is turner on crack ?

Gibsons Beard · **Posted:** Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:09 pm

chip fireball wrote:

the substitutions were bizzarre to say the least, and seemed to baffle the players as much as the crowd.

first he took bjornsson off, which was fair enough, he went straight to the dressing room so perhaps he had a knock, tho he seemed fine in the car park after the game running to his motor.

however he brought on larkin and asked him to play out of position on the left wing and moved monkhouse up front.

then it got crazier. he brought boyd off, who was playing really well, and brought on mcsweeney. he went on the left wing, and larkin went up front. at which point we lost all shape and momentum.

then hartley got sent off. logically you would put humps left back, monky left mid, bring jones into the centre, and have mcsweeney on the right, so everyone was in their natural positions.

he does not do that. he switches austin to left back, and sweeney to right back, and larkin to centre mid, so every fooker is all over the place. the score almost immediately and have 2 great chances to equalise in a game in which they had never looked like scoring.

then to cap it all he decided his new formation was shyte and took mcsweeney off, who he had just brought on ( cue a hissy fit with leon storming straight off down the tunnel ) and replaced him with freddy.

wtf was that all about

dreadful management imho.

he has not got a clue what he is doing. for us to be in the top half of the table is a miracle.

Obafemi Obsession · **Posted:** Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:19 pm

Concurring with Mr Fireball. Bizarre substitutions.

Bramstein · **Joined:** Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:49 pm **Posts:** 1526

Subbing McSweeney was ridiculous. Particularly as the lad had done nothing wrong.

Boyd's removal was indeed strange and Humps and Sweeney both got far longer than they deserved. I would have taken one of them off at the break and put Larkin in the centre. I thought Oldham were slow as fook at the back and having someone with pace to attack them through the middle might have brought a couple more goals.

BillinghamPoolie · **Posted:** Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:52 pm

chip fireball wrote:

sean gregan rolfl

eeee he's shyte isnt he ?

what kind of manager builds a team round someone garbage and 6 clem overweight ?

Amazingly he's played almost 600 professional matches!!

pittingtonone · **Joined:** Sat Jan 03, 2009 9:03 pm **Posts:** 130

Yeah sweeney rubbish getting into the box pulling the ball back for the opener how dare you. I personally thought flinders should of done better with the one on one. Why didn't he pull the ball into his chest with his right foot? taz

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:08 pm

Turner has finally lost the plot completely. As I keep saying I didn't believe he was the right man, 1 year 2 weeks and 5 days ago, but I said I would support him, my patience snapped at Southend and after yesterday all he did was confirm to me that a new man is needed and as soon as possible.

The substitution of McSweenie had me totally scratching my head, yes I know the reason behind it let's waste a little time , but to do that you take the furthest man from the dug out off not the F****** nearest and not someone, who has reasonably strong legs as he's only been on the pitch 15 minutes. And as chip says once Hartley has been sent off why so many so called tactical changes when almost one will suffice.

As Grave also says "how has he got us to 11th". Don't get me wrong I'm over the moon with the current position.

Another thread debates why the low attendance, yes the weather would have affected a lot going. But I know some and one is a regular user of this board who has stated he not going again while Turner is still in charge and as far as I know he has stuck by that since he said it.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:13 pm

instead of coming up with opinions and moaning about why he did what he did, why doesn't someone ask him? You never know, he might give you a good reason!!!

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:24 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

instead of coming up with opinions and moaning about why he did what he did, why doesn't someone ask him? You never know, he might give you a good reason!!!

So we all email the club ask the question(s) possibly get the answer's then what.

And a good answer on an opinion is not really an answer as an opinion is just that. He will give you his opinion on why he made the substitutions he did but people will still disagree with them.Unless every sub he made yesterday was because of injuries/knocks and he had no other option. Did Boyd / McSweenie look injured, I don't think so.

If he has a REASON for the substitution of McSweenie apart from wasting time then as 2634 people watched McSweenie walk straight down the tunnel, then I'm sure that will be in his quotes in the press later.

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Was I dreaming or did we win 2-1 yesterday??

Nope, we won. Monkhouse and Jones. Hartley sent off.

I'm informed it wasn't a perfect performance though and believe people are offering suggestions on improvements for forthcoming (and much tougher) games.

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Was I dreaming or did we win 2-1 yesterday??

Nope, we won. Monkhouse and Jones. Hartley sent off.

I'm informed it wasn't a perfect performance though and believe people are offering suggestions on improvements for forthcoming (and much tougher) games.

Or, alternatively, people are twisting on 21 again.

I'm going to watch the Cricket, enjoy Charlton.

I'm not going. Unless he's sacked, of course. :wink:

We've narrowly beat 6th bottom, it doesn't mean we're world beaters and I don't see the problem in offering possible improvements. People can bury their head in the sands and say 'we're 11th top, we've won 2-1, everything is rosey' if they want but I see no harm in wanting the club to build on yesterdays result and improve areas where we weren't up to scratch. It'd appears CT's substitutions are one of them.

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:28 pm

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Was I dreaming or did we win 2-1 yesterday??

Come on EAD I expect better from you mate, simply because we won do you expect every one to just to say Ok it's 3 points, when the manager totally confuses the fans. Yes I'm over the moon with the 3 points, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy with the performance or manager's decision's and not want to debate them.

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

MadJohn wrote:

Fetish_Bob wrote:

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Was I dreaming or did we win 2-1 yesterday??

Come on EAD I expect better from you mate, simply because we won do you expect every one to just to say Ok it's 3 points, when the manager totally confuses the fans. Yes I'm over the moon with the 3 points, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy with the performance or manager's decision's and not want to debate them.

Fair comment of course. However I am sure you would admit that there seems to be far more desire on here to find fault with wins than to find things to build on in defeat. When we lose it's "crap, sack him, drop him, worst performance in a Pools shirt, relegation battle here we come...". When we win it's more like "hooray we won, three points, but still crap, sack him, drop him......." Gets tiresome dontcha think?

I don't remember people adopting the attitude after our last victory against Milwall? You have to go back nearly 2 months for our victory before that and can I fck remember what people were saying that far back! So no, I don't think it's tiresome because it has rarely happened like what you're suggesting in recent memory.

TalbotAvenger · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:51 pm

MadJohn wrote:

Fetish_Bob wrote:

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Was I dreaming or did we win 2-1 yesterday??

Come on EAD I expect better from you mate, simply because we won do you expect every one to just to say Ok it's 3 points, when the manager totally confuses the fans. Yes I'm over the moon with the 3 points, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy with the performance or manager's decision's and not want to debate them.

Fair comment of course. However I am sure you would admit that there seems to be far more desire on here to find fault with wins than to find things to build on in defeat. When we lose it's "crap, sack him, drop him, worst performance in a Pools shirt, relegation battle here we come...". When we win it's more like "hooray we won, three points, but still crap, sack him, drop him......." Gets tiresome dontcha think?

Oh yes

jish · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:52 pm

I'm glad we won yesterday.

The last 10 minutes, we did our best to throw it away.

This has happened time and time again this season.

What's wrong with debating that? There's clearly a problem as far as I can see.

The low crowds are a combination of lack of money (1st game after xmas/new year period), Pools only turning up for 1 half of the game (at best), Severe lack of entertainment from the team and the fact that many people want Turner out before returning.

We are 11th in a ridiculously tight league and our upcoming fixtures are daunting. A better team than Oldham would have capitalised on this yesterday.

One final point. Sweeney (with the exception in his involvement in the goal) and Humphreys may as well have not been there for me (certainly in the first half). Jones ran himself into the ground as a result of this.

Fetish_Bob · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:28 pm

MadJohn wrote:

Fetish_Bob wrote:

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Was I dreaming or did we win 2-1 yesterday??

Come on EAD I expect better from you mate, simply because we won do you expect every one to just to say Ok it's 3 points, when the manager totally confuses the fans. Yes I'm over the moon with the 3 points, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy with the performance or manager's decision's and not want to debate them.

Fair comment of course. However I am sure you would admit that there seems to be far more desire on here to find fault with wins than to find things to build on in defeat. When we lose it's "crap, sack him, drop him, worst performance in a Pools shirt, relegation battle here we come...". When we win it's more like "hooray we won, three points, but still crap, sack him, drop him......." Gets tiresome dontcha think?

I have to disagree with that comment as far as I'm concerned. I try to find positives from all performances and things to build on regardless of how poor the team and manager's decisions have been. But that last 10 mins or so from the time Hartley was sent off, totally baffled me. We hadn't looked in any real danger yet when one positional change is all that is required, that surely, in my opinion is the better option. To make 3 or 4 to accommodate one is baffling.

Spender · **Posted:** Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:34 pm

MadJohn wrote:

Fetish_Bob wrote:

ElvisAintDead wrote:

Was I dreaming or did we win 2-1 yesterday??

Come on EAD I expect better from you mate, simply because we won do you expect every one to just to say Ok it's 3 points, when the manager totally confuses the fans. Yes I'm over the moon with the 3 points, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy with the performance or manager's decision's and not want to debate them.

Fair comment of course. However I am sure you would admit that there seems to be far more desire on here to find fault with wins than to find things to build on in defeat. When we lose it's "crap, sack him, drop him, worst performance in a Pools shirt, relegation battle here we come...". When we win it's more like "hooray we won, three points, but still crap, sack him, drop him......." Gets tiresome dontcha think?

I wasn't there of course and therefore I know fu ck all, but I think the level of common sense displayed here is tremendous. clappp

Slow down and keep up. :wink:

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:37 am

what a lot of tosh.

HTH

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

misterb2001 wrote:

what a lot of tosh.

HTH

Well it doesn't help really, does it? You might as well have not replied.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:26 am

ADG wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

what a lot of tosh.

HTH

Errrrr, I guess you have never played the game then.

As we were doing reasonably well at 2-0, with a settled side. So what do you think changed the game then?

the sending off. We were comfortable before it happened.

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

misterb2001 wrote:

ADG wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

what a lot of tosh.

HTH

Errrrr, I guess you have never played the game then.

As we were doing reasonably well at 2-0, with a settled side. So what do you think changed the game then?

the sending off. We were comfortable before it happened.

Other teams have players sent off and it doesn't mean the whole team falls to bits. :roll:

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:44 am

how much?

So let me get this right, its turners fault that a bloke dives and one of our players takes exception to it and runs 30 yards and tries to head butt him? Hartley got sent off for being immature.

Larkins best games for us have arguably been on the left wing. I assume he put monkey up front for a bit of height although i do agree it was a pointless and silly decision.

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

So after all that you do actually agree with the consensus that Turner was at fault?!

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 11:03 am

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

So after all that you do actually agree with the consensus that Turner was at fault?!

at fault for the 10 panic at the end?

No i dont. I blame the sending off.

Turners made two of the subs when we had 11 men and couldnt have forseen the future.

He made two changes at the back when possibly only one could have been made, but who would you rather have seen at the back, humphreys or sweeney?

I think the question should be.....are people blowing things out of proportion?

My personal belief would be yes.

tREE_wiTH_hAMStER · **Joined:** Sat May 19, 2007 11:00 am **Posts:** 20758

This has been going on for too long but sadly with the old pals act we have at this club then it wont be stopping anytime soon. The club is infected.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 11:22 am

ADG wrote:

misterb2001 wrote:

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

So after all that you do actually agree with the consensus that Turner was at fault?!

at fault for the 10 panic at the end?

No i dont. I blame the sending off.

Turners made two of the subs when we had 11 men and couldnt have forseen the future.

He made two changes at the back when possibly only one could have been made, but who would you rather have seen at the back, humphreys or sweeney?

I think the question should be.....are people blowing things out of proportion?

My personal belief would be yes.

Fookin hell Mr B.

Turner made two substitutions but made at least 4 positional changes with those 2 subs.

When Hartley was sent off he then made a further 3 positional changes.

And then he subbed a sub.

It was utter fookin madness.

the first 4 positional changes didnt matter that much at the time as we were two nil up and cruising. If turner had known what was about to happen im sure he wouldnt have done what he did, but thats the beauty of hindsight.

Out of the 3 changes turner made when hartley got sent off
2 had to be made anyway. And as i said earlier, sweeney at the back instead of humphreys is a correct decision 100% of the time. As for subbing the sub...well fook knows what that was about.

Compo · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:04 pm

am i the only one who thought Boyd played crap and did nothing

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:13 pm

Compo wrote:

am i the only one who thought Boyd played crap and did nothing

i didnt think he was that bad, but not as good as others thought

Compo · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:26 pm

to be honest it was one of the worst game of football i have seen, was over the moon we won, but the calamity at the end it was like the alimo and shouldnt have happened. That would have been different if monkys header (come shoulder) effort had went in and not hit the bar. But it highlights the stupidity of Turner with the subs and our ability to not hang onto a lead, against another half decent team we would have lost.

misterb2001 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 1:56 pm

Compo wrote:

But it highlights..... our ability to not hang onto a lead....

but we won 2-1

Compo · **Posted:** Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:32 pm

misterb2001 wrote:

Compo wrote:

But it highlights..... our ability to not hang onto a lead....

but we won 2-1

i was meaning that his actions caused the problems in the last 10 minutes we had not outlet up front and therefore the ball just kept coming back, as I said if against better opposition we wouldnt have won

is turner on crack ?

Gadgies online