dec 2009 00:04

Ideal FWIW, I almost agree on Rasiak.
He is not great, but he is what we needed, sort of like Owusu was what we needed at the time.
What really gets me though is spending £2M on Mills, there just isn't any way to justify that.
I'd rather see us gamble £300K-£500K on four or five random players than have us spend £2M on what looks to be a total dud, we might as well have kept Duberry.



Hmmm. That was exactly what Coppell did wrong. Brought in loads of sub standard cheap players.

User avatar
Para Handy
Member
Posts: 798
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 21:01
Location: One of the 10,961

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Para Handy » 01 Dec 2009 00:09

Ideal Oh well I have some brilliant encouragement for you Para Handy, I promise that as soon as Brendan Rodgers is sacked I shall put my RTG's back on and go back to being positive. Until then, you can chalk it up to being BR's fault.


That's your problem Ideal. You see everything as Brendan's Rodgers fault. To me that's a typical response of a fan only used to the Premiership years.

I think Brendan is doing a "reasonable" job. I think he's making some mistakes but I'm sure he's better qualified than either of us to decide what needs to be done. Some posters on here seem to think that they are better qualified due to their success on CM which is lolworthy in itself.

Some posters, like you, go past that though, and think that personal abuse is acceptable. To be honest that pisses me off a little. I've sat/stood next to too many wnakers over the years that find it acceptable to boo Rougier, Keith Jones etc. before they even come on, to even want to listen to arguments like yours.

If you don't like this club, fcuk off and support someone else. I can PM you my seat number if you ever want to come and chat. That goes for all you moaning minnies. I don't think for a minute that everything is fine. I also don't think for a minute that slagging Brendan Rodgers and/or the players off on here is going to improve things.


User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Ian Royal » 01 Dec 2009 00:15

Ideal
Ian Royal That was exactly what Coppell did wrong. Brought in loads of sub standard cheap players.


Yep. That guy Doyle, what a waste of money.


Yeah, that's exactly who I'm talking about. Not Bennett, Halls, Sodje, Andersen, Cisse etc etc

User avatar
Para Handy
Member
Posts: 798
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 21:01
Location: One of the 10,961

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Para Handy » 01 Dec 2009 00:23

Ideal
Para Handy To me that's a typical response of a fan only used to the Premiership years.

1993. 16 years ago. You fail. HTH.

Para Handy Some posters, like you, go past that though, and think that personal abuse is acceptable.

fcuk off...I can PM you my seat number if you ever want to come and chat.


Hahaha, are you having a laugh? I have two things to say to that:
1) OH THE IRONY!!!!!!!!!
2) Ugh ugh, you wanna piece of me, I fcuk you edddieee, I fcuck youuuu, I can take you hard man, ugh ugh ugh, etc. Perhaps you belong in the zoo, where people can feed you a banana now and then?


Wow 1993.

I have no idea what you're on about. I was taking the piss out of you never attending games if that helps.


TBH, I always think of you like this:


User avatar
Royal With Cheese
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5701
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 07:45
Location: location location

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Royal With Cheese » 01 Dec 2009 00:30


User avatar
Wimb
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4399
Joined: 21 Nov 2005 09:43
Location: www.thetilehurstend.com

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Wimb » 01 Dec 2009 06:46

Ideal FWIW, I almost agree on Rasiak.
He is not great, but he is what we needed, sort of like Owusu was what we needed at the time.
What really gets me though is spending £2M on Mills, there just isn't any way to justify that.
I'd rather see us gamble £300K-£500K on four or five random players than have us spend £2M on what looks to be a total dud, we might as well have kept Duberry.


Mills wasn't signed for £2 million it was up to that amount based on incentives etc. How you can describe the man as a total dud after a handfull of starts and a couple of goals is beyond me.

And as others have pointed out, the 300-500k scatter gun game doesn't bring you the type of players needed to make the playoffs. It does bring you the likes of Sam Sodje etc.

I do see where you are coming from and that it would be nice to have a few more options for left wing etc, but there has to come a time when you put the kids up to the test and give older signings like Tabb, Cisse, Kebe the chance to sink or swim. One of my biggest beefs with Coppell was that he signed the likes of Bennett, Halls, Sodje etc and then never actually played them.


User avatar
Platypuss
Hob Nob Moderator
Posts: 8203
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 21:46
Location: No one cares about your creative hub, so get your fukcin' hedge cut

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Platypuss » 01 Dec 2009 07:55

And it's the wages that kill, not the transfer fees. Over three years, who would cost the most, Mills or five £400k players?

User avatar
Harpers So Solid Crew
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5273
Joined: 06 Jul 2004 08:39
Location: enjoying the money

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Harpers So Solid Crew » 01 Dec 2009 08:37

Ideal
Para Handy TBH, I always think of you like this...


That's pretty funny, I always imagined you kind of like this:


Btw, don't try and weasel your way out of neanderthal threats of violence, you've done that before on this board, with other users, and it is just pathetic, you don't impress anyone and they're not scared of you.



See now I did not think it was a threat of violence, but the chance to talk face to face about a view. Once upon a time you were a decent poster Ideal, but anyone who comes along just to be mega negative, or like royalee megapositive about one person, our manager are jusy boring, in fact I would put you ahead of Royalee, at least he did accept that BR made mistakes, I do not recall one positive thing you have said about BR.

Like me you do not go to the games, so where do you find this expertise about how RFC are playing??? You cannot make such wild comments taken from match reports from here and the papers, and from clips of games seen on television. Television does not show what is happening in a game, it shows a part of the field , usually where the ball is, and not the bigger picture.

Barry the bird boggler
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8153
Joined: 06 Aug 2006 08:34
Location: in my bird boggler

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Barry the bird boggler » 01 Dec 2009 08:55

Brendan has the benefit until SJM starts taking the club seriously again.

Terminal Boardom
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7791
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 19:50
Location: No more egodome until the daft old coot leaves

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Terminal Boardom » 01 Dec 2009 09:32

IMHO, there is nothing worse than supporting your club from afar. It hurts. You feel as if you are well and truly on the outside looking in and you really wish you could be there and do your bit to improve matters. I know. Been there, got the t-shirt.

However, Barry the Bird Boggler has hit the nail well and truly on the head. SJM has been distracted by other goings on. The last time he was thus distracted was under the tedium that was TB2 and we all know what happened then.

Ideal and Royalee are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum. This is a classic example of Newton's law of relativity: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Without one, the other can not exist. So, let's accept and "enjoy" their ramblings.

rob the royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1024
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 12:51

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by rob the royal » 01 Dec 2009 12:36

Terminal Boardom Ideal and Royalee are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum. This is a classic example of Newton's law of relativity: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Without one, the other can not exist. So, let's accept and "enjoy" their ramblings.


and sticking with the science theme opposites attract...




what a couple they'll make.

User avatar
Para Handy
Member
Posts: 798
Joined: 02 Sep 2004 21:01
Location: One of the 10,961

Re: Worst attacking options since January 2000

by Para Handy » 01 Dec 2009 22:24

Ideal Btw, don't try and weasel your way out of neanderthal threats of violence, you've done that before on this board, with other users, and it is just pathetic, you don't impress anyone and they're not scared of you.


I have? Care to point me to some examples? Or is it just your usual overreaction?

I can't see how offering a chat is a threat of violence. Particularly as I know you don't go to games. I was taking the piss. Still, I'll be interested to see all those other threats of violence I've been offering.

I'm just tired of your boring fecking sniping (from afar).

rhroyal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2639
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 10:19

Striking options

by rhroyal » 05 Dec 2009 17:28

Okay, so with Church going off today we have 1 fit striker. Rasiak.

Positives:

- Top scorer this season, decent goals to starts record

- Proven track record at this level

- Gets on the end of lots of chances. Misses a few, but getting there is half the work and is often not appreciated by fans.

Negatives:

- Questions over his ability to play more than 1 game a week. We play Palace on Tuesday before Scunthorpe on Saturday. He'll probably be expected to play 90 minutes in each.

- If things aren't going well, we have no other options. Might make us more 1 dimensional - not good.

380 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 172 guests

It is currently 05 Aug 2025 06:06