Jump to content

The Entirely Reasonable Potential Transfers Thread


Ayatollah Hermione
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, The Fish said:

 

Lascelles made himself as big as possible and conceded a penalty. 'Giving 100%' cost us a goal, so put that in your curmudgeonly pipe and smoke it. 

 

Turning their back is not the biggest issue, it's not even in the top five. We concede goals because we've average-to-poor defenders, coached by average-to-poor coaches and managed by a poor tactician. 

 

It's like moaning about the in-flight meal as the plane plummets towards the ground.

‘Making yourself big ‘ is a new one on you,isn’t it? Shar getting out the way of the shot contributed towards Ings’ goal.Yes? Turning his back and making himself small contributed towards Ings’ goal.Yes? I’ve put blame on TOT for slicing a simple clearance out of play.I’m putting no blame on TOT for not winning the header from the throw-in.I’ve pointed out that turning your back isn’t an example of poor play.Yep,we’re a poor team with a number of poor players,with questionable team selections and tactics,we all know that.Poor players make more mistakes than good players,that’s down to lack of ability,but one serious weakness we all see regularly isn’t down to lack of ability.Would you be more critical if our keeper joined in with such cowardice? It’s costing us goals,sometimes defeats,and it’s preventable.Daft Brucey and his staff are either ignoring this problem or are quite happy for it to continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, essembeeofsunderland said:

‘Making yourself big ‘ is a new one on you,isn’t it? Shar getting out the way of the shot contributed towards Ings’ goal.Yes? Turning his back and making himself small contributed towards Ings’ goal.Yes? I’ve put blame on TOT for slicing a simple clearance out of play.

 

I’m putting no blame on TOT for not winning the header from the throw-in.I’ve pointed out that turning your back isn’t an example of poor play.Yep,we’re a poor team with a number of poor players,with questionable team selections and tactics,we all know that.Poor players make more mistakes than good players,that’s down to lack of ability,but one serious weakness we all see regularly isn’t down to lack of ability.

 

Would you be more critical if our keeper joined in with such cowardice? It’s costing us goals,sometimes defeats,and it’s preventable.Daft Brucey and his staff are either ignoring this problem or are quite happy for it to continue.

 

I think there are far more problems that lead to Ings' goal than one centreback turning his back, yeah.

 

You seem to think that if the players were taking shots to the face (rather than turning their backs) we'd not be losing, when, in reality, it's an infinitesimally small factor that you've arbitrarily chosen as the hill you're going to die on. Calling them cowards to make it seem a more heinous crime is pathetic as well.

 

We're losing because we're not pressing well, we're not using the ball well and we're not finishing chances. We're not organised defensively and we're not measured in our attacks. We rely way too much on individual incidents of ability, rather than team play. We have a good striker that we fail to provide for. We've a few technically gifted attacking midfielders that we don't support. Our lynchpin central midfielder is a selfish cunt whose prefers to spray Hollywood balls about the place and shoot from the halfway line, instead of using that passing range to build attacks consistently. 

 

We've seen a poorer iteration of this squad play pragmatically, with a mean defence and an efficient attack. Now, with better players we should still be able to be mean at the back, while playing with more verve at the other end. 

 

So no, cowardice isn't the fucking problem. Bruce and his cohort are.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Fish said:

 

I think there are far more problems that lead to Ings' goal than one centreback turning his back, yeah.

 

You seem to think that if the players were taking shots to the face (rather than turning their backs) we'd not be losing, when, in reality, it's an infinitesimally small factor that you've arbitrarily chosen as the hill you're going to die on. Calling them cowards to make it seem a more heinous crime is pathetic as well.

 

We're losing because we're not pressing well, we're not using the ball well and we're not finishing chances. We're not organised defensively and we're not measured in our attacks. We rely way too much on individual incidents of ability, rather than team play. We have a good striker that we fail to provide for. We've a few technically gifted attacking midfielders that we don't support. Our lynchpin central midfielder is a selfish cunt whose prefers to spray Hollywood balls about the place and shoot from the halfway line, instead of using that passing range to build attacks consistently. 

 

We've seen a poorer iteration of this squad play pragmatically, with a mean defence and an efficient attack. Now, with better players we should still be able to be mean at the back, while playing with more verve at the other end. 

 

So no, cowardice isn't the fucking problem. Bruce and his cohort are.

 

 

I agree with a lot of what you say,and I’ve highlighted a lot of what you have said in previous posts,which you may have missed.It’s a shame you’ve let yourself down by suggesting I believe  only cowardice is the problem,which of course,you know I’ve never suggested it is.Maybe in your lifetime of supporting NUFC it’s been rife,and you know nothing different,but it certainly wasn’t happening not that  many years ago.I never saw John McGrath do it,nor Moncur,nor Pat Howard,nor Peter Jackson,nor Darren Peacock,nor Steve Howey,nor Nick The Greek,nor Woodgate.In fact I cannot remember anyone in those era’s showing the cowardice I now see on regular occasions.As I’ve said in earlier posts,they don’t always end up in goals.We could have a very good forward line with a decent mid-field,but if defenders intentionally allow shots to be on target,we’re asking for trouble.To repeat myself,it’s not down to poor players playing poorly,and it’s not down to excellent play by the opposition.It’s usually defenders refusing to defend.Just as well it’s not rife in cricket,although Stewart Broad is no stranger to similar cowardice when he’s batting.

Edited by essembeeofsunderland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@essembeeofsunderland also, turning your back as someone is shooting is not simply an act of self-preservation it has historically been part of making yourself big with built in plausible deniability - ie. You turn your back so that it is perpendicular to the trajectory of the ball and extend your arms outwards casting the largest possible surface area to block or deflect the ball. If it strikes your arm then it couldn't possibly have been hand to ball as your back was turned. Of course with the introduction of new rules for natural position of hands this is no longer applicable, so it's muscle memory from learned behaviour that causes players to do this. It's really nowhere near as big an issue as you make out and has little to do with cowardice.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Kid Dynamite said:

The issue with the Ings goal wasn't Fede turning his back, it was the fact he was fucking 10yds away from his man whilst marking him on a long throw 

It contributed towards us conceding but turning his back and getting out the way played a massive part so it was an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless Willock is on the combined wages of Carroll, Atsu, Muto, Lejeune, Longstaff and Saivet (and a chunky fee from the Armstrong transfer) how the fuck is there no money for a loan signing? 

Edited by Kid Dynamite
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Unless Willock is on the combined wages of Carroll, Atsu, Muto, Lejeune, Longstaff and Saivet (and a chunky fee from the Armstrong transfer) how the fuck is there no money for a loan signing? 

 

mikey's earmarked our transfer warchest for his future son in law....

 

 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58340082

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Unless Willock is on the combined wages of Carroll, Atsu, Muto, Lejeune, Longstaff and Saivet (and a chunky fee from the Armstrong transfer) how the fuck is there no money for a loan signing? 

I think it just boils down to the owner and/or Charnley thinking we’re ok. I.e. this squad will keep us up. We know that’s the aim and they also have a track record of not acting until it’s too late. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Alex said:

I think it just boils down to the owner and/or Charnley thinking we’re ok. I.e. this squad will keep us up. We know that’s the aim and they also have a track record of not acting until it’s too late. 

Oh aye, I'm aware of how it works. It's just Bruce being a mouthpiece for the club. Can you imagine Rafa blowing smoke up Ashley's arse cos we released 6 players and signed 1 ... "we've spent more than I ever could have hoped for in my wildest dreams!" 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Tom locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.